5 ms·
Yes on a pragmatic basis, if the coworker is male and gets upset at being referred to by "he", but it goes against your own personal beliefs to refer to him as
by prarro 2y ago
Yes on a pragmatic basis, if the coworker is male and gets upset at being referred to by "he", but it goes against your own personal beliefs to refer to him as "she", it's best just to refer to him by name and practise wording your sentences to be pronounless. And, where possible and not disadvantageous, to avoid situations where he's involved in your own work.
With this approach, he's less likely to make a complaint to HR about you (though he might notice the careful lack of "she", but that's much more difficult to make a substantiated complaint about), and you still get to stick to your own beliefs.
It's still somewhat vexing to have to do this, but at least it prevents you from getting in the crosshairs of HR.
- djur 2y agoOr you could just call people what they want to be called when it does not inconvenience you in the slightest.
- prarro 2y ago[flagged]
- djur 2y agoThat analogy doesn't work. A closer analogy would be a vegan refusing to talk to a coworker who eats meat. That would be unacceptable to me, too.
- prarro 2y agoThe analogy in my comment was about adherence to philosophical beliefs, in response to what appeared to be a suggestion by you that such beliefs should be ignored if someone else finds them to be an inconvenience. Could you explain why you think your analogy works, please?
- djur 2y agoA vegan doesn't eat tofu at you. Your right to untrammeled adherence to your philosophical beliefs ends the moment that those beliefs result in conduct affecting other people. After that point, some form of balancing occurs.
- prarro 2y ago[flagged]
- djur 2y agoNoticeably treating a coworker differently because of your beliefs about their gender identity is not a balanced and pragmatic solution.
- prarro 2y ago[flagged]
- djur 2y agoDo you ask everyone you work with for a birth certificate so you can ensure you're referring to them using the terms you consider appropriate?
- prarro 2y agoYes absolutely, and I take a blood sample from each of them for karyotype testing while doing a thorough inspection of their genitals. Any more daft questions?
- djur 2y agoSo is it a problem to use the "wrong" pronouns for someone or not? You take people at their word on their gender every day. Why go out of your way to fret about what you call people only when they tell you they're trans?
- coderc 2y agoPersonally, agree with calling people what they want to be called. That said, here's a thought experiment: What if someone is inconvenienced? What if someone feels uncomfortable using pronouns that don't match the sex of the person? What about uncommon "neopronouns" like "zhe", "xe", or "fae"? Whose comfort gets priority in this situation?
- djur 2y agoWe expect people to say things that make them uncomfortable all the time. I don't feel comfortable telling my boss that I'm the one who wrote the buggy code that caused the incident, but I have a responsibility to do it regardless. I might be expected to thank everyone involved in a project, even if I don't feel personally grateful to them. And so on. Obviously there's no easy way to reason these cases from first principles. As it is, I'm aware that being affirmed in their gender identity is recognized as therapeutically important for trans people. On the flip side, I'm not aware of any condition that causes people to suffer significant distress due to using a particular pronoun. So in this case, I feel like it's a pretty easy decision. EDIT: The "neopronoun" question was added after I replied, or I missed it. I have never met a person who expected me to use them, nor have I ever encountered a workplace environment where policies required their use, so I haven't formed an opinion.
- coderc 2y agoI've never met anybody who used neopronouns either, I've only heard about it online. I wonder if there are any long term effects of forcing someone to say something that they consider to be untrue? Taken to its most hyperbolic extreme, it could be used as a form of psychological torture, like something out of 1984, where Winston is tortured for not accepting that four fingers being held up is five, or "Four Lights" from Star Trek. To get one to renounce what they know to be true and accept whatever you say without question is probably the ultimate form of control and subjugation. For emphasis: "taken to its most hyperbolic extreme". edit: more realistically, you could say that transgender or gay people might feel like they are compelled to lie about who they are in order to fit in, or in certain circumstances. Surely, if we recognize this as psychologically damaging, then we should recognize all other types of forced lying to be similarly damaging.
- wat10000 2y agoIf it goes against your personal beliefs to call someone what they prefer to be called at no expense to yourself, then you need some new personal beliefs.
- crackercrews 2y agoWhat about neopronouns? Can someone just make up a new set of words like zi / zim / zis and expect you to remember them whenever talking to or about that person?
- djur 2y agoYou already remember what standard pronouns to use to refer to each person in your life. They're words you learned right from the start of learning the language. The same isn't true of "neopronouns".
- crackercrews 2y agoYou seem to be in agreement with my sentiment. There is also additional work in remembering which pronoun to use with which NB person. With most people, you just automatically say the right thing.
- foldr 2y agoWhat have you done so far in cases where a coworker has asked you to refer to them only using a neopronoun?
- crackercrews 2y agoAs others have suggested I just avoid pronouns. This seems to be a common approach.
- foldr 2y agoSeems like a practical solution. So what’s the problem?