Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

[Upchurch]

Which is quite rare, and not at all relevant to this controversy.

Its entirely relevant. It demonstrates that people are not evaluating anyone's sex but their conformity with gender norms and, even when cis-gendered people deviate from those norms, they get misgendered.

There is no confusion, except on the part of those who believe gender exists as a practical matter, apart from sex.

I mean, You're living in the 19050's give or take, at least.

 

[d4m10n]

If we take that the 'test accuracy rate' for (the general) you being able to tell who is transgender to be 99%, which is in and of itself absurdly generous given how many people are sure demonstrably cisgender women are transgender, with the rate of adults being transgender as being between 0.004 and 0.006, then the 'true positive' rate (the probability of A given B) is going to be between 0.30 and .333. Which means the 'false positive' rate is going to be the remaining.

Okay, I think I can see what you're saying now. If the base rate of relatively masculine cisgender females is much higher than the base rate of masculine MtF individuals, then the false positive rate will be high if you are using masculinity to sort people rather than something more reliable.

Unless those steroetpyically masculine markers are enough for you to believe they are trans women, as you have maintained.

I have not, and do not, maintain that adherence to feminine or masculine or feminine social norms ought to be factored in if you are trying to guess birth sex. There are far more reliable indicators of sex available, which is why there is currently a growth market for facial hair removal by electrolysis and facial feminization surgery, among other feminizing body modifications.

You claim that their word, their self-id, isn't enough for you to use she/her pronouns unless they meet your level of perception to 'pass' as cis women.

If by "use she/her pronouns" you mean at all times and places, then yes, I reserve the right to use the pronouns that make sense to me instead of the ones which make sense to the people being referenced, when having conversations in private. You have yet to convince me that pronouns are somehow correct or incorrect because of self-id, since I've used pronouns for several decades before even being introduced to the idea of self-id.

Let me provide a specific example, to show you what I mean. The woman on the right in this picture goes by Seani and helps to moderate a travel group for womxn. That's all well and good, but because he looks just exactly like a beardy bloke, I have trouble using his preferred pronouns when he's not around. Am I doing a violence?

 

[gnome]

I have trouble using his preferred pronouns when he's not around. Am I doing a violence?

Didn't we get past this already, that it would take persistence and malice to come even into the discussion of what can be described as "violence"?

You might ask instead if you're being a jerk.

 

[d4m10n]

You might ask instead if you're being a jerk.

Ok.

Am I being a jerk when I use masculine pronouns to describe an untransitioned natal male like him?

FWIW, I think a far more relevant question is whether I am using "incorrect pronouns" in the sense that phrase has been invoked in this thread.

What exactly makes pronouns correct or incorrect and how can we even know when we're referring to non-human mammals?

 

[Sherkeu]

Her crimes. Quite an unpleasant person, from what I'm seeing. Britain's longest-serving transgender prisoner. But still "her".

The first thing you thought to write in reply is a stern correction to my use of pronouns for a violent sadistic torturer, rapist and murderer?- or as you describe "her" as "quite an unpleasant person". Unpleasant?

I do not need to defer to your views of what women are now or the 'nice' pronouns to use for any one individual. It is, frankly, pretty insulting.

But thanks for responding. I have been educated.

eta: Sarah Jane Baker is back in the Men's prison today and that was the right decision to protect women.

 

[d4m10n]

She might show no moral restraint when it comes to rape, torture, & murder but we can surely trust her word on subjective sense of self.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Hercules56]

Didn't we get past this already, that it would take persistence and malice to come even into the discussion of what can be described as "violence"?

You might ask instead if you're being a jerk.

So you're saying it doing it just once, makes one a jerk.

Doing it repeatedly is an act of violence.

 

[Upchurch]

So you're saying it doing it just once, makes one a jerk.

Doing it repeatedly is an act of violence.

Context matters.

Do you really want to rehash all that again? It didn't go very well for you the first time.

 

[arthwollipot]

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.

There's no reason for it to show up in the DSM. It's not a mental illness.

 

[arthwollipot]

Oof. Your appeal to popularity noted and dismissed.

So it's either an anecdote, or an appeal to popularity? Either way you get to dismiss it.

How ironic that your argument is so binary.

 

[arthwollipot]

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.

Well you see here's the thing. Whether the bloke in the photo is male or not is none of your business.

 

[d4m10n]

Well you see here's the thing. Whether the bloke in the photo is male or not is none of your business.

...but it's vital that I know whether he thinks of himself as male, yeah? Otherwise I'm at risk of using "incorrect pronouns" and thereby violating local norms.

There's no reason for it to show up in the DSM. It's not a mental illness.

Excellent; we can safely rule out social transition as a form of affirmative care in such cases.

 

[arthwollipot]

One might think RuPaul was a woman at a quick glance, and refer to them as she. Upon finding out that he was a man in convincing drag, he would likely be referred to as a he. Nothing to do with roles or presentaion; simply the knowledge of the reality.

Drag is a different issue (and incidentally has its own thread). Drag is a character. When in character, we use the character's pronouns. Have you seen any of the many interviews of RuPaul when he is out of character?

 

[gnome]

...but it's vital that I know whether he thinks of himself as male, yeah? Otherwise I'm at risk of using "incorrect pronouns."

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Context seems to be more difficult than it needs to be in your question.

If you don't know, sure, make your best guess and the worst thing most anyone will do is politely advise you if they know something you don't. Maybe someone will talk about how cool it would be if neutral pronouns were more popular by default. Does that kind of reaction go beyond what you can handle?

I don't know why people are so afraid of accidentally misgendering someone, unless they've just been reading too many right wing memes with some "triggered" person.

 

[arthwollipot]

Arth, I'm not trying to challenge you with these questions, I'm merely seeking clarification. I'm hoping to learn something.

Is not accepting the biological sex of others bigoted like not accepting their gender, and if not, why not?

Because unless you are in an active sexual relationship with someone, their biological sex is both irrelevant and none of your business.

Why is putting someone's biological sex over the identity they choose a problem?

Because it denies them agency in their own identity.

 

[d4m10n]

If you don't know, sure, make your best guess and the worst thing most anyone will do is politely advise you if they know something you don't.

My best guess at what, exactly? I was guessing sex, but I'm guessing you'd rather I was guessing gender.

Maybe someone will talk about how cool it would be if neutral pronouns were more popular by default.

I'm not trying to seem cool. [emoji41]

 

[d4m10n]

No, everybody has a right to their pronouns.

I don't believe rights actually exist apart from legal frameworks, as Thomas Jefferson did. That said, I'd be curious to know how this right was discovered from your POV. Was it self-evident, or did it follow from other premises?

 

[gnome]

My best guess at what, exactly? I was guessing sex, but I'm guessing you'd rather I was guessing gender.

I suppose I'm missing the point. I thought you were hypothetically trying to guess the person's gender and worried about getting it wrong. If that isn't it, I'm not sure what your question was.

 

[arthwollipot]

I don't believe rights actually exist apart from legal frameworks, as Thomas Jefferson did.

That's a fair comment, given what I've said in other threads about the lack of validity of so-called "inherent" rights. But in response I will suggest that Articles 1, 2, 5, 6, 12, 18, 19, and perhaps especially 22 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights apply.

 

[d4m10n]

I suppose I'm missing the point. I thought you were hypothetically trying to guess the person's gender and worried about getting it wrong. If that isn't it, I'm not sure what your question was.

I'm getting the sense that it's considered acceptable here to guess whether he sees himself as a man, but not to guess whether he is actually male or not. I'm happy to guess either way, but I'm much more confident when guessing something that can be objectively determined to be true or false.