hm. so generally, i think whoever would like to put their pronouns in their email signature or elsewhere should do so but... LW being the CEO makes it a bit of a bigger deal, imo. I would say that if she wants to put her pronouns in her email signature, her company should actually have a good track record of supporting and welcoming trans and nonbinary people (incl. medical benefits that support transition).

I mean, every CEO should work to make sure this is the case, and it seems like LW is already sensitive to these issues, which hopefully has translated to her already doing these things at her company. But if the company's encouraging people to list pronouns, I think the leadership should make the extra effort to make sure that people with nonbinary or unexpected pronouns aren't disadvantaged.

Basically, I think the CEO listing her pronouns in the email signature implies that the workplace is/strives to be trans & nonbinary friendly so, like, try to make sure that is actually the case (bc disclosing pronouns does not achieve this in & of itself). Considering how much hostility LW faces when people find out she's a woman, it seems like this industry is hostile to people who don't Fit expectations - how can LW make her company the exception to that?