Via Mr Muldoon in the comments, a shocking revelation:

Resumes including ‘they/them’ pronouns are more likely to be overlooked, new report finds. 

Not so much overlooked, I think, as warning signs heeded.

As we’ve seen many times, pretending to be a they does rather send a message regarding neuroticism, pretentiousness, captiousness, and the likelihood of disruption. If job applicants in effect announce that they expect anyone nearby to indulge their tedious psychodrama and pretend along with them, this will not always be met with enthusiasm. Demanding that others lie – and ignore or contradict the evidence right in front of them, daily – is, in short, rude. An act of hostility.

Contrary to Ashton Jackson, the author of the article quoted above, and contrary to Ryan McGonagill, the author of the report cited in said article, it’s not a matter of “how much work there is to do around diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging in the workplace.” And I very much doubt it’s about pronoun-stipulators finding themselves disqualified for “being authentic.” It’s more a matter of whether employers would be wise to hire, and trust, people who signal their narcissism, their unrealism, and their inclination to manipulate others.

And employers would do well to remember that The Pronoun Game, so much in fashion, is very often an attempt to bully others, to exert power, by making them say things, publicly and repeatedly, that they don’t for a minute believe to be true.

If an illustration is required of how things can go awry, readers may recall the infinitely charming Ms Amber Leventry, a “queer person and educator,” a professional them, who managed to be outraged by the fact that she had been asked not to swear and scream in the workplace. This appeal to reciprocal courtesy, and preference for not being assailed with bellowed epithets, was denounced as both “tone policing” – a wickedness “rooted in colonialism and white supremacy” – and an effort to crush underfoot the rights and wellbeing of transgender people.

When not expecting deference and “validation” for her frequent fits of temper – one might say bullying – Ms Leventry encourages her own small children, aged seven and nine, to shout profanities at passers-by who may have voted Republican. So, obviously, the perfect employee.

Update, via the comments:

EmC adds,

They should just write I AM REALLY HIGH MAINTENANCE.

Well, if a job application includes imaginary pronouns and claims of themness, I think one could treat it as roughly equivalent to the words I like to shit on the carpet. Signalling, as it does, insufferable pretension or serious mental illness, or some unhappy combination of the two.

But in the minds of Ms Jackson and Mr McGonagill, every employer, and every workmate, has time for this shit.

And every employer, and every workmate, wants to be held to ransom with workplace meltdowns and threats of self-harm if the absurd made-up rules, which can change arbitrarily, at seemingly any time, several times a day, aren’t obeyed.

Update 2:

In the comments, sH2 follows the links above and finds this, one of many such examples:

My gender changes depending on the day, or week, or even depending on the hour. It also means the pronouns I’m comfortable with can change too.

A complication that necessitates the wearing, and frequent changing, of colour-coded bracelets:

Pink means she/her; yellow means they/them; and blue means he/him.

To which, sH2 replies,

Hard pass.

Well, quite. One has a finite lifespan and only so much goodwill. Best not to piss it away.

And note that Ms Jackson and Mr McGonagill make no provision for such scenarios, despite them being very much in fashion among the “non-binary” demographic, and competitively so. It would seem that Ms Jackson and Mr McGonagill believe that no degree of farce would be too much, and employers should simply accommodate and indulge any level of derangement and manipulation, regardless of the impracticality and expense, and regardless of the disruption, and regardless of the impact on the employer’s own mental health.

And so, we arrive at a situation in which employers and employees would be obliged to closely monitor the mood swings of their unhinged workmates, regularly checking pronoun-bracelets and pronoun-earrings, and other pronoun-stipulating accessories, as if they couldn’t possibly have anything better to do. Lest they be faced with some hair-trigger umbrage and operatic drama, or get summoned to the HR department and then scolded for being insensitive and insufficiently inclusive.

And a happy, utopian workplace would surely follow.

Not entirely unrelated.




Subscribestar
Share: