Failure to comply could cost you your scholarship or professorship at CU Boulder, so it is a bit facile to pretend these are low stakes choices made voluntarily between consenting adults with no institutional coercion involved.
What makes you believe it is entirely costless to play along with the notion that people can change their sex? Plenty of costs have been pointed out in the other thread, most of them falling upon natal females.
How many failures to comply ought to get (CU Boulder) students sent home, in your view?
Imagine you are on the committee, deciding the fate of a serial misgenderer. This student seems to believe that pronouns refer to sex rather than gender and also seems fairly incorrigible in their belief. How bad does it have to get before you decide to kick them out for holding this belief and acting accordingly?
I can relate. There's no way I'm referring to a man as she, or a woman as he. That's a fantasy I won't participate in. But they works for all parties.
It seems to me that shifting this convo from institutional norms which may be enforced by an educational institution (e.g. CU Boulder) to a matter of simple interpersonal politeness between friends constitutes a retreat from the bailey to the motte. The controversial position, in this case, is that pronouns must be taken to refer to gender identity on pain of institutional sanction. The much more defensible position is that it is nice to be polite to your colleagues and friends.
Ultimately, questions of public policy must be decided by the public. Especially in a representative democracy, your answer constitutes an abdication of one of your fundamental responsibilities as a citizen.
That implies subservience. It's not the same thing.
Given the greater context and the nature of Elizabethan society, I think we can be confident that he’s talking about men men.