So, rather than make it.a choice, the Reich Wing is anti-choice. As typical.
- Name is Alex/Jordan/Leslie
- Not allowed to clarify gender
Wouldn’t the world be better off if no one knew each others gender? If you’re a cis man and find yourself attracted to another man? Congrats you’re gay now.
nul42 would stop using pronouns completely and just use genderless nouns or proper names instead.
Oh no what a shame
How does this hold up against a first amendment test?
When “What Trump wants goes” is all the Supreme Meme Court cares about
It’ll never have to
Well like any other employee, you can say whatever you like, but you might get fired for it.
I don’t see how the first ammendment applies here.
That said, I think this is a stupid and mean spirited order. It is by design trying to continue the exodus of federal employees while also the tyrannical denial of being able to identify people however they find appropriate for themselves.
Well it’s not a private entity hiring them, it’s the actual govt. Usually the defense is that those are private companies and they can do what they want but that doesn’t apply here
Yes it does apply here. Why would you think it would be different?
There are always policies in government, just like anywhere else you have people working. Freedom of speech is not an excuse to break those policies.
Because their employer is the US Government. The very entity the 1st Amendment protects us from.
Not how this works at all. Do you really believe that an employee can just do or say anything while on the job just because they work for the US government?
Lets take Email for example, because that is what we are talking about here. There are policies about structuring emails. An agency can say: Your name goes at the bottom of every email, followed by your position, and then the Logo of the Agency. If you choose to sign your emails with someone else’s name, from “This is such bullshit department” and a logo you made up, you WILL get disciplined.
Your freedom of speech ends at the door. Outside of work feel free, not at work.
Most of that isn’t political speech. You absolutely still have the right to political speech as a government employee. Even the military was forced to let soldiers have political speech. The dividing line is where it looks like the speech is from the government instead of from you. Personal pronouns are hardly going to be from the government.
In your assertion the government could simply remove the rights of civil servants by issuing a policy. And that’s just not how rights work.
- I → (the) speaker/writer
- you → (the) listener/reader, pl. (the) audience
- they → that person, pl. those people
The writer believes that such an idea is quite stupid. In fact, the writer believes that the audience will find this language extremely obtuse. These methods will only cause more pain to the federal employees in question.
Don’t forget pronouns like who, mine, and ours. In fact, here’s a list of >100
Someone should write a script that completely replaces these with BS standins
I think we need a tool that automatically rewrites text to remove all pronouns, but I’m not even sure that is possible.
Use of pronouns outlawed. Now they have to say “that person” or call them by their name.
But why would a pronoun be in a signature? Something like Her Majesty, Patricia Jones, Dept. of Health?
-
Parker Smith
-
She/Her
-
Department of Defense Black Budget Coordinator
-
867-5309 ext. 1
Questions?
-
So people know how you would like to be addressed.
Referred to. People are never addressed by their pronouns.
Him needs to shut up.
So is it alright to just assume trump is female? The email signature no longer states her preferred pronouns, so I think this is what she wants?
She did sign that executive order designating everyone as female, too.
This is just begging for malicious compliance.
You want to eliminate an entire part of speech? Then good luck trying to understand what the fuck my email is trying to say.
In the article it specifies you to remove pronouns from your email signature. Definitely less fertile ground for malicious compliance, but it’s still doable.
End every email body with “For your response, I am referred to using (feminine/masculine/any/whatever) pronouns”
Replace it with “[Insert Pronouns Here]”. Make sure to have your desk already cleaned out though.
You
FUCKING PRONOUNCE turns red and screams
Does the reader want to eliminate an entire part of speech? Then good luck trying to understand what the fuck the writer’s email is trying to say.
Could be fun. I bet ChatGPT could automate it.
DeepSeek can automate it
Does the reader want to eliminate an entire part of speech?
Which one are they going to outlaw next? Verbs? Or Adjectives?
Exactly… Maybe have a boilerplate disclaimer at the top of each email that does include pronouns, just explaining that the following email has had all pronouns removed so as to comply with the new rule.
“The following email has had all pronouns removed in compliance with blah blah blah. Readability has unfortunately, but obviously, been significantly reduced. Apologies will be made available at a later date.”
my new bio: (masculine neutral/masculine possessive)
but they banned mentioning gender, change it to (identifying with the societal archetype of the sex producing the small reproductive cell)
my new bio: (masculine neutral/masculine possessive)
Isn’t it nominative/objective?
I don’t see “he/his” or “they/their,” I see “he/him” and “they/them.”
I put all of them in, ie he/him/his… just to remove ambiguity.
And pronouns remain in my sig. Ain’t going anywhere.
Probably! Been a long time since I’ve been to school.
emails
\sigh
shemails?
I guess Trump doesn’t want to be referred to as He/Him
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-appears-accidentally-declared-every-174749266.html
Hmmm, I see…
Removed by mod
Trolling or stupid? Trolling…or stupid? I just can’t tell anymore.
Wow, did you rub all 3 brain cells together to come up with that? Your mommy must be so proud.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
It says email signatures.
And good; it’s ridiculous, virtue-signalling bullshit and you’ve got to let it go.
You fuckers need to let your vice-signaling go. Funny how “freedom” to ignore pronouns quickly gives way to banning them. The only freedom you guys seem to care about is the freedom to be ignorant pieces of shit.
Yeah, turns out reality is more nuanced than that.
It’s useful for people with unisex names like Taylor, Chris, or Jordan, especially in email, where you may not have any face-to-face contact.
Or for people with names from cultures not associated with English naming standards such as Chinese or Indian cultures working in western companies or governments.
Pop quiz anti-pronouners! 星辰 Xīng Chén, girl or boy? 美莉 Měi Lì, girl or boy?? Would you like to buy a pronoun now?
The first is male, the second is female, but I study Chinese so that’s not very fair of me.
Yes, that’s a reasonable position.
And good; it’s ridiculous, virtue-signalling bullshit and you’ve got to let it go.
You’re expressing a VERY strong negative reaction on words in an email signature. Why are you so threatened by what someone puts in their email signature? How does it challenge or change what you are that you’ve put so much thought into it to get this angry about it?
Because it’s very, very silly identity politics and the majority of people agree. You’ve got to let it go and focus on important things, like the insane and ever-increasing wealth inequality.
Identity politics for email signatures? There was no federal policy around email signatures like this until folks like you decided to make it politics forcing removal.
Ah yes, folks like me, of course.
Do you find my statement offensive? Are you not celebrating this new policy? How would you not be folks that share your mindset be like you?
I don’t know if celebrating is the right word. I’m not American and would never have voted for Trump, but in isolation this seems fairly benign and I think a majority of people will be glad to hear it. You might disagree, that’s fine, I’m not interested in an extended argument about it.
I’m been told that it is not just virtue-signaling (it is), but that it is also a virtue (allyship) in action. Normalizing sharing that information make it easier for people that have a more complex relationship with their gender than I do.
