• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

Lukraak_Sisser said:
Again, politeness and empathy?
Click to expand...

Would it not be equally polite of a trans person to just accept that most people they have casual encounters with will default to the outward appearance that they present to the world and that their internal identity is largely irrelevant to most people?
 
Darat said:
Not playing along with anyone, just being nice and using the words they wish me to use. It costs me exactly nothing to do so and it costs no one else anything. That you need to tie it into changing sex is your issue not mine.
Click to expand...

If I decide I want to be referred to as "Your Highness" or "His Royal Highness", are you going to comply?
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Again, politeness and empathy?
Click to expand...

Politeness and empathy are two way streets. Anyway, I think you're conceding the point. The dude isn't a lady, and nobody thinks he is a lady. We're just all supposed to feel sorry for him, and play along with the polite fiction of his womanface because politeness and empathy.

Empathy about what, exactly? What form of human suffering are we supposed to empathize with?
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Again, politeness and empathy?
Click to expand...
Politeness and empathy has entered the school system, and there is a cost that follows. This is not my thought experiment. It is leading to gay youth being told they are trans.
I hope this is wrong for the sake of society.
I will read any link to show I am wrong.
 
Darat said:
Not playing along with anyone, just being nice and using the words they wish me to use. It costs me exactly nothing to do so and it costs no one else anything.
Click to expand...
I'd say there is an obvious informational cost to be paid every time you choose to obscure sex in favor of gender. The sentence "William should not swim against women, because of his inherent advantages" has significantly more intuitive impact than "Lia should not swim against women, because of her inherent advantages." The first sentence conveys key information, whereas the second one requires an additional explainer as to the nature and origin of the advantages.
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
We are for sure seeing gender as being demanded to be proscriptive. The descriptiveness is being told to some of us that we is wrong.

That they can't get consistent with theeaning of gender makes it a little silly to be proscriptive tho.
Click to expand...

I do see it the other way around, which is interesting on how perspectives can differ. I see many people taking a proscriptive position that gender and sex should both remain biological references, when gender is increasingly being used to refer to other than biology. A descriptivist point of view allows for the evolving of the term "gender".
 
Hercules56 said:
If I decide I want to be referred to as "Your Highness" or "His Royal Highness", are you going to comply?
Click to expand...

Only if you are a frog that looks like a Tesla.


By which I mean, you sound like the people who wanted to not "allow" same-sex marriage because next we'll have to let people marry their horse or letterbox.

Silly analogies don't work here. The overwhelming evidence is that transgender people exist.
 
theprestige said:
Why not use the words you wish to use? Why do your wishes get demoted? Someone looks male to you, you use masculine pronouns. Unless they tell you your perception doesn't matter. Okay, so what gives them that privilege, to tell you that you don't see what you see?
Click to expand...

So you have a co-worker Bob who is objectively short, well under average male height for his age.

You like to use cute nicknames for coworkers, and call him "shorty" and "shortstop" and such.

He complains as it makes him feel bad.

Do you stop, accepting that your words cause hurt, or do you continue, based on the "fact" of his shortness; you are only using "truth"?
 
Ryan O'Dine said:
Actually, the highlighted is one of the things that does "bring the pain."

Having one’s name and pronouns accepted (Bailey et al., 2014; Bauer et al., 2015a; Haas et al., 2011; SPRC, 2008).... is known to reduce the risk of suicide.
Click to expand...

Note your cite refers to trans people, which I've already expressed sympathy for. My issue is with xes and zhirs, which the OP article goes into at more length than the violence thing.

Trans, I get, and will call them whichever pronoun they feel lines up with them. The xe crew is where I have problems. There's not even any such thing as xes. They just made the **** up.

Being subservient does cost me something. It's not the same thing.
Click to expand...

Careful, now. You're not "being" anything. It's a no-cost to you game to make them feel comfortable.

Do you mean it's a problem because others might look at you and make assumptions? Yeah, that's how I feel about using xe or zhir or they to refer to an individual.
 
pzkpfw said:
Only if you are a frog that looks like a Tesla.


By which I mean, you sound like the people who wanted to not "allow" same-sex marriage because next we'll have to let people marry their horse or letterbox.

Silly analogies don't work here. The overwhelming evidence is that transgender people exist.
Click to expand...

I 100% support same-sex marriage.
 
pzkpfw said:
So you have a co-worker Bob who is objectively short, well under average male height for his age.

You like to use cute nicknames for coworkers, and call him "shorty" and "shortstop" and such.

He complains as it makes him feel bad.

Do you stop, accepting that your words cause hurt, or do you continue, based on the "fact" of his shortness; you are only using "truth"?
Click to expand...

Nicknames have no relevance in this thread. And I cannot recall anyone saying they would not use a name that is provided when they are introduced to a person. The thread is about pronouns.
 
FWIW, I think using the term “violence” is deliberate hyperbole and shouldn’t be used outside of physical harm or metaphor. I think those who play the linguistics card need to learn a bit about language use though.

As far as the law is concerned, I don’t think it should be illegal to misgender people according to their preferred pronouns except in certain specific occasions where the misgendering is done by someone in a position of power and there is a pattern of harassment. Star examples given of landlords and employers seem to be good examples of where there can be legal consequences.
 
gnome said:
I do see it the other way around, which is interesting on how perspectives can differ. I see many people taking a proscriptive position that gender and sex should both remain biological references, when gender is increasingly being used to refer to other than biology. A descriptivist point of view allows for the evolving of the term "gender".
Click to expand...

I can see that. I guess the trick would be, who's doing the describing? If it's me, there's two genders, correlating to sex, and special cases for trans and intersex. The other stuff, real thought may or may not be, would fall outside the scope of gender.
 
Thermal said:
Note your cite refers to trans people, which I've already expressed sympathy for. My issue is with xes and zhirs, which the OP article goes into at more length than the violence thing.

Trans, I get, and will call them whichever pronoun they feel lines up with them. The xe crew is where I have problems. There's not even any such thing as xes. They just made the **** up.
Click to expand...
I can sympathize with that. I don't think I've ever said the trans community is asking nothing of us. I just think that what they're asking, in the grand scheme of things, is pretty trivial.

Do you mean it's a problem because others might look at you and make assumptions? Yeah, that's how I feel about using xe or zhir or they to refer to an individual.
Click to expand...

No, that's not why. It's because the person in your example is requesting that I act as their inferior. That's not what the trans community is doing.
 
Thermal said:
I can see that. I guess the trick would be, who's doing the describing? If it's me, there's two genders, correlating to sex, and special cases for trans and intersex. The other stuff, real thought may or may not be, would fall outside the scope of gender.
Click to expand...

What term would you use to refer to masculine and feminine forms attached to some nouns in languages such as Spanish? It seems natural to refer to it as a "gendered" word. It does not seem natural to refer to the word's "sex" as if it were a biological entity. Doesn't that suggest a difference already?
 
angrysoba said:
FWIW, I think using the term “violence” is deliberate hyperbole and shouldn’t be used outside of physical harm or metaphor. I think those who play the linguistics card need to learn a bit about language use though...
Click to expand...

Thank you!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom