Am I conveying disrespect if I omit my gender pronoun from a conference nametag?

Question

Situation

I have an academic conference coming up, and on the registration site we are instructed to optionally enter a personal gender pronoun (PGP) to appear on our name tags. To enter it or not to enter it?

---

Thoughts

My personal view is the following: if someone does include a PGP on their tag, then I understand that they'd like me to know something about their identity in order to respectfully converse with/about them. In the case that that person does use an non-standard pronoun (if that's the right terminology), then this offers them what is already privileged to those whose gender is aligned with societal assumptions (e.g. a white male who identifies as a man and uses the PGP "he/his", like me) to not have to make their identity a point of conversation at the outset of any interaction. So, I respect and appreciate that the organizing committee is being progressive and inclusive in this sense.

As for myself, I don't have any desire to include my PGP on the name tag. I simply don't have a very strong sense of identity, and don't think of the self in those terms. I realize that there is a painfully obvious response to this; I don't have to worry about it because I already conform to societal assumptions about gender anyway. I have the privilege of knowing that no one is going to call me "she" by accident. But, if I ask myself if I would strongly object if someone did... I dunno, I suppose I'd prefer that didn't happen.

We can look at another dimension of identity, ethnicity, to try and isolate exactly what I'm saying. I'm Italian, which means I have dark skin and hair. Fairly often in life I've encountered people who make the false assumption that I'm actually Mexican or middle eastern. I may correct them if it was appropriate to do so, but really I've never been offended or uncomfortable by it; I simply don't care enough about identity. If there was an optional field for filling in your ethnicity on a conference nametag, I wouldn't have any desire to complete that either, even though I do know that mine is often mistaken.

A potential flaw with this analogy is that gender is ubiquitous in conversation. The same is not true of ethnicity necessarily. Still, all I mean is that I don't feel compelled to broadcast anything about my identity as a pretext to interaction. If someone wants to learn about who I am, they can speak to me. It wouldn't make me more comfortable to walk around knowing that information about my identity can be obtained on sight (be it gender or anything else).

---

Note:

I do not want to be misunderstood as attempting to assert my beliefs onto others. Even though I don't put strong value in identity, I'm not saying that identity is objectively not valuable; I respect that to some people identity is of enormous value, and I appreciate that those people put their PGP on their name tag so that I can treat them the way they'd like to be treated.

---

Question

Now, my real question is not necessarily about the agreeableness of the position I've described above (though I'm happy to discuss it). Rather, I'd like to ask if the act of omitting the PGP from the name tag itself, even if well motivated/justified, is inadvertently signaling any disrespect. At the last one of these conferences, the vast majority of people did include the PGP. Now, I don't feel compelled to conform for conformity's sake, but I also don't want to give the false impression that I'm a proponent of gender binarism.

Answer 1

It seems to me that the way to signal respect is, quite simply, by literally respecting people’s choice as to how they wish to present themselves to the world. So I’d advise you to take care to refer to people using their preferred pronoun as they chose to list it on their name tag (or using common sense if no pronoun is indicated). And don’t insult or think ill of anyone for making a choice that you disagree with regarding their pronoun, or regarding a choice not to list a pronoun for that matter.

While this advice may seem too obvious to be helpful, my point is that you are also entitled to the same respect that I just advised you to accord others. When you fill that form, you are choosing how you wish to present yourself to the world. Any choice that you make is 100% legitimate and deserves to be respected, including not wanting to list a pronoun. You don’t owe anyone a reason or an explanation of what (if anything) you are trying to “signal”. And anyone who professes to support other people’s rights to choose a pronoun to describe themselves, by extension supports your right to describe yourself however you choose to. Thus, I don’t see how any such person can take offense to your decision without being inconsistent and somewhat of a hypocrite. It doesn’t mean there aren’t such people who would find a way to imbue your action with a meaning it doesn’t have and take offense, but if there are I’m pretty sure you can safely ignore them, or, better yet, if challenged by them you can easily (and in a friendly way, I suggest) explain to them why they are misguided to be offended.

---

Edit: To address some of what’s been said in the comments and other answers, here are a couple more thoughts that occurred to me:

1. Someone (@vaelus) said my answer sidesteps the question since it focuses on whether people should be offended, but “doesn't advise on how likely it actually is for people to be offended.” That is correct. The reason why I chose to focus on this aspect is that there are situations where any action we take is likely to offend or annoy someone. Arguably most of life is like that, since the world unfortunately has many unreasonable people. Here too, I expect that some people will likely be annoyed also by the inclusion of pronouns on name tags, and might specifically be annoyed with OP if they were to take the action of including one. So it’s a Catch 22, damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t sort of situation. Therefore in my opinion the correct way to make decisions about tricky dilemmas like this is to base your actions on logic, and to be at peace with your own choices and be prepared to defend them if challenged. “Will people be offended?” is simply the wrong question to ask.

2. A lot of people are focusing on what OP will be “signaling” with each of the various choices that are available to them. And yet I find it amusing and interesting that almost everyone with an opinion is reading the “signal” a bit differently from everyone else. So, if the signal is such that 10 people look at it and each one is “reading” a different meaning into it (and appearing pretty confident that their reading is the correct one) isn’t that a sign that there actually isn’t any signal there to interpret, or that if there is then it is an extremely weak one at best? (Moreover, this is after we read OP’s very detailed explanation of what their opinion actually is! No signal is even necessary in this case.) So again, I think the focus on the signal is misguided. As @vladhagen said in another answer, the pronoun field is optional, and optional means precisely that. The only signal that not including a pronoun legitimately sends is “I chose to exercise my right not to include a pronoun.”

Answer 2

At the last one of these conferences, the vast majority of people did include the PGP.

I suspect your refusal in this might come off more of rejecting the idea of PGPs rather than choosing not to have your own, which is at least mildly rude.

You describe yourself as looking like a cishet man (I don't have to worry about it because I already conform to societal assumptions about gender anyway. I have the privilege of knowing that no one is going to call me "she" by accident.), which - fairly or unfairy - I think would make people more likely to interpret a blank gender field as a rejection, rather than "no pronoun preferred." You may have to be explicity about your support for PGPs.

I'm curious, what would you do if you were in a meeting and everyone went around and said "names and pronouns please"? Would you still say "I don't care, call me what you want"?

but I also don't want to give the false impression that I'm a proponent of gender binarism.

Putting either binary pronoun down wouldn't be seen as an endorsement of gender binarism. As far as I know, there are not separate pronouns for people who are proponents of a gender sepectrum yet identify as a member of the traditional genders.

Still, all I mean is that I don't feel compelled to broadcast anything about my identity as a pretext to interaction. If someone wants to learn about who I am, they can speak to me

Yet, you do plan on wearing a nametag with your name on it, right?

---

On the whole, I wouldn't go so far as to say leaving an optional field blank is disrespectful (if it was mandatory, I would say it was rude), but if only for the first reason, I suggest you do it.

Keep in mind that normalizing sharing pronouns is as much for your comfort as for those who feel compelled to share theirs, either because theirs are unusual or because they don't look "typically" masculine or feminine. The reason we go around in a meeting and ask for pronouns is so one trans person (for example) doesn't feel called out because they chose to name their pronouns, but no one else did.

You say you don't have the desire to include a PGP on your nametag. Unless you truly desire not to have one, put one on. Maybe try "they," if you don't feel "he" works for you.

Answer 3

In the case that that person does use an non-standard pronoun (if that's the right terminology), then this offers them what is already privileged to those whose gender is aligned with societal assumptions (e.g. a white male who identifies as a man and uses the PGP "he/his", like me) to not have to make their identity a point of conversation at the outset of any interaction

People with non-binary pronouns do benefit from this kind of measure, but it's also helpful for some people who do have "he" or "she" pronouns which are not immediately obvious. This can include transgender people and those who are just plain androgynous.

I used to get addressed as "ma'am" on a regular basis. On one occasion when travelling in the USA they selected me for a random search and called for a female officer, even though they could have just looked at my ticket to see my first name. It still happens occasionally in my forties. I'm not bothered by it, but other people might be, and in my experience the people who make the mistake are often mortified when they realise. Pronoun badges etc. can help avoid that kind of awkwardness.

However, if only the non-gender-conforming people are wearing pronoun badges (or stating their pronouns in online profiles, etc. etc.) that can become uncomfortable. Being NGC is sometimes risky - I've been yelled at in public by a stranger who was angry because he couldn't immediately tell my gender, stared at for using the "wrong bathroom", and plenty of folk have had far worse experiences. When other folk also use pronoun badges/etc. it helps defuse this; it establishes the idea that giving your pronouns is a normal thing and doesn't have to flag you as a weirdo.

So, if you do choose to include your pronouns on your badge, you will be helping to make things a little more comfortable for the folk who need to include them.

But if the vast majority of folk at this conference are doing it, then one more or less is unlikely to make much difference, and it's unlikely that anybody would take it as an affront. What's important is that it's common practice, not that it's universal.

Answer 4

One of the strongest things you can do as a privileged ally is to use your position of privilege to erode systems of oppression.

While being explicit about your PGPs are optional for this conference, that optionality is really only available to folks in a position of privilege. Your ability to say "I don't have to worry about it" is not something available to others.

I think that leaving your PGP blank sends a signal that you're comfortable with your privilege. Taking the opportunity to normalize the sharing of PGPs and thereby drawing others into what is "normal" seems to be a signal more in line with the views that you expressed regarding inclusivity.

Answer 5

Not really disrespectful, but perhaps inadvertently signalling that you yourself don't have to worry about such things, because society's default works for you. Or, as often happens, signalling that due to your good fortune you are oblivious to the whole issue, etc. If you'd like to instead signal your awareness, I'd think do indicate your preferred pronouns.

(For what it's worth, I need to get around to systematically doing this on my web pages...)

Answer 6

Any time we visibly violate a social norm, other people notice, and will interpret that non-comformity through their own lens of understanding.

Whether abstaining from the practice is worth the possible misinterpretations is an individual judgment of conscience and practicality.

---

Leaving the information out is signalling something, however inadvertently. Exactly what is open to interpretation, but it is a signal. Moreover if, as you say, the majority of participants are including the information then including the information has become a social norm for this event. That means that omitting the information would violate this social norm, and including it would conform to the norm. In these circumstances, the signal sent by omitting pronouns from your name tag will be much stronger than the signal sent by including the information.

As an analogy, consider names. I'm not particularly attached to my given name. I don't hate it and don't have a better name in mind, I just don't identify with it very strongly. If people misspell it or mispronounce it or mistake it for something else it doesn't really bother me. I guess you could say I don't think of myself in terms of my name. But if I'm at an event where given names on name tags are the norm I still write it on a tag and slap it on my shoulder. Omitting the name tag would be confusing and potentially disconcerting to other people who are looking for that information. Wearing a name tag but leaving it blank would be even worse: that clearly looks like a STATEMENT of some sort, even if I only meant that "you can call me anything, just don't call me late for dinner" as my grandfather liked to say. Using my title and/or surname likely looks stuffy.

Now, names are not a highly contentious and emotive topic in my area, so at best I would be considered eccentric for omitting my given name, and at worst a crank or a snob. On the other hand, when I do include my name no one assumes that I am making a strong statement in favor of my name or declaring, with Andrew Carnegie, "that a person's name is to that person, the sweetest and most important sound in any language." As one person-wearing-a-name tag in a sea of others, the main thing I've signaled is "here is a person who knows the name tag etiquette of this event, whose name is ___."

In the case of personal pronouns, the topic is currently contentious and emotive. That means that if you omit the information when most others are including it the perceived message is likely to be more contentious. At best people might assume you are oblivious, at worst that you are actively dismissive or contemptuous of the practice. You may find people gently asking if you've forgotten something, or becoming slightly cooler to you after glancing at your tag—or sidling up to you to "commiserate" about the horrible practice of including pronouns on name tags.

If you do include the information, you will also be signalling something. If you were the only person at the event to include pronouns on your name tag then that inclusion would be a violation of the event's norms. In that case, the message might be interpreted as a protest against gender binarism or a personal quirk, or could just be baffling for individuals who have never seen the practice. But in this case you would be conforming to the social norm, which generally goes unnoticed—when was the last time you looked up in class and thought "Hey! That person is wearing pants! And SHOES!!!"¹? So for the vast majority of conference attendees, the message you convey by including pronouns would simply be "here is a person who understands the name tag etiquette of this event, and who prefers ___ pronouns."

---

¹ _{Unless, of course, you come from a place where "pants" means the intimate garment worn under clothing or the norm is some type of clothing other than western dress or are a time-traveller from the Victorian era, in which case seeing a (female) student in pants might well be a shocking violation of the social norm.}

Answer 7

I don't think it's disrespectful to leave it blank.

However, it doesn't cost you anything to fill it in, and by filling it in you are demonstrating that you think that it is a reasonable question and supporting the right of others, who may want to write something more surprising, to do so.

Hence, unless you feel strongly that this question should not be asked, I recommend filling it in as a supportive / ally action.

Answer 8

It sounds like if it is optional, then it is just that: optional.

If you wrote your PGP as "he/him" maybe that would signal an even stronger belief in binary gender norms.

We can respect people who request to be called by a certain PGP. But we do not need to feel obligated to disclose our own view on the subject via means of a nametag.

Answer 9

No, you are not disrespectful. Ideally (not in the real world, unfortunately) the only people who would object are those who would find unreasonable ways to disrespect you.

It is good that it is optional, as it should be. Everyone should have the freedom to define their own identity in these matters. If others want to define you, it isn't necessary to assist them.

Of course, this is just my opinion. But your own opinion is the one that should matter.

Answer 10

If it were me, I would just put the name down. I have no desire to participate in the pronoun game or over complicate things. A person's name should be perfectly sufficient for a "name" tag.

Answer 11

I'm not sure how so many people have missed a key part of the question: OP does not identify as a he/his. OP states so explicitly:

I simply don't have a very strong sense of identity, and don't think of the self in those terms.

Many answers assume that because OP is at home in a male body (OP's sex), OP must therefore be perfectly fine with the masculine gender (a strange set of ever-evolving societal expectations tied to behavior). But OP has gone so far as to ask this question and explicitly state distaste at writing the "default" pronoun: "I don't have any desire to include my PGP on the name tag."

OP has made it clear they identify outside of the gender binary. Now comes the tough part, because we don't have great words for that yet, and of course at this point, we're just left guessing which of the multitude of non-binary genders OP identifies as (which includes the option of not really identifying with any of them).

I'm in similar shoes myself: at home in a masculine body, entirely not at home with our society's definition of the masculine gender. I identify as genderqueer, and prefer "they/them". Since OP doesn't seem to identify that way, here are some other ideas for options that don't force much of a gender identity on OP:

• Human
• [Your Name]
• Doctor / Professor / Student
• Mathematician / Engineer / Researcher
• Any / None
• Ally
• Non-binary
• Still figuring it out
• You can call me "he" until our society comes up with better words
• Gender's complicated
• ze/hir, co/cos, xe/xem/xyr, hy/hym/hys

The key part is that you don't have to write down anything you don't identify with. That's the whole point of that space- to respect people's many and varied gender identities, and to explicitly state that we're bad at knowing someone's gender identity just by looking at their physical characteristics and making assumptions.

If you spend some time looking up agender pronouns or genderqueer pronouns, you'll see there's still nothing like a consensus around this, so unfortunately, you're stuck making the decision yourelf. The closest thing I can think of to dodging the issue is Human, using your name, or Ally. Human is what I try to use for all new people I meet, and it's worked out well for me for the past few years.

Answer 12

I highly doubt that anyone will take offense to you not filling out the PGP slot. If I were you and anyone came up to me and started to accuse me of being disrespectful, I'd assert that I intend no such disrespect and write them off as unreasonable (mentally, of course - heaven forbid I end up on Youtube). The conversation shouldn't start up at all if you never bring it up; you don't have to explain why you didn't fill it out, and I recommend that you don't, as no one can object if they don't know why you didn't do it.

Personally, if everyone else was filling it out, I'd think twice about leaving it blank, as that might be perceived as inflammatory.

The only thing you have to worry about would be other's potential reactions to it; morally and legally, you are in the clear. Be confident; this is only as much of an issue as you and others let it become.

Answer 13

For the particular situation you describe, with what I gather your motives are: I would put down a preference for a masculine pronoun.

Why?:

Firstly, it may do some good. You give a good summary of why asking this question might help (I won't repeat them, but I agree) and it's not going to work if everyone abstains.

Secondly, as other have pointed out, it does no harm. It's exceptionally unlikely that anyone would read putting down a preference as being an advocate of any stance on gender. It's not like you went out of your way to insist on a pronoun. Maybe this doesn't signal the interest you clearly have in the issue (and make others stop think about it). However it doesn't give an implication to the contrary and your not going to find a response that does in a drop-down list.

Finally, refusing to answer may be interpreted in a number of ways that you have no real control over. I think the question to ask is: "do the likely interpretations line up with the views I want to portray?". This bit is very subjective, but I would say no. I would have thought it more likely that someone would perceive not answering as: "I am not interested in this. (I'll get 'he' anyway)" than "I care, and have thought about this extensively, but I was not comfortable with any of the responses". Worse, within the "I care" group the "why" is equally open to interpretation. I imagine there are as many who are mocking or subverting the intention of the question as those trying to improve it. It might be worth noting here that in polarised issues, people tend to see threats more quickly than allies. I'd be reluctant to assume people will give you the benefit of the doubt in interpreting your stance.

So, is it rude not to answer: No, there are a host of reasons not to that are not rude at all and I like to think most would see it this way. But it may well be seen as rude by some, not everyone will have thought about it in the same way.

Is it worth it? This has been answered well elsewhere but: Up to you, there are no wrong answers.

Controversy time:

If it's free text (I'll go on a limb and say it's not) what to put? I would still put he/him. There may will be the magic combination of characters instead that has the desired affect but I doubt it. If this question turns into a complex game with rules and pitfalls and "damn, that's a better answer", people will stop playing. Maybe one day ... but one step at a time.

Answer 14

My suggestion is that, if you really have no preference, you should enter

(no preference)

on the registration form and leave it to the organizers to figure out how to process this. This may also help clue the organizers in that the way they are doing this may not be a good fit for everyone.

However, if there are pronouns you prefer to she, either pick one, or list your top choices, e.g.

he/they/zey

As some people have pointed out, just leaving that question blank could be construed as not being supportive of the organizers efforts. If you actual are opposed to the way this is done, and have a better suggestion, you could also communicate this to the organizers.