[redwoolf]

Republicans are the party of personal liberty until they don't like what you're doing.

[hypeatei]

This is basically what happened with abortion. The supreme court overturned Roe v. Wade and the Republican argument was that it was just a "State's rights" issue but then introduced a federal bill to protect the "preborn"[0] recently. It's fine until states do what they don't like.

0: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/722

[bitshiftfaced]

Here is a document about pronouns from the CDC's website (~2022): https://web.archive.org/web/20221221141850/https://npin.cdc....

Here's part of the document (emphasis added):

> Make Your Support Visible!

> • Include “pronoun:” under “name:” in name tags and introductions in groups as an opportunity for participants to make their pronouns visible. At the beginning of the semester, educators can call out students by their last name instead of their first name in case a student has not been able to change their name in the Student Information System or legally. Let students know that after class they can let you know what name they use if it is different than what is on the roster.

> • At the beginning of the semester, educators can pass out 3x5 notecards to students and ask them to add their name, pronouns, and whatever information you feel is necessary to know about the student that they might not want to share out loud.

> • Have pronouns be added to all email signatures, and link the word “pronouns” to this guide or another reference for people who are new to this practice: ‒ Sincerely, Mx. Marvel Pronouns: They, Them, Theirs

Granted, part of the document talks about not having to share your pronouns, but we don't know what kind of internal policies they had that employees either needed to follow or at least felt pressure to follow.

[panarky]

Curious how all the "free speech absolutists" have suddenly discovered infinite examples of when it's a great idea to censor speech.

[readthenotes1]

I'm not sure the e o. affects the pronoun pronouncements on personal email accounts. If it does, you may have. Otherwise it's irrelevant

[all2]

It isn't really 'personal liberty' being removed in this case. This is a bureaucracy that is enforcing external appearance standard. I'm sure these folks will be free (!) to express themselves however they like in their personal lives.

[datavirtue]

RINOs

[redwoolf]

I'm not talking about the 1st amendment. I'm talking about the rhetoric of those on the right in America. They are constantly congratulating themselves on being the champions of freedom. But if someone wants to read a book they don't like, or if someone wants to use a pronoun they disagree with, or if someone wants access to certain medical procedures then they pass laws to restrict those freedoms. It's incredibly hypocritical.

[stebalien]

Private companies != federal government. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny, there's no way the federal government will be able to argue that it has a legitimate interest in banning pronouns in signatures.

[llamaimperative]

"Personal liberty" is a superset of what's protected by the First Amendment. No one said anything about 1A. It's clear that MAGA is not actually interested in either 1A protection specifically (totally aside from this case specifically) nor personal liberties generally (as exemplified by this case).

[kyjrteqw]

in twenty years of working for universities, federal agencies, state agencies, startups, and enterprises, I have never had a mandated signature style.

[alistairSH]

From the linked article...

internal memos obtained by ABC News that cited two executive orders signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office seeking to curb diversity and equity programs in the federal government

This isn't about standardizing email signatures.

[Reasoning]

And ditto the Democrats.