"My pronouns" at CVS today ...

[Drama Llama]

4 minutes ago, KSera said:

I think it means different things to different people. My nb kid uses it to mean that they don’t have a gender at all (agender is probably more correct technically, but they use non-binary that way). That’s different to them than it being applicable to either gender. So for them, using they for someone who does claim a gender would be misgendering them as being genderless. 

I would hope most people would say the latter. Our brains seem to be pretty good at identifying what singular “they” means when we are talking about an unknown or unspecified individual. It’s definitely context dependent.

I assume that people here who are saying that they seems awkward to them for a single person aren’t using it regularly.  I use it enough that it comes out naturally.  

[Jenny in Florida]

4 minutes ago, KSera said:

I think it means different things to different people. My nb kid uses it to mean that they don’t have a gender at all (agender is probably more correct technically, but they use non-binary that way). That’s different to them than it being applicable to either gender. So for them, using they for someone who does claim a gender would be misgendering them as being genderless. 

I get that. 

I think our (general "our") use of language in this regard is very much in flux, which is why, as clunky as it can be sometimes, the practice of clearly stating or displaying one's preferred pronouns is the best we can do for the moment. Well, that and extending each other grace in terms of viewing others as  human beings trying to do their best. 

I have a co-worker who was using she/her at the time they joined our company and sort of quietly switched to they/them when it became clear it was safe to do so in our workplace. It's been over a year, but I still slip occasionally. They seem to like me okay, anyway 😀, and I appreciate their patience.

[KSera]

1 minute ago, BaseballandHockey said:

I assume that people here who are saying that they seems awkward to them for a single person aren’t using it regularly.  I use it enough that it comes out naturally.  

I use it all the time, because my nb person lives at home. It comes out naturally (it did take a while to change habits) but it still ends up awkward/confusing in some contexts. 

[vonfirmath]

4 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

How many of us have received things in the mail with "Mr?" Many companies default to assuming a male gender because they assume a male would be more offended than a female. No one cared about customer service then. 

 

My experience is the other way around.

Women tend to get more upset about how they are referred to than men.  Our business does not use Mr. or Mrs. or anything for that reason. Unless we know for sure to whom we are referring to. We use first and last name.

[Melissa Louise]

52 minutes ago, Jenny in Florida said:

Ummmm, the use of "they" as a singular pronoun was not driven by the need to address sexism. So, I'm going to call that a flawed argument.

Gender neutral language did actual arise as part of a movement to neutralise sexism.

[Lady Florida.]

1 hour ago, BaseballandHockey said:

I assume that people here who are saying that they seems awkward to them for a single person aren’t using it regularly.  I use it enough that it comes out naturally.  

That was me as recently as two years ago. It just felt awkward and grammatically incorrect (which it isn't) and it didn't make any sense to me. Then one of ds' good friends who was frequently at our house changed their pronoun to they. It took a while and some practice but now it feels normal. Once it becomes a regular part of your vocabulary it no longer seems weird or awkward. 

Edited June 5, 2021 by Lady Florida.

[katilac]

2 hours ago, maize said:

To expand your imagination, I will share that I have a teen with selective mutism. Not all teens are comfortable or even able to speak for themselves in situations like this.

Hopefully now you can imagine not casting judgment on a teen who doesn't speak up or a parent who speaks for them.

If such were the case, it would be an important fact to include in the story, imo. Remember that I was also wondering why the staff member would not be directly addressing the teen in the first place. 

I don't need to use my imagination, because there are lots of dx in my immediate and extended family that lead to all sorts of interesting situations. When you make a public post and ask a public question, you can expect to get a variety of opinions. If someone expresses an opinion and you feel like they made a conclusion because you didn't include certain information, then you it's certainly valid to say, "we didn't do that because of x, y, and z" or simply "I can't get into the details, but there's a reason we can't do that." 

2 hours ago, KSera said:

 My two oldest would have had trouble with that at that age. They both had high anxiety and one is on the spectrum. The oldest would be just fine with it now, but my kid with ASD absolutely would not. I still have to deal with all that kind of stuff for them. So, there’s another couple reasons that might be the case. 

Yep, and my general response is above. There are definitely things that I do for others, and different things that they do for me, that might strike others as strange. If any of us are sensitive to the reasons why, then we simply don't tell that story. 

[katilac]

3 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

 Legally of course, teens have to have parental permission.  But should they?  I mean the presumption seems to have been than 14 yr olds should be able to determine their own pronouns, even if their parents disagree.....if that's the case, can they determine whether or not they receive the covid vaccine, even if their parents disagree?

I need to sleep before answering this one, but I'll come back to it. 

[SKL]

7 hours ago, hippymamato3 said:

This was my thought too. My DD, at age 12, speaks for herself at appointments. 

Yeah, I was trying to resolve the fact that the online appointment (that I made) got deleted in their system.  I had the info on my cell phone.  And I was the one needing to give consent.  (And actually this kid didn't want the shot, so I didn't want to give her the chance to decline.)  So I was the person who went over to talk to the guy.  My dd was there for part of it (she did walk off at some point), but she feels shy in those situations and has to be forced to speak up.  I do make her speak for herself in doctor office visits etc., but these particular questions were not about how she was feeling etc.  It's not  like she would have spelled her name differently or given a different birth date, regardless of how she felt about anything.

While all this was going on, I left my other 14yo to fend for herself with the nurse giving the shots.  😛  She's much more confident than her sister.  And FTR I've signed waivers for my kids to attend health visits alone since they were 10, though they usually want me there anyway.

Edited June 5, 2021 by SKL

[SKL]

6 hours ago, historically accurate said:

I have a daughter with a gender neutral, but often assumed to be male, first name. If I am setting her up with a new doctor's appointment, every provider assumes male. Some are so stuck in their "work script" that it becomes he/him with me answering "She's a girl. She is...", that the conversation ends up very similar to SKL's in the OP. It can be a very jarring conversation, but I've never run into SKL's exact situation. I've gotten off the phone a few times and told DD, "Well, we'll see if they notice you're a girl once you're in the office." 

 

Yeah, and my daughter has a very feminine name.  I have never heard it used as a male name in any language/culture.

[SKL]

Even if this was a guy not paying attention to the person in front of him ... isn't that a problem when you're dispensing pharmaceuticals, particularly to someone without an ID?  Seems to me that CVS needs to train its pharmacy people differently.

I had a friend who died after a pharmacy mixed up his medication.  It's a responsible position.  "I wasn't paying attention" is definitely not an excuse IMO.

[SKL]

4 hours ago, Jenny in Florida said:

That's not what a neutral pronoun means. It means it refers to everyone regardless of their gender.

I will say that my daughters understand "they" to denote certain members of the LGBTQ community, unless the person saying it is honestly unable to identify the sex/gender.  In other words, the guy calling my daughter "they" was, in her mind, overriding she/her with a term incompatible with she/her.

My daughter's assumption is that the guy was gay and was making a statement because it's pride month.

[Tanaqui]

It's a big leap from "A customer facing person, having to ask a series of standard questions, goes on autopilot" to "And therefore, that same person is likely to kill somebody with mixed up medications". I'm sorry about your friend, but my core assumption would be that every bit of thought not used on The Script is more mental energy that can be used on, idk, making sure the medication is correct.

[Frances]

27 minutes ago, SKL said:

My daughter's assumption is that the guy was gay and was making a statement because it's pride month.

I’m completely confused. What does this even mean? 

[Frances]

46 minutes ago, SKL said:

Even if this was a guy not paying attention to the person in front of him ... isn't that a problem when you're dispensing pharmaceuticals, particularly to someone without an ID?  Seems to me that CVS needs to train its pharmacy people differently.

I had a friend who died after a pharmacy mixed up his medication.  It's a responsible position.  "I wasn't paying attention" is definitely not an excuse IMO.

Did you read the article I posted about how generally understaffed and overworked CVS personnel are? While I personally would never get a prescription filled at CVS or any large chain pharmacy, I would hope that the staff in such places would be devoting the majority of their bandwidth to making sure prescriptions are filled correctly. It’s not surprising to hear people in this thread reporting terrible customer experiences at CVS given their corporate model. But if I was an overworked, stressed out pharmacist there who may not get a bathroom or food break all day, my number one priority would be dispensing medication correctly so that I didn’t harm or kill anyone and lose my livelihood (because it’s the pharmacist who will be punished by the state licensing board, not the corporation that put them in a dangerous situation). Paying attention to unrelated details would not be my priority or focus.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Frances

[SKL]

5 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

Legally of course, teens have to have parental permission.  But should they?  I mean the presumption seems to have been than 14 yr olds should be able to determine their own pronouns, even if their parents disagree.....if that's the case, can they determine whether or not they receive the covid vaccine, even if their parents disagree?

Personally I think 14 is too young to take parental authority away (absent some serious family problem that needs to be addressed legally).  (I'm fine with parents deciding that their specific children are mature enough to decide xyz / giving blanket consents.)

My 14yo Kid2 was against getting vaxed.  I told her "I'm your mother so I get to decide."  I am aware that some people view that as a societal problem.  I heard that in some US jurisdictions, kids as young as 12 have privacy that extends to parents, i.e., the parent doesn't even get notified of whatever health care services are given to their children.  In my jurisdiction, parents consent for a 14yo's healthcare, and I think that's appropriate.

The pronoun thing ... if my kid told her friends / doctors / whoever that her preferred pronoun was __, that wouldn't / shouldn't have a lasting effect on her health, the way prescription pharmaceuticals and medical procedures could.  She could later change her mind about being a "they," but she can't change her mind about having received male hormones, having breasts removed, etc. (just for example).

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Jenny in Florida said:

That's not what a neutral pronoun means. It means it refers to everyone regardless of their gender.

But why do this any further once it is clear what gender the person uses? The very large majority of people throughout history and everywhere in the world want to be identified as one particular gender. To pretend it is somehow more egalitarian to call everybody “they” all the time in order to pretend gender identity is not specific and fixed for billions of people is a “Tyranny of the Minority” argument. Even the majority of transgender people still want to be identified all of the time as a particular gender; it’s just not the gender you might have figured. 

I have been working in a public-facing job for six months. I have not yet met one single person in my work whose gender is ambiguous and asks for gender-neutral identifiers. If I were calling everybody “they” in the event that one rare person per year might rather be not identified as male or female, that would be very odd. 

It actually reminds me of the “Colorblind” theory when people avoid saying, “Oh, he is Black,” because they think it’s a big taboo to “notice” that someone is not white. 

[kristin0713]

This would have annoyed me.  He took the time to use “they” but not to respect the mom’s repeated use of “she.”  I find it doubtful that he was stuck in a script for the entire conversation and most likely he has decided to always just use “they.”  Some may appreciate that.  But this scenario would provoke insecurity in my 15yo DD who has anxiety and OCD. “Why did he keep saying they? Do I look like a boy? Do I look transgender?”  Maybe it wouldn’t phase kids of today’s age who don’t struggle with that. I think my DS would probably brush it off and assume the guy was making a political statement.  But I’m sure my DD would overthink it and take it personally. 

[Carrie12345]

7 hours ago, Jenny in Florida said:

I wonder sometimes what people who are meeting me for the first time make of me when I show up with my post-mastectomy flat chest, light-but-noticeable-in-some-conditions, post-menopausal facial hair, not always overtly "girly" clothing, purple hair and traditionally girlish name. 

I have to admit that I am still tender enough on this topic that I would much prefer to have people default to "they" instead of leaping to "he." 

Examples like this and others given are what have me wanting to reprogram my default.  That reprogramming takes time and conscious effort. My interactions with new people who appear androgynous/ambiguous/etc. are pretty infrequent, so trying out “new” language is stilted and awkward in the very moment when it matters most.
Heck, the day I learned dd’s friend was trans, I did a whole mini speech of support and asked clarifying questions, then sent them off with a “See you later, girls!” ::: face palm :::  New is hard!

I don’t know what’s going on in the mind of some random CVS employee, and I do think it would have made more sense for him to pick up on the shes, but I just can’t muster up the outrage, lol.  Defaulting to ‘they’ isn’t the same as defaulting to ‘she’ for every person with long hair or ‘he’ for cargo shorts.

I have a boy and a girl who have often been misgendered. They’re generally not the ones who’ve gotten offended, because there’s nothing inherently offensive about males or females.  But the people who get corrected get VERY embarrassed even though they did nothing awful. And then we wind up feeling the need to make them feel better, which is pretty weird when I think about it.  If people defaulted to a neutral term, they wouldn’t need as all that comforting over a wrong guess.

And if my “they” ever naturally and casually hits one person who really needs it in that moment, it’ll be worth however many other people have felt triggered by its use.

[maize]

9 hours ago, Jenny in Florida said:

That's not what a neutral pronoun means. It means it refers to everyone regardless of their gender.

A gender-neutral pronoun applies to everyone equally.

The flux happening with the word "they" right now has made of it, in some contexts, something different from gender-neutral. Instead of inclusive (male and female, or male or female) as it has been in the past it is now being used by many to distinguish "neither male nor female."

The meaning of a word depends entirely on its usage, and one meaning can push out another. Inclusive gender neutral is not the same as male-or-female exclusive, and it is difficult for one word to effectively convey both the inclusive and exclusive meanings. 

Singular "they" is not a straightforward gender neutral pronoun at this point, it is a word very much in flux. Where it will ultimately settle I am not sure.

[Sneezyone]

50 minutes ago, maize said:

A gender-neutral pronoun applies to everyone equally.

The flux happening with the word "they" right now has made of it, in some contexts, something different from gender-neutral. Instead of inclusive (male and female, or male or female) as it has been in the past it is now being used by many to distinguish "neither male nor female."

The meaning of a word depends entirely on its usage, and one meaning can push out another. Inclusive gender neutral is not the same as male-or-female exclusive, and it is difficult for one word to effectively convey both the inclusive and exclusive meanings. 

Singular "they" is not a straightforward gender neutral pronoun at this point, it is a word very much in flux. Where it will ultimately settle I am not sure.

I dunno. While it’s not comfy to my ears, including/referencing male, female AND neither seems with one word pretty inclusive on its face. That seems to be what it’s evolving to mean. I don’t think it’s pushing out ‘either female or male’ but adding ‘neither’. IOW, an expansion of the possible unknown options.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Sneezyone

[QueenCat]

16 hours ago, SKL said:

I mean I'm not really bothered if this was just one guy thinking he was being extra woke.  But if this is the policy of CVS or if this is some trend some group is trying to force on society, I don't appreciate it.

 

We use a CVS. I haven't experienced this there. I'd be fine if they asked for preferred pronouns and kept them stored for future reference. I wouldn't be okay if I kept using "he" for my son and they kept calling him "they."

[maize]

21 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I dunno. While it’s not comfy to my ears, including/referencing male, female AND neither seems with one word pretty inclusive on its face. That seems to be what it’s evolving to mean. I don’t think it’s pushing out ‘either female or male’ but adding ‘neither’. IOW, an expansion of the possible unknown options.

People who are choosing "they, them, their" as their personal pronouns are not using it inclusively but exclusively, explicitly rejecting both male and female.

That is not expansion and is not inclusive.

Like I said, the word is in flux and this is not the only way that singular they is being used. It is sometimes being used in an inclusive or generic sense; in that sense it can certainly mean "male, female, or neither."

I find inherent conflict between the inclusive and exclusive uses of the word.

[Drama Llama]

2 hours ago, Quill said:

But why do this any further once it is clear what gender the person uses?

Many of us have provided an explanation, which is the people working at CVS don't pay full attention, and this person may have missed it.  

2 hours ago, Quill said:

The very large majority of people throughout history and everywhere in the world want to be identified as one particular gender. To pretend it is somehow more egalitarian to call everybody “they” all the time in order to pretend gender identity is not specific and fixed for billions of people is a “Tyranny of the Minority” argument.

It's also not an argument that anyone makes. It's an argument that FOX news and other right wing media made up so they could rail against it and get viewers. 

It's so weird that people rail against situations where liberals  introduce themselves and state their pronouns, and rail against situations where forms ask for pronouns, and then also accuse liberals of being the ones who think liberals are trying to do away with variety in pronouns.  

2 hours ago, Quill said:

Even the majority of transgender people still want to be identified all of the time as a particular gender; it’s just not the gender you might have figured. 

I think there are plenty of people who want to identified with gender specific pronouns in situations where they are known, but have no problem with being identified without their gender in some situations.  

2 hours ago, Quill said:

I have been working in a public-facing job for six months. I have not yet met one single person in my work whose gender is ambiguous and asks for gender-neutral identifiers. If I were calling everybody “they” in the event that one rare person per year might rather be not identified as male or female, that would be very odd. 

It actually reminds me of the “Colorblind” theory when people avoid saying, “Oh, he is Black,” because they think it’s a big taboo to “notice” that someone is not white. 

 

[Sneezyone]

14 minutes ago, maize said:

People who are choosing "they, them, their" as their personal pronouns are not using it inclusively but exclusively, explicitly rejecting both male and female.

That is not expansion and is not inclusive.

Like I said, the word is in flux and this is not the only way that singular they is being used. It is sometimes being used in an inclusive or generic sense; in that sense it can certainly mean "male, female, or neither."

I find inherent conflict between the inclusive and exclusive uses of the word.

I agree with the first part. People using the terms FOR THEMSELVES are often choosing it to explicitly represent neither. It’s just not clear to me that people following this trend and applying it to others share that sentiment when applying it generically, to others besides themselves. I’ve heard my oldest use these terms to apply to random friends and that’s not how they’re using it, at all. I agree that it’s a work/word in progress. I just think it may settle into being a perfectly acceptable neutral and inclusive choice sooner rather than later. According to DD, I was born in the 1900s so...I’m trying to listen to/for these varied uses and see how things evolve. It’s not an area where I feel like I’m on solid ground.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Sneezyone

[pinball]

10 hours ago, Jenny in Florida said:

Oh, I won't lift a finger to defend CVS when it comes to customer service. Every CVS I've been in for the last several years has offered abysmal customer service. All I'm suggesting is that I don't think this single encounter is evidence of a nefarious plot to erase SKL's daughter's rights to be recognized as the girl she considers herself to be. 

She is a girl. I think the bolded is an odd way of phrasing the fact that SKL’s daughter is a girl.

[Junie]

I studied journalism in college and was trained to follow the AP Stylebook.  I looked it up last night and the AP (Associated Press) now allows "they" as a singular pronoun.  It sounds wrong to me, probably because it was wrong when I was a student.  If a writer was discussing a person of unknown gender, there were other ways to discuss the person without using the pronoun "they".  I guess I will eventually get used to hearing it, but it is difficult for me.  

[Carrie12345]

1 hour ago, maize said:

People who are choosing "they, them, their" as their personal pronouns are not using it inclusively but exclusively, explicitly rejecting both male and female.

That is not expansion and is not inclusive.

Like I said, the word is in flux and this is not the only way that singular they is being used. It is sometimes being used in an inclusive or generic sense; in that sense it can certainly mean "male, female, or neither."

I find inherent conflict between the inclusive and exclusive uses of the word.

 

49 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I agree with the first part. People using the terms FOR THEMSELVES are often choosing it to explicitly represent neither. It’s just not clear to me that people following this trend and applying it to others share that sentiment when applying it generically, to others besides themselves. I’ve heard my oldest use these terms to apply to random friends and that’s not how they’re using it, at all. I agree that it’s a work/word in progress. I just think it may settle into being a perfectly acceptable neutral and inclusive choice sooner rather than later. According to DD, I was born in the 1900s so...I’m trying to listen to/for these varied uses and see how things evolve. It’s not an area where I feel like I’m on solid ground.

I don’t personally know anyone who prefers to go by they/them, so I don’t know if individuals’ specific feelings. I’ve never gotten the impression that there was an intention of exclusion in their pronoun preference any more than a trans woman would suddenly want “she” to be exclusive to trans women and no longer applicable to the people for whom we’ve been using it all this time.

It may be an important and meaningful choice for themselves, but doesn’t negate other uses. 

[maize]

56 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I agree with the first part. People using the terms FOR THEMSELVES are often choosing it to explicitly represent neither. It’s just not clear to me that people following this trend and applying it to others share that sentiment when applying it generically, to others besides themselves. I’ve heard my oldest use these terms to apply to random friends and that’s not how they’re using it, at all. I agree that it’s a work/word in progress. I just think it may settle into being a perfectly acceptable neutral and inclusive choice sooner rather than later. According to DD, I was born in the 1900s so...I’m trying to listen to/for these varied uses and see how things evolve. It’s not an area where I feel like I’m on solid ground.

I hope you are right because I like having a neutral, generic third person singular.

[maize]

26 minutes ago, Carrie12345 said:

 

It may be an important and meaningful choice for themselves, but doesn’t negate other uses. 

This is not how language works--I don't have ownership of the words I use; the ways that I use words impacts what those words mean to the people around me, not just to me.

If some people are using "they" to mean "neither male nor female" it may not negate other uses of the word but it does impact the meaning of the word "in the wild" not just as that specific person is using it. One single individual doesn't usually have much impact, but in this case there are a lot of individuals using the word this way and that does necessarily have an impact on how the word will come to be understood by everyone.

This is a feature of the adaptable nature of language.

For a historic example: the word silly originally meant blessed or holy. As people started using it to mean things incompatible with "holy" it lost that meaning.

 

[Guest]

It's also not an argument that anyone makes. It's an argument that FOX news and other right wing media made up so they could rail against it and get viewers. 

It's so weird that people rail against situations where liberals  introduce themselves and state their pronouns, and rail against situations where forms ask for pronouns, and then also accuse liberals of being the ones who think liberals are trying to do away with variety in pronouns.  
 

Well, I personally hate Fox News and never watch it intentionally anymore, and *I*, at least, am not railing against the use of “They” if that is what someone prefers. What I do find absurd is using “they” persistently or for everybody on the slight chance that someone does not identify as male or female. It’s odd to me. It’s not inherently offensive to be a woman who identifies as a women, after all. 
 

I don’t like the far-left view that we should all be androgynous and not apparently female or male. It’s super rare for people to prefer this, so I simply don’t think it’s an allowance we should make everywhere on the slight chance someone is non-binary. 
 

Forgive the formatting; I’m on my mobile.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Quill

[J-rap]

Getting back to the original post...  Something like that would definitely stand out to me and make me curious, but I wouldn't spend much more than a minute thinking about it.  So I'll use that minute here.  😄  I'd assume that it was an issue important to him, and in his mind, it was important enough to extend to his customers.   I'm sure he thought he was doing the right thing, even though I'd be puzzled that he didn't pick up on my cues.

That doesn't mean I don't have my own thoughts about gender identity issues, but I don't know if they (my thoughts on it) are really so important in the whole scheme of things.  Whether this is something here to stay or a something that will come and go in a generation, who knows.  Other things concern me so much more that it feels like a distraction to make this something to be too bugged about.

 

Edited June 5, 2021 by J-rap

[Catwoman]

1 hour ago, BaseballandHockey said:

It's so weird that people rail against situations where liberals  introduce themselves and state their pronouns, and rail against situations where forms ask for pronouns, and then also accuse liberals of being the ones who think liberals are trying to do away with variety in pronouns.  

Please don’t generalize about how “liberals” feel about this issue. 

We don’t all agree on it — nor do we agree on lots of other things. 

Personally, I think the CVS employee was wrong not to have used feminine pronouns as soon as SKL referred to her dd as “she” and “her.”

And maybe this will make some people’s heads explode, but this particular liberal still has no problem with people making the initial default assumption about a person being male or female and calling them by those pronouns, and then changing to a different pronoun if the person requests it.

Like it or not, the vast majority of people refer to themselves as male or female, and I would guess that a very large percentage of those people would not like the idea of being referred to in a gender-neutral manner, particularly when it was done repeatedly despite correction, as it was in the situation with SKL’s very girly dd. 

[Catwoman]

3 minutes ago, Quill said:

It's also not an argument that anyone makes. It's an argument that FOX news and other right wing media made up so they could rail against it and get viewers. 

It's so weird that people rail against situations where liberals  introduce themselves and state their pronouns, and rail against situations where forms ask for pronouns, and then also accuse liberals of being the ones who think liberals are trying to do away with variety in pronouns.  
 

Well, I personally hate Fox News and never watch it intentionally anymore, and *I*, at least, am not railing against the use of “They” if that is what someone prefers. What I do find absurd is using “they” persistently or for everybody on the slight chance that someone does not identify as male or female. It’s odd to me. It’s not inherently offensive to be a woman who identifies as a women, after all. 
 

I don’t like the far-left view that we should all be androgynous and not apparently female or male. It’s super rare for people to prefer this, so I simply don’t think it’s an allowance we should make everywhere on the slight chance someone is non-binary. 
 

Forgive the formatting; I’m on my mobile.

I agree with the idea that we should be respectful to people who request that we refer to them by pronouns like “they,” and I also agree that “they” shouldn’t be the default. 

I’m not sure why it’s somehow offensive to assume that the little old lady in the dress and flowery cardigan is actually female, and to refer to her as such. If she prefers to be called something else, I’m sure she will let me know, and I will politely oblige.

But I think it’s pretty ridiculous to think that we should never assume that the guy in front of us in line at the store is actually a guy. Realistically, our assumption will probably be correct about 99% of the time, and I think the odds of offending that guy by acting like we don’t know if he’s male would be a lot higher than accidentally referring to him as male when he would actually prefer us to use a different pronoun.

[SKL]

So when I said I think CVS should train its employees differently ... what I meant was:  you can use "they" before you know the individual's preferred pronouns.  However, then you need to listen and conform to their preferred pronouns.  Obvious hints of preferred pronouns:  being referred to by a gender-specific term (daughter, wife, sister, mother....); being referred to as he/she; having a gender-specific title included in their name (Mrs/Ms/Mr); probably others.  I also think it's acceptable, but not required, to assume gender when a person's name is unambiguous.  For example, in the US, the name Mary implies she/her; the name Robert implies he/him.  And furthermore, I don't think it's wrong to assume based on certain chosen styles of appearance.  Wearing a dress, heels, feminine jewelry, and a feminine haircut while being named Mary makes it reasonable for anyone to use she/her initially.  Then if the person asks for a different pronoun, the worker should adapt to that.

[Sneezyone]

10 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

I agree with the idea that we should be respectful to people who request that we refer to them by pronouns like “they,” and I also agree that “they” shouldn’t be the default. 

I’m not sure why it’s somehow offensive to assume that the little old lady in the dress and flowery cardigan is actually female, and to refer to her as such. If she prefers to be called something else, I’m sure she will let me know, and I will politely oblige.

But I think it’s pretty ridiculous to think that we should never assume that the guy in front of us in line at the store is actually a guy. Realistically, our assumption will probably be correct about 99% of the time, and I think the odds of offending that guy by acting like we don’t know if he’s male would be a lot higher than accidentally referring to him as male when he would actually prefer us to use a different pronoun.

I largely agree. I’m just withholding judgment/final verdict until my children tell me what the norm is. Cal me an unprincipled chicken, I don’t care. It’s one of those things I’m not particularly invested in so I can throw them this bone and earn brownie points. 🤣

Edited June 5, 2021 by Sneezyone

[stripe]

16 hours ago, KSera said:

Chances are far, far greater than not she feels just fine about it. I don’t think the pharmacy counter at CVS is a meaningful place to address it anyway, if not. 

And why would that even be the time to force children to reveal their gender nonbinariness, which is what demanding someone’s pronouns is asking for. 
I personally loath the idea that we’re all supposed to say person with a penis/testicles/vagina/cervix instead of male or female. It is so crass. And excludes men who’ve suffered tragic accidents (12% of battle injuries involve genitourinary trauma) and women with birth defects or the HALF of women who don’t know they have a cervix or don’t know where it is or women who’ve had hysterectomies. Not to mention the Canadian and UK health plans’ encouragement and financial support for trans women to get a Pap smear.

[Catwoman]

Just now, Sneezyone said:

I largely agree. I’m just withholding judgment.final verdict until my children tell me what the norm is. Calm em a chicken, I don’t care. It’s one of those things I’m not particularly invested in so I can throw them this bone and earn brownie points. 🤣

Hey, you have to earn those points somehow! 

[SKL]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I largely agree. I’m just withholding judgment/final verdict until my children tell me what the norm is. Calm me a chicken, I don’t care. It’s one of those things I’m not particularly invested in so I can throw them this bone and earn brownie points. 🤣

I wouldn't be surprised if the "norm" varies from place to place, and changes rapidly, in the circles our kids move in.

The individual at the CVS who insisted on using "they" appeared to be in his 20s.

That said, the vast majority of pharmacy customer interactions are going to involve people on the older side.  Like it or not, their feelings matter too.

[Sneezyone]

12 minutes ago, SKL said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the "norm" varies from place to place, and changes rapidly, in the circles our kids move in.

The individual at the CVS who insisted on using "they" appeared to be in his 20s.

That said, the vast majority of pharmacy customer interactions are going to involve people on the older side.  Like it or not, their feelings matter too.

Maybe, but I think CVS doesn’t represent national trends on this issue given it’s customer and employee base. DD (16) has friends all over the country and world thanks to DHs occupation. They don’t see things like I do. My kids represent a much bigger cohort than I do and majority rules. That same cohort prefers a lot of terms that I find abhorrent or odd. I’m determined not to count myself among the number that declares ‘get off my lawn!’. 🤷🏽‍♀️

Edited June 5, 2021 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

7 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Maybe, but I think CVS doesn’t represent national trends on this issue given it’s customer and employee base. DD (16) has friends all over the country and world thanks to DHs occupation. They don’t see things like I do. My kids represent a much bigger cohort than I do and majority rules. That same cohort prefers a lot of terms that I find abhorrent or odd. I’m determined not to count myself among the number that declares ‘get off my lawn!’. 🤷🏽‍♀️

Not sure what you mean by "majority rules."  Do you mean in terms of language used in your family, or in the US / world?  I think the majority in the US/world expect gendered terms to be the norm.

[Sneezyone]

13 minutes ago, SKL said:

Not sure what you mean by "majority rules."  Do you mean in terms of language used in your family, or in the US / world?  I think the majority in the US/world expect gendered terms to be the norm.

I mean language used in the English speaking world. The dominant usage is the one that will prevail in time. Right now, we’re in a time of transition. I think, however, that the dominant view of this will come to be defined by a majority of people in DD/DSs generation. As it happens, most of those people are on the coasts/in cities, even overseas.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

I mean, in the world. The dominant usage is the one that will prevail. Right now, we’re in a time of transition. I think, however, that the dominant view of this will come to be defined by a majority of people in that generation in the English speaking world. As it happens, most of those people are on the coasts/cities.

Well, after all of us are dead, I guess pronoun usage will be different, but it will be a while IMO before "they" becomes the default among adults.

And to be honest, and politically incorrect, I think some of this is a fad.  A lot of young people currently identifying in school as "not cis/not straight" haven't had their first serious crush.  I know a girl who declared she was "pan" and another "bisexual" at age 12.  At 14, that has now changed to "straight" and "non binary."  Not sure what is coming next, but neither of these girls has had more than a crush (and the crushes were on boys).  Oh and now, a lot of 14yo girls are calling themselves "asexual."  Check back with me in several years.

Another thing is, who's teaching the kids what these things are?  My kid has commented that __ is a trans boy because she doesn't like make-up.  I guess that makes me a man!  There is a lot of confusion, and I hope it gets sorted out before anyone gets hurt.

Young people get together and label their parents __-ophobe, which doesn't help when we're trying to promote clarity.

[melmichigan]

My children were the ones that gave me that quick fact about age.  🙃

I was going to mention the AP Stylebook yesterday, but got distracted.  The change was made in 2017.

We have to get our local prescriptions filled at CVS.  They are always running ragged and overworked.  I live in a small town, so that helps a bit, but I give them the benefit of the doubt, and always check our scripts.  

[Sneezyone]

9 minutes ago, SKL said:

Well, after all of us are dead, I guess pronoun usage will be different, but it will be a while IMO before "they" becomes the default among adults.

And to be honest, and politically incorrect, I think some of this is a fad.  A lot of young people currently identifying in school as "not cis/not straight" haven't had their first serious crush.  I know a girl who declared she was "pan" and another "bisexual" at age 12.  At 14, that has now changed to "straight" and "non binary."  Not sure what is coming next, but neither of these girls has had more than a crush (and the crushes were on boys).  Oh and now, a lot of 14yo girls are calling themselves "asexual."  Check back with me in several years.

Another thing is, who's teaching the kids what these things are?  My kid has commented that __ is a trans boy because she doesn't like make-up.  I guess that makes me a man!  There is a lot of confusion, and I hope it gets sorted out before anyone gets hurt.

Young people get together and label their parents __-ophobe, which doesn't help when we're trying to promote clarity.

Maybe but I don’t think so. Yes, young people are often confused but I don’t think this change WRT the acceptance of ambiguity (in language or identification) is going anywhere. I was certainly less ‘fixed’ in my sentiments WRT romantic partners when I was younger and don’t have any issues with my kids exploring their preferences in safe, responsible ways. My kids certainly haven’t learned these things from me either. We discuss medical facts only. My DD follows politicians she likes on Instagram, for ex. Again, I’m not bothered by that. I choose to emphasize the quality of their sources over the content. They have their own minds.

Edited June 5, 2021 by Sneezyone

[QueenCat]

1 hour ago, Catwoman said:

Please don’t generalize about how “liberals” feel about this issue. 

We don’t all agree on it — nor do we agree on lots of other things. 

Personally, I think the CVS employee was wrong not to have used feminine pronouns as soon as SKL referred to her dd as “she” and “her.”

And maybe this will make some people’s heads explode, but this particular liberal still has no problem with people making the initial default assumption about a person being male or female and calling them by those pronouns, and then changing to a different pronoun if the person requests it.

Like it or not, the vast majority of people refer to themselves as male or female, and I would guess that a very large percentage of those people would not like the idea of being referred to in a gender-neutral manner, particularly when it was done repeatedly despite correction, as it was in the situation with SKL’s very girly dd. 

This liberal concurs with you. 

[Jenny in Florida]

14 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

Gender neutral language did actual arise as part of a movement to neutralise sexism.

Two different things being conflated here, though.

And saying that one isn't valid or worthwhile because the other "didn't work" just doesn't hold up. (Not to mention it's a pretty heartless excuse for denying other humans the right to feel that their identities are accepted and respected.)

[Jenny in Florida]

11 hours ago, SKL said:

My daughter's assumption is that the guy was gay and was making a statement because it's pride month.

Wow, that's .  .  . a leap.

Not everything is a "statement." Sometimes, people are just following the script or not paying attention to the mundane administrative details or just being normal, awkward humans.

And sometimes people are gay and comfortable enough in their own skins not to need to make every interaction a political statement.

And some people are gay and not big fans of pride month.

And sometimes it might be any combination of the above things.

But I really doubt it was intended to be as big a deal as your reaction seems to make it.

[SKL]

2 minutes ago, Jenny in Florida said:

Wow, that's .  .  . a leap.

Not everything is a "statement." Sometimes, people are just following the script or not paying attention to the mundane administrative details or just being normal, awkward humans.

And sometimes people are gay and comfortable enough in their own skins not to need to make every interaction a political statement.

And some people are gay and not big fans of pride month.

And sometimes it might be any combination of the above things.

But I really doubt it was intended to be as big a deal as your reaction seems to make it.

Yeah, I'm just sharing how the individual 14yo reacted to CVS guy's behavior toward her.  I think she's entitled to her own feelings about how he referred to her.

I'm not making it a big deal.  I just wanted to see how others reacted, and whether this is some kind of policy or trend nowadays.

[Sneezyone]

15 minutes ago, SKL said:

Yeah, I'm just sharing how the individual 14yo reacted to CVS guy's behavior toward her.  I think she's entitled to her own feelings about how he referred to her.

I'm not making it a big deal.  I just wanted to see how others reacted, and whether this is some kind of policy or trend nowadays.

How does does she even know tho? Was she present or was she told your version of events?