Non-binary identities are valid

[arthwollipot]

Are you saying that you introduce yourself in this manner: "Hi, I'm Arthwollipot, and I like to be addressed as he/him?"

Yes, this is definitely an option. Words to that effect, anyway. The most common formula is to say "Hi, I'm Arthwollipot, my pronouns are he/him". I don't recall having introduced myself to anyone in particular for a while now, so it hasn't come up.

I wouldn't necessarily do it every time though. For example, if I'm introducing myself to someone I'm not likely to run into again (I'm in customer service, so it happens), I probably wouldn't bother. On the other hand, if I'm introducing myself to someone or a group of someones who are likely to be part of the LGBTQI+ community, I will. I share my pronouns on my social media profiles as well as the Corporate Directory at work. Virtually no-one has noticed, or if they did they haven't mentioned it to me.

 

[d4m10n]

It appears that you're unfamiliar with the concept of gender dysphoria. It's got nothing whatsoever per se to do with one's biological sex, one's name, one's clothing preferences or one's sexual orientation (although it can often partially manifest itself through any/all but the first of those categories).

What has gender dysphoria to do with people who claim neither gender? I've seen the DSM entry, and it's not obvious what you're driving at in the context of non-binary persons.

 

[Steve]

Yes, this is definitely an option. Words to that effect, anyway. The most common formula is to say "Hi, I'm Arthwollipot, my pronouns are he/him". I don't recall having introduced myself to anyone in particular for a while now, so it hasn't come up.

I wouldn't necessarily do it every time though. For example, if I'm introducing myself to someone I'm not likely to run into again (I'm in customer service, so it happens), I probably wouldn't bother. On the other hand, if I'm introducing myself to someone or a group of someones who are likely to be part of the LGBTQI+ community, I will. I share my pronouns on my social media profiles as well as the Corporate Directory at work. Virtually no-one has noticed, or if they did they haven't mentioned it to me.

Funny thing about pronouns. They are never used in reference to the person you are actually talking to. No one uses them when talking directly to the person who expresses their preference. The implication/assumption when stating preferred pronouns to a person that you are meeting for the first time is that your new acquaintance is going to be impressed enough with you that they will want to use those pronouns to discuss you with a third party.

In my case that new acquaintance could be just as likely to walk away and say to someone "What a jerk" - a completely gender neutral comment.

 

[Elaedith]

Timely tweet from Dr James Cantor.

 

[arthwollipot]

Funny thing about pronouns. They are never used in reference to the person you are actually talking to. No one uses them when talking directly to the person who expresses their preference. The implication/assumption when stating preferred pronouns to a person that you are meeting for the first time is that your new acquaintance is going to be impressed enough with you that they will want to use those pronouns to discuss you with a third party.

That's why I wouldn't do it universally. But yes, we talk about other people all the time. Sometimes I think other people is a lot of peoples' favourite topic.

In my case that new acquaintance could be just as likely to walk away and say to someone "What a jerk" - a completely gender neutral comment.

Perhaps you are unaware that "jerk" refers to male masturbation.

 

[xjx388]

Funny thing about pronouns. They are never used in reference to the person you are actually talking to. No one uses them when talking directly to the person who expresses their preference. The implication/assumption when stating preferred pronouns to a person that you are meeting for the first time is that your new acquaintance is going to be impressed enough with you that they will want to use those pronouns to discuss you with a third party.

In my case that new acquaintance could be just as likely to walk away and say to someone "What a jerk" - a completely gender neutral comment.

This is something that occurred to me. I mean, maybe there might be a situation where I’m in a conversation with a few people and I’m referring to one of the people with the others, but that’s easily rectifiable with just using the person’s name. But generally speaking, the only time this will really come up is when writing about someone. Text messages, social media, etc. And maybe I’ve been to quick to say I’d “never” use weird pronouns. Purely out of a desire not to hurt someone unnecessarily, I probably would cave in and utter a sentence like, “Max is such a cool person, ve is always there when you need vim.” But can we acknowledge that it’s really, really clunky and requires more thought than we normally put into our online communication? And I don’t see what utility we gain by using weird-ass words when “they” would acknowledge that the person is non-binary and just flows off the brain better.

 

[Aber]

"Race" as a construct seems to often be used in comparisons and examples when discussing gender identity.

It makes me curious. How would it be (or would it not be) substantively different for me to identify as a black man (and insist my identity as such be validated) from identifying as a Woman and insisting that others validate that claim?

Is that any different?
If I wake up tomorrow, and really, really feel like I am a black man- who is to say that I am not (other than bigots, obviously)?

Have a look at this:

The Identity Hoaxers
What if people don’t just invent medical symptoms to get attention—what if they feign oppression, too?

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/03/krug-carrillo-dolezal-social-munchausen-syndrome/618289/

 

[LondonJohn]

What has gender dysphoria to do with people who claim neither gender? I've seen the DSM entry, and it's not obvious what you're driving at in the context of non-binary persons.

Gender dysphoria has everything to do with people who claim identify as neither gender.

Gender dysphoria is simply defined as non-identification with the gender assigned to you at birth (which in virtually every instance is, of course, the gender correlating to your biological sex). So for example I was born male, and was assigned the gender "man" at birth. If I have gender dysphoria, it means I do not identify as "man" - and that encompasses everything from "I identify as woman" to "I identify as neither man nor woman, and consider myself gender-fluid".

 

[LondonJohn]

Timely tweet from Dr James Cantor.

I'm not entirely sure why it should be considered timely, and neither am I sure about the validity of his statement.

After all, is it possible to measure or calibrate "objective evidence" to indicate homosexuality*?

I fear that Dr Cantor may need to revisit his understanding around the identification and diagnosis of many different types of mental health conditions (and, for that matter, many different types of mental health disorders).



* that is to say, as a valid mental health condition (as opposed to outcomes - for example engaging in gay sex...)

 

[Steve]

That's why I wouldn't do it universally. But yes, we talk about other people all the time. Sometimes I think other people is a lot of peoples' favourite topic.

Yes, but I encounter/talk to many people that I never mention again. Most people I casually meet/talk to never again enter my thoughts. If a person become significant enough to me then I have no issue with learning and appropriately using their gender ID. I just do not think it needs to be part of an introductory conversation.

Or perhaps I am. Origins and common uses are not necessarily the same. But hey, I am flexible. Let's change it to the sex/gender neutral ass(hat).

 

[d4m10n]

Gender dysphoria has everything to do with people who claim identify as neither gender.

Which of the diagnostic criteria would you expect apply to someone like Sam Smith, given his own self-assessment? I'm guessing maybe the last three?

 

[Distracted1]

Have a look at this:



https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/03/krug-carrillo-dolezal-social-munchausen-syndrome/618289/

Interesting.
Apparently it is "a thing".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transracial_(identity)

Do those who would have us penalized for not accepting a claim of being a gender identity that is different from the one commonly understood, also have us penalized for not accepting a claim of racial identity that is different from the common usage?

 

[Emily's Cat]

You certainly seem triggered to me. And this post merely confirms that.

It confirms nothing other than your lack of mindreading skills.
Seriously, where do you get off trying to tell me what my emotional state is? You definitely don't know me that well.

The comment in question was in no way "tantamount to slavery". Yes, a different example could have been used, but the chosen example was perfectly valid, as an example only.

And, for the record, I did not have anything "in there too".

Apologies, I made the error of assuming that the person objecting to my quip was responsible for the inane comment that I was responding to.

 

[Emily's Cat]

That was all readily apparent to me. I could not figure out how the "don't talk about slavery" rant was relevant, other than to completely disregard context.

Also in this thread... one quip is a "rant".

 

[Steve]

It confirms nothing other than your lack of mindreading skills.
Seriously, where do you get off trying to tell me what my emotional state is? You definitely don't know me that well.


Apologies, I made the error of assuming that the person objecting to my quip was responsible for the inane comment that I was responding to.

 

[Upchurch]

Do those who would have us penalized for not accepting a claim of being a gender identity that is different from the one commonly understood, also have us penalized for not accepting a claim of racial identity that is different from the common usage?

Penalized how?

 

[Steve]

Also in this thread... one quip is a "rant".

A quip is generally understood to be lighthearted. Your comment was definitely not that. You were angry that the word slavery was used, without taking any time to consider the context, which you completely misunderstood. So yes, a short rant, but a rant just the same.

 

[Emily's Cat]

"Race" as a construct seems to often be used in comparisons and examples when discussing gender identity.

It makes me curious. How would it be (or would it not be) substantively different for me to identify as a black man (and insist my identity as such be validated) from identifying as a Woman and insisting that others validate that claim?

Is that any different?
If I wake up tomorrow, and really, really feel like I am a black man- who is to say that I am not (other than bigots, obviously)?

But, but, but... that's different! It would be unconscionable for a privileged person (a white man) to appropriate the experiences of an oppressed class (black men) for their feelings! But women are totally the oppressors, so it's punching up, really, and no big deal. Right?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'm not even going to rant about the improper use of the word "trigger" in this thread.

Wolli, you make me smile

 

[Upchurch]

It would be unconscionable for a privileged person (a white man) to appropriate the experiences of an oppressed class (black men) for their feelings!

Wait, who did that?