Non-binary identities are valid

[Steve]

To which the obvious objection is that "it" strikes the ears as objectifying/dehumanizing, much like menstruator.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Like I said, people need to get over it. If they are going to be offended anyway they might as well be offended by a word with no connotations. That way everyone can be offended by the same word. Keeps things simple. Everyone gets objectified/dehumanized in exactly the same way.

Anyway, this whole thread is really about using pronouns differently from their original intent. Change the meaning of it and a single word is sufficient for any situation.

 

[Chanakya]

The perfect trans pronouns!

Actually They could appropriate the royal We for Themselves. First person, second person, and third person as well. With towering initial capitals, but otherwise unchanged. The capitals would be enough to set them apart.

They would, in the process :

(a) Help put another nail in the concept of monarchy. An incidental, additional plus. (That odious institution, while no more than a harmless joke and a tourist attraction in Europe and the Anglosphere, still has some teeth left in other parts of the world. Teeth that sometimes do bite, and often glint menacingly in the background. I'm thinking Thailand, but I suppose some other places as well.)

(b) Combine Their cause with a sense of humor. Water down the stridency, without watering down Their cause.

(c) Gain ready/readier acceptibility for Their pronouns, and in the process Their cause. The gimmicky nature of this stunt would draw attention, most of it, I think, in sum, positive.

(d) They'd get easy early traction if They could get the actual royals to fall in. The Queen, although a sweet old lady, is unlikely to give in, IMO. Charles might be more amenable.

 

[Steve]

Further to the above, different pronouns are used depending on whether the person being referenced is present or absent. When talking to a person who is present I tend to useyou almost exclusively. Nothing remotely offensive there. If I am discussing a person who is not present it makes absolutely no difference to them what pronoun I use as that person (it ) is completely unaware.

For clarity, in my world anybody can identify however they want. Makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to me. I have no reason to criticize or object to anyone’s self identity. My 18yo daughter is “testing the water” a little right now. I am fine with whatever she settles on. Regardless of what she settles on her particular pronoun(s) are very unlikely to be used by me in reference to her during any conversations with her, other than discussions specifically about her self-identity.

 

[Steve]

Actually They could appropriate the royal We for Themselves. First person, second person, and third person as well. With towering initial capitals, but otherwise unchanged. The capitals would be enough to set them apart.

They would, in the process :

(a) Help put another nail in the concept of monarchy. An incidental, additional plus. (That odious institution, while no more than a harmless joke and a tourist attraction in Europe and the Anglosphere, still has some teeth left in other parts of the world. Teeth that sometimes do bite, and often glint menacingly in the background. I'm thinking Thailand, but I suppose some other places as well.)

(b) Combine Their cause with a sense of humor. Water down the stridency, without watering down Their cause.

(c) Gain ready/readier acceptibility for Their pronouns, and in the process Their cause. The gimmicky nature of this stunt would draw attention, most of it, I think, in sum, positive.

(d) They'd get easy early traction if They could get the actual royals to fall in. The Queen, although a sweet old lady, is unlikely to give in, IMO. Charles might be more amenable.

I could go with that. Of course it doesn’t help with pronouns that other people use for them, although I suppose Majesty could work for first, second, and third person.

I sure hope Tragic Monkey isn’t following this thread.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I sure hope Tragic Monkey isn’t following this thread.

Not any more. Some things get too silly even for me to bother with.

 

[JihadJane]

Further to the above, different pronouns are used depending on whether the person being referenced is present or absent. When talking to a person who is present I tend to useyou almost exclusively. Nothing remotely offensive there. If I am discussing a person who is not present it makes absolutely no difference to them what pronoun I use as that person (it ) is completely unaware.

For clarity, in my world anybody can identify however they want. Makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to me. I have no reason to criticize or object to anyone’s self identity. My 18yo daughter is “testing the water” a little right now. I am fine with whatever she settles on. Regardless of what she settles on her particular pronoun(s) are very unlikely to be used by me in reference to her during any conversations with her, other than discussions specifically about her self-identity.

Would you be fine with your daughter taking testosterone?

 

[Steve]

Would you be fine with your daughter taking testosterone?

My only concern would be that she takes it safely. If it helps her to be comfortable with her identity and it is physically safe for her then yes, I would be fine with her taking prescribed doses under the supervision of a physician.

 

[zooterkin]

Secondly, if you'd read even the first paragraph of the link, you'd see that "Mx" is actually used widely in the UK. It's used by the government, the majority of banks, and many other businesses and institutions, especially the biggest.

The Wikipedia page said ‘widely accepted’, which is not the same as ‘widely used’; interesting to learn of it, but I’ve never seen it before as far as I can recall.

 

[theprestige]

The Wikipedia page said ‘widely accepted’, which is not the same as ‘widely used’; interesting to learn of it, but I’ve never seen it before as far as I can recall.

I'm not even sure "widely accepted" is quite accurate. How many people are involved in such a decision, at a major bank? Six or seven? A dozen or so, if it's something socially contentious? A few PR folks, a few HR folks, a lawyer, an executive or two to sign off on it... I doubt it went to a vote of the shareholders, let alone the 230,000 or so rank and file at the bank.

 

[arthwollipot]

Further to the above, different pronouns are used depending on whether the person being referenced is present or absent. When talking to a person who is present I tend to useyou almost exclusively. Nothing remotely offensive there. If I am discussing a person who is not present it makes absolutely no difference to them what pronoun I use as that person (it ) is completely unaware.

Right, they are unaware at that time. But if you misgender someone to another person, they are more likely to misgender that person as well. And sometimes you do refer to someone by their pronoun when they are present.

For clarity, in my world anybody can identify however they want. Makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to me. I have no reason to criticize or object to anyone’s self identity. My 18yo daughter is “testing the water” a little right now. I am fine with whatever she settles on. Regardless of what she settles on her particular pronoun(s) are very unlikely to be used by me in reference to her during any conversations with her, other than discussions specifically about her self-identity.

To be clear - that you have no problem with other people referring to you however they want has no effect on other people, who may well have a problem with that. And if your daughter does choose a pronoun, you would (in my opinion) be a bad dad not to use it.

 

[Steve]

Right, they are unaware at that time. But if you misgender someone to another person, they are more likely to misgender that person as well. And sometimes you do refer to someone by their pronoun when they are present.

To be clear - that you have no problem with other people referring to you however they want has no effect on other people, who may well have a problem with that. And if your daughter does choose a pronoun, you would (in my opinion) be a bad dad not to use it.

I really do not give two ***** about all the little things that may trigger the delicate sensibilities of the vast number of strangers on this planet. I do try to be respectful to all but there are limits beyond which it becomes impractical. I doubt that gender ID is much of an issue for over 99% of people. If A says something to B who repeats it to C and D happens to overhear it and becomes offended, that is D’s problem and no one else’s.

As I said upthread, it is a very usable third-person pronoun. The word applies equally to every person and shows no bias whatsoever. Saves the trouble of memorizing a long list of pronouns to apply to people you will never know. My concern for the gender ID of complete strangers ends at trying to find a neutral term that encompasses all equally. It fits the bill nicely.

Now, in the real, everyday trivial world I do not really use the word it to refer to a person. For example, if I am out with my wife and l happen to say “I like the hat he (or she) is wearing” the gender ID word that I use is actually the least important word in my statement. It saves me from the totally impractical action of approaching the person to determine their actual gender ID, and is trivially based on their general presentation/appearance that they have chosen for public display.
There are a certain very, very small number of people in my life who actually matter to me. You may be able to understand that my daughter is one of them. I have a tendency to treat those very few people with a lot more care and concern than I apply to the unwashed masses. Consider and try to understand this before you bring up your suggestion of “bad dad”.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Indeed, and even if you succeed in getting a neologism out there into the world and used by people, once it is out you are no longer an authority on how it gets used. Ask that guy who thinks his invention is pronounced "Jiff". Sorry, everyone else calls it "Gif".

Yeah, he's not going to win that one. It stands for "Graphical user interface" (IIRC?) That first G is a hard G. Obviously it's "Gif"

 

[Ziggurat]

Yeah, he's not going to win that one. It stands for "Graphical user interface" (IIRC?) That first G is a hard G. Obviously it's "Gif"

Ummm... that's GUI, not GIF. GIF is Graphical Interchange Format.

 

[arthwollipot]

I really do not give two ***** about all the little things that may trigger the delicate sensibilities of the vast number of strangers on this planet. I do try to be respectful to all but there are limits beyond which it becomes impractical. I doubt that gender ID is much of an issue for over 99% of people. If A says something to B who repeats it to C and D happens to overhear it and becomes offended, that is D’s problem and no one else’s.

Appeal to unpopularity?

If I call you an ass and you get offended by that, it's not your problem for being offended, it's my problem for calling you an ass in the first place.

As I said upthread, it is a very usable third-person pronoun. The word applies equally to every person and shows no bias whatsoever. Saves the trouble of memorizing a long list of pronouns to apply to people you will never know. My concern for the gender ID of complete strangers ends at trying to find a neutral term that encompasses all equally. It fits the bill nicely.

"It" is dehumanising. "It" is what you call an inanimate object. That said, I'm sure that there'll be someone somewhere who will choose it as their pronoun, because humans be humans.

Now, in the real, everyday trivial world I do not really use the word it to refer to a person. For example, if I am out with my wife and l happen to say “I like the hat he (or she) is wearing” the gender ID word that I use is actually the least important word in my statement. It saves me from the totally impractical action of approaching the person to determine their actual gender ID, and is trivially based on their general presentation/appearance that they have chosen for public display.

And if that gender presentation is ambiguous? Why not say "I like the hat they are wearing."? The great thing about "they" is that it is universal. You don't have to establish who they are before using it. See? I just used it without establishing who I'm talking about.

There are a certain very, very small number of people in my life who actually matter to me. You may be able to understand that my daughter is one of them. I have a tendency to treat those very few people with a lot more care and concern than I apply to the unwashed masses. Consider and try to understand this before you bring up your suggestion of “bad dad”.

What I'm reading here is "I don't care about people, only about me and mine". It strikes me as rather selfish. I mean look at your language here. Literally everybody on the planet apart from a "very, very small number of people" is unwashed masses. Your contempt is showing.

 

[arthwollipot]

Ummm... that's GUI, not GIF. GIF is Graphical Interchange Format.

The argument is the same.

 

[Steve]

Appeal to unpopularity?

If I call you an ass and you get offended by that, it's not your problem for being offended, it's my problem for calling you an ass in the first place.

"It" is dehumanising. "It" is what you call an inanimate object. That said, I'm sure that there'll be someone somewhere who will choose it as their pronoun, because humans be humans.

And if that gender presentation is ambiguous? Why not say "I like the hat they are wearing."? The great thing about "they" is that it is universal. You don't have to establish who they are before using it. See? I just used it without establishing who I'm talking about.

What I'm reading here is "I don't care about people, only about me and mine". It strikes me as rather selfish. I mean look at your language here. Literally everybody on the planet apart from a "very, very small number of people" is unwashed masses. Your contempt is showing.

Well your reading is accurate and you have me pegged. Seriously. It is a fact that I am quite selfish. Most people in this world mean very little to me. I wish them no ill but I am very unlikely to go very far out of my way to accommodate them either. I have no contempt. I just plain don’t care. I also don’t care that some people may dislike that I am selfish. My selfishness, to a very large degree, is also irrelevant to most people because it is not apparent during my dealings with them. I have no trouble being pleasant and civil with strangers. It eases my dealings with them in the everyday world and I have no reason to make our encounters unpleasant. I seldom socialize because I find it boring. I have a very small number of friends and I like it that way.

Shrinks, both pro and amateur, would probably say I have some kind of personality disorder and may even hang a name on it. Makes no difference to me. I have survived 66 pleasant years on this planet. I have no enemies (that I am aware of) in spite of my outlook. Some few people, such as yourself, may come away from an encounter with me thinking I am an ass, or other similar disparaging descriptor. They are probably right and I would not waste my time arguing about it. If, on occasion, I happen to unwittingly offend some stranger because I have not wasted my life learning the intricacies of language peculiar to all the myriad small communities of people who think they deserve special treatment that is much more their problem, not mine. There is no reason my ignorance should matter to them. They have no more reason to care what I say than I have to care what they say.

I hope I am quite clear. People are just not as special as they like to think they are.

Now, addressing a couple of other points in your post;

In my experience, ambiguous gender presentation in my everyday world is so uncommon as to not exist. Yes, it exists in abundance in certain communities. Those communities and I never seem to encounter each other. I know from discussions with my daughter that if she ultimately chooses to identify as male she will present as male to the world at large by choosing to dress in clothing that is commonly identified as male clothing, which she does to a large degree already, and by choosing a “male” name. Nothing ambiguous there.

It is in no way restricted to inanimate objects. There is only one specific object (well actually 7 billion+) for which that pronoun is frowned upon by convention. That object is the human being. And the reason is that humans mistakenly think they are too special to be lumped in with everything else that exists.

 

[Steve]

Thinking after I posted the above, there is a much simpler way to explain my “selfish” approach to life.

Golden Rule.

I do not expect or require any strangers to make any special accommodations for me, and in return I do not see a need to make special accommodations for others. Being civil and fair in dealing with others is all that is really necessary.

 

[arthwollipot]

Thinking after I posted the above, there is a much simpler way to explain my “selfish” approach to life.

Golden Rule.

I do not expect or require any strangers to make any special accommodations for me, and in return I do not see a need to make special accommodations for others. Being civil and fair in dealing with others is all that is really necessary.

But there are people who do require special accommodations from you. Do you park in the disabled parking spaces?

 

[Steve]

But there are people who do require special accommodations from you. Do you park in the disabled parking spaces?

Clever. You sure got me there. I suppose your point is that because you can find one exception that I have to agree that all exceptions are equally valid. I reject that.

And now it is midnight here and I am going to bed. I will see what else you come up with in the morning.

 

[arthwollipot]

Clever. You sure got me there. I suppose your point is that because you can find one exception that I have to agree that all exceptions are equally valid. I reject that.

And now it is midnight here and I am going to bed. I will see what else you come up with in the morning.

Good night. Sleep well.