Forum Business Training forums hidden

[Anna C]

I also support what @Steve W. is saying. I tend to be a "go with the flow" type person so when something does catch my eye and not look quite right to me (as with "Brotherhood/Sisterhood" and "Ladies and Gentlemen Only"), I just kind of go "eh..." and then ignore it from that point forward. I mean, I spent 20 years in the military and you just have to learn to be like that, to a large degree. But I agree it seems old school and not inclusive. Society is changing, and this seems a bit of a misfit. Welcoming in those who might not feel welcomed by that presentation feels like a worthy goal to me.

 

[North Coast Miller]

I am largely clueless re a lot of this.
I understand not wanting to be labelled, but I cannot reconcile that with the insistence that one be relabelled. If one identifies with a gender other than how they present, or dresses one way, identifies another, defying any attempt to decipher their prefered gender or if they in fact prefer to not identify with a gender, how to be offended if someone is clueless re this? If I have to be told your pronoun, I don't feel like I'm the one with a communication or messaging problem here.

How do people who have rejected gender identity refer to their siblings?

End of day I don't really care one way or the other so long as respect is in evidence. If the phrase "brothers and sisters" or "ladies and gentlemen" is disrespectful then I am in favor of a change, but I honestly don't see that as disrespectful, restrictive, or uninviting. As mentioned, I don't get out much...

 

[Eric Wilson]

I appreciate the "Ladies and Gentlemen only" -- certainly it is the way we are to behave, and we treat everyone with dignity when we acknowledge that they were made to be one of these two. And words about how we behave are appropriate and desirable.

But "Brotherhood/sisterhood of strength"? Super awkward. If you aren't willing to use the old-fashioned language (in which it might be "brotherhood of strength", with the understanding that women are included) then maybe "Family of strength" is better.

The slashed construction feels forced, and for no clear benefit. Seeing "brotherhood/sisterhood of strength" show up in the breadcrumbs is weird, since there isn't a different part ot the forum.

 

[Boris Bachmann]

I appreciate the "Ladies and Gentlemen only" -- certainly it is the way we are to behave, and we treat everyone with dignity when we acknowledge that they were made to be one of these two. And words about how we behave are appropriate and desirable.

But "Brotherhood/sisterhood of strength"? Super awkward. If you aren't willing to use the old-fashioned language (in which it might be "brotherhood of strength", with the understanding that women are included) then maybe "Family of strength" is better.

The slashed construction feels forced, and for no clear benefit. Seeing "brotherhood/sisterhood of strength" show up in the breadcrumbs is weird, since there isn't a different part ot the forum.

I kinda find the whole "ladies and gentlemen" AND "brotherhood/sisterhood of strength" super awkward...

I absolutely DO appreciate the community-vibe that it's going for, but yeah, I agree w. Steve W on this. I teach for a living and times have changed. If I address a group of students as "ladies and gentlemen", I can pretty much expect a lot of eye rolls and sometimes flat out hostility. It doesn't matter what I personally think about gender and pronouns, it's about how people want to be addressed.

 

[Steve A]

The phrase is about behavior. Changing it to family/clan/whatever would be changing it to terms that are not about behavior. While it might seem reasonable to change it to something along the lines of "those who behave in a courteous and respectful fashion" there is enough evidence out there that this too, can be taken as exclusionary ("courteous/respectful as defined by X group"). I don't know whether any phrase is actually necessary if moderation and written standards of conduct are provided, but if one is to be used, one that suggests behavioral expectations adds more value than a generic welcome.

 

[Red_and_Black]

I really don't like the phrase. Less to do with the inclusivity that's been mentioned and more to do with the implications of the words; ladies in particular is horrible IMO, and most of my female friends find it dated, patronising, and off-putting. I"d vote for it to be dropped. If it's about signifying behaviour that's part of the problem, it's like something from the Victorian era, urgh.

E2A: just seen the Brotherhood/sisterhood etc. Cringe.

 

[offwidth]

I have to admit I am now following this discussion with some interest. I’m not sure any of us have a vote in this. It will be interesting to see if SF leadership reacts one way or the other on the topic. At the end of the day SF is a private organization that is more or less able to run their business as they see fit. This forum is a wonderful free resource, that we in turn are free to use or not use as we see fit, regardless of if we view certain verbiage as antiquated or exclusionary or not as is our own perspective.

 

[Bauer]

maybe "Family of strength" is better.

How about "School of Strength"

 

[Red_and_Black]

I have to admit I am now following this discussion with some interest. I’m not sure any of us have a vote in this. It will be interesting to see if SF leadership reacts one way or the other on the topic. At the end of the day SF is a private organization that is more or less able to run their business as they see fit. This forum is a wonderful free resource, that we in turn are free to use or not use as we see fit, regardless of if we view certain verbiage as antiquated or exclusionary or not as is our own perspective.

Yes, it totally wouldn't put me off using it, but I can see how it might to some people casually looking and then seeing that. (My mention of a vote was symbolic, know I have no say in this!)

 

[Mirek]

How do people who have rejected gender identity refer to their siblings?

If the scale is continuous, from brother=0 to sister=1, then you can have, e.g. 0.23 and 0.86, formerly known as brother and sister.
It's not binary but even infinite.

 

[Steve Freides]

I think we have said what there is to say here.

If the scale is continuous, from brother=0 to sister=1, then you can have, e.g. 0.23 and 0.86, formerly known as brother and sister.
It's not binary but even infinite.

… and then some.

-S-