Passenger Complaint regarding Gender

[baz962]

But...they are passengers.

But , they don't want to be called that. Or does that not matter.

 

[Journeyman]

But , they don't want to be called that. Or does that not matter.

How do you know? Have you asked all of them?

 

[baz962]

Most women I know hate being referred to as "ladies". It's seen as a very patronising and outmoded term that has some negative connotations to it.

Which is neither here or there when I'm asking specifically for the women that do.

 

[NoRoute]

Because the world has moved on, and that is no longer inclusive language. All sorts of words are still in the dictionary, it doesn't mean using them is polite or considerate.

"Ladies and gentlemen" has sounded incredibly dated to me for years anyway, and I'm really not convinced it's fit for purpose any more.

This is entirely a matter of personal opinion. Many people consider "Ladies and gentlemen" a perfectly polite and reasonable way to address a group of people and it has been accepted as such for hundreds of years. Others are of course perfectly entitled to believe it to be old fashioned, or non-inclusive and use an alternative means of address, but that is purely their opinion and should not over-ride everyone else and it certainly shouldn't result in people using 'ladies and gentlemen' being criticised or sanctioned for using a perfectly reasonable phrase of speech.

 

[Journeyman]

Which is neither here or there when I'm asking specifically for the women that do.

I think you're just trying to be difficult, and don't properly understand the issue.

 

[Ianno87]

But , they don't want to be called that. Or does that not matter.

They're not excluded by being referred to as that. It's like me getting on a train and expecting to be referred to as Sir Topham Hatt.

 

[baz962]

How do you know? Have you asked all of them?

Not every woman I know , but some have specifically said that they do. They also feel customers make's them feel like a non special cash machine.

 

[Journeyman]

This is entirely a matter of personal opinion. Many people consider "Ladies and gentlemen" a perfectly polite and reasonable way to address a group of people and it has been accepted as such for hundreds of years. Others are of course perfectly entitled to believe it to be old fashioned, or non-inclusive and use an alternative means of address, but that is purely their opinion and should not over-ride everyone else and it certainly shouldn't result in people using 'ladies and gentlemen' being criticised or sanctioned for using a perfectly reasonable phrase of speech.

I agree that generating a very public Twitter sh*tstorm is a bad move. However, I don't see how any reasonable person can object to a polite all-inclusive greeting.

 

[Ianno87]

I agree that generating a very public Twitter sh*tstorm is a bad move. However, I don't see how any reasonable person can object to a polite all-inclusive greeting.

Which doesn't even have to be a big deal: "Welcome to all passengers" or something that nobody sane would bat an eyelid about.

 

[221129]

I am somewhat surprised at a union rep (who I would fully expect to challenge any issues they come across, like being a manager that's part of their role to some degree) choosing to report it to the company on public social media rather than having a word when it would inevitably blow up and make the national press, and not in a good way for anyone concerned. I would say that was remarkably poor judgement.

I'm not. This individual has a habit of pulling such stunts. Throws their toys out the pram at the slightest inconvenience.

 

[Darandio]

Wouldn't 'peasants' be more appropriate? Especially given how the passengers are often treated.

Seriously though, this wasn't a great move and although there are many huge battles still to be fought in the name of inclusion and representation they need to be picked better than this.

 

[Journeyman]

Which doesn't even have to be a big deal: "Welcome to all passengers" or something that nobody sane would bat an eyelid about.

Exactly. That's a perfectly reasonable and friendly greeting that works perfectly. In time it'll become completely standard anyway.

 

[Darandio]

Bit off that an RMT rep has thrown a member of staff under the bus in such a public way.

It seems to me that LNER are the ones who have done that. Could have been handled so much better by all parties.

 

[Journeyman]

Wouldn't 'peasants' be more appropriate? Especially given how the passengers are often treated.

Seriously though, this wasn't a great move and although there are many huge battles still to be fought in the name of inclusion and representation they need to be picked better than this.

It's worth raising as an issue, but not in this particular way. If I ever made it into the pages of the Daily Mail, I'd be mortified. Talk about setting your cause back a few decades...

 

[NoRoute]

I agree that generating a very public Twitter sh*tstorm is a bad move. However, I don't see how any reasonable person can object to a polite all-inclusive greeting.

Yes, there's nothing objectionable about using a more generic or alternative greeting, but it's also perfectly reasonable for someone to use 'ladies and gentlemen'.

 

[Journeyman]

Yes, there's nothing objectionable about using a more generic or alternative greeting, but it's also perfectly reasonable for someone to use 'ladies and gentlemen'.

I'd say it's becoming increasingly less so as time goes on, and it's worth being aware of that. Certainly most people born this century would bristle at it, and plenty of them are adults now.

 

[Ianno87]

, but it's also perfectly reasonable for someone to use 'ladies and gentlemen'.

Used to be. But time moves on.

 

[NoRoute]

I'd say it's becoming increasingly less so as time goes on, and it's worth being aware of that. Certainly most people born this century would bristle at it, and plenty of them are adults now.

But again, this is purely opinion and the opinion of those who bristle is no more valid or important than those who continue to regard it as a polite means of address.

 

[Journeyman]

But again, this is purely opinion and the opinion of those who bristle is no more valid or important than those who continue to regard it as a polite means of address.

But if someone is offended by something, we should stop doing it. Because that's, you know, not being rude.

It used to be considered acceptable put up signs that said "No Coloured, No Irish" in house windows. I'd say the opinion of those who were offended by that is much more valid than the opinion of those who weren't.

 

[Iskra]

But if someone is offended by something, we should stop doing it. Because that's, you know, not being rude.

It used to be considered acceptable put up signs that said "No Coloured, No Irish" in house windows. I'd say the opinion of those who were offended by that is much more valid than the opinion of those who weren't.

So why is it acceptable to use terms such as 'gammon,' but not 'ladies and gentlemen?' One is pejorative, one isn't?

 

[Ianno87]

So why is it acceptable to use terms such as 'gammon,' but not 'ladies and gentlemen?' One is pejorative, one isn't?

I dislike the term "gammon", but it is directed at a section of society that is not by any stretch of the imagination marginalised or discriminated against.

 

[Journeyman]

So why is it acceptable to use terms such as 'gammon,' but not 'ladies and gentlemen?' One is pejorative, one isn't?

I was making a point with it.

I dislike the term "gammon", but it is directed at a section of society that is not by any stretch of the imagination marginalised or discriminated against.

...but are absolutely convinced they are.

 

[Iskra]

I was making a point with it.

It weakens your point.

 

[Journeyman]

It weakens your point.

That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. It's lazy shorthand, admittedly, but my point stands.

 

[Loppylugs]

Pathetic, it's a polite and perfect address. So what do we address Lady Gaga as now? (Careful!)

 

[Iskra]

That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. It's lazy shorthand, admittedly, but my point stands.

I think it makes you look daft and hypocritical when you're simultaneously trying to argue for inclusive language.

 

[Journeyman]

I think it makes you look daft and hypocritical when you're simultaneously trying to argue for inclusive language.

I didn't use it in any personal sense against any particular individual. I was referring to a body of opinion. Said body of opinion regularly throws homophobic and transphobic slurs about, so I'm not exactly desperately worried about upsetting them, if I'm honest.

 

[221129]

I didn't use it in any personal sense against any particular individual.

So exactly the same as the TM in this scenario then.

 

[XAM2175]

So what do we address Lady Gaga as now? (Careful!)

She'd be included in "passengers" or "guests" or "customers".

 

[Journeyman]

She'd be included in "passengers" or "guests" or "customers".

Exactly. Hence why inclusive language works. It even includes gammons.