• 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??

Steve said:
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.
Click to expand...

The thread is about hurt caused by words.

People are trying to deflect by making it about "proper use" of pronouns.
 
pzkpfw said:
The thread is about hurt caused by words.

People are trying to deflect by making it about "proper use" of pronouns.
Click to expand...

"Hurt caused by words" is such an amorphous topic that no thread could contain it. The current pronoun fandango is bad enough.

BTW, my pronouns are "Hey, you!" and "Yeah, you!" Anybody wanna 'fend me?
 
pzkpfw said:
The thread is about hurt caused by words.

People are trying to deflect by making it about "proper use" of pronouns.
Click to expand...

*reads thread title and shakes head*

Anyway, if that is the case then choosing not to use certain words can be struck from the conversation, right?
 
d4m10n said:
Good thing I was only talking about pronouns, rather than every other aspect of language.
Click to expand...
Right. That's how I know you've been paying attention.

Now, because pronouns could only be sex-based, rather than gender-based, what sex-based criteria makes a ship a "she"? Is it the ship's chromosomes? Perhaps the boat gametes she produces?
 
Steve said:
Could be. Thread drift is inevitable. But saying that people are trying to deflect it to making it about pronouns - the actual title of the thread - is rather odd.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is deflecting it to pronouns. I believe the two topics something akin to "what are the proper pronouns?" and a misunderstanding that physical violence is the only kind of violence there could possibly be.
 
Upchurch said:
Now, because pronouns could only be sex-based, rather than gender-based, what sex-based criteria makes a ship a "she"? Is it the ship's chromosomes?
Click to expand...
This is how I know you're not paying attention. I've already said that there is no need to have a hard-and-fast rule that applies all of the time, when applying pronouns to human beings.

d4m10n said:
My position is that people can feel free to use pronouns to refer to apparent sex (if that is obvious) or to gender identity (if it has been mentioned). I think people tend to do the former rather than the latter pretty much of the time, because there is little need to delve into questions of gender identity when secondary sexual characteristics happen to match up to gender expression. That said, I'm not making an argument in favor of strictly adhering to either approach.
Click to expand...

It is probably worth pointing out the asymmetry here. While I don't really care whether people use pronouns to refer to sex or gender, CU Boulder does care and they expect compliance.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Fair enough, sometimes good manners really are more important than good epistemology. Not always, though, and sometimes people will use your sense of propriety to prevent you from saying true things which need to be said, as when a cold reader encourages respect for the bereaved while fleecing them.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I mean, I don't think good epistemology even entails an obligation to challenge every falsehood I come across, so it's more like good manners vs. do I feel like it's important to engage with this.

Honestly, I don't even know what commitments we're supposed to be making when we refer to someone with their preferred pronouns. If a crusty old sailor says "She's a fine ship", I'm not obligated to say "I think you'll find, sir, that your sea vessel plays no reproductive role whatsoever". If he looks at me askance and turns to walk away, calling his faithful hound with "Let's go, girl" I'm not going to shout after him, "Um, I think you'll find that a girl is a female child. That is a dog, sir."

It just seems like agenda-driven pedantry of the lowest kind to me. Which is not to say that I think people should be compelled to use pronouns, but I think we'll probably be fine.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
I think we can all agree that simple use of the wrong pronoun is not an act of violence.
Click to expand...
No.

"Simple" use of the wrong pronoun, as in a mistake or because you don't know someone's pronoun, is not an act of violence. It's just a mistake. Apologise, correct yourself, move on.

Deliberately using the wrong pronoun, using someone's deadname, or otherwise misgendering them because you refuse to accept their identity is, or at least can be, an act of aggression, if not violence.
 
Ryan O'Dine said:
Only if the failure to comply reaches the level of harassment.
Click to expand...
Here in a nutshell is why the issue is simpler and less complicated than some people want it to be.

Does your misgendering someone constitute harrassment? If so, then you should not be doing that. Otherwise you're probably going to be okay.
 
Upchurch said:
I don't think anyone is deflecting it to pronouns. I believe the two topics something akin to "what are the proper pronouns?" and a misunderstanding that physical violence is the only kind of violence there could possibly be.
Click to expand...

See below:

pzkpfw said:
The thread is about hurt caused by words.

People are trying to deflect by making it about "proper use" of pronouns.
Click to expand...
 
Steve said:
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?
Click to expand...
Would it be polite for trans people to jump back into the closet whenever someone else deems it convenient? No, it wouldn't. It would be pandering to bigots.
 
arthwollipot said:
Here in a nutshell is why the issue is simpler and less complicated than some people want it to be.

Does your misgendering someone constitute harrassment? If so, then you should not be doing that. Otherwise you're probably going to be okay.
Click to expand...

The thread title asks if it constitutes violence. Persisting in misgendering someone certainly constitutes harassment IMV. Nothing here has convinced me that it rises to the level of violence. Harassment and violence are not equivalent or interchangeable.
 
d4m10n said:
This is how I know you're not paying attention. I've already said that there is no need to have a hard-and-fast rule that applies all of the time, when applying pronouns to human beings.
Click to expand...
I was. The point is that it has never been sex based in the way we've been using the term. It's always been gender based.


d4m10n said:
It is probably worth pointing out the asymmetry here. While I don't really care whether people use pronouns to refer to sex or gender, CU Boulder does care and they expect compliance.
Click to expand...
Do you care that CU Boulder cares?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom