Signallers should no longer be referred to as "signalmen"

[MattRat]

People are free to refer to themselves however they wish. But, language evolves, and when talking about the profession in general, or a person who hasn't expressed a preference, the default should be signaller. That is the term in the books and contracts, and that is the term which is not rooted in a basic assumption that only men can do the job. When people insist that the word "signalman" is the only word that is acceptable that indicates that they have those basic assumptions (which may well be subconscious) and aren't willing to challenge them.

Do you really think that only men are capable or want to be signallers? I can promise you, I know some very good fe male signallers and some very bad male signallers (and vice versa!)

Have you considered they just say it to wind people up? It's something I'd do. The best counter is to stop caring so much.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

I’m afraid you’re in the minority here Tazi, not the rest of us, and you seem to be the one getting most annoyed by it all.

On the forum, I may be in the minority, but in the real world... Especially outside of university and educational institutions.

 

[alxndr]

Have you considered they just say it to wind people up? It's something I'd do. The best counter is to stop caring so much.

I don't spend my days seething in rage over this. I saw a thread and thought I'd chime in with my take on it. Is that not the purpose of a forum?

It would be nice if it gave someone food for thought, but I know that on the balance of probabilities it won't.

 

[MattRat]

I don't spend my days seething in rage over this. I saw a thread and thought I'd chime in with my take on it. Is that not the purpose of a forum?

It would be nice if it gave someone food for thought, but I know that on the balance of probabilities it won't.

I didn't mean to suggest you have a problem, just that people do go out of their way to try and annoy people. If you don't get annoyed, that's fine, but some people do. And those people are the target. But, if more people were like you, then the 'prank' would simply fall flat on it's face.

 

[deltic]

There are still plenty of professions which have a gender distinction in the job title for which little fuss seems to be made.

Actor, waiter, midwife, to name but a few. Are those verboten?

Actor is unisex in its orgins - actress was orginally the term for female actors who were rumored to be prostitutes or sexually promiscuous.
Waitress is a relatively new term dating back to only 1834 - women were assuredlly waiting on tables a long time before that. Presumably the term came in so busissenesss could advertise just for women and so pay them less!
The wife in midwife does not refer to a wife as we know the term. It comes from old English where mid means with and wif means woman, ie the term means "with woman" and again is a unisex term.

 

[seagull]

Then you're wrong. Women worked out for themselves years ago that these terms are exclusive and outdated.

You're just making yourself look worse all the time here. Friendly piece of advice - you might want to consider quietly bowing out of this thread.

No he isn't wrong at all. Most women are quite unopiniated about such matters, or even pro keeping things like they are. Our postman signs the Christmas card "from your postman" and is very much a female. I asked her why and she laughed and said "well, I AM your postman, aren't I?"

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

I genuinely believe (and know) that the vast, vast majority of women in my life, from my daughter, my wife and extended family, that they would be far more offended by the absurd thought that I somehow reconsider my use of language to make them feel more “inclusive”!

People that promote all this tosh are generally very left wing / liberal, usually young (or working with younger people), and from middle to upper class backgrounds, and often are (allegedly) highly educated. Likely to be in a city, or large urban area, especially in London.

The actual test of normality or reasonableness is what the man on the Clapham omnibus thinks. (Yes, man! Or do we need to change our case law too?)

Not that I would advocate violence, but get yourself to a mining town in the North East, go into a local pub and correct their terminology for them. You’ll learn a whole new vocabulary in seconds, and may find your way to the local hospital!

 

[MattRat]

No he isn't wrong at all. Most women are quite unopiniated about such matters, or even pro keeping things like they are. Our postman signs the Christmas card "from your postman" and is very much a female. I asked her why and she laughed and said "well, I AM your postman, aren't I?"

Correction. Most people are unopiniated full stop. Most people only care about food on the table, and a roof over their head. It's only political types that bicker over terminology, or trolls who take advantage of the bickering an cause even more chaos.

 

[Journeyman]

I genuinely believe (and know) that the vast, vast majority of women in my life, from my daughter, my wife and extended family, that they would be far more offended by the absurd thought that I somehow reconsider my use of language to make them feel more “inclusive”!

People that promote all this tosh are generally very left wing / liberal, usually young (or working with younger people), and from middle to upper class backgrounds, and often are (allegedly) highly educated. Likely to be in a city, or large urban area, especially in London.

The actual test of normality or reasonableness is what the man on the Clapham omnibus thinks. (Yes, man! Or do we need to change our case law too?)

Not that I would advocate violence, but get yourself to a mining town in the North East, go into a local pub and correct their terminology for them. You’ll learn a whole new vocabulary in seconds, and may find your way to the local hospital!

Ah, yes. "I'm an Angry Old White Man. Therefore I must be right."

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Correction. Most people are unopiniated full stop. Most people only care about food on the table, and a roof over their head. It's only political types that bicker over terminology, or trolls who take advantage of the bickering an cause even more chaos.

So by that definition, most people couldn’t care less what someone’s proper job title is called? Which logically means that those who insist on a particular title are likely to be in a minority.

Ah, yes. "I'm an Angry Old White Man. Therefore I must be right."

I’m not white but old and a man.

I also think you’ll find that the majority of our population is old and white.

You only have to look at our government to understand that liberal / so called “woke” policies are not generally accepted by society, to the point where legislation is being enacted to force universities to promote alternative, divisive views, on threat of punitive compensation, and laws around
protecting statues are being proposed!

As people get older, they naturally mature and become more conservative generally, and understand these sorts of things don’t really matter compared to our other problems!

 

[Journeyman]

So by that definition, most people couldn’t care less what someone’s proper job title is called? Which logically means that those who insist on a particular title are likely to be in a minority.

You seem to be very fond of speaking on behalf of other people and assuming you know what they think, which is another pretty obnoxious trait.

I’m not white but old and a man.

Apologies, I shouldn't have brought race into it.

 

[MattRat]

So by that definition, most people couldn’t care less what someone’s proper job title is called? Which logically means that those who insist on a particular title are likely to be in a minority.

Well, that was what I was trying to say. Was I not clear? Apologies if so.

 

[alxndr]

If it's not appropriate to bring race into this discussion, why is it appropriate to bring gender into signal boxes?

 

[MattRat]

If it's not appropriate to bring race into this discussion, why is it appropriate to bring gender into signal boxes?

Personally, I just found it funny that the person trying to take the moral high ground ending up coming across as racist, meaning they aren't so moral after all.

 

[AlterEgo]

So many land mines in this thread.

Signaller still remains a perfectly cromunlent word and I honestly don’t know why anyone would die on a hill either for or against its use.

 

[Journeyman]

Personally, I just found it funny that the person trying to take the moral high ground ending up coming across as racist, meaning they aren't so moral after all.

I never claimed to be perfect, and I'm happy to be polite, even if the person I'm dealing with is being pretty obnoxious.

 

[AlterEgo]

I never claimed to be perfect, and I'm happy to be polite, even if the person I'm dealing with is being pretty obnoxious.

Just waiting for the inevitable apology for assuming the poster’s age and gender too.

 

[Journeyman]

Just waiting for the inevitable apology for assuming the poster’s age and gender too.

I think that was fairly obvious...

 

[MattRat]

I never claimed to be perfect, and I'm happy to be polite, even if the person I'm dealing with is being pretty obnoxious.

By assuming the worst in another, it comes across as a superiority complex. I like watching those sorts of people be knocked down a peg or two. Probably why politics keeps me interested.

 

[Journeyman]

By assuming the worst in another, it comes across as a superiority complex. I like watching those sorts of people be knocked down a peg or two. Probably why politics keeps me interested.

Personally, I'm not choosing to get massively offended by a job title that's been in widespread use for decades, I'm not trying to assume what others think, and I'm not calling for anyone to be brought down a peg or two, so my conscience is clear.

I'm being called "liberal", "left wing", "woke" and a "snowflake" like those things are insults!

They're all badges I wear with pride.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Again, I really couldn't care less what people choose to call themselves, or call others. I may well think you're a bit odd, or conversely I may actually like learning a new "term" which I come to prefer, but it's my choice.

What I vehemently object to is somebody telling ME how I ought to address other people, describe various jobs/roles etc, or that my choice of language somehow implies that I am an angry old white man who sets out to discriminate against gender equality because I'm somehow stuck in a Victorian mindset.

Just wait until I next see my milkman, postman, ice cream man and handyman ! I'll be reporting each of them to the authorities and quite rightly putting them out of business for each of them daring to refer to their roles in such a non inclusive, cuddly and 'safe' manner. I'd best fire my draftsman too, before he wreaks anymore havoc in the legal world. Even now I'm seeing discriminatory Facebook adverts for a local "man with a van". Hate speech for sure.

 

[Journeyman]

Again, I really couldn't care less what people choose to call themselves, or call others. I may well think you're a bit odd, or conversely I may actually like learning a new "term" which I come to prefer, but it's my choice.

You obviously do care, because you've posted here repeatedly.

What I vehemently object to is somebody telling ME how I ought to address other people, describe various jobs/roles etc, or that my choice of language somehow implies that I am an angry old white man who sets out to discriminate against gender equality because I'm somehow stuck in a Victorian mindset.

But "signaller" is the official job title, and has been for years. And your choice of language IS important, and it DOES matter. Quite why you find this term offensive, I have no idea.

Just wait until I next see my milkman, postman, ice cream man and handyman ! I'll be reporting each of them to the authorities and quite rightly putting them out of business for each of them daring to refer to their roles in such a non inclusive, cuddly and 'safe' manner. I'd best fire my draftsman too, before he wreaks anymore havoc in the legal world. Even now I'm seeing discriminatory Facebook adverts for a local "man with a van". Hate speech for sure.

You're just making a fool of yourself now.

 

[MattRat]

You obviously do care, because you've posted here repeatedly.

Wouldn't that also apply to you? And yes, also me.

 

[Journeyman]

Wouldn't that also apply to you? And yes, also me.

Yes, but I'm not pretending I don't care. I think this stuff matters.

 

[Ianno87]

What I vehemently object to is somebody telling ME how I ought to address other people, describe various jobs/roles etc, or that my choice of language somehow implies that I am an angry old white man who sets out to discriminate against gender equality because I'm somehow stuck in a Victorian mindset.

OK. So how would you, presuming you identify male, react to somebody referring to you as a "Signalwoman" or as "Excuse me, Madam"?

 

[endofthetunnel]

If it's not appropriate to bring race into this discussion, why is it appropriate to bring gender into signal boxes?

Thanks for this absolutely bang on comment. Proves the point in seconds.

Not that I would advocate violence, but get yourself to a mining town in the North East, go into a local pub and correct their terminology for them. You’ll learn a whole new vocabulary in seconds, and may find your way to the local hospital!

You’ll be pleased to hear I live in a former mining village in the north of England and speak with a strong regional accent so this isn’t much of a trip for me, and I work in the railway, a famously traditional trade.
I still believe in equality and inclusion.

 

[Journeyman]

The point I was trying to make, somewhat clumsily I admit, were that @Tazi Hupefi was expressing opinions in such a way that made him look like the stereotypical Angry Old White Man (TM) that is a collective shorthand for a selection of views now considered by many to be exclusive, discriminatory and rude. That's something I wouldn't be proud of. I'm a middle aged white man, for reference purposes...

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

OK. So how would you, presuming you identify male, react to somebody referring to you as a "Signalwoman" or as "Excuse me, Madam"?

I'd smile and nod, and make a mental note that I need to pop down to Marks and Spencers for some new clothes.

It wouldn't bother me one bit - a brown man with a full beard, moustache, glasses, balding on top, with a belly that has seen far too much curry (and the odd beer, but don't tell the wife). If they think I'm a woman, or want to address me as a woman despite all that, I absolutely advocate the smile and nod! It's not even remotely offensive!

 

[Journeyman]

OK. So how would you, presuming you identify male, react to somebody referring to you as a "Signalwoman" or as "Excuse me, Madam"?

Very good point. If all job titles used feminine terms by default, sit back and watch all the men lose their s***.

I'd smile and nod, and make a mental note that I need to pop down to Marks and Spencers for some new clothes.

It wouldn't bother me one bit - a brown man with a full beard, moustache, glasses, balding on top, with a belly that has seen far too much curry (and the odd beer, but don't tell the wife). If they think I'm a woman, or want to address me as a woman despite all that, I absolutely advocate the smile and nod! It's not even remotely offensive!

Ah, yes. The "I wouldn't be offended, so no-one else should be either" response.

You don't get to gate-keep how other people should respond here, I'm afraid.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Thanks for this absolutely bang on comment. Proves the point in seconds.


You’ll be pleased to hear I live in a former mining village in the north of England and speak with a strong regional accent so this isn’t much of a trip for me, and I work in the railway, a famously traditional trade.
I still believe in equality and inclusion.

Nothing wrong with believing in equality and inclusion, in fact, it is hardly a "belief" in any event. I'm sure the vast majority of people in the country have no problem with equality and inclusion.

What people DO have a problem with is being told that THEIR version of equality and inclusion is not good enough, or outdated, or that they aren't doing it right, or that if they don't do XYZ instead, they will be labelled as <insert term here>.

Everybody has the right to be offended, but everyone also has the right to offend other people, (again save for certain legal/criminal acts). If you take offence to something, it's not something to fear or ban/prevent - challenge it, get your view across. I might well still think you're an oddball, and you might think likewise about me, but people do not (and should not always) agree with each other, and it is healthy to have opposing points of view, regardless of the matter at hand.

My right to call someone a "Signalman" or "Milk Man" does not mean that you do not also have the right to call yourself "Signal Person" or "Milk Delivery Agent". There is no "right" answer.

There is an obsession (generally) emanating from typically left wing, younger members of society with preventing offence, creating 'safe spaces' etc - when they ought to be encouraging diverse, opposing, challenging and different views and perspectives. Someone on this forum before essentially tried to tell me to stop posting - i.e. because they cannot accept or understand an alternative perspective. If you think my views are obnoxious, that is absolutely fine, you're allowed to think that, and so long as I play within the rules (and law), which hopefully this forum would agree I am compliant with, I can continue to post things which you do not like to read. I disagree with a lot of things being posted in this particular area, but I celebrate the variety of opinions being shared and discussed and would not want anybody to stop posting just because I find the views of some here fairly unusual and excessive.