While I am firmly in the camp of calling people whatever they prefer and leaving it at that, I'm also in agreement that the stated penalty for "harassment" is too steep if it is applied uniformly every time someone says the wrong thing. But is it? Is it a minimum penalty? Would the person in question think it harassment if it's a misunderstanding? Would a case ever occur here? Would it not make a difference whether one misunderstands a situation or whether one, as the original poster implies he would, insists on it on the basis of some perceived notion of rightness and truth that overrides the ideas of others?
We're in a very abstract territory here, it seems. We're all presented at times with situations that make us uncomfortable, about which we would at least secretly want to make nasty comments. Sometimes those comments may be warranted, and sometimes not. Sometimes we understand what's going on and sometimes we don't. Both times, I think, it's likely they can be omitted without hardship. Why should one actually give a damn? If a person with a vagina wants to be called a man, how can you know what's going on in that mind, or that blood stream? Why not just do it? You can spout off about it later at the pub, and feel righteous amid all the laughs and snickers.
