Split Thread Pronouns

[SpuriusMaximus]

I suspect what you call me in private is a fair bit more colorful than what you call me on ISF

Dunno about him, but I've routinely called you stuff like "our feline colleague" on the forum

 

[Myriad]

A pronoun replaces a name in grammar. "I like John" becomes "I like him". It follows all of the grammatical rules that the name does. I have the right to tell you what my name is, so by those same rules I also have the right to tell you what my pronoun is, because my pronoun is literally standing in as a substitute for my name. It serves the role of the name in a sentence in every way.

I ask you to call me Andrew and not Andy because, by Data's Rule, Andy is not my name. You substitute a pronoun for my name, which grammar permits you to do, and I ask you to call me he/him and not she/her because she/her is not my pronoun.

"Hey you!" also replaces a name, especially in real life when you have no knowledge of a person's name but see a need to get their attention quickly. Your actual name is almost certainly not Hei Yu, nor do I have your prior permission to refer to you in that way.

So if I ever see you about to walk into a traffic lane, I'll understand if you stand by your right to completely disregard any warnings I call out.

 

[theprestige]

A pronoun replaces a name in grammar. "I like John" becomes "I like him". It follows all of the grammatical rules that the name does. I have the right to tell you what my name is, so by those same rules I also have the right to tell you what my pronoun is, because my pronoun is literally standing in as a substitute for my name. It serves the role of the name in a sentence in every way.

I ask you to call me Andrew and not Andy because, by Data's Rule, Andy is not my name. You substitute a pronoun for my name, which grammar permits you to do, and I ask you to call me he/him and not she/her because she/her is not my pronoun.

Not really.

Your preferred name falls into the category of identifiers you select yourself. Third person pronouns fall into the category of identifiers other people select based on their perception of you. Specifically, based on their perception of your biological sex. That's its whole function and usage, to provide an effective identification of someone whose name is not known or not relevant. You see two people walking down the road, one male, one female. "Look at him," you say to your companion, and your companion immediately identifies the subject of your interest. Even if that male had rather you said "her", your identification was still correct and successful.

Because third-person pronouns, in English, are by function and usage based on how the other person perceives you, not how you perceive yourself, and not how you wished others perceived you.

A male asking a lesbian to pretend to perceive him as a "her" - as female - won't add him to her potential dating pool. It won't help anyone who's trying to refer to him at a distance, without knowing his name.

tl;dr - your preferred name is a product of how you see yourself. Your third-person pronoun is a product of how others see you. I wouldn't dismiss the first; you shouldn't dismiss the second.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I'm not. Do you think that I'm screwing up my own principles when I refer to congressional representatives instead of congressmen and congresswomen? Or when I reference firefighters and police officers? Using sex neutral language has long been a goal of liberals and feminists.

Why do you object to neutral language in this context?

Do you want me to persistently distinguish between policeman and policewoman? Actor and actress? Doctor and doctoress?
Do you think I'm abandoning my principles and burning down my own house by using neutral language for those?

The topic of this thread is pronouns, not nouns. I haven't devoted a single instance of thought about what you might employ as nouns.

I don't care what any of you identify as. I simply don't reference either sex or gender identity whenever it's possible to do so. And it's completely possible to avoid it in the case of pronouns.

Only by using the wrong pronouns, deliberately, when you have been corrected. Calling a "he" a "they" is using the wrong pronoun. For sex or gender or both.

Why do you think it's important to reference anyone's sex or gender identity in language, when such isn't actually pertinent to the topic of discussion?

It's part of the English language to used sexed pronouns when appropriate. To not do so is rude.

I will also note that gender identity doesn't change someone's sex. The traditional definitions of male and female remain unchanged.

You're still using the wrong pronoun when you call a "he" a "they". That's not only traditional definition of male and female but traditional use of English.

This is you choosing to be uncivil and disrespectful. Which you can certainly do, but bear in mind that you're the one who has chosen to behave with contempt and derision when met with disagreement.

I don't think it's uncivil. Report it if you think it is and we'll see if the mods think so. Disagreeing with you is not uncivil, nor is pointing out profoundly silly arguments. Nor is poking fun at your egotism that you imagine your Pronoun Principles trump not only civility, and not only English, but also reason itself. You're just not that important that you cannot use "he" and "she" like literal billions of others do. I assure you the world will not end.

Do you genuinely think it makes more sense for me to be expected to not take part in discussions at all rather than to simply use neutral language across the board?

If you cannot participate in any thread without bringing it around to the topic of transgenderism, and you insist on 'making a point' by distorting language to use the wrong pronouns in a deliberate effort to draw attention then yes, maybe you should make a choice. It's like having a preacher pop into every conversation to just mention Jesus.

You seem very keen on silencing disagreement.

Not at all. I just think there's a time and place for everything, and arguing with a poster that he's not a "he" and you can't possibly use the normal pronoun in the normal way because of The Transgender Crusade is not appropriate in threads unrelated to said crusade. Your pronoun antics are disruptive and derailing.

 

[arthwollipot]

If I want to call you Andy, or Drew, or That Numpty, I have the freedom to do so. You might consider it rude, and in many cases I would agree with you. But I still have the right to call you whatever the hell I damned well please.

Yes, you are free to do so. I can't stop you. But I can choose not to associate with you if you continue to ignore me like that, because why the hell would I want to?

Because third-person pronouns, in English, are by function and usage based on how the other person perceives you, not how you perceive yourself, and not how you wished others perceived you.

No. I absolutely deny this. Pronouns replace names. They serve the same function. I have the same control over my name that I have over my pronoun.

 

[Thermal]

At no point have I done this. This appears to be a malicious misrepresentation of what I have actually said.

What you have actually, literally said is a mild rewording. "Reframing", if you will.

Arthwollipot asks you to use he/him pronouns when referring to him. You say no, you'll use what you please. "Reframing" that (remember reframing?) to something more palatable doesn't unsharpen the F.Y. inherent in your reply, that an English speaker hears.

 

[Emily's Cat]

If you cannot participate in any thread without bringing it around to the topic of transgenderism,

Pronouns cannot be completely divorced from the topic of gender identity. This entire discussion only exists because of the topic of gender identity. I'm being as limited as I reasonably can be. But you can't have a discussion about pronouns while pretending that it isn't because of gender identity ideology.

and you insist on 'making a point' by distorting language to use the wrong pronouns in a deliberate effort to draw attention

I don't. In fact, for over five years it simply hasn't drawn attention at all. About once a year someone asks about it, I indicate that I simply don't use sexed or gendered pronouns at all, and everyone moves on. I'm not making a point, and I'm not engaging in anything deliberate. If anything, arthwollipot has decided to make it a big deal instead of just moving on.

then yes, maybe you should make a choice. It's like having a preacher pop into every conversation to just mention Jesus.

As opposed to people like you who merely "request" that I thank jesus and pray for your immortal soul constantly, and berate me as rude and bigoted if I decline to participate in your rituals?

 

[Emily's Cat]

No. I absolutely deny this. Pronouns replace names. They serve the same function. I have the same control over my name that I have over my pronoun.

You do not control how other people perceive you. You have no authority over how other people talk about you.

You can be offended by it sure. Go right ahead.

But you absolutely do NOT control how other people refer to you.

 

[arthwollipot]

You do not control how other people perceive you. You have no authority over how other people talk about you.

You can be offended by it sure. Go right ahead.

But you absolutely do NOT control how other people refer to you.

I never said I did. I said that you were wrong for using the wrong pronoun. You chose to ignore me and refer to me in a way that I asked you not to. That, in my opinion, is being an ass.

 

[Thermal]

Umm... I get told by people here that I am what they say I am on a regular basis. I've been told I'm a republican (I'm not), a conservative (I don't think of myself as such), a nazi (not even a little bit), a bigot (nope again), a fascist (also not true), and many many more over the years. I've been told that I support genocide.

Might be a good time to stop and think about how you could be coming across that way? A lot of folks think if it quacks like a duck, and all that.

And I don't mean that as a slam- I went through my own bout with this forum with the "where the hell are they coming up with this?" thing. It wasn't till I reread my own posts with cold eyes that I saw it. I was so laser-focused on one angle that I went tone deaf to what it sounded like to some one.. you know... outside my head. I think you may be struggling wth a similar sitch.

When I tell people what I am, many people here feel quite free to disregard my assessment of myself and to substitute what they think of me instead.

Or what any reasonable person would interpret it as, sure.

In general, this is incredibly common. It's not always rude, but we generally refer to other people based on how we perceive them, not on how they perceive themselves. arthwollipot perceives me as being rude because I use neutral pronouns.

No he doesn't. He perceives you as belligerent* in your posturing of only using neutral pronouns, even when the one he requests aligns with your declared version of 'proper' pronoun usage. Pretty much anyone would be on the same page as he is.

*{Eta: Mr Wollipot may not agree with 'belligerent', and of course I don't speak for him.Its a random close adjective}

Like, in some American cultural circles, calling a guy a 'they' is taken as deliberately emasculating, hence insulting. You are being asked not to be insulting as part of this forum-wide act. Is that so much to request of you?

And yes, I've heard your "reframing" of the usage. I find it to be bull ◊◊◊◊, as virtually everyone else that hears it finds. Remember on That Thread how regulars there like to tell visiting critics that the problem is theirs? When you post in the rest of the forum, YOU are that guy. You have left the echo chamber, and are now in a massively larger universe where no one is buying this ◊◊◊◊.

I don't perceive myself as being rude, I perceive myself as being reasonably accommodating, consistent, and fair. No amount of me telling arthwollipot this requires that they change their practice.
So far as I'm aware, there is only one group of people for whom everyone else is expected to forego our own perceptions and to substitute the subject's perception of themselves instead.

And why not? A cop has to refer to people she can't stand in language she would likely prefer not to use. The kid who was ringing up my purchase this morning probably didn't consider me to be a distinguished gentleman, military officer, or British ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ knight, but he still called me "sir".

Simple courtesies don't compromise your essence. They just show that you are not generally a douchebag and can function around the humans.

 

[Thermal]

@Emily's Cat: here's one for you to ponder:

Arthwollipot asks you to please refer to him by his preferred pronouns.

Have you ever goddamned ONCE asked anyone if they mind being refereed to as a "they"? Have you ever said "PLEASE let me refer to you by the words I choose?

 

[arthwollipot]

The thing is, if they'd asked, I probably would have said it was fine.

 

[Thermal]

As would I. Because normal people are like that- if someone asks nicely, you are nice back, especially when it's no skin off your back.

 

[arthwollipot]

I would be surprised if it had been unkempt for five years.

You shouldn't be.