Split Thread Pronouns and expectations

[bruto]

My mistake.

No worry. It's hard to say everything well, especially as I'm currently typing with clumsy fingers on a tablet, and also coming to grips with some subtleties of discourse that I hadn't likely thought through.

I can see the point and the concern of some people with whom I nonetheless entirely disagree. I do not believe their fear of a society in which they feel uncomfortable or wronged justifies a society in which some others cannot be free, if they can exist at all, but I can at least see it.

Nor, might I add for some above, would I think to equate unkind behavior in our social interactions with argument or criticism, even if at times immoderate, on an iternet forum such as this.

As an aside, I must add that it seems the older I get, the less patient I become with the certitude of theory, faith and doctrine. The world is a lovely place to be, but it is chaotic and filled with contradiction and surprise. Even the best intentions come at a cost. We needn't necessarily abandon them, but we need at least to count it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Do not placate them for being evil, blacklist them, punish them, make their lives sheer misery until they learn how to act at the bare minimum level expected of human beings.

If they cannot accept others for being harmlessly different, we should not allow them to be destructively hateful.

This seems incredibly intolerant, and you seem to be demanding ideological conformity on pain of harassment and abuse.

 

[Emily's Cat]

This. It also leads to women being unable to articulate their case for boys and men being excluded from female facilities. A request that "she", a "transgirl", should be excluded from girls' athletics events sounds mean and unjustified. (It also leads to uninitiated readers thinking that these meanies are trying to exclude a girl who wants to be a boy.) To make the position clear it is essential to be able to say that the person who should be excluded is a boy and refer to him as "he".

Same with prisons. "She should not be in a women's prison" and "he should not be in a women's prison" are very different sentences. And for changing rooms, showers, dormitories and all the rest. We are immediately placed on the back foot and in a near-impossible position if we are forced to adopt the language of the trans cult when discussing these issues.

That's not even getting into police alerts and news articles asking that citizens be on the lookout for a 'woman' and telling the public that 'she' robbed a store and beat up a pensioner.

In some few situations, using a person's preferred pronouns is courtesy toward that person - and courtesy is a good thing most of the time. But pronouns convey information, and in a great number of interactions, the information is of far more import than the hypothetical feelings of the person who isn't even present.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I didn't read the article. I determined it was worthless when the title equated pronouns to the date rape drug.

It might be worth at least perusing the article. There are some good points in there that you may not have given consideration to.

 

[acbytesla]

No worry. It's hard to say everything well, especially as I'm currently typing with clumsy fingers on a tablet, and also coming to grips with some subtleties of discourse that I hadn't likely thought through.

I can see the point and the concern of some people with whom I nonetheless entirely disagree. I do not believe their fear of a society in which they feel uncomfortable or wronged justifies a society in which some others cannot be free, if they can exist at all, but I can at least see it.

Nor, might I add for some above, would I think to equate unkind behavior in our social interactions with argument or criticism, even if at times immoderate, on an iternet forum such as this.

As an aside, I must add that it seems the older I get, the less patient I become with the certitude of theory, faith and doctrine. The world is a lovely place to be, but it is chaotic and filled with contradiction and surprise. Even the best intentions come at a cost. We needn't necessarily abandon them, but we need at least to count it.

I get this big time. Certitude is something I think we should always be wary of. Other people's and our own.
And I have no room for faith at all. I see faith as the excuse people give when they don't have a good reason.

The only principle I try to preach to myself is to be as understanding as I can be. Which I sometimes find hard when I'm talking to idiots. Especially when the idiots are certain of stupid ideas. But the reality is we all have believed stupid ideas. I can list wrong ideas argued for by Edison, Tesla, Newton, Darwin, Einstein and many others. So give mere mortals a break. And maybe I'm the one who's wrong.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Nobody asks me what pronouns I prefer.

 

[acbytesla]

I agree. We're put on the back foot by the demand to respect people's obviously incorrect (sometimes mendacious) judgement of their sex, which they call 'gender' to further obfuscate the truth, and then the unthinking go along with it through self-censorship because they don't want to be thought of as unkind, or they're stupid enough to actually believe people are born in the wrong body. Plenty of thinking people go along with it because of the cost of resisting the groupthink. Admittedly, the campaign has been brilliantly engineered, a long game, first capturing universities, then political parties (the 'kind' ones, obviously, on the left), then work places, with the EDI training and pronouns-required emails, and - most disgusting of all - schools, to reach the kids, get them to ruminate on how they fit on the gross (intrisically homophobic and misogynistic) stereotype spectrum between G I Joe and Barbie.

I don't hate anyone, certainly not someone confused about their sex, but the people behind this travesty (WPATH, etc.) ought to be brought to justice. I don't suppose they ever will be.

There's a difference between sex and gender. Gender is a cultural and social construct. Sex is biological. So their judgment isn't wrong. This is what they see and who they want to be. You think it's appropriate for you and society to tell them who and what they are and feel like.

 

[John Freestone]

There's a difference between sex and gender. Gender is a cultural and social construct. Sex is biological. So their judgment isn't wrong.

If 'gender' was merely a social construct, wouldn't it simply equate to masculinity and femininity, to those characteristics we most commonly associate with each of the sexes? As we all know, there are more feminine men and more masculine women. If that was all 'gender' referred to in transgender theory, it would not be set against sex; people's sex would not be denied. The most repeated claim, "Transwomen are women" would not be made. The statement, "Transwomen are men," would be accepted as perfectly reasonable, rather than risking a law suit, left hook, or "non-crime hate incident" record.

This is what they see and who they want to be. You think it's appropriate for you and society to tell them who and what they are and feel like.

This is very confused. People can see all manner of things, including "dead people"; it doesn't mean those things are real. They can want to be anything at all, and I don't have to pander to their aspirations. I can't, in fact, tell anyone what they feel, since that is a private experience they have. On the other hand, yes, I can indeed tell them what they are. They are human beings, members of the species Homo sapiens, not cats or dogs. They are whatever sex they are (which almost all the time is very clear, before you start down the 'intersex' route). Why the hell should it be inappropriate to tell someone what they are when they're confused about it? It is actual kindness to do so. They might be upset, offended, but it would be the kind thing to do in almost every circumstance. Confusion about such basic facts is dangerous, as plenty of detransitioners will attest. What an idiotic world we're creating when we imagine we have to believe or pretend to believe everything someone says about themselves, in the name of autonomy! I'm Jesus Christ, by the way. Don't you dare tell me otherwise!

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

I'm reminded of the study done in various Scandinavian nations on the qualities of leadership. Each country emphasized different aspects, like assertiveness, delegation, adaptability, but every country was the same in that whatever the primary traits were, women did not have them as men did. Should the country value assertiveness, women only excelled at delegation or adaptability. Other countries were sure women were as capable at assertiveness as men were, but that wasn't as important as this other leadership trait that women obviously didn't have.

That's what gender is, it's a collection of traits that society assumes apply to those whose appearance is that of either sex. All to serve society, to fit all members into the collective whole whether it's a perfect fit for the individual or not. Rather, their comfort is immaterial. It's all so that everyone around them knows what to expect of them and what is expected of themselves.

 

[acbytesla]

If 'gender' was merely a social construct, wouldn't it simply equate to masculinity and femininity, to those characteristics we most commonly associate with each of the sexes? As we all know, there are more feminine men and more

masculine women. If that was all 'gender' referred to in transgender theory, it would not be set against sex; people's sex would not be denied. The most repeated claim, "Transwomen are women" would not be made. The statement, "Transwomen are men," would be accepted as perfectly reasonable, rather than risking a law suit, left hook, or "non-crime hate incident" record.
[
This is very confused. People can see all manner of things, including "dead people"; it doesn't mean those things are real. They can want to be anything at all, and I don't have to pander to their aspirations. I can't, in fact, tell anyone what they feel, since that is a private experience they have. On the other hand, yes, I can indeed tell them what they are. They are human beings, members of the species Homo sapiens, not cats or dogs. They are whatever sex they are (which almost all the time is very clear, before you start down the 'intersex' route). Why the hell should it be inappropriate to tell someone what they are when they're confused about it? It is actual kindness to do so. They might be upset, offended, but it would be the kind thing to do in almost every circumstance. Confusion about such basic facts is dangerous, as plenty of detransitioners will attest. What an idiotic world we're creating when we imagine we have to believe or pretend to believe everything someone says about themselves, in the name of autonomy!
I'm Jesus Christ, by the way. Don't you dare tell me otherwise!

Nice to meet you Jesus. As if I care what you call yourself? I'd be polite and kind to you regardless of what I thought. I would call you by the name you gave me. But I do love that you brought up this analogy. Since I humor Christians all the time. Religious claims are also socially created constructs and usually far more stupid and delusional than identifying your gender differently than your sex.

 

[John Freestone]

Nice to meet you Jesus. As if I care what you call yourself? I'd be polite and kind to you regardless of what I thought. I would call you by the name you gave me.

Your lack of care is not really a positive feature.

But I do love that you brought up this analogy. Since I humor Christians all the time. Religious claims are also socially created constructs and usually far more stupid and delusional than identifying your gender differently than your sex.

So you're saying identifying your gender differently from your sex is "stupid and delusional"?

 

[John Freestone]

I'm reminded of the study done in various Scandinavian nations on the qualities of leadership. Each country emphasized different aspects, like assertiveness, delegation, adaptability, but every country was the same in that whatever the primary traits were, women did not have them as men did. Should the country value assertiveness, women only excelled at delegation or adaptability. Other countries were sure women were as capable at assertiveness as men were, but that wasn't as important as this other leadership trait that women obviously didn't have.

That's what gender is, it's a collection of traits that society assumes apply to those whose appearance is that of either sex. All to serve society, to fit all members into the collective whole whether it's a perfect fit for the individual or not. Rather, their comfort is immaterial. It's all so that everyone around them knows what to expect of them and what is expected of themselves.

Yes, and people - particularly women, of course - have been working hard for centuries to raise our awareness and value women equally to men. Others, meanwhile, appear to believe that it's better for someone who doesn't meet those expectations to demand access to the other category. They're undermining the point and progress of feminism. And men (some men), being men, want whatever women have. So they pretend to be women to access those spaces and (few) privileges women enjoy. They demand to be accepted as members of the Women's Institute, or as lesbians, or to breastfeed.

Some sensitive boys don't want to grow up to be the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ they see other men being, so they start to think the only way to avoid it is to identify as a girl. And too many girls, seeing the inequalities still in society, and suffering men's aggression and sexual abuse, decide to flee their sex, identify as men (or non-binary), again undermining any progress made against toxic masculinity. And every time we collude with this, I suggest, we make it worse.

 

[acbytesla]

So you're saying identifying your gender differently from your sex is "stupid and delusional"?

Not compared to the stupid and delusional Jesus claim. I don't go into a church and tell them they are all nuts either. And i bet you don't either.

Why do insist on being rude to others? Seriously, why? You're life only has value if you make someone else miserable?

 

[acbytesla]

Your lack of care is not really a positive feature.

Why should I care? Do you think I should be a jerk? I was brought up to forgive and be kind to others. Why should I care that someone tells me their name is Jesus? There are thousands of people that go by Jesus. It's a very common name. Shouldn't I take this person on their word?

Should I call Muhammad Ali Cassius Clay?

And how are you so sure the person is the biological sex you think they are? Are you going to shove your hand down their pants? Because I flat out guarantee you there are people that are trans that you wouldn't know were unless they dropped trou. Not to mention the fact there are some masculine women and feminine men out there.

 

[theprestige]

It's pretty obvious that third person pronouns express the observer's perception of the subject's biological sex. Occasionally, that perception is mistaken, and easily corrected.

But when someone tells you their preferred pronouns, what they're actually saying is that they want you to pretend to perceive their sex as the opposite of what it actually is. They're not correcting you; you were correct to begin with.

Asking someone to deny their accurate perception of reality, for your comfort, is rude. Demanding that everyone normalize that denial as your rightful due, is toxic and anti-social.

The expectations about preferred pronouns are exactly backwards from what they should be.

 

[acbytesla]

It's pretty obvious that third person pronouns express the observer's perception of the subject's biological sex. Occasionally, that perception is mistaken, and easily corrected.

But when someone tells you their preferred pronouns, what they're actually saying is that they want you to pretend to perceive their sex as the opposite of what it actually is. They're not correcting you; you were correct to begin with.

Asking someone to deny their accurate perception of reality, for your comfort, is rude. Demanding that everyone normalize that denial as your rightful due, is toxic and anti-social.

The expectations about preferred pronouns are exactly backwards from what they should be.

No, it's not.

Let's go back to the Jesus analogy. The story is batcrap stupid. Do you call Christians out on their delusions? Or do you you think transubstantiation is real? I bet you don't call them out. Why is it you're polite to some people, but insist on being a jerk to others?

And I repeat my earlier point. How are you so sure you know their biological sex? Did you do a DNA scan? Did you insist they drop trou before you refer to them as they told you? Don't you think such an insistence would be rude?

 

[Aridas]

Why should I care? Do you think I should be a jerk? I was brought up to forgive and be kind to others. Why should I care that someone tells me their name is Jesus? There are thousands of people that go by Jesus. It's a very common name. Shouldn't I take this person on their word?

Thousands? Not quite accurate.

JESUS is ranked as the 256th most popular given name in the United States with an estimated population of 261,547.
This name is in the 99th percentile, this means that nearly 0% of all the first names are more popular.

And how are you so sure the person is the biological sex you think they are? Are you going to shove your hand down their pants? Because I flat out guarantee you there are people that are trans that you wouldn't know were unless they dropped trou. Not to mention the fact there are some masculine women and feminine men out there.

Going further, biology is messy. "Man" and "woman" are useful for general usage, but if you're going to try to push terms like "biological sex," what you're dealing becomes much weirder in reality. You want to invoke chromosomes? There's plenty of nonstandard sets of chromosomes around and XX and XY don't always manifest in the usual way anyways. One's gonads? Also not really a binary situation. Anatomy? Intersex is a thing, after all, and sex change surgery on them seems to be pointedly exempted from these crusades against gender affirming care, despite the far less defensible harms, to the surprise of virtually no one who doubts the sincerity of the anti-trans movement. Hormones? Yeah, not even remotely binary there, either. Brain chemistry? Yeah, that's not even remotely close to a binary.

 

[theprestige]

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

Let's go back to the Jesus analogy.

An appeal to analogy? Sure, why not?

The story is batcrap stupid.

The analogy is holding up so far.

Do you call Christians out on their delusions?

Only when they demand that I pretend to share their delusion, for their own comfort.

The analogy is still holding.

Or do you you think transubstantiation is real?

Of course not. That would be insane.

The analogy is still holding.

I bet you don't call them out.

Not as long as they don't demand that I pretend to share their delusion, for their own comfort.

The analogy is still holding.

Why is it you're polite to some people, but insist on being a jerk to others?

Because some people are polite to me, and others insist on being jerks.

The analogy is still holding.

Congratulations! You made an appeal to analogy that was properly analogous. It still didn't work, though - it ended up supporting my position anyway.

And I repeat my earlier point. How are you so sure you know their biological sex? Did you do a DNA scan? Did you insist they drop trou before you refer to them as they told you? Don't you think such an insistence would be rude?

The debate about preferred pronouns would be very different, if it were actually about people with DSDs trying to reconcile their genotype with their sex as perceived by others. But it's not. That's not the problem you're trying to solve, and you know this. It's not even really a problem that needs solving in this way, and you know this too.

 

[bruto]

Not compared to the stupid and delusional Jesus claim. I don't go into a church and tell them they are all nuts either. And i bet you don't either.

Why do insist on being rude to others? Seriously, why? You're life only has value if you make someone else miserable?

Maybe so, in a roundabout way., as so many people live comparatively. They measure their own happiness and prosperity, the validity of their istitutions and even of themselves, against that of others. Looking outward is easier than looking inward. The value of a club is its exclusivity, of a doctrine its narrowness,

 

[acbytesla]

Thousands? Not quite accurate.

JESUS is ranked as the 256th most popular given name in the United States with an estimated population of 261,547.
This name is in the 99th percentile, this means that nearly 0% of all the first names are more popular.

How is 261,547 people in the US with the name of Jesus not thousands? And what difference does it make? Is there a license to be a jerk if a minority population falls below 1 percent?

Going further, biology is messy. "Man" and "woman" are useful for general usage, but if you're going to try to push terms like "biological sex," what you're dealing becomes much weirder in reality. You want to invoke chromosomes? There's plenty of nonstandard sets of chromosomes around and XX and XY don't always manifest in the usual way anyways. One's gonads? Also not really a binary situation. Anatomy? Intersex is a thing, after all, and sex change surgery on them seems to be pointedly exempted from these crusades against gender affirming care, despite the far less defensible harms, to the surprise of virtually no one who doubts the sincerity of the anti-trans movement. Hormones? Yeah, not even remotely binary there, either. Brain chemistry? Yeah, that's not even remotely close to a binary.

Yep. Biology is very messy.