You misread, or I miscommunicated my statement: I don't care about 'signage'.
If Google has a practical reason to have special signage, all the power to them.
I care about the 'social ethos unwittingly imbued on people' as a function of an aggressive culture.
The signage is an artifact of the culture, as implied by the author it's 'Googly', i.e. 'these are the values that we must have' - which may have nothing to do with the workplace, but more to do with projecting ideology.
If an Atheist was required to have 'morning prayer' at a company ... would this be acceptable? I mean, why should an Atheist care? It's just a bunch of words that would effectively have no meaning to them? Of course, it wouldn't be right to have 'prayer', per say, as a 'cultural requirement' unless it was a religious org, or special in that manner. Imagine being the only one at your company who 'doesn't do it' ... you'd be the Black Sheep surely.
Google may have an over-representation of people with gender ID issues, and may very well just have some pragmatic solutions, like 'individual bathrooms' that are just marked as 'bathrooms'. This seems like a rather good solution to me, and avoids the ideological issues entirely. There's no argument needed, anywhere. But to specifically foster 'anti gender binary ideals' as part of the culture is wrong.
My guess is the author is projecting is own ideals onto what 'Googly' means.
Ask someone 'what Burning Man means' - and you get 1000 different answers. Most of them 'authoritative'. :).
This is all a bit intersectionalist for me. I'm having a hard time keeping track. Are they asking people to pray to the toilet signage? I think I might be right there with you on that one.
If Google has a practical reason to have special signage, all the power to them.
I care about the 'social ethos unwittingly imbued on people' as a function of an aggressive culture.
The signage is an artifact of the culture, as implied by the author it's 'Googly', i.e. 'these are the values that we must have' - which may have nothing to do with the workplace, but more to do with projecting ideology.
If an Atheist was required to have 'morning prayer' at a company ... would this be acceptable? I mean, why should an Atheist care? It's just a bunch of words that would effectively have no meaning to them? Of course, it wouldn't be right to have 'prayer', per say, as a 'cultural requirement' unless it was a religious org, or special in that manner. Imagine being the only one at your company who 'doesn't do it' ... you'd be the Black Sheep surely.
Google may have an over-representation of people with gender ID issues, and may very well just have some pragmatic solutions, like 'individual bathrooms' that are just marked as 'bathrooms'. This seems like a rather good solution to me, and avoids the ideological issues entirely. There's no argument needed, anywhere. But to specifically foster 'anti gender binary ideals' as part of the culture is wrong.
My guess is the author is projecting is own ideals onto what 'Googly' means.
Ask someone 'what Burning Man means' - and you get 1000 different answers. Most of them 'authoritative'. :).