Call Me By My Pronouns
Making the case for workplace gender identity protections
When Ames Simmons, a queer trans male, transitioned at his corporate health care job in Georgia, his company had no policies for easing this process or protecting him from workplace harassment. Simmons navigated his transition at work himself, speaking to managers and his fellow employees to explain his changing appearance, name and pronouns. “I told them that they’re with a company that of that size, which was five or 6000 people there, I guaranteed there, there’s at least one employee who’s sweating in their cubicle, because they need to transition and they’re afraid that if they do that, that the company is going to fire them,” says Ames.
Ames ended up leaving the company not even a full year after he transitioned, and now works as the policy director at Equality NC, an organization that advocates for the rights of LGBTQIA+ people in North Carolina. As part of his position at Equality NC, Ames facilitates LGBTQIA+ workplace protection workshops at companies and organizations throughout the state. He believes any workplace should do their best to ensure that LGBTQIA+ employees are safe. “That doesn’t cost the company anything to, you know, provide reassurance in the form of a neutral process that trans people can go through in the workplace to make sure that they’re respected,” he says.
As gender pronouns become increasingly accepted and understood in the United States, some local governments have passed gender identity and expression workplace protection statutes. Right-leaning voices have criticized these laws, citing these policies threaten the First Amendment and freedom of speech. Yet using a person’s correct pronouns is foundational to addressing them with dignity and respect. Passing LGBTQIA+ workplace protections that safeguard gender pronoun usage at the national and local level is an important step at improving the safety and well-being of trans and gender non-conforming individuals.
For some people, gender pronouns are a normal part of everyday life. Pronoun “go rounds,” where people share what gender pronouns they use, are common in some academic, professional and social settings. In this practice, people will say their name and their pronouns: like she, her, he, him, and they, them. Yet some Americans might not understand or agree with the reasoning behind a pronoun go round. A 2019 study found that 47 percent of Americans are uncomfortable with gender neutral pronouns. 56 percent of all adults think that forms and online profiles should not give extra options beyond “man” and “woman.”
Cities and municipalities are increasingly recognizing that pronouns usage is an important tenant of LGBTQIA+ anti-harassment policies. New York City, Washington D.C. and the state of California have all passed laws that require people to adhere to a person’s gender pronouns in the workplace. The language in these laws are similar. The New York City Commission on Human Rights’ law, “requires employers and covered entities to use the name, pronouns and title (e.g., Ms./Mrs./Mx.) with which a person self-identities, regardless of the person’s sex assigned at birth, anatomy, gender, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on the person’s identification.” The Washington D.C. statute addresses pronouns by saying that “deliberately misusing a person’s preferred name or pronoun” constitutes harassment.
Some have voiced opposition to these pronoun-specific LGBTQIA+ protections, saying these rules violate the First Amendment. In 2016 op-ed by Eugene Volokh published in The Washington Post he states, “So people can basically force us — on pain of massive legal liability — to say what they want us to say, whether or not we want to endorse the political message associated with that term, and whether or not we think it’s a lie.” Taken literally, asking someone to saying something, like using a certain gender pronoun, is compelled speech. But LGBTQIA+ advocates and legal experts say there’s a stronger argument that using someone’s correct pronouns is a matter of human dignity. Not using someone’s correct pronouns can be considered sexual discrimination. In light of the Bostock vs. Clayton County Supreme Court decision in 2019, discrimination based on sex is included in Title VII protections.
What do experts in LGBTQIA+ advocacy, policy, and law make of workplace gender expression protections and pronoun statues? Ames Simmons explains why he sees pronoun usage as a basic gesture of respect, and not something that violates a person’s freedom of speech.
Dr. Caitlin Carlson, a communications law professor at the University of Seattle, echoes that a First Amendment argument against gender pronoun usage has some holes.
Paul Castillo is a lawyer with Lambda Legal, a legal organization dedicated to protecting LGBTQIA+ rights. Castillo was on the legal team for the landmark case Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized gay marriage. Castillo explains that any kind of sexual of harassment or discrimination is barred in the workplace. The Bostock vs. Clayton County case codified this into law.
Castillo also makes the distinction that while freedom of speech is protected in the public sphere, private employers can legally place restrictions on their employees’ speech when they’re in the workplace. Respecting people’s pronouns in the workplace falls under this type of speech constriction.
If an employer or employee is misgendering someone in the workplace, Bostock could be applicable to a potential workplace harassment lawsuit. Yet it’s difficult to decipher how federal court cases can apply to people’s own lives, especially if cities or municipalities have not made any statements or laws that protect LGBTQIA+ people in the workplace. Both Castillo and Dr. Carlson see the importance of local gender identity statutes so LGBTQIA+ employees know their rights. It’s important for people to understand when or how they can advocate for themselves if they see or are experiencing harassment.
Lastly, the following are first person testimonies from three trans and gender non-conforming individuals who live in North Carolina and have experienced misgendering in the workplace. First, you’ll hear from Ames Simmons, who speaks about how the corporate company he worked at did not fully support or aid his transition process at work. Next, you’ll hear from Wade Deisely who explains the challenges that LGBTQIA+ people can face working minimum wage jobs in the rural south. Lastly, you’ll hear from Maxwell Pulley who speaks about how he navigates a new workplace and decides when, or if, to come out to his employers.