re: Company going Virtue Signaling, need some pronoun suggestions

quote:

---

It basically requires people to police each other for wrongthink and doubleplusungood speech.

---

Correct.

A fake world where shaming for misgendering is lauded.

quote:

---

Based on your original comment you came off as defending the ridiculousness of the company mandating employees must provide pro nouns.

---

How so? Just because I said that OP was being an attention whore who lacked creativity? Does that mean I can't also believe the company is attention whoring as well? Why are they mutually exclussive?

quote:

---

You then said it was ironic that the OP came here and asked how to mess with his company because that mandate is, in most logical circles, absolutely ridiculous. First of all it's not ironic and you saying so makes absolutely no sense.

---

Nope. I said that this thread was attention whoring and virtue signaling, and so it was ironic that it was created in response to an accusation of virtue signaling.

quote:

---

Second of all, after reading that, I assumed you're a tranny.

---

And this basically explains all the bullshite that came before it

quote:

---

If you lash out every time someone makes fun of this stuff, you are going to blow a gasket.

---

Doesn't take much time or effort for me to knock out a quick post calling the OP an attention whore. You're the one who seems to have their blood pressure up

quote:

---

Here's the rub. They get really pissed off if you "misgender" them.

---

That's my point, though. How often, in a work email, do you directly reference a person's gender? The only time I can ever see it being a problem is if you Cc someone on an email that the Cc'ed person is the subject of.

I think it makes even less sense in a college setting. Now, this could be because I majored in Economics and most lectures had 0 interaction, but I feel like most professors don't even address students. If they do address a student, it is usually directly.

quote:

---

That's my point, though. How often, in a work email, do you directly reference a person's gender?

---

I refuse.

Far more bad can come from it than good.

If Tom wants to be called Becky, I'll call him Becky. If he wants to be called xer, frick that.

quote:

---

That's my point, though. How often, in a work email, do you directly reference a person's gender? The only time I can ever see it being a problem is if you Cc someone on an email that the Cc'ed person is the subject of.

I think it makes even less sense in a college setting. Now, this could be because I majored in Economics and most lectures had 0 interaction, but I feel like most professors don't even address students. If they do address a student, it is usually directly.

---

This 100% wasn't a thing either when I was in undergrad or law school, but professors routinely referred to people as "Mr./Ms. (Lastname)". So while the pronoun itself wouldn't matter, I could see how it would simply act towards gendering in general. I had a few undergrad professors refer to students by their first name, but even that wasn't super common. It pretty much didn't exist in law school.

Hijack: I was in a high level meeting recently and some assistant corrected a CFO about her pronouns. He looked directly at her for probably 5 excruciating seconds and then continued on with the meeting like she was a bug on his windshield. It was both impressive and awkward.

Hey Klark, I thought I was going to be able to post "hey, looks like we used to get along better..."

Then I hit the third page. Looks like some things never change

LINK /

quote:

---

. It was both impressive and awkward

---

yeah, This pronoun fad is the height of egocentrism. Some people just never grow out of childish things.

(eat/arse)