I just finished a grocery shop. The cashier seemed to be a young female with very short hair, but most definitely a female from my angle of view. When it was my turn the cashier had a decidedly soft male sounding voice and their name tag bore an absolutely male name with no female equivalent.
There are no options other than male and female on the report, so I figured by observation I should go with female. Then, I also figured my report would get flagged for inaccuracy with the male name. I chickened out and checked off "male". I expect the client will probably understand if it comes up in review.
Is this something anybody's run into before?

Check male since it's obliviously their preferred gender. Then maybe explain your answer in notes to MSC.

If there is no place for notes, I would provide a short explanation with the name.

I go by DNA and make a note in the report.

I just had this at a car wash! But I didn't have a check box. Just a description, which included a very specific face tattoo.

I had one at a Five Guys I used to shop near me that has since closed. What made it tougher was, they don't wear name tags. My best guess was female so that's what I went with. I was never rejected.

I am curious how you propose obtaining a DNA sample from the cashier and then performing a chromosomal analysis in time to submit the report. I am also curious how much you think it would cost.

@HonnyBrown wrote:

I go by DNA and make a note in the report.

Have you considered a genetic male who is exhibiting the symptoms of gynecomastia? Gynecomastia is common (more than 50%) in genetic male infants, and again (lower incidence) during puberty and early adulthood and is generally transitory. IMHO, I suggest consideration of the desire of the person, regardless of what you perceive as a difference between your conclusion and the gender suggested by the name tag.

On a lighter note, listen to a recording of the Johnny Cash hit song, "A Boy Named Sue". [www.youtube.com]

@JW wrote:

I just finished a grocery shop. The cashier seemed to be a young female with very short hair, but most definitely a female from my angle of view. When it was my turn the cashier had a decidedly soft male sounding voice and their name tag bore an absolutely male name with no female equivalent.
There are no options other than male and female on the report, so I figured by observation I should go with female. Then, I also figured my report would get flagged for inaccuracy with the male name. I chickened out and checked off "male". I expect the client will probably understand if it comes up in review.
Is this something anybody's run into before?

@myst4au wrote:

I am curious how you propose obtaining a DNA sample from the cashier and then performing a chromosomal analysis in time to submit the report. I am also curious how much you think it would cost.

@HonnyBrown wrote:

I go by DNA and make a note in the report.

My guess is Honny was making a funny.

@myst4au wrote:

Have you considered a genetic male who is exhibiting the symptoms of gynecomastia? Gynecomastia is common (more than 50%) in genetic male infants, and again (lower incidence) during puberty and early adulthood and is generally transitory. IMHO, I suggest consideration of the desire of the person, regardless of what you perceive as a difference between your conclusion and the gender suggested by the name tag.

On a lighter note, listen to a recording of the Johnny Cash hit song, "A Boy Named Sue". [www.youtube.com]

@JW wrote:

I just finished a grocery shop. The cashier seemed to be a young female with very short hair, but most definitely a female from my angle of view. When it was my turn the cashier had a decidedly soft male sounding voice and their name tag bore an absolutely male name with no female equivalent.
There are no options other than male and female on the report, so I figured by observation I should go with female. Then, I also figured my report would get flagged for inaccuracy with the male name. I chickened out and checked off "male". I expect the client will probably understand if it comes up in review.
Is this something anybody's run into before?

??? I'm meeting this person for 45 seconds, I can't "consider gynecomastia," I have to fill out a report soon that asks a gender-specific question. I can "consider" gynecomastia but it isn't going to help me fill out the report unless I ask the employee if they have gynecomastia which I flat out am not going to do. As far as the "desire of the person," huh what?

"I know this seems awkward but I need to know how you identify in a gender sense. What are you comfortable with? Oh by the way I'm NOT a mystery shopper."

Yeah if I know them as an acquaintance outside of shopping, your advice makes a lot of sense. Everyone should feel comfortable in their own skin. But if mystery shopping, how do you propose we gauge "the desire of the person?"

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2021 05:00AM by KokoBWare.

I would check the "male" box and provide an explanation in the report if there's space. I would also email my scheduler, if there is one assigned to this shop.

I have known males who were born male who have very feminine features. I've known some of them since they were babies or toddlers. If I had not known them since they were little, I would have sworn some of them were female or transgendered just by looking at their faces.

What names (especially these days) are male only?

This is quite common in my community, and I think surveys should avoid only having male/female pick boxes. If there’s any narrative section I state “gender not determined.”

@BusyBeeBuzzBuzzBuzz wrote:

I would check the "male" box and provide an explanation in the report if there's space.

What names (especially these days) are male only?

Nathanial, Noah, Doug, Jason, Peter, Todd, Oscar... Names I've recorded at Grocery shops that I'd consider pretty gender specific. One of these was the cashier's name...

Clearly seems like the person is transitioning/etc and would like to present as male based on the name. I would choose male. If there’s room to describe somewhere—ok. If there is not, just go with male.

Once, I had a likely dude with a traditional female name. At another shop at the same location, I had the same name badge (it was distinctive) for a different and apparently female person who would not have been this dude after a transition. Too many unchangeable differences there.

I would mark whatever my first impression was and forget about it. I would explain if the survey permitted this. But... why are we supposed to attempt to determine whether people are transvestite, transitioning, or other? ( I intensely dislike questions about sex/gender/sex and I want them eradicated from all of my jobs. !)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2021 03:08PM by Shop-et-al.

I'm not really sure as to why it matters about checking the male or female box.

If they appear to be a woman with a man's name, I would just check "Female" and give them the name or vice versa.
For as long as I've done shops, the accuracy of the employee's sex was not ever questioned, especially so when the time of the shop and the employee's name was also requested.

Thanks for answering.

Yes, those are traditionally male names but not always gender-specific. Take, for examples, a second Noah from the Bible (https://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0436.htm#5), and Noah Cyrus.

Also, some females take on a male saint's name. It's not just nuns, either. For example, see [am.adventistmission.org]

These days, more and more parents like to give non-traditional names to their baby girls. For example, Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively named their first daughter "James," for Ryan's father. I know "James" is not on your list but that's a pretty traditionally male name.

@JW wrote:

Nathanial, Noah, Doug, Jason, Peter, Todd, Oscar... Names I've recorded at Grocery shops that I'd consider pretty gender specific. One of these was the cashier's name...

I agree with French Farmer. Go with your impression. I would ignore using the name other than perhaps when you cannot decide. Often times people seem to switch badges and some stores seem to allow nicknames. I would not be at all surprised if they add a don't know type category in the future.

I had a similar situation many years ago. The person was a bit chubby, so it was hard to tell from their form whether they were male or female. There was no name tag. They were wearing the company polo style shirt so no clue there. The person's voice was as gender-neutral as I've ever heard. On that particular form, there was a drop down menu for hair color that gave all the usual, plus blue, green, purple,etc, but the drop down for gender was just male or female. I got a clandestine photo to cover my bases if there was a question, but I never heard back from the company, other than getting the usual payment.

I once knew a man named Tiffany, Tiff for short. Poor guy--he told me that his parents were dead set on that name no matter what. So names aren't always an indicator of born or preferred gender. Especially these days when so many parents are hell-bent on giving their kids "unique" names that nobody else can pronounce or spell. (Don't even get me started on that topic!)

Back on topic, there's a cashier at one of my local grocery stores who looks just like "Pat" from SNL. For the longest time I couldn't figure out his/her gender and never was in his/her checkout line. Finally I was in that line and she spoke to me. I was so glad I didn't have her when I did a shop there, which was before I determined her gender. If MSCs are going to insist on gender identification, they need to add "non-binary" and/or "indeterminate" as choices. I mean, how is a shopper supposed to know the person's preference?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2021 03:08AM by BirdyC.

@BusyBeeBuzzBuzzBuzz wrote:

What names (especially these days) are male only?

"Oscar" would be a good bet

Going out on a limb here. But I have to say it:

Often, at many gas stations, there are employees who have obvious unfamiliar names, to many folks. I try my best to write down their name on my worksheet and often, I've found (in the employee photo) that I've either misspelled it or was very wrong. It didn't matter to the MSC at all - I was never questioned. The same for their sexual identity.
If they (the MSC) ever asked me (not once in all my years), I would just answer, "I did my best in answering either question".

When I was younger, I remember reading the older books from the Nancy Drew mystery/detective series for kids. Nancy had 2 girlfriends who often accompanied her on her many amateur sleuthing adventures.
They were cousins Bess, very feminine and George, Bess' tomboy cousin. I thought her name was unusual, but so what? It didn't really matter much at the time then or now.

Names are just that - names. So are sexual identifications.

So, don't sweat the sexual identification thing, don't make it about the employee's sexual identification preference or your opinion of it, or not.
In the end does it really? No! By observation, check the box that seems right to you and just note the employee's name.
Move on.

If someone, or some MSC, wants to question sexual identities of an employee, or that employee's identification preference let them go there, not you.

You'll be the better person.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2021 12:00PM by French Farmer.

I routinely shop for three MSCs (including one of the major ones) that also ask for race, which is another minefield I don’t enjoy stepping in. Many other MSCs wisely mandate never referencing an employee’s race.

@NinS wrote:

I routinely shop for three MSCs (including one of the major ones) that also ask for race, which is another minefield I don’t enjoy stepping in. Many other MSCs wisely mandate never referencing an employee’s race.

I know; I hate that question. What does it matter as long as you give a detailed description. And if you have to also give their names, there's usually plenty enough identifying information in the report.

There are some shops where it makes good sense to ask for race/ethnicity and other potentially "fraught" identifiers. I do a TON of cash integrity shops, but other shops where the employee could be fired if identified, such as alcohol sales to minors also come to mind. BUT, I think that the clients/MSC for the large cash/integrity MSC have the right idea; the description question is open ended. So, I can enter, for instance, " medium brown complexion, possibly South Asian, based on accent," " Caucasian, strong non-Hispanic foreign accent>" When the "bad guys" are most likely to have used another's name tag, or no name tag, it becomes really important to use details about such things as accents, skins tones, even scars, piercings, tattoos, etc, so that the some similar, but innocent, other employee is not wrongly suspected. When such shop reports have helped the client to narrow the field of potential suspect, the client may then do video surveillance of one sort or another to obtain solid evidence.

The question that really baffles me is weight. Some MSCs specifically say they don't want to know. Others have weight ranges and one wants weight reported to the nearest pound. I have decided that I really can't estimate weight very well at all. There used to be carnival barkers who guessed your weight or owed you a prize. I know that is not a career for me.

@French Farmer wrote:

Going out on a limb here. But I have to say it:
....

I love how even that story changed over time. Initially, the parents expected a baby boy and wanted to name him after a relative. Then, a baby girl was born. They did not change the name. And baby girl George came to be! Later, editors decided that George was short for Georgia. Hmm.

When I was younger, I remember reading the older books from the Nancy Drew mystery/detective series for kids. Nancy had 2 girlfriends who often accompanied her on her many amateur sleuthing adventures.
They were cousins Bess, very feminine and George, Bess' tomboy cousin. I thought her name was unusual, but so what? It didn't really matter much at the time then or now.

Names are just that - names. So are sexual identifications.

So, don't sweat the sexual identification thing, don't make it about the employee's sexual identification preference or your opinion of it, or not.
In the end does it really? No! By observation, check the box that seems right to you and just note the employee's name.
Move on.

If someone, or some MSC, wants to question sexual identities of an employee, or that employee's identification preference let them go there, not you.

You'll be the better person.

@walesmaven wrote:

There are some shops where it makes good sense to ask for race/ethnicity and other potentially "fraught" identifiers. I do a TON of cash integrity shops, but other shops where the employee could be fired if identified, such as alcohol sales to minors also come to mind. BUT, I think that the clients/MSC for the large cash/integrity MSC have the right idea; the description question is open ended.

That makes sense in that case, and it helps that it's open-ended. Sometimes you can't tell if someone is Black or Hispanic or mixed-race, especially if they have a cap and a mask on! But being able to give other descriptors is more comfortable, I think.

The weight thing is weird; estimating someone's weight is really difficult to begin with. Some reports I've had ask for general build (tall, slender, large, etc.), and some specifically say to NOT mention build. I've never been asked to estimate weight in pounds. Even guessing age within a certain range can be tough.

Many lifetimes ago, I sometimes needed to estimate height and weight in order to match riders with horses. Mmm. My vantage point was ~ eight inches higher than the people I was eyeing. This was important for the horses! Some of them can handle larger loads. Others were ready for persons who weighed less. And, what about the person was well over six feet tall and proportionately weighed about three hundred pounds. Only a few horses could handle this person's weight. They found a horse for them. Fortunately, it was someone else's job to inform people who did not fit available horses.

As for race/ethnicity, it might not be difficult for a skilled person to alter their appearance with cosmetics. There was an article somewhere about "becoming" a Disney princess. Each person who played the role, who did not look like the others in real life, had a specific cosmetics plan to follow in order to transform into the same look for each princess. So how easy or difficult would it be for any of us to transform into the "same" other person or any other person besides ourselves? We might need different cosmetics and techniques, and we might want to cover most of our skin to make this task easier, but we could pull it off and fool someone.Just look at the array of cosmetics for all skin tones! They are widely available in a wide range of prices. We could do it. Anyone we are shopping could do it.