33 Comments
User's avatar
Mady Castigan's avatar

Malicious compliance. Stop using all pronouns in emails and tell them that's what you were told to do.

Expand full comment
Ty is Holding the Line's avatar

Haha. Came here to say this. Remove ALL pronouns. EVERYWHERE.

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

Oh dear. How will we tell El Nino from La Nina?

Expand full comment
Chelle's avatar

Crime stats that don't look at gender definitely sounds like protecting women...

Expand full comment
Shelley Powers's avatar

'Because they can't fulfill all those requests by 5pm Friday, some number of data portals will become unavailable, opting to go offline rather than run afoul of the OPM memo.'

The sheer incompetency in all of this.

This has Musk written all over it. Can we sue him for the harms we're suffering?

In seriousness (though I kinda am serious in the previous sentence), is there any legal action anyone can take to stop this madness?

Expand full comment
MissNumbersNinja's avatar

I sure hope that a lot of people notice the portals are down and are really upset when they find out why.

Expand full comment
Shelley Powers's avatar

What bothers me is we're seeing little of this in the media.

I know the plane crash is important, and incredibly sad. But we don't need to spend days on it when Musk is given control over the OPM and GSA, and Trump is dumping necessary water from reservoirs and potentially flooding farms in California.

Expand full comment
Shelley Powers's avatar

There is more on the purge of civil rights data, but the coverage isn't really reflecting the devastating nature of what's happening.

Expand full comment
MissNumbersNinja's avatar

I agree on all points!

I've reached out to my Democratic Senator and have been encouraging others to do the same, in hopes that if we put enough pressure on the reps, they will start talking to the media, which hopefully will give cover to protests.

Expand full comment
Robert Riggs's avatar

It's so ironic, removal of gender (oops, sex) ID pronouns from names renders the sex of some people to be unknowable, such as persons named Kim, for example. This renders some people to be effectively sexless and androgynous, which is the opposite of what the policy intent is!

Expand full comment
christopher o'loughlin's avatar

Chris,

IANAL. I'm a contract nurse for Fed agency. I have received letters like the ones you publish. Question: isn't censorship of speech or written words by executive branch, a violation of 1A?

Please address so all of your readers will be informed.

Thank you,

Peace,

Christopher and family

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

I've noticed something about the 1st Amendment. It says "Congress shall make no laws..." Doesn't say anything about the President. Apart from the tiny detail that he can't make laws---those that he does make by force don't seem to be covered by the 1st.

There's GOTTA be some case law out there already fixing this.

Expand full comment
Jane Hensley's avatar

It seems like the Supreme Court decision that just killed the ability of government agencies to interpret the statutes they were created to implement would apply to the President, himself, too. Surely a lawyer more clever than me will make this argument soon...

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

You mean the one that axed the Chevron Doctrine? That does make it harder for agencies to come up with regulations that stick. But it doesn’t nullify the Administrative Procedure Act that is required both to create AND to repeal regulations. It cannot be done by executive order. Under that decision the COURT does the deciding. So trump is not just tromping on Congress’s toes, he’s tromping on the courts’ toes. Not going to make judges or justices very happy.

Expand full comment
Shelley Powers's avatar

I want to remind people of the power of the Wayback Machine (and drop it some bucks)

Example of content that's gone but captured on Wayback

http://web.archive.org/web/20241004055906/https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/bsc/bsc-pres-kristen-miller-amy-branum-2-10-2022.pdf

Expand full comment
Susan V's avatar

I'm 71 years old and am not exaggerating when I tell you these 11 days have been the most rage inducing of my entire life.

It's too bad everyone couldn't just refuse to comply. But I get it.

Expand full comment
Robin Friend's avatar

How about "peach" understood as she/her, "corn" as he/him, "salad" as they/them. Or maybe use "rock, paper, scissors" in email signatures.

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

If Trump 2.0 is going to banish even the word “gender” … what is he or his Secretary of Defense going to grab?

Expand full comment
MissNumbersNinja's avatar

even if I put my head in their point of view, I really don't even understand what their hangup on the word gender. They could have said all the same crap using the word gender (there are only two genders, blah, blah, blah).

Maybe it's because gender identity is a term people use and sex identity isn't (as far as I know...yet!).

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

I don’t think “they” care about fine distinctions … just something to hate, and gender is a “sophisticated” alternative to fag.

Expand full comment
Randy Susan Meyers's avatar

Just so you know, you are extraordinarily appreciated for the work you do bringing sunlight to the truth.

Expand full comment
Megan's avatar

Not just anti-trans... a ton of stuff is disappearing from CDC websites. Even stuff about at-risk youth behavior and climate change impacts.

Expand full comment
KentGZ's avatar

Ich bin ein Trans

Expand full comment
Susan Linehan's avatar

There are about, top estimate, 3 million trans people in the US. The population is 334.9 million. That means under 0.9% of the population is trans. They don't actually hurt others; the number of violent ones is far more miniscule. There are 30 million people with peanut allergies. Deregulation of the FDA with the chance of inaccurate food labeling could kill 30 million people. Same goes for those of us with celiac disease, around 3 million of us. A mislabeled serving of "real crab" that was fake crab put me in the hospital,.

And we have had two weeks of attacks on trans people. Rules about pronouns (for SURE a pronoun didn't ever hurt anyone). Other nastiness, abounding.

But sure, let's gut food safety regulations if we can just keep the streets safe from trans people.

If time has an understatement of the year award, it will be for "the administration hasn't got its priorities straight."

Expand full comment
Sherri Wiegman's avatar

Chris - as troubling as all this is, do you know what can be done to halt Elon Musk's "participation" in the current administration with his actions of sending letters to federal employees telling them they have a week to decide whether they want to stay or leave with a severance package. Also, causing the Treasury guy to resign rather than give the "keys to the palace" codes? While the entire current administration is a cluster muck to the rule of law, there has to be something that can be done about Musk.

Expand full comment
Spot the Wonder Dog's avatar

In the war on pronouns, the older use of gendered nouns in signature blocks has apparently been overlooked. (Perhaps there will be an expanded use of the nonbinary Mx. alongside Ms, Mrs., and Mr.) Yours truly, Jeffrey S. Ankrom (Mx.). Of course, one does not place the honorific before one's own name.

Expand full comment
Dana Shilling's avatar

"Serene Highness" is always a good choice.

Expand full comment
Karen Scofield's avatar

You seem to be the only person reporting on this?! Thank You, Chris and will reStack ASAP 🙏💯

Expand full comment
David J. Sharp's avatar

That EO defining “sex” boils down to a triumphant Us and to be demeaned Them.

Expand full comment