Would you ding a kid for having their pronouns on their LinkedIn
Would you ding a kid for having their pronouns on their LinkedIn. How about in their email signature
There's been a common trend in every Summer Analyst I've worked with where they list She/Her in their name, they've been an annoying bitch to work with. Always expecting special treatment and other bs
Ironic how each side claims the other are snowflakes and yet they both get offended so easily by stupid meaningless shit thats not hurting anyone
Lol and what exactly does it say? See, this is the problem, both sides think that the other side are terrible people. I'm not liberal but i know Most people that do pronouns are just trying to be nice / inclusive to trans people. That's it. They just want to be nice lol
Having pronouns in someone's LinkedIn profile obviously isn't hurting anyone in and of itself, it's more that it's a massive red flag indicating that someone is very likely to be a problem child.
Take a time machine 50 years ago and the same thing would be said about people of color
If pronouns we're meaningless, people wouldn't bother telling you their preferred pronouns to begin with
It's not a matter of being "offended." It's a matter of whoever uses pronouns like this doesn't have common sense. There are two biological sexes. Not "genders"; gender is used to refer to grammar.
Face it, we don't want it. I know you're going to say that this lets us be more inclusive to people who practice transgenderism, but that's not my goal, nor is it something people want. If you were doing business in Saudi Arabia, you wouldn't get mad at them for not drinking alcohol. Well, we don't want Silicon Valley/New York values imposed on us either.
When homosexual marriage was legalized, at the time my mindset was, well this doesn't really affect people outside of them so although it's not my cup of tea, I can't really argue against it - but it does seem now that it's opened up a whole can of worms culturally, and we don't want it.
Whatever economic benefit we get from more "diversity" isn't worth continued cultural rot and debasement of all human life to the lowest common denominator, where everyone is androgynous, no one is exceptional, and the main priority is an obsession with safety, walking on eggshells, and just blindly following orders from your Latinx obese HR manager with 20 cats. We need to get back to a culture that focuses on greatness instead of rolling out the red carpet to the lowest.
Actually there are more than 2 distinct "sexes" or presentations of biological genitalia. There are people born with both male and female parts if you will, (now known as hermaphrodite or intersex) and some born lacking certain biological genitalia that traditionally corresponds with their "sex". Secondly, Human gender identity is not located in ones genitalia but rather in certain sections of the brain specifically, the development of gender identity is represented by the central subdivision of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST) and the third interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH3). This has nothing to do with grammar.
None of this biology has anything to do with cultural rot except in your ideology. It's just science.
You know those people who put their pronouns in Zoom - lol. But no, I would not risk harming some kids career significantly due to a small sign of political affiliation they display which does not impact me in the slightest. That sounds like being a complete asshole to me. This is like dinging a dude for listing guns as one of his interests. Not cool.
How dare you have a reasonable and sensible take
Shit yeah this is actually pretty fair. Can't argue with you on that broski.
I fucking love guns, and would ding a kid for both of these things. It's a lack of social intelligence and not knowing how to at least pretend to be normal more than political affiliation.
The left just keeps slowly encroaching and trying to restrict gun owners' rights.
100%. It's all virtue signaling.
dinging a candidate for virtue signaling is sociopathic shit
the right virtue signals fucking *constantly*, but are you dinging someone for fake outrage over starbucks cups?
If you feel the need to use pronouns you don't belong in banking... simple as that.
Lol they are completely unrelated but ok
What exactly qualifies you to say this lmao
Nothing qualifies me at all. It's my opinion, take it as it is. I don't respond to anyone from my alma mater who uses pronouns. It's political virtue signaling, and in all honesty it's soft as f*ck.
You just used the pronoun 'you' looks like you don't belong in banking.
DING, DING, DING. Only part of it has to do with political leaning...in my opinion, either you are a male or female, and hopefully people can tell by looking at your photo and not because you specified your "pronouns". All this has gotten out of control over the last few years (and I'm not even that old).
Mostly it has to do with lack of awareness and street smarts. No one will EVER ding you for NOT including your pronouns, but some people will absolutely ding you for it.
It's a free country and you can say/think/feel whatever you want, but why put yourself at a potentially major disadvantage? Finance people, for the most part, are generally conservative.
I think it's to get past the HR screen tbh. Way too many "woke" basic bitches in HR.
lol thats so true they eat up so many shitty lies that candidates have given them (me included lol)
If I were still in IB, I would not. Who gives a shit? All I need is a bunch of efficient monkeys that crank out error free books.
Ding. Do not put pronouns. Stop virtue signalling. Read the bible. Uphold Judeo-Christian values upon which the West was built, and became the greatest, most successful, civilisation ever built.
We have to encourage a return to traditional moral values.
yes, like cocaine and hookers
dude, Jesus wasn't white. LOL.
But you don't have to be white to do any of those things
Judeo-Christian values did nothing but harm the West's dominance and advances (i.e. Christian book burnings). Look at how successful Greek & Roman civilizations were pre-Christianity. Ancient Greek philosophy and Hellenistic philosophy like Stoicism produce superior civilizations than Christian civilizations.
"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones." ― Marcus Aurelius, Last of the Five Good Emperors of the Roman Empire
While there are some useful base values in Christianity, similar ones are found in other places, too. As Norf has aluded - read Plato's Republic for example - he talks about being good as the highest virtue and the only path to being a philosopher.
There is some overlap between ancient philosophies alike Stoicism and Judeo-Christian values. Both believe in the importance of living a virtuous life end using the rational mind to control you passions. When OP says, "return to Judeo-Christian values" I believe this is what he is talking about.
You picked the wrong industry. [Burped out in between gulps of a mixed drink]
Hate to break it to you, but Western glory came about like this
The modern Western world <- industrial revolution <- enlightenment <- renaissance <- reviving the Roman world by going against Middle Ages Christianity* (i.e. naked statues of David, and allowing usury in trade, which were anti-Christian) + Islamic Golden Age (example: algorithm comes from the Arabic Al Khawirzmi, so does alcohol and the concept of algebra) + < - Ancient Greece < - Babylon, Syria and Persia
*Btw, the Middle Ages Christianity the renaissance Italians were rebelling against in the 13th - 15th centuries was actually a Romanised form of Jesus' teachings that Jesus himself would've been offended by (idea of the trinity, three Gods in one, idolatry, alcohol) that are completely against the ideals of an Abrahamic faith.
It was never a Judeo-Christian thing. If its was, then Christians wouldn't have been slaughtering Jews for 2,000 years. Turn off Fox News and read a history book.
No such thing as "Judeo-Christian values". There´s the Hellenic/Master spirit, shared by some parts of the Catholic Church, and the Yeast/Slave spirit, shared by all the rest. Read BAP.
Agree on the ding, but reading more not sure if this is sarcastic or not just for how over the top it was
Reality is that Christianity got us to where we are now. The Covington kids were thrown under the bus by their own church. Probably the best thing that will save the west is a moderated form of Islam really.
"Stop virtue signalling"
"We must return to Judeo-Christian Values"
Hmm, this is pretty interesting to read, didn't realize this forum was so against pronouns? Interesting that pronouns are supposedly a political topic, might just be my geography
To answer your question OP, I wouldn't even think twice about them listing it
Personally don't see an issue in listing/using preferred pronouns at all, I'm happy to refer to people in the way they prefer to be addressed. All experiences I've had in the workplace have just been catching myself if I slip up and use the wrong ones toward someone who uses different ones (typically someone who goes by they/them). Not much of a headache on my end and I haven't found any meaningful correlation between people who specify pronouns and their attitudes in the workplace.
To me, it's just a matter of respect and inclusivity - I understand there are differing opinions on the gender vs. sex debate that I don't see a need to get into (which I suppose explains why pronouns are a political topic), but feel like something so small as using the correct pronouns doesn't inconvenience anyone and shouldn't incite a big debate?
Hopefully the above isn't too controversial and happy for someone to challenge my views if I'm not thinking about it the right way
think of it this way -- the client CFO is on a call and asks to be explained a certain assumption made on the model. MD; "Sure, he [referring to the analyst] can explain." Analyst: "No md, my pronouns are they/them," 50-year-old conservative client CFO: "[What the hell is going on here?]". Long story short, these craps don't belong to the Investment Banking environment, if you care about these, then go work at a marketing company or at the HR department of the bank.
Appreciate the example and I can completely see where you're coming from!
I think, if I were in a similar situation, the way I would have addressed that exchange (as the Analyst) would be to not bring up the pronoun correction during the meeting, rather address the MD afterwards (in a neutral tone, just flagging that would prefer to be referred as Asshole/Bitch)
I know you say this isn't what IBD is like, but I've absolutely found the seniors in my firm to appreciate these things and our firm does promote this sort of environment without forcing D&I material down our throat
I will note it seems my experience isn't representative of what the standard IBD environment is like, so think I'm not in the best position to talk about this with a banking-specific context
... but this isn't the scenario? Obviously this is inappropriate (unless said MD is doing it repeatedly and on purpose), but you've created this out of whole cloth. If my name is Randolph and I put Randy as my name on LinkedIn, I'm not "virtue signaling," I'm expressing a preference for how I'd like to be addressed. Pronouns are no different, whatever Sean Hannity may like you to think. Anyone getting up in arms because someone made an honest mistake is going to find other things to be upset about anyway, so you're not exactly dodging a bullet.
Use pronoun on LinkedIn and it's an automatic ding.
I have never met anyone who wants to be referred as something else than they are. Never met someone who asked to refer to them as they. Especially in IBD, this is highly unlikely.
According to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental disorders (DSM 5), gender dysphoria is not common, with only less than 0.6% of the population suffering from it.
It does not make sense to reorganise the whole society for such a small % of the population suffering from gender dysphoria (policing whether we used right pronoubns, changing all official documents to include other genders, changing the way sports are split between men and women, bathrooms, locker rooms, competitions, department stores, fashion, schools etc).
The entire pronouns thing on LinkedIn is pure virtue signalling. Those that put their pronouns, almost always just put the pronouns we would have used anyways - he / him for men and she / her for women.
Appreciate you commenting, and I'll admit I find it hard to think of solutions for the broader issues in society (schools, sports etc.)
From my perspective, I do genuinely feel it's a sign of support. I view it as a simple way for me to show support to a group of people (yes - they are a small subset of our population) who struggle with their own battles, be it due to the lack of identity or the very divisive viewpoints people have on the topic
I never really thought there would be this much of a negative view towards it but it has been interesting reading this thread, and has left me with a bit to reflect on, so once again appreciate your thoughts
Thank you for bringing the truth to this conversation!
While this may be true, not everyone who chooses to use alternative pronouns suffers from gender dysphoria.
Are you, by chance, the world's biggest pussy? Asking for your dad.
Hahaha, I wouldn't say so
If you're referencing my tone - I've always found it better to have these discussions in good faith, because it allows me / hopefully others to think more critically about our views instead of resorting to bad faith arguments. I'm more than happy to think through and challenge my / others views but understand WSO may not be the best medium to do so
If you're referencing my views - I suppose I've just been in environments that focus on respect / empathy for others without allowing it to consume my entire life. I'm aware this could be perceived as "weak" behavior, but I wouldn't say that's the sentiment held by people in my life (relationships, work, friends)
Cant tell if this is a trolling comment or not. You have had multiple people ask you to refer to them as a 'They', and you see nothing wrong with that?
You have no spine. Those people hate you and everything you are. Don´t believe me? My mom had a gay friend, the way his "people" talked about us normal folk was more than derogatory, it was almost enough to warrant a hate crime - in Minecraft, of course.
Here is how me and my fellow analysts would go about it:
Pronouns on their linkedin/email signature? No -> continue? Yes -> it depends:
Lol you better be careful about the she/her. The moment you start giving side glances expect to be reported to HR for harassment.
that's exactly why I'd ding them. Like I don't want to get cancelled or deal with HR nonsense because of this one weirdo who thinks he is neither male nor female and will raise a complaint if I make a mistake once.
Facts. The ugly ones would just be a complaining nightmare
that's exactly why I'd ding them. Like I don't want to get cancelled or deal with HR nonsense because of this one weirdo who thinks he is neither male nor female and will raise a complaint if I make a mistake once.
Fucking based. But watch these "she/her" Emilys, they´re the most ruthless ones in the pack.
If someone uses pronouns, it's just more potential drama that no one wants. At best, the candidate is a genuine person who is trying to be inclusive. But those people are super rare, especially in banking.
It's quite likely the candidate is attention seeking or "woke" and would be a head ache to work with.
Its like why tempt fate, why not go with the candidate you think you have a thick skin since banking can be so stressful? For example, finding a great girl is hard enough, so why give girls you know will have baggage or be be more work than normal - would you date a single mom if you were ready to settle down?
Facts. Say goodbye to cracking off hand jokes at all. Just completely sterile conversation. Lame asf, why would I choose to walk on eggshells when I could just ding the simp
If from their school email, they might be required to have them there.
My MBA program wants us to put our pronouns on basically everything, including in our email sigs. I won't do it on LinkedIn and remove them for all my external emails but imagine many people who don't care and just leave them on everything.
Please tell me you're getting your MBA from DeVry or something.
Hate to break it to you but it's a M7 program
They don't tell us to do it on LinkedIn FWIW
Edit: as an aside, I should note that I don't have a huge issue with people doing it... but my opinion is that you should only do it if you have pronouns that differ from those people will naturally use. I am a guy, I identify as a guy, I think it's dumb that I have to put he/him on shit because it's basically pointing out the obvious. If I went by they or she or whatever else then obviously I'd want to do it so people use the correct pronouns.
I believe it's called the Keller School of Management.
Can't you just say that you do not have any preferred pronouns/do not care what pronouns people use? Think I would just do that if it was forced like this.
I don't put them in my bio but pretty much everyone has preferred pronouns. Nobody wants to be called she if they are a he or vice versa.
What is the name of the program?
not gonna give the name but it's an M7 - pretty sure all of our peers do the same thing so it's not unique to my school
Guess what, you could grow a pair of balls and not do it on your school email.
Lol you seem bitter... did I upset you?
WSO is a weird place.
posts about diversity: "no way, white males are discriminated against, no one else is, if I ever get in power I'm going to hire the most capable person for the job!" (I'm exaggerating this, you get the point)
next post: "I would throw away a resume if someone uses pronouns.." (quickly moves to discriminate against a group)
hiring the best and most capable people? I know some people will turn around with arguments about what is needed in the work environment, etc (the same arguments that they disregard in other posts), but just read through this, so many people jump to conclusions and make assumptions about people just based on the use of pronouns. It is crazy, you shouldn't care about it, if you think someone can't do the job, figure it out from their resume, interviews, etc. look for the best people and stop discriminating.
Agreed 100%. I'm one of those people who supports complete meritocracy and wants rid of all diversity programs, but I wouldn't discriminate and ding someone just for pronouns. Now if the other associated personality red flags came with that during the interview, ding them 100%. If they're good people and got all the tough techs right, I would pass them on. I think most people who believe in full meritocracy wouldn't discriminate here either.
Out of curiosity, how can you justify getting rid of all diversity programs when there are literally analysts, VPs, and others in this thread saying they ding black, trans, ugly women, etc. purely based on demographics?
I generally don't care at all about anyone's world view. But I do care that someone is stupid enough to make a potentially controversial statement in their hiring materials. In other words, I'd view College Republicans and pronouns on a resume with equal contempt.
If they're smart, they probably want to filter out people like me anyway.
I understand the general sentiment but imagine 500 resumes on your desk and you're asked to pick 25 for a first round. What exactly would you do? You're going to use some sort of assumption/heuristic to filter out candidates that WILL have flaws because you're given a few hours not a month to figure out who advances. That is why people repeatedly say the single best way to get in is through networking and truth be told if you've got a few people pushing for you that's enough to get a spot.
those are not mutually exclusive though. I can hire, let's say, a male who identifies as queer if he is the most qualified candidate, but if he asks everybody to call him they/them, it might piss me off.
P.S. just playing devil's advocate. I personally don't mind calling anybody anything they prefer and don't mind pronouns at all.
Dinging somebody because they are not diverse and dinging somebody because they make political statements on their LinkedIn, etc are two very different things.
It isn't a political statement…
Are you going to hire the best? Or make assumptions about people based on a non political, non offensive, line in their LinkedIn profile? People may believe there is a political skew to those who use this, but let's all be clear, not a political statement, just information on preference of how they want to be addressed, very small thing. You do realize that it is discrimination to ding people based on that right?
If you have pronouns in your bio, you´re either a spineless cuck (goes for men and women) or you´re insane. Either way, I don´t want you at my firm, basta.
I'm hoping this is a troll. Really sad you think this way, you should open your mind up a bit to different views. I'm not saying you need to like everyone, but people are a lot more than a line on their resume or LinkedIn. People are different, think differently, etc, and the constant approach of just labeling entire groups (again over identifying information) is very dangerous. You can (obviously) choose to live your life this way, and you'll be exposed to similar people, etc, but I wouldn't recommend it. I'm hoping this is just one of those immature posts that happen every so often here, rather than a legitimate view.
Clearly, being in HF doesn't exempt you from being a 'commoner' like the rest in just about anything else but HF. Very much susceptible to biased views of the world and inflated views of themselves.
Here's my hot take. I manage a couple hundred people in healthcare where pronouns are prevalent and people are sensitive. We have way more HR issues with people who list their pronouns in their email signatures or LinkedIn. I'll still consider hiring you, but I also assume that you will be a whiny headache at some point.
Our head of HR, who is a lesbian btw, identified this through some data analysis she ran using a ML/AI program on who our best hires are.
What were some other qualities/traits of the best hires found through the data analysis?
That gets complicated based on functional area. We have the most success from people who demonstrate domain expertise in our area prior to joining. They are largely state school grads and have 7+ years of experience. I could write an epic poem on this, but unfortunately don't have the time today. We look at a ton of data.
The easiest way to frame it is more than 7 years out of school and work at someone directly relevant to us. We are in a technical and nuanced part of healthcare so it's not something people can figure out overnight.
Makes sense. If I see it I also think to myself "this person is going to be a headache".
It took a ML algorithim to tell you that? Shit I could have told you that for a whiskey. Much more cost effective.
I could have too, but HR always wants evidence.
So much for all these banks claiming to be champions of DEI
I recently added my pronouns (he / him) on my LinkedIn and nobody gives a shit. My bank is pretty fratty / conservative and nobody's treated me different since I added them. I would caveat that I would probably add them after, not before breaking in since it's clear there's a lot of retards who will ding you for it
Why did you add it?
I doubt anyone is regularly monitoring your profile to actually have noticed lol
I interact pretty regularly with my coworkers on LinkedIn (for deal announcements, recruiting posts, etc.) so I know a lot of them have seen it.
No because LinkedIn periodically prompts you to enter them and while I'm careful to ignore said prompts it would be easy for someone to do it without thinking, at which point I would imagine you would be able to change them but it would be near impossible to remove them entirely.
But, it would not be a point in their favor.
Ok, so people who have non-western or unconventional names continually get misgendered all the time. If someone called you Miss LeoSteel77 for the first few emails you had with someone, you'd be annoyed. Having pronouns when it's obvious a person is male or female is obvious virtue signalling and people pretending to be an "Ally" but there is a utility to it, as it promotes general respect and provides clarity in communication. That being said, anyone with neo-pronouns (e.g. Xir, Xie, etc.) can fuck off and should not only be dinged but blacklisted.
This is a good point and something I hadn't considered. I'm a white guy who speaks a non-western language and I've slipped up on this myself even when dealing with people from the culture whose language I speak. Typically I try to avoid referring to someone by pronouns at all if their first name is unclear (can happen with western names too, like "Pat" or "Alex"). However, in the context of LinkedIn this isn't really an issue as you can see the person's picture, and you can usually upload a picture into your profile at work as well although it may not be visible to external email recipients.
LinkedIn has photos. If you do not have a photo I am going to assume you are in Indian dude looking for bobs and vagene.
this whole liberal shit annoys the fuck out of me
In all seriousness, I put my pronouns on my social media like LinkedIn or Instagram if they have an option for it. I'm not liberal by any means, but if it makes some people feel more comfortable and accepted, then why not? It takes 5 seconds out of my day and doesn't affect my life - why are you getting so twisted? If they want to refer to themselves as they/them or attack/helicopter, who cares? It doesn't affect you.
If anything, if I see someone with "he/him" or something conventional on his resume or LinkedIn, I would be more inclined to think he's empathetic, rather than virtue signaling.
Have you not read the responses here? Clearly it can have an impact.
I do this crazy thing where I ding people if I don't think they're appropriately qualified or they didn't interview very well.
Being liberal = being unqualified, meaning instading
Absolutely, for 3 reasons.
1) This person is so dumb or out of touch w/ reality that they don't know the difference between men and women
2) A person who puts that on their resume is somewhere between 10kx & 1mmx more likely to make a stink w/ HR over a benign comment / incident than someone who doesn't
3) I assume that this person will annoy the fuck out of me if I had to work w/ them
I come from down in the valley, where mister when you're young, they bring you up to do like your daddy done
Pretty much anyone who uses pronouns is a raging leftist progressive who thinks AOC and Bernie are the greatest thinkers of our time. Personally, I believe in not discriminating against people even if they believe in retarded things. If they were okay people with good personalities and got hard techs right, I would give them the benefit of the doubt and pass them on. However, there often seems to be a correlation between being a control freak/whiny baby and progressive. If I was asked to do a networking call, I would def turn down though because I have no interest in talking to economically illiterate individuals that are clouded by emotion. It's straight up become a code of language that makes it very easy to screen people. Whenever I go through instagram profiles and see pronouns or BLM in their bio, I immediately know they're a raging leftist and to avoid like the plague. It's unfortunate that many of them tend to be good looking girls
Fair enough but why? I doubt people would accuse you of racist for not having something in your insta bio lol. And who cares if those retards accuse you of being racist? You know what you are. You don't become racist just because someone lazily calls you that.
Call yourself Moonbeam / Unicorn / Redneck for all I care.
Don't care if you have green hair, dress like a homeless person, vote for AOC, pray to Allah next to both your LGBTQ+ and Confederate flags while eating caged salmon and working for PETA, Greenpeace, and the KKK on alternate weekends.
Do your job well, don't piss anyone off in the office, make money for the firm, do not talk politics / religion and do not bring the Woke/Cancel Culture to my door.
Or as Harry Hart famously said 'I'm a Catholic whore, currently enjoying congress out of wedlock with my black, Jewish boyfriend who works in a military abortion clinic. So, hail Satan, and have a lovely afternoon, madam." And no one fucks with Harry Hart...
The problem is that the type of person you described is likely to bring cancel culture to your door.
Any adult who quotes/refers to Marvel movie characters for moral guidance belongs in the same bucket…that aside, using pronouns in your profile is unprofessional and pathetic. The fact that this has even become an issue is depressing.
In reality, if you have worked your entire life to build whatever company you have created or worked hard enough to become the CEO of, I would imagine you could not care less about what your banker likes to do in their personal lives. If someone is of the mindset that it's something that needs to be aired out for all the world to see (or finds the need to clarify their gender in public) then yes, that is concerning and I would imagine an immediate disqualification for most candidates, at most banks, at any level.
My points are not meant to be controversial. If you want to tell me I'm rude etc, then go ahead…it's just called reality and somehow everyone has lost a lot of it recently.
It's a signal of political affiliation, which is not a problem in itself.
If you are going to work in investment banking, you certainly do not need to be a conservative, but you at least need to be tolerant of their constitutional rights. Because these people do exist in the business world. And I think that is going to be the $64,000 question in the interviews. Is this guy going to screw up a deal because of some political nonsense? Same goes for the guy with the Trump flags on his Facebook page.
FWIW, Wall Street is mostly Business Democrats, which has its own issues for a bleeding heart liberal. But there are also a lot of conservatives and Trump supporters.
Me personally, I would not ding the kid. But while the rule in interviews is to avoid politics and religion at all costs, I would pay good money to have some random Trump supporter walk up to him and try to strike up a conversation and see how it went. Not to figure out the kid's politics-- which I could care less about, but to figure out, "Does this kid understand that there are people who think differently than him in the business world? He can handle that, right?"
For the Trump supporter, it's a lot easier. The Muslim and the Trans lady will definitely be on the interview roster. Does he make them feel extremely uncomfortable? And does he understand that he will have to work with these people if he comes here? And most importantly, do they think the kid is competent? Can he solve their programming questions?
And what's the problem with people with putting their pronouns in their name exactly? Are we really discriminating candidates because of a simple pronoun next to their name now? It's pretty ironic how people are outraged about this calling them "soft" and then also get mad about REAL discriminatory issues.
Also, if they been an "annoying bitch to work with" then that's just how they are in the first place, not because they have a few pronouns next to their name. Summer Analysts from big schools will mostly always been entitled brats having been spoon fed getting there in the first place.
It reflects people bending over backwards and trying just a little too hard to deal with woke culture.
I have no problems with other people doing it, although it is a little goofy, and I think we will look back on this as a very silly period in American culture.
My only analysis on this is that is a clear marker of political affiliation, and nearly half of the people I've met who announce their preferred pronoun also break out in hives at the mention of Bad Orange Man or the thought that some people might vote Republican. And if you break out in hives in the presence of Trump supporters, that is not necessarily a problem in itself in this industry, but if you start freaking out and kill a deal, because you've broken out in hives, THAT'S the problem.
Business has its own pragmatic disciplining mechanisms that encourages people to be tolerant, at least within the bounds of deontological ethics.
You and a lot of other people on this thread are overthinking this in terms of "political affiliation" and I think I can clearly understand why with some of the terms you used above. Since when did people simply wanting to be identified in certain pronouns become a political thing? It's not like they wrote D or R next to their name. Now wouldn't THAT be a clear marker of political affiliation?
Funny how you also use that term "Bad Orange Man" because the only people I've seen use that are the people who support him, which are the ones who are usually AGAINST woke culture, BLM, etc.
Resumes/LinkedIn is scanned for 20-30 seconds to determine whether to advance a candidate. Stating your stance on gender fluidity (note this lies outside the few who have the illness) is horrendous judgement if you believe that will help you getting hired as it one indicates that you don't understand that not all your coworkers think the same way as you. I don't think these candidates are willingly rolling the dice, I truly think given their sheltered environment that they believe every other person in corporate America is "woke" like them. This isn't really much different from me putting on my resume
IncomingIBDreject (MAGA!) as the name. I could argue I'm showing support for the rural working class of America, but obviously people will associate that with Trump which shows horrendous judgement.
Imagine getting this worked up over something this small
For those who are having difficulty understanding why it's an issue consider you see my resume and the name is:
What's your first impression?
My argument is that I'm showing support for the rural working class of America a group historically marginalized from high finance due to nepotism. What would you think about it?
I'm not one to snoop that deep before an interview and this is a very minor aspect of a candidate that I probably wouldn't notice. Wouldn't affect their ability to do the job but it will probably affect their fit depending on the group. If I see pronouns in the email signature it's probably their school, but on LinkedIn or their resume yeah I'm gonna peg them as politically liberal. I don't think it's a good look because no one should be able to tell your political or religious leanings from a glance. It's not appropriate for work - should be as neutral as possible because clients can hold any number of opinions. It's a liability for someone to possibly interject inane gender-special commentary during meetings.
What is your view on College Republicans/Democrats Club or internships with Congressmen on their resume? I've seen quite a few of these in finance and they pretty explicitly give away political leanings.
I would avoid putting those clubs prominently on the resume / LinkedIn for someone pursuing finance. Congressional internships are fine, though, as that's impressive experience and easier to justify as just wanting some exposure. But I agree it will mark the kid as probably leaning that direction, which is a potential disadvantage.
Both my parents work in government but not in the legislative branch. It would probably be even simpler optics to intern in other parts of government as a lot of departments and executive offices are pretty apolitical or at least bipartisan. It's really polarizing right now, so best to never reveal your hand.
As an aside, I don't think public sector work makes sense past freshman year as won't it seem like the kid should just take the Foreign Service Exam or go to law school instead of pursuing IB? I could only see this path making sense at Georgetown or GW, maybe Stanford - they have quite a few grads in the State Department.
Don't do it. I worked on a presidential campaign and left it off. Never know if a lib is going to ding you for working on a Republican campaign. In fairness, if someone worked on a Biden/AOC/Bernie campaign, I'd assume they're a nitwit (or just supportive of those w/ dementia) and ding the fuck out of them
I come from down in the valley, where mister when you're young, they bring you up to do like your daddy done
Nah, would not ding, don't care. Also, sometimes I can't tell someone's gender based on their first name, so that helps set the tone.
Would You Ding A Kid For Having A Tattoo On Their Face?
It strikes me as basically the same thing... a very visible error of judgement that doesn't acknowledge that there is an asymmetric payoff to the downside based on how you may be perceived.
Having said that, at least with a face tattoo a potential employer is likely to be most concerned about what their clients might think, not whether they'll end up at an employment tribunal for having phrased something in a slightly clumsy manner.
Moreover, a face tattoo is at least relevant to other areas of a person's life and they probably didn't get it done for work purposes. LinkedIn or a resume is by definition for work purposes.
(I say face tattoo for dramatic effect.... substitute this with a tattooed neck or hands if you prefer.)
But there is also an asymmetric downside to making a big deal out of it if you are a manager, though.
Coming from the other side of the table, the only thing I care about is (1) can you do the work (2) are you going to screw up some business opportunity for the firm (3) for heavens' sakes can we please try to keep this a reasonable place to work-- if not a nice place to work?
22 year old kids are transitioning from academia into the business world, and I am empathetic to that. But at the same time, the 22 year old kid also has to be empathetic to the mission of the business, and why we are hiring them. As professionals, when they are at work, wearing their Barclays hat or whatnot, the business has to come first. They don't have to agree with or affirm political beliefs that they don't agree with, but there is also a place in the business world for quietly getting the job done and then going home to vent about it online (ideally anonymously, although my general rule is that if it happens outside of work and does not involve the firm, it's none of the firm's business).
Earum ea et aut et reiciendis laboriosam. Eaque voluptas in veniam et eveniet laboriosam.
Laudantium in ad sunt nesciunt at id magni distinctio. Repellendus autem nihil cumque delectus.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Ab sit et quia velit alias et. Et ad quo tenetur sunt sit. Voluptatem culpa est nihil asperiores. Maxime dolore enim ipsam eius. Voluptate velit ut sed tempora dolor sunt dignissimos.
Et dolor iusto accusamus nobis. Dolorem corrupti quibusdam temporibus quidem officiis atque ratione. Unde possimus et quidem nemo. Dicta consequatur autem autem iusto nihil. Consequatur earum veritatis provident et.
Labore aliquid saepe sint fuga dolor. Eum atque voluptas iure in et. Voluptatum soluta cumque adipisci quas assumenda dolor. Et ipsam et nam ducimus.
Voluptas iusto repellat tenetur vero ut dolorem dolorem. Aut non saepe placeat sed placeat voluptas quae. Laborum sed inventore sequi eius.
Maxime fugit aperiam et perferendis vel. Sed vel deserunt recusandae minus quod. Sint accusantium delectus odio itaque accusantium sequi eos.
Omnis quia dolor nostrum non aliquid omnis est necessitatibus. Harum reiciendis occaecati praesentium doloremque sint et et. Beatae distinctio neque sunt beatae voluptatem.
Accusamus dolores dolorem quo. Illo aut sed in in optio. Eaque nesciunt aut voluptate sint rerum numquam vel. Est quibusdam molestiae harum enim.
Nulla aspernatur id dolores sint. Commodi distinctio error consectetur. Est quam ut autem est non.
Eos voluptates mollitia et voluptates. Quis autem rerum fugiat aliquam qui voluptas amet. Vel sit dolor qui itaque. Minima fuga numquam aut incidunt et vitae. Qui repellendus enim est. Omnis minima sint est amet facere voluptas.
Optio voluptas consequuntur est vitae illum. Sit aliquid aut eos suscipit eius consequuntur consequatur quas. Omnis vitae quis ut minus.
Quae et vel beatae illum nisi iusto. Recusandae sit soluta qui quam.
Iste voluptatum expedita veniam rerum sunt perspiciatis voluptate. Eum et quam est at accusamus. Sit hic mollitia incidunt praesentium fuga sed nemo et. Culpa dolore est accusamus dolorem expedita. Similique aut voluptatem modi beatae repellat doloribus voluptate. Iure modi sed ullam ea.
Incidunt debitis temporibus incidunt porro molestiae. Atque ducimus ut voluptas. Aut autem quae nisi ea expedita minima in. Assumenda qui voluptatem ex nostrum et.
Molestiae quo inventore rerum quasi dignissimos qui. Dicta aut corporis quae ex blanditiis laudantium quam. Rerum molestias illo quos impedit quod neque corporis.
"Work ethic, work ethic" - Vince Vaughn
Recusandae vitae voluptas quibusdam repudiandae omnis. Laboriosam unde natus voluptate harum alias et esse provident. Et sunt veritatis error consequatur dolores quisquam. A unde quibusdam porro. Molestiae earum reprehenderit incidunt omnis beatae sit iusto. Necessitatibus nemo aut nam est voluptas adipisci.
Odio quae omnis accusamus et. Rerum ipsa beatae sed consectetur aut atque sunt magnam.