"Misgendering" is now a federal offense

[Ziggurat]

Say you were at work and you were in a meeting with someone whose pronouns (either he/him or she/her) had been made available to you (e.g. on their bio) just before so they're clear in your mind.

Would you use those pronouns when referring to them in the meeting, or use other ones depending on your opinion of their sex?

If I were at work, I would act in accordance with my employer's policy, because that's part of the job. I do not have freedom of speech when I am on the clock.

Students are not in general employees. They retain freedom of speech rights. So I don't know why you think this scenario is relevant.

 

[Thermal]

I demand you call me "Your Highness".

Will you?

If you were nobility that traditionally is referred to that way, sure. Were I to meet King Charles, I'd expect to refer to his majesty as such.

If not and you were just making it up and trolling, then no.

And that's kind of the undercurrent here: that trans people are pulling our legs. I don't think they are, from my limited experience. I think they by and large are sincere.

And regarding whether they've fully transitioned or not, that comes down to what kind of resources they have. Transition surgeries and hormone therapy aren't necessary cheap or fast. But if a guy commits to living his life as a woman, whether he still gets five o'clock shadow shouldn't make him "authentic". Take her at her word if she's living the life sincerely.

Of course, we still have to watch for a guy who slaps on a wig and dress to get into the women's locker room. There are going to be pervs running around, and we gotta deal with that too.

 

[Hercules56]

If you were nobility that traditionally is referred to that way, sure. Were I to meet King Charles, I'd expect to refer to his majesty as such.

If not and you were just making it up and trolling, then no.

And that's kind of the undercurrent here: that trans people are pulling our legs. I don't think they are, from my limited experience. I think they by and large are sincere.

And regarding whether they've fully transitioned or not, that comes down to what kind of resources they have. Transition surgeries and hormone therapy aren't necessary cheap or fast. But if a guy commits to living his life as a woman, whether he still gets five o'clock shadow shouldn't make him "authentic". Take her at her word if she's living the life sincerely.

Of course, we still have to watch for a guy who slaps on a wig and dress to get into the women's locker room. There are going to be pervs running around, and we gotta deal with that too.

There are trans women who insist on being called "she/her" or "they" but have full facial hair or mustache. You cannot expect me to call them anything but "he/him".

 

[Thermal]

Do pronouns refer to gender or to sex?

Again, that's the whole issue here. I don't remember hard definitions given to me, but my understanding is that it always referred to bio sex. And well... there weren't really enough exceptions running around to become thorny. Transsexuals were a thing, but not an everyday one. Fringe cases.

But words evolve and change meaning. This whole "gender but not sex" thingy has been bouncing around for decades. The meaning is definitely changing, but to what? These cats flat refuse to define anything in a way that makes sense, them blame everyone else for having problems with the wishy washy bull ****.

If gender is your internal self ID, and sex remains sex, we're good. The problem comes up when they want to sometimes have gender and sex as the same, while they stroke their beards saying "it's complicated. Just do as you are told". That's some bull ****, right there, and unacceptable to an adult audience looking for honest understanding and solid resolution.

 

[Darat]

But Holyoke has

No they haven't.

 

[Thermal]

There are trans women who insist on being called "she/her" or "they" but have full facial hair or mustache. You cannot expect me to call them anything but "he/him".

I don't know why you quote a post but ignore it's content.

Responding to your point: yes, there are, but it's probably pretty rare. And you and I might picture a woman as not having a beard, and quite fairly and reasonably, but what would a trans woman feel like? There's a male on that show Queer Eye who wears dresses and all, but rocks a full beard. I heard "them" interviewed once, and they say they are "a non binary bitch", and that their beard is a natural part of who they are.

This is the important part: they are not playing dress up, trying to look like a Barbie doll. They are full tilt sincere that they feel right and honest living in that gray area, and the traditional polarity doesn't apply. And I believe they are sincere, so I'll cooperate with the pronouns, at least to whatever degree I can. Sure, I'll frequently slip and call them a "he". I mean, the beard is undeniably male. But I wouldn't keep telling them that they are wrong about their maleness. I think it's pretty obvious that I'm wrong about them not having a big dose of woman in them, too big to ignore.

 

[Darat]

Again, that's the whole issue here. I don't remember hard definitions given to me, but my understanding is that it always referred to bio sex. And well... there weren't really enough exceptions running around to become thorny. Transsexuals were a thing, but not an everyday one. Fringe cases.

But words evolve and change meaning. This whole "gender but not sex" thingy has been bouncing around for decades. The meaning is definitely changing, but to what? These cats flat refuse to define anything in a way that makes sense, them blame everyone else for having problems with the wishy washy bull ****.

If gender is your internal self ID, and sex remains sex, we're good. The problem comes up when they want to sometimes have gender and sex as the same, while they stroke their beards saying "it's complicated. Just do as you are told". That's some bull ****, right there, and unacceptable to an adult audience looking for honest understanding and solid resolution.

It's interesting that there was - when I was lad - so 40 years or so ago - still a significant hangover for those in the "gay community" to refer to each other as "she" and "her" - it was part of a tribal identity, and I think a protective response (see my next comments). Put that alongside with the rest of society trying to abuse homosexuals by calling male homosexuals "she" and female homosexuals "he" and I had a visceral reaction to being misgendered. That's why I can be understanding of those that want a specific pronoun to be used as I know I never liked being what I considered "misgendered".

 

[Thermal]

It's interesting that there was - when I was lad - so 40 years or so ago - still a significant hangover for those in the "gay community" to refer to each other as "she" and "her" - it was part of a tribal identity, and I think a protective response (see my next comments). Put that alongside with the rest of society trying to abuse homosexuals by calling male homosexuals "she" and female homosexuals "he" and I had a visceral reaction to being misgendered. That's why I can be understanding of those that want a specific pronoun to be used as I know I never liked being what I considered "misgendered".

That's something that even us boring straight guys should be able to relate to. Among our friends, we might playfully call each other mother *******, but wouldn't expect strangers/acquaintances to refer to us that way. The way you are addressed packs punch, subtlety or not. A guy living his life sincerely as a woman is getting stung by Billy Bob telling him "I don't care what you say you are; I say you are what I say you are".

 

[Darat]

Which is why in the end the one social rule is always, with irony given the topic, "try not to be a dick".

 

[TheGoldcountry]

There are trans women who insist on being called "she/her" or "they" but have full facial hair or mustache. You cannot expect me to call them anything but "he/him".

No one can expect anyone to do anything. But don't be surprised that if you go out of your way to be a dick to someone, you are treated as such.

If your principles are so important that you're going to call someone a certain way, even when you know it will upset them, that's fine. I see kids dressing and acting a certain way that would never fly when I was a kid, where I grew up. But the only thing I ask of others is that they treat me with a measure of respect, and I'm not going to be a dick to them because they don't live according to my standards. Life is too ******* short.

ETA: In short, what Darat said above.

 

[bruto]

Oh, yes it is!

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Your_Highness

and "His Royal Highness" and "Her Royal Highness" are also a pronouns

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/His_Royal_Highness
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Her_Royal_Highness

I now identify as King Smartcooky of the Republic of ISF, President for Life, Field Marshal Smartcooky VC, DSO, MC, CBE, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas. My pronouns are "His Royal Highness"/"His Excellency".

When referring to me, I demand you use "His Royal Highness" or "His Excellency".
When addressing me personally, I demand you use "Your Royal Highness" or "Your Excellency".

You can demand what you want, but I still contend a title is not a pronoun, no matter who wishes it otherwise. I would be inclined to argue that more traditional references to English grammar are better relied on than Wiki, but also note that the instances you cite do indeed have sexed pronouns. In direct address, "Your royal highness" is unisex, but in reference, "his royal highness" is not "her royal highness," so the issue of sexed pronouns (or actually, I think, in this case what should be called pronomial adjectives) is not solved anyway.

No matter how you slice it, denying that a person is royal is not the same thing as denying that that person is male or female, at least so far in the world as we seem to live in it now (and discounting the rants and demans of the insane), and though one might demand, and even succeed in demanding, that they be addressed as "your royal highness," (as might well occur if one is, in fact, a monarch) they will be described with sexed pronouns, and at times after the introduction of the principal to whom the pronoun applies, only by those pronouns.

His royal highness went to his room. If her royal highness went to his room, it's likely the story differs from what happens when she goes to her room.

 

[bruto]

No one can expect anyone to do anything. But don't be surprised that if you go out of your way to be a dick to someone, you are treated as such.

If your principles are so important that you're going to call someone a certain way, even when you know it will upset them, that's fine. I see kids dressing and acting a certain way that would never fly when I was a kid, where I grew up. But the only thing I ask of others is that they treat me with a measure of respect, and I'm not going to be a dick to them because they don't live according to my standards. Life is too ******* short.

ETA: In short, what Darat said above.

But feelings are everything, as long as they're his!

 

[Thermal]

But feelings are everything, as long as they're his!

The problem is, both sides here have valid points. Looking up a definition for "he", the top google hit is "a third person pronoun referring to a male person or animal". Thats-a pretty biological definition. But "the other side" can quote definitions that show it closer to a more ambiguous internal ID. Perfectly credible, too. I don't reckon we'll ever get a round consensus here. Bottom line for yours truly is that I don't want to hurt someone with my form of address, so I'm not going to do so intentionally. People demanding to be called "His Eminence" or "zhe" or whatever will be clocked as insufferaable jerks and put on my social ignore list. A man living as a woman who wants to be called a "she", I'll happily do so. Providing she gets that she ain't jumping in the ladies locker room, because no matter what she feels like, she might be making other women profoundly uncomfortable with a dick out in the open, and their feelings count, too.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

The problem is, both sides here have valid points. Looking up a definition for "he", the top google hit is "a third person pronoun referring to a male person or animal". Thats-a pretty biological definition.

That's the definition I go by as well.

I'm just not willing to abuse others over the issue.

Not allowing transgender men in women's sports or dressing rooms? Yes, I'm behind that, because it involves others (biological women) who are losing something real and tangible over what is, in the end, a personal issue about identity.

Making a point of using language I know will hurt someone else, when it serves no other purpose other than to validate my own opinions or biases?

No, I'm not going to do that. I consider it hateful. I would never respect someone who did it to someone I care about personally, so I'm not going to do it to anyone else. I think that's the least that people who live together in society owe each other. The bare minimum, really.

 

[theprestige]

Coming back to the topic of the thread: Mount Holyoke College is an all-women's school. Historically it has been near the forefront of women's liberation and women's equality movements. From the beginning, it sought to give women the same curriculum and the same educational standards as men's colleges.

To me that's an important part of this story, though I'm not sure what to make of it.

 

[Thermal]

His royal highness went to his room. If her royal highness went to his room, it's likely the story differs from what happens when she goes to her room.

Dear Penthouse forum, his royal highness never thought this would happen to his majesty, but...

 

[Thermal]

That's the definition I go by as well.

I'm just not willing to abuse others over the issue.

Not allowing transgender men in women's sports or dressing rooms? Yes, I'm behind that, because it involves others (biological women) who are losing something real and tangible over what is, in the end, a personal issue about identity.

Making a point of using language I know will hurt someone else, when it serves no other purpose other than to validate my own opinions or biases?

No, I'm not going to do that. I consider it hateful. I would never respect someone who did it to someone I care about personally, so I'm not going to do it to anyone else. I think that's the least that people who live together in society owe each other. The bare minimum, really.

Yup. You might be factually right to call someone fat, too. But why would you? It's just mean.

 

[Ron Obvious]

Yup. You might be factually right to call someone fat, too. But why would you? It's just mean.

Fat is a judgement. So is ugly, and I wouldn't call anybody that either.

Man/woman on the other hand is a FACT. We're being asked to deny reality.

I strongly suspect most of those going along with this nonsense agree with me on this (including here), but are absolutely terrified of being considered a bigot.

 

[Thermal]

Fat is a judgement. So is ugly, and I wouldn't call anybody that either.

Man/woman on the other hand is a FACT. We're being asked to deny reality.

I strongly suspect most of those going along with this nonsense agree with me on this (including here), but are absolutely terrified of being considered a bigot.

Fat is pretty damned objective.

And we are not being asked to deny reality. We are being asked to accept that he/she doesn't mean strictly bio sex anymore. To those of us who grew up thinking it does, it's awkward. But a trans woman usually knows she is not a bio woman, and doesn't expect you to assert that she is. Yes, there's a few "women have penises" running around, but most aren't arguing to be given a gynecological exam.

 

[Ron Obvious]

Fat is pretty damned objective.

And we are not being asked to deny reality. We are being asked to accept that he/she doesn't mean strictly bio sex anymore.

No, increasingly we're not being asked. We're being told. Redefining words and then pretending it's always meant something different than what we know it is is quite literally Orwellian.

I know meanings change or drift over time, but this feels quite different.