Lefty Lunacy: London Underground goes gender neutral

Transport for London workers have been told to stop using the term “ladies and gentlemen” because it is deemed ‘offensive’.

In an effort to go ‘gender-neutral’, TfL bosses have told their staff to use the term “good morning everyone” in order to signify the fact that gender has been consigned to the dustbin of history.

Campaign groups have welcomed the moves, calling the gendered language “polite but really belonging to yesterday”, for a time when people used to be men or women.

As from tomorrow, we shall therefore change our name to The Conservative Person. Not.

UPDATE: Listen to co-editor Laura Perrins slamming TfL's decision on TalkRADIO here.

(Image: Tom Page)

The Conservative Woman

  • martianonlooker

    I am deeply offended. Why single me out? Maybe I don’t want a cheery, or even, half-hearted acknowledgement. I would also prefer to be formally addressed.

    Yours, deeply offended,

    An Everyone

  • Bik Byro

    Cockfosters tube station is to be renamed “Non gender specific genitalia fosters”

    Seven Sisters tube station is to be renamed “Seven Genderfluid Siblings”

    Dollis Hill is to be renamed “Gender-neutral toys in neither pink nor blue Hill”

    Earls Court will now become “Member of nobility who should be taxed and have their land confiscated Court”

    and Blackfriars will be “Person of ethnic descent friars”

    I hope you will all agree this will make for a much saner world.

    • martianonlooker

      It will be hard to beat your tongue in cheek post. The saddest part of all this, no matter how much we poke fun at it, is that somewhere TfL treat this very seriously. There must be oodles of management time spent in meetings and an array of, what should be, unemployable gender studies graduates coming up with this guff.
      It’s as though the lunatics are in charge of the asylum and I have been committed.

    • Charitas Lydia

      Brilliant! How about manhole?

      • Labour_is_bunk

        I can see this leading to something unprintable……

        • Bik Byro

          I believe that no less than Jeremy Corbyn himself is an admirer of pangender orifice covers.

  • CommanderJampot

    It’s a shame they couldn’t just say ‘Ladies and Gentlemen, and anyone else loony enough to be in between.’

    • Craig Martin

      Or Crazies and Genitals.

  • Snoffle Gronch

    I don’t really look to TfL (or any public transport body) for leadership or direction on the entirely straightforward matter of gender.

    If you have a Y-chromosome you are a bloke, and should be addressed as Mister, and collectively as gentlemen; if you don’t, you are a woman, addressed as either Miss, or Mrs. Same as ever. Note that “Ms” is an abbreviation of “manuscript”, and should only be prefixed to someone’s name in exceptional circumstances.

  • Dodgy Geezer

    In my days as a Whitehall Crown Servant, we sometimes used to drink south of the river, to avoid running into our bosses. One favourite watering hole, was the Fentiman Arms, In Fentiman Street.

    During the initial push for ‘genderless equality’ in the 1990s, we used to know it as the Fentiperson Arms…

    • Bik Byro

      I still refer to a certain MP as “Harriet Harperson”

      • a misplaced modifier

        That’s very polite — compared to some of the things I’ve heard her called. You must be a real gentleperson BB.

      • PierrePendre

        Is she the one who’s married to Jack Drongo?

  • Labour_is_bunk

    Who made the decision that people were being “offended” and on what basis?

    TFL’s overall attitude strikes me as the usual public sector disdain for the Common Herd who are mug enough to pay taxes which finance this stupidity.

    To continue the theme of a recent post of mine – expect more of this in Corbyn’s Britain.

  • Royinsouthwest

    What about all the people, probably most of the population, who are offended by the gender neutral nutters? Why are only certain people allowed to be offended?

    • Snoffle Gronch

      “Your rights end where my feelings begin”

    • Harley Quin

      You have spotted the serious flaw in the ‘Don’t offend minorities’ attitude.

      It ends up meaning oppression by minorities rather than majority oppression.

  • AJ

    Many years ago we developed a medical device which allowed the operator to enter patient details. Complying with the relevant standard we allowed the sex to be male, female or other. This makes sense as there are intersex conditions even if they are relatively rare.

    Anyway the client went crazy and thought we were making an irresponsible english joke (they were american) and made us change it so we could only enter male or female. This was a long time ago but it shows how things have changed. This was a situation were it actually made sense to allow the sex of the patient to be something other than male or female yet it was considered unacceptable. It was however sex rather than the entirely subjective and nebulous concept of gender.

  • Phil R

    This sort of stupidity is a rich Western preoccupation only. The wealth amassed by the West depended upon certain cultural preconditions that are being eviscerated with each passing month. This libertine society we have created is simply not compatible with long-term prosperity.

    It’s therefore a self-correcting problem. The West will soon no longer be rich or dominate the world. The further the pendulum swings one way, the further it eventually will swing back.

    However, when it comes back it will not be the a Christian pendulum, or a liberal one either.

    • Labour_is_bunk

      I see “gender” has reared its head in the BBC’s Wimbledon coverage, with Our Man Murray slapping down a reporter for implied “casual sexism”.


    • James Chilton

      Perceptive comment.

      These crazy preoccupations with “gender identity” and suchlike, are symptoms of a disease that could only become widespread in an age of affluence.

      • JabbaPapa

        An age of decadence I think you mean — the preoccupations that people had during the decline of the Roman Empire were different, but they were just as fatuous.

        • James Chilton

          Certainly. The symptoms point to a moral disease.

    • guestwho2

      Spot on. Every time we’re told it’s a universal human condition they seem to draw blanks on naming Third World nations with similar proportions of transgendered (in mind or body) individuals.

  • Guardian’s Quitter

    I must thank the Moronic Left for letting me know what offends them. I shall now be sure to use ‘Ladies and Gentlemen’ as often as I can.

  • Jethro Asquith

    Of course being a man or a woman has NOTHING to do with gender. It is to do with sex. I am more than happy for gender to be consigned to the dustbin of history – except of course for french nouns etc. However i will never accept that there are any sexes other than male and female.

    • AJ

      Bearing in mind my comment above there are genuine medical conditions in which people have the characteristics of both sexes. These intersex conditions are rare. tellingly in describing these male and female characetristics are identified rather than some third sex. The modern gender concept as distinct from sex has no objective reality.

      • Damaris Tighe

        They know it has no objective reality. That’s the point. Genderists are radical subjectivists – ‘reality’ is a construction, not something external to the mind. Where they’re taking this is that any subjective fantasy can be honoured as reality.

    • Sargv

      > Of course being a man or a woman has NOTHING to do with gender.

      That’s not what scientific research shows. Different sex – different behavioural patterns, in almost any domain in life.

      Our sexual roles are different, and reproductive function is one of the oldest parts of the brain. Our dopamine triggers differ, our risk tolerance profiles differ, our agreeableness levels differ, etc. All of that guarantees that social manifestation of our biological sexes – our gender – will always vary.

      Of course you can repress that with cortex. But repression never lasts.

  • It is not gender that is being consigned to the dustbin of history. No, it is sex itself. And yet, here we are, post-announcement; still of the male sex or the female sex. Note the phrase is “good morning everyone,” not “good morning everybody.” The body itself is being scrubbed from law – and, therefore, from language.

  • Politically__Incorrect

    Gender is nothing more than a social construct; a figment of the imagination of certain confused people. The vast majority of people do not have this problem and should not be forced to participate in a mass-delusion.

  • PierrePendre

    Has anyone noticed that men and women and everyone of whatever sexual orientation in between or beyond all use the same public toilets on trains and aircraft and think nothing of it?

    • JabbaPapa

      What has this to do with anything ? Public conveniences for single persons are not in shared use at any time.

  • Anyone remember “Dixon of Dock Green”?

    The opening was always “Evening All”. Nobody objected to this and it seems an ideal mode of address for public announcements.

  • JabbaPapa

    I find this to be extraordinarily offensive to all ladies and gentlemen.

  • jb

    Once you start down the road of politically correct language there is no stopping . I still refer to a “chairman” and a “comedienne” because the logic to do otherwise is exactly the logic that leads to the idea that “Ladies and Gentlemen” is offensive and its better to nip these things in the bud. Incidentally there is one sexist phrase that I do object to its “Women only shortlist” but I don’t suppose there is any chance of that becoming gender neutral as in “Talented only short list”

  • guestwho2

    There must be more than few ladies and gentlemen remaining in London however rapidly their numbers may be dwindling. Why are they the first to be chucked overboard in the name of dye-vur-suh-tee?

    Moreover, isn’t the goal, stated or unstated, of a transgender individual to pass oneself off as a member of the opposite sex? Would a lady-turned-gentlemen object to being included in a public address to gentlemen and vice versa? If so, there is no cause to change the announcement beyond the usual virtue signalling from what is clearly a surfeit of do-nothing managerial types.

  • Jolly Roger

    It follows then that people should be upbraided when using the term ‘guys’ to address any group of people. After all, some of them might be offended at the possibility of being likened to the stuffed effigies that children used to use to beg pennies for fireworks.

    Even ‘hello people’ isn’t obviously correct enough. It might offend any vampires in the group.