Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

[arthwollipot]

You repeating that doesn't obligate me to pretend I believe it.

This is quite true. You shouldn't believe just me. I'm only one person.

 

[Samson]

Mangled grammar aside, why is what I said "unsettling"? Why can't you see it working?

Look, there's a simple three-step process to determining what pronoun to use:

1. Do you know what pronoun is correct? If so, use that.
2. Ask them what pronoun to use.
3. There is no step 3.

I would rather be alone and let the battle be fought by others.

 

[Samson]

Criminalizing for misgendering is extremely popular in Australia and Michigan according to this video.

https://youtu.be/2xR-Lptk0Zg

 

[angrysoba]

Is verbal harassment a kind of violence?

I've answered this question already, so I'm not sure why anybody is still having problems with it.

It can be, if the victim considers it to be. An appropriately empowered arbitration committee may also in the appropriate circumstances find it to be.

Would such a victim be justified in using violence in self-defense?

I think you're actually asking whether someone is justified in using physical violence in "self-defense" against mental, emotional or social violence, which is crossing over categories. Would this be a correct interpretation of your question?

I think the highlighted is the whole point of the discussion.

People dispute that failing to or refusing to use someone's preferred pronouns is violence, because they think there is an important distinction being elided between, say, harassment and violence.

Those who think that failing to or refusing to use someone's preferred pronouns is violence have to argue that there is no meaningful distinction.

Yet when asked if violence should be met with violence, you argue that the first form of violence is very different to the second form of violence, which is selling the pass.

If there is a useful distinction to be made between two senses of a word (one of which is extremely controversial) then it makes no sense to muddy the waters by insisting that the word be used interchangably for vastly different situations.

 

[Upchurch]

I have an IRL thing that has limited my thread time,

I'm just assigning pronouns based on apparent sex, without hardly thinking about it.

Unless you have the person’s sequenced DNA, CT scan, and/or have performed an intimate physical examination, you aren’t basing it on sex at all, apparent or otherwise. You are assigning pronouns based on a person’s conformity to current social gender norms.

 

[d4m10n]

Sure, casually, with people you don't know, whom you are never likely to meet. Personally I have tried to cultivate the habit of using gender-neutral language, including pronouns, in such situations, but whatever, who cares.

I do. My point was that English speakers (other than yourself) assign pronouns based on (apparent) sex without even thinking about gender, and moreover this is how it was always done until around a decade or two ago when we started personalizing pronouns.

The real question is: if someone says to you, "my pronouns are they/them," are you going to respect that, or not?

The real question is: Why should I? Non-binary identity was invented on Tumblr around a decade ago, it doesn't show up in the DSM as a diagnostic category which might require social affirmation to treat, and every enby I've met would be a basic progressive white girl if it wasn't for this one special category which didn't exist when I was their age.

 

[d4m10n]

Unless you have the person’s sequenced DNA, CT scan, and/or have performed an intimate physical examination, you aren’t basing it on sex at all, apparent or otherwise.

I'm guessing that the adult fellow in your profile picture is male, based solely on appearances. Am I incorrect?

 

[Upchurch]

I'm guessing that the adult fellow in your profile picture is male, based solely on appearances. Am I incorrect?

What are you basing that on? Do you know what’s going on between my legs and in my DNA or are you basing it on how I conform to gender normes and roles?

 

[d4m10n]

What are you basing that on? Do you know what’s going on between my legs and in my DNA or are you basing it on how I conform to gender normes and roles?

Happy to answer these questions after you answer mine.

 

[Upchurch]

Happy to answer these questions after you answer mine.

Do you accept self identification?

 

[Thermal]

Do you accept self identification?

Not the issue. I identify as a hottie. Is that how you will refer to me? Or maybe it doesn't matter in some contexts how a third person sees themself?

If I refer to "that blonde over there", do you stop and check if they are "really " a blonde, or how they identify?

 

[tyr_13]

Not the issue. I identify as a hottie. Is that how you will refer to me? Or maybe it doesn't matter in some contexts how a third person sees themself?

If I refer to "that blonde over there", do you stop and check if they are "really " a blonde, or how they identify?

Answering d4m10n's question would be exactly self-id. If you, or d4m10n, thinks self-id is wrong, then his question is meaningless.

If I perceived you as a bot, would I be justified in calling you 'it'? In trans supportive circles, misgendering is wrong even when used against those who insist on misgendering. It would also likely be against the forum rules.

But for theprestige and d4m10n, that wouldn't be rude. In fact it would only be right to do, and they'd I'm sure object to any punishments the forum rules would impose in the same exact way they are against all the negative social/professional consequences for misgendering.

Do you self-identify as 'no an it'? Is my perception not of primary importance?

 

[theprestige]

This is quite true. You shouldn't believe just me. I'm only one person.

Oof. Your appeal to popularity noted and dismissed.

 

[tyr_13]

I often use pronouns to refer to people without any idea of their gender identity, e.g. "Wow, that guy shouldn't be driving his diesel truck here inside the maintenance hangar," or "Damn that lady looks fit in her sundress." I'm just assigning pronouns based on apparent sex, without hardly thinking about it. You say these pronouns may be incorrect but I'd say they are doing what they are supposed to do, even if the cowboy in the truck sees herself as a cowgirl and the lady in the sundress sees themself as non-binary.

Sent from my Pronoun Decanter using Tapatalk

And when you find out you're just calling a butch woman a man you'd continue doing it, even in a professional setting, to the point you can be fired for harassment? And them object saying you're not being rude, you're just using pronouns 'for their job'?

Your rules lawyering is as transparent as ever.

 

[Upchurch]

Not the issue.

It's very much the issue. How can I answer the question? Either d4m10n accepts my self identification or else I have to provide some sort of evidence. I could post a forum-inappropriate picture (which, no, thank you) or I could go get a CT scan or a DNA sequence and submit that.

The true point, however, is that d4m10n was not evaluating my "apparent sex". He couldn't. He simply didn't have enough information to do so. d4m10n was evaluating my conformity to our society's current gender norms for the male gender.

 

[theprestige]

I think the highlighted is the whole point of the discussion.

People dispute that failing to or refusing to use someone's preferred pronouns is violence, because they think there is an important distinction being elided between, say, harassment and violence.

Those who think that failing to or refusing to use someone's preferred pronouns is violence have to argue that there is no meaningful distinction.

Yet when asked if violence should be met with violence, you argue that the first form of violence is very different to the second form of violence, which is selling the pass.

If there is a useful distinction to be made between two senses of a word (one of which is extremely controversial) then it makes no sense to muddy the waters by insisting that the word be used interchangably for vastly different situations.

Thanks for putting the issue so succinctly.

 

[d4m10n]

Do you accept self identification?

I think it's a bit unproductive to answer questions with other questions. I asked whether the bloke in the photo is male or not, and so far you've shot back with three other questions instead of simply answering mine.

The true point, however, is that d4m10n was not evaluating my "apparent sex".

I was, though, and the process has nothing to do with "current gender norms for the male [sex]" but rather secondary sex characteristics which are fairly rare in females and especially rare in females old enough to have a bit of grey in their beards. Buck Angel is exceptional in many ways, but also statistically so, since MtF transitioning didn't become a growth sector until after 2011.

 

[d4m10n]

And when you find out you're just calling a butch woman a man you'd continue doing it, even in a professional setting, to the point you can be fired for harassment?

I'll use pronouns however the suits in HR say we must until I've paid off my mortgage.

Does your appeal to authority tell us something useful about how pronouns actually work in natural language?

 

[Thermal]

Answering d4m10n's question would be exactly self-id. If you, or d4m10n, thinks self-id is wrong, then his question is meaningless.

Of course I think self-ID is valid. I also think objective/external ID is valid, and more so.

If I perceived you as a bot, would I be justified in calling you 'it'? In trans supportive circles, misgendering is wrong even when used against those who insist on misgendering. It would also likely be against the forum rules.

There are a lot of forum rules that don't apply in meatspace. I hardly think that's a meaningful barometer, unless you feel like people IRL should be silenced, for instance, for changing the subject in conversation.

But for theprestige and d4m10n, that wouldn't be rude. In fact it would only be right to do, and they'd I'm sure object to any punishments the forum rules would impose in the same exact way they are against all the negative social/professional consequences for misgendering.

Pretty sure those two, and yours truly, would not misgender a trans person to their faces, mostly because we are reasonably considerate and/or not flaming douchebags. In their absence, though, we might all refer to the person as what we know them to actually be, sex wise. Reality trumps self image for some of us.

Do you self-identify as 'no an it'? Is my perception not of primary importance?

I don't identify in the negative, as that would be a long and complicated list. But to your point, that would be intentionally mis-species-ing me, as humans are generally male or female, and the pronoun "it" doesn't apply, unless we are making **** up, which is kind of a theme here, come to think of it. .

 

[Upchurch]

I think it's a bit unproductive to answer questions with other questions. I asked whether the bloke in the photo is male or not, and so far you've shot back with three other questions instead of simply answering mine.

I don't know how to provide you an answer you will accept. Will you accept me identifying myself as one or the other?

I was, though, and the process has nothing to do with "current gender norms for the male [sex]" but rather secondary sex characteristics which are fairly rare in females and especially rare in females old enough to have a bit of grey in their beards.

Oh, I think you are making quite a bit of unfounded assumptions. I, in fact, know quite a few trans males with gray in their beards. Actually, most of them I know have gray in their beards, now that I think about it.