Sir, – I have tried for the last two weeks to get an answer from various Ministers, Government Departments, and the Higher Education Authority as to whether or not it is unlawful to refuse to use preferred pronouns. I have not received any clarification on the matter. Fintan O’Toole, in his piece “It is good manners to address people by preferred pronouns” glibly provides the answer: “It isn’t and it shouldn’t be” (Opinion & Analysis, October 10th). I appreciate his opinion and share his view that it should not be unlawful to refuse to use preferred pronouns and suggest that clarification from the Government on this matter is now needed. Those working in educational settings need clear guidance on this matter in the interests of both staff and students.
In his article, O’Toole employs a straw man logical fallacy and misrepresents my views. He says (referring to me), “I think she’s wrong to go further and claim that requiring staff to use a person’s preferred mode of address could result in discrimination against those who do not subscribe to gender identity theory”. I have never claimed such a thing. What I actually said was: “I support the broad aims of the policy, but not the methods. All students should be treated fairly and equally. But the methods of this policy could result in discrimination against those who do not subscribe to gender identity theory and who believe that biology is more relevant than gender identity in matters such as women’s sports and changing rooms”. This accurate quote was published in The Irish Times on October 5th in a news article by Carl O’Brien. You will note that I was referring to a specific gender identity policy rather than just to the use of preferred pronouns.
The policy I was referring to supports self-identification with, or without, a gender recognition certificate. This means that students and staff can play on sports teams and use changing rooms and be housed in accommodation in line with their gender identity rather than their biological sex. As such, a female student rugby player who does not subscribe to gender identity theory and who believes that consideration of biological differences should be prioritised over gender identity (including for upholding principles of fairness and safety in women’s sports) can infer from the policy that any male who identifies as a woman is to be permitted to play on the women’s team and to use the women’s changing rooms. This would suggest discrimination is, indeed, possible.
Gender is a protected characteristic in Irish legislation whereby gender refers to the sex binary of male or female. Our equalities legislation also provides protections within this category for those who have undergone gender reassignment.
Dublin riots left north inner city youth ‘traumatised’ by the stigma of violence
A helping hand with the cost of caring: what supports are available?
Matt Williams: Take a deep breath and see how Sam Prendergast copes with big Fiji test
New Irish citizens: ‘I hear the racist and xenophobic slurs on the streets. Everything is blamed on immigrants’
O’Toole also makes a significant fallacy of omission by neglecting to mention that I have no problem using preferred pronouns. However, I do not think it is appropriate that use of preferred pronouns is compelled. I use them because I choose to do so. I also have concerns that relatively newly emerging neo-pronouns such as zie/zim/zir or noun-self pronouns such as bun/bunself or kitten/kittenself will have a deleterious impact on both students and staff in an environment where the use of preferred pronouns is compelled. I myself believe that sex is binary and immutable and although I do not have a gender identity myself, and do not have any preferred pronouns, I understand and accept that gender identities are very real and important for those who do have them.
Finally, Fintan O’Toole suggests it is bad mannered and shows a lack of respect if educators do not address students according to the student’s preferred pronouns and name. Dr Hillary Cass, who wrote the Cass review interim report on the UK’s Tavistock Gender Identity Development Service, has stated that there are different views on the benefits versus the harms of social transition and that social transition (commonly involving preferred pronouns and a change of name) is not a neutral intervention and has potentially “significant effects on the child or young person in terms of their psychological functioning”. She has pointed out that research on the impacts of social transition are lacking.
My own approach to gender identity theory is to stress the need for clarity, for up-to-date research and for basing decisions and policies on evidence and best medical practice, rather than on ideology. – Yours, etc,
COLETTE COLFER,
Waterford.