Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

[LondonJohn]

Why? There is nothing wrong with being a woman, assuming you are a man.

Yep. This certainly does seem like wilfully obtuse "pretending-not-to-understand"-ing to me.

The very fact that you (claim you) cannot see how a cis woman might be offended by deliberately being referred to as man/he/him by someone who knew she was a cis woman - or vice versa - is as socially- and empathetically-baffling to me as it is laughable.

Tell you what: start deliberately referring to a female you are "friends" with (or who you work with, if you work) as a man, and see how that pans out for you........

 

[Samson]

But do you have any links to show you are right?
Sure, I teach in the Netherlands, but that assertion is not true here at all.

Here is an essay thoughtfully written to answer your point. I draw particular attention to the last sentence in the excerpt that you seem to argue is without foundation.


Since my first encounter with the pronoun question, the movement has only intensified.* Everywhere you look it seems people are talking about pronouns.* Pronouns in online bios, email signatures, on name tags; peppy educational videos about how to use pronouns and why they’re important; memos from your office or school.* So what are these pronouns we are being asked to specify?* What is the purpose of specifying one’s pronouns?* And what does all of this mean for individuals and the broader culture?* I argue that the modern social obsession with pronouns represents a collective collusion to misrepresent reality motivated by misguided empathy, and that rather than protecting people it breeds fragility and narcissism as it sows seeds of gender confusion in today’s youth.

https://criticaltherapyantidote.org...ouns-neo-etiquette-or-radical-self-rejection/

 

[LondonJohn]

Seriously? Are you unable to imagine that an adolescent might be mortified by that?

Indeed. Some posters' "arguments" are really getting pitiful at this point, aren't they?

 

[LondonJohn]

Here is an essay thoughtfully written to answer your point. I draw particular attention to the last sentence in the excerpt that you seem to argue is without foundation.


Since my first encounter with the pronoun question, the movement has only intensified.* Everywhere you look it seems people are talking about pronouns.* Pronouns in online bios, email signatures, on name tags; peppy educational videos about how to use pronouns and why they’re important; memos from your office or school.* So what are these pronouns we are being asked to specify?* What is the purpose of specifying one’s pronouns?* And what does all of this mean for individuals and the broader culture?* I argue that the modern social obsession with pronouns represents a collective collusion to misrepresent reality motivated by misguided empathy, and that rather than protecting people it breeds fragility and narcissism as it sows seeds of gender confusion in today’s youth.

https://criticaltherapyantidote.org...ouns-neo-etiquette-or-radical-self-rejection/

Erm..... a "traditional therapy" (i.e. snake oil) blog page? REALLY??? Is this the best you've got?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Indeed. Some posters' "arguments" are really getting pitiful at this point, aren't they?

I would respect it more if they were just honest in saying that they are opposed to trans people identifying the way they do and are constantly looking for an opportunity to engage in "debate" on the issue, and that they are pretty upset that their reactionary viewpoints are not really welcome in polite society.

 

[gnome]

Why? There is nothing wrong with being a woman, assuming you are a man.

I must agree this strongly comes off as "pretending not to understand". How one feels about being misgendered has nothing to do with whether there's anything objectively wrong with one vs. another. It's insulting that you expect this to be taken as a sincere point. I'm not an idiot and neither are you, so don't pretend one of us is.

 

[Hercules56]

I think the best way to sum up this thread is "people need to grow thicker skin".

Just because somebody called you the wrong pronoun doesn't mean you have to make believe you are a victim of violence.

 

[Elaedith]

Erm..... a "traditional therapy" (i.e. snake oil) blog page? REALLY??? Is this the best you've got?

Misrepresenting the title of the piece and not responding to the content? Is that really the best you've got?

Oh wait, it is. Nevermind.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I think the best way to sum up this thread is "people need to grow thicker skin".

Just because somebody called you the wrong pronoun doesn't mean you have to make believe you are a victim of violence.

Gotta say, people combing college websites for non-binding declarations for largely powerless student organizations should probably re-evaluate their own sensitivity before handing out this kind of advice.

 

[LondonJohn]

Misrepresenting the title of the piece and not responding to the content? Is that really the best you've got?

Oh wait, it is. Nevermind.

Oh look: more "pretending not to understand". Brava! (Or should that be "bravo", perhaps?)

 

[LondonJohn]

(And I don't know why you're referring to a Nirvana album in your "response" - you do you though)

 

[Samson]

Erm..... a "traditional therapy" (i.e. snake oil) blog page? REALLY??? Is this the best you've got?

The thread is to debate "violence" in pronouns.
If one gay child has been converted to trans by the enabling and promoting mechanism of pronoun culture that is a form of violence driven by misuse of pronouns.

Yet it is not one, it is many.

As to the idea a blog post has no importance, I have witnessed too many experts in medicine conducting harmful procedures for high financial reward long after the science has debunked them, yet governing bodies are unassailable. A thoughtfully written and plausibly argued essay achieves greater public good, and I will promote accordingly.

What is her biggest error?

 

[Elaedith]

Oh look: more "pretending not to understand". Brava! (Or should that be "bravo", perhaps?)

I understand that you misrepresented the title of the piece by pretending that 'traditional therapies' is 'snake oil' when it is referring to therapies that are apolitical (a traditional aim of psychotherapies) rather than subservient to activism.

I understand that you did this to try to discredit the content without any argument, and this is typical of people who have no argument.

 

[Steve]

Interactions on the internet are different than in the "real world". Obviously.

I get the distinct sense that you're a tad bit clueless about other peoples' sensibilities.

Some of us are. I genuinely do not understand why someone would get upset about something that would not upset me. 70 years of interactions with other people have taught me that this is so often the case and I have developed social mechanisms to mostly avoid actually doing things that would upset people, but there are so many things that people get upset about that to me are trivially unimportant.

Example: Re d4m10n's example of being mistaken for a member of the opposite sex - I would not find this to be the least little bit upsetting. My reaction would be amusement and I would assume that the other person would fairly quickly recognize their mistake. Going out of my way to correct them would not be a priority. At that point the other person's reaction would likely be some level of embarrassment, which I also do not understand. Why be embarrassed about an honest mistake?

 

[LondonJohn]

I understand that you misrepresented the title of the piece by pretending that 'traditional therapies' is 'snake oil' when it is referring to therapies that are apolitical (a traditional aim of psychotherapies) rather than subservient to activism.

I understand that you did this to try to discredit the content without any argument, and this is typical of people who have no argument.

Then you're referring to the title of the blog, not the title of the piece. Furthermore, the title of the piece contains a (not-uncommon among the semi-educated) punctuation error that further devalues the credibility of the article itself. And talking of the article itself, it's nothing more than a self-affirming piece of nonsense that effectively argues "I'm right because I'm right".

Oh well. As you say: never mind.

 

[LondonJohn]

PS: turns out that the author of that blog is an obsessed transphobe:

https://criticaltherapyantidote.org/

Who'd'a thunk it?!

 

[Elaedith]

Then you're referring to the title of the blog, not the title of the piece. Furthermore, the title of the piece contains a (not-uncommon among the semi-educated) punctuation error that further devalues the credibility of the article itself. And talking of the article itself, it's nothing more than a self-affirming piece of nonsense that effectively argues "I'm right because I'm right".

Oh well. As you say: never mind.

Oh the irony.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Here is an essay thoughtfully written to answer your point. I draw particular attention to the last sentence in the excerpt that you seem to argue is without foundation.


Since my first encounter with the pronoun question, the movement has only intensified.* Everywhere you look it seems people are talking about pronouns.* Pronouns in online bios, email signatures, on name tags; peppy educational videos about how to use pronouns and why they’re important; memos from your office or school.* So what are these pronouns we are being asked to specify?* What is the purpose of specifying one’s pronouns?* And what does all of this mean for individuals and the broader culture?* I argue that the modern social obsession with pronouns represents a collective collusion to misrepresent reality motivated by misguided empathy, and that rather than protecting people it breeds fragility and narcissism as it sows seeds of gender confusion in today’s youth.

https://criticaltherapyantidote.org...ouns-neo-etiquette-or-radical-self-rejection/

So a person's opinion that transpeople are wrong and evil means and should just shut up somehow shows that schools are forcing children to be trans?

If someone wrote a similar opinion piece about how we should just call children from mixed race marriages mongrels because that was traditional would you accept that too?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

So a person's opinion that transpeople are wrong and evil means and should just shut up somehow shows that schools are forcing children to be trans?

If someone wrote a similar opinion piece about how we should just call children from mixed race marriages mongrels because that was traditional would you accept that too?

Woke boss fired me because I referred to my coworker as a quadroon.

 

[d4m10n]

I must agree this strongly comes off as "pretending not to understand". How one feels about being misgendered has nothing to do with whether there's anything objectively wrong with one vs. another. It's insulting that you expect this to be taken as a sincere point.

Okay, I'll be somewhat less subtle than usual here. If you take the trouble to introspect about why you'd be upset to have someone address you with the wrong pronouns, you might well find that you're actually upset about being perceived as the wrong sex regardless of your particular gender expression and level of (non)conformity to gender roles.

Suppose I were to run the experiment proposed at #670, deliberately referring to female friends using he/him pronouns to see how they react. Will they become upset with me because I have missexed them by failing to acknowledge their femaleness, or because I have misgendered them by failing to acknowledge that their gender identity aligns with their sex at birth? Both? Something else?

It seems at least possible that you are all simply mistaken about why people would be upset to be addressed with the wrong pronouns, presumably because you have failed to adequately distinguish between sex (something you are) and gender (something you feel).

Contrary to the advice given in the original CU Boulder page, I've found that people (outside of progressive activist settings such as Skepticon) rather rarely take the trouble to ask for pronouns at the outset of a social interaction. Why is that? The only reason that springs readily to mind is that they are using pronouns automatically and unthinkingly to refer to apparent sex rather than one's inner sense of self.