Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

[arthwollipot]

A fairly recent development, on the pronoun front. Not too long ago, everyone was assigned pronouns at birth based on sex and no one was fired for using the original ones thereafter.

Not a fairly recent development on many other fronts. Or do you think are still routinely bred and raised for meat or companionship?

Has anyone given an argument for adopting the new approach over the original approach? Saying "it's just wrong" is a conclusion, not an argument.

I don't know how else to say that referring to me as a she is wrong. It's not me. It's not what I associate with me. Think about your own pronoun. Is it just a preference, or is it just the right one?

 

[d4m10n]

We've got this entire thread, and several others, devoted to answering that question. Why do you think you need to ask it again?

Because no one has given an argument yet. So far all we've seen is "Be nice!" by which you mean "Conform to my moral norms!" An actual argument would proceed from generally shared moral premises, such as avoidance of harm.

I don't know how else to say that referring to me as a she is wrong. It's not me. It's not what I associate with me.

I don't associate being fat with me, but I'm actually (factually) overweight. Still adjusting to being bald as well. Self-perception and observable reality don't always match up, as in cases of body dysmorphia or gender dysphoria.

Think about your own pronoun. Is it just a preference, or is it just the right one?

I've already said you are all perfectly free to use any pronouns you like for me. They will only be right or wrong inasmuch as they lead to clarity or confusion in the process of communication.

 

[arthwollipot]

Because no one has given an argument yet. So far all we've seen is "Be nice!" by which you mean "Conform to my moral norms!" An actual argument would proceed from generally shared moral premises, such as avoidance of harm.

My mum taught me how to be polite. Did yours not?

I don't associate being fat with me, but I'm actually (factually) overweight. Still adjusting to being bald as well. Self-perception and observable reality don't always match up, as in cases of body dysmorphia or gender dysphoria.

You can, in principle, probably change how fat you are. You can change your diet, get more excercise, have agency in the determination of your weight. I cannot decide to be "she".

I've already said you are all perfectly free to use any pronouns you like for me. They will only be right or wrong inasmuch as they lead to clarity or confusion in the process of communication.

Great! That it's not important to you is your business. Not everybody has the same attitude and you should not generalise your experience to others. For me, for example, it matters. You have no right to tell me that it should not.

 

[d4m10n]

My mum taught me how to be polite. Did yours not?

I've already done an entire post on the various ways politeness can be weaponized to manipulate people. Did you miss it?

You have no right to tell me that it should not.

You have no right to tell me that it should. If you want me to use your preferred pronouns (even when the mods aren't looking) you need me to believe that it actually matters. I don't think it would actually harm you to be called "she/her" since you seem mature and non-sexist enough to know that there is nothing wrong or bad about being seen as a woman. It might have been an insult on the playground, but we're all well past that now.

I cannot decide to be "she".

You don't know that. Some people swear up and down they are cisgender until they change their minds; I once read an entire memoir about one such person.

 

[arthwollipot]

I've already done an entire post on the various ways politeness can be weaponized to manipulate people. Did you miss it?

Must have, sorry. But for the purposes of this thread, do you think that it is okay to be impolite where pronouns are concerned?

You have no right to tell me that it should. If you want me to use your preferred pronouns (even when the mods aren't looking) you need me to believe that it actually matters. I don't think it would actually harm you to be called "she/her" since you seem mature and non-sexist enough to know that there is nothing wrong or bad about being seen as a woman. It might have been an insult on the playground, but we're all well past that now.

Read my lips: the existence of people who don't care doesn't mean that nobody cares or that nobody should care. You and I aren't the people who are affected by this. Our experience should not be generalised.

You don't know that. Some people swear up and down they are cisgender until they change their minds.

I've tried it on for size, and it doesn't fit. Have you?

 

[varwoche]

Making doctors appointments and giving medical information.

Assigning group changing rooms for teenagers in school.

Buying clothes.

Simple pronoun usage/reference in a group.

But I don't see why we need a list of reasons to justify a particular knowledge. It's almost never important that I have blue eyes, but that doesn't validate the argument that we should never refer to eye color, or defer to subjective beliefs about eye color self identification.

I went to the nursery to talk to the lady who is highly knowledgeable about tomatoe whose name I forgot. She wasn't there. I considered the options and proceeded to ask What days does the lady who knows all about tomatoes work? I deemed that asking about the tomato person was too vague and, well, odd.

There are lots of mundane scenarios like this.

 

[d4m10n]

I've tried it on for size, and it doesn't fit. Have you?

I've done a bit of light gender ******* in my day, skirts and lipstick and nail polish and whatnot. That was all perfectly normal in the subculture, though, it would've been far braver to show up in golf attire.

But for the purposes of this thread, do you think that it is okay to be impolite where pronouns are concerned?

Nope, because I've seen the mods card it here.

Read my lips: the existence of people who don't care doesn't mean that nobody cares or that nobody should care.

Read my lips: If you want to get people to use language in the way you would prefer, you need to either have power over them (e.g. school admins who fired the counselor at the very top of the thread) or else persuade them over to your view.

Your view is that there are "incorrect pronouns" and that what makes them incorrect is not whether they serve the purposes of communication well (by clearly pointing back to nouns) but rather whether they affirm the subjective identity of the sort of people who care about pronouns. One of the premises in your argument (were you to ever make it explicit) is most likely that we all have a moral duty to affirm other people's stated gender identity, even when they are not around to partake in the conversation.

 

[arthwollipot]

Read my lips: If you want to get people to use language in the way you would prefer, you need to either have power over them (e.g. school admins who fired the counselor at the very top of the thread) or else persuade them over to your view.

I'm being as persuasive as I know how to be. It is insufficient for some. I will never be able to convince them, because they will not ask themselves the question "what will it take to change your mind?"

To change my mind, I would have to deny the experiences, identities and agency of quite a few people whose friendship I value. I would have to estrange them, and I am not prepared to do that. They count on me for support, and I will not disappoint them.

Your view is that there are "incorrect pronouns" and that what makes them incorrect is not whether they serve the purposes of communication well (by clearly pointing back to nouns) but rather whether they affirm the subjective identity of the sort of people who care about pronouns. One of the premises in your argument (were you to ever make it explicit) is most likely that we all have a moral duty to affirm other people's stated gender identity, even when they are not around to partake in the conversation.

For a start, it's not my view alone. I've already cited the Queensland Human Rights Council which agrees with me. If I had the energy (which right now for the purposes of this conversation is rapidly depleting) I could find dozens of other health care, psychological, human rights, and yes, advocacy organisations that also support my contention that pronouns are a part of a person's identity.

Secondly, is it immoral to be rude? I would say that it is immoral to bully and harass, but general casual rudeness, while objectionable, is not necessarily immoral. I think you're throwing that word around for the outrage rather than as a genuine argument.

Using correct pronouns for someone when not in their presence is simply good practice for when you are in their presence.

 

[d4m10n]

To change my mind, I would have to deny the experiences, identities and agency of quite a few people whose friendship I value.

I'm not here to change your mind about which pronouns to use or when. You may well want me to change mine, I only want people to feel free to change their own minds after weighing the arguments to hand.

I could find dozens of other health care, psychological, human rights, and yes, advocacy organisations that also support my contention that pronouns are a part of a person's identity.

I find it exceedingly odd to make controlling how other people use words (even when you are not present) part of your own identity, unless you identify as something out of Orwell's recurring nightmares.

I think you're throwing that word around for the outrage rather than as a genuine argument.

If you are telling other people they ought to do something to conform to a specific set of norms, you are probably talking about morality. Possibly grammar.

Using correct pronouns for someone when not in their presence is simply good practice for when you are in their presence.

It certainly is, if you believe you have a moral duty to partake in the process of gender affirmation.

 

[arthwollipot]

I'm not here to change your mind about which pronouns to use or when. You may well want me to change mine, I only want people to feel free to change their own minds after weighing the arguments to hand.

I find it exceedingly odd to make controlling how other people use words (even when you are not present) part of your own identity, unless you identify as something out of Orwell's recurring nightmares.

If you are telling other people they ought to do something to conform to a specific set of norms, you are probably talking about morality. Possibly grammar.

It certainly is, if you believe you have a duty to partake in affirmation.

Again with the language! Controlling. I'm controlling no-one. If you think I'm capable of controlling anyone then you have vastly underestimated the number of levels I have in the Wizard class.

Anyway. I said that my energy for this conversation was rapidly waning. Being accused of misogyny for choosing to defend my trans friends' identities and pronouns in a thread that was specifically for that purpose was pretty much the last straw. I'll probably be back, but I'm going to drop into lurk mode for a while. Please don't consider disinclination to engage with an admission of defeat.

 

[d4m10n]

I'm controlling no-one.

Same here, except that it doesn't bother me at all. If you want to use pronouns to map to subjective states of consciousness in human beings, that's just fine with me. If you want to use pronouns the same way we do on all other mammals, that's just fine with me. I'm not here to tell anyone what heuristics they ought to use when assigning pronouns to nouns. Some people are, though, and the burden of making an argument falls upon them.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Thermal]

I'm not drifting towards it. That's where I have firmly been for the whole conversation.

Or rather, where I have been is the place where someone's sex (biological, gonadal, chromosomal whatever) doesn't matter.

You're losing me. Their actual sex doesn't matter, but their view of their sex role does? The role play is more important than the reality?

Two situations have been presented where it matters - engaging in sexual intercourse with someone, and medicine.

Jesus man, sex and medicine are like two of the most important gigs out there. Sex and romantic relationships and families are kind of super duper up there on the consequential list. We literally wouldn't exist without them. Medicine ranks pretty high for the same reasons.

There may be one or two others.

Yeah, there's a lot more than two. Simple identification is a good 'un. How do you describe a missing child? "The age and height-challenged individual, who has not disclosed their gender and views themselves as a superhero had been missing for three days".

Would you like to see sports dominated by men? I kind of like a women's division to let them compete agains peers without a huge biological muscle mass advantage.

Your sex isn't what the world revolves around, any more than your hair color, but such a simple identifier shouldn't be disregarded for capricious reasons, or no reasons at all.

But for the most part, what "sex" someone is is both irrelevant and none of your business.

Whether it's my business or not is not going to stop me from saying ""See him? That guy over there?" His gonad situation doesn't interest me. Who I am referring to, as simple and clearly as possible is the objective.

If you saw me at 100 feet, you probably couldn't tell that I have blue eyes or devilishly good looks. But you could easily see that I am a largish white male. Unless we apply your standards, which would pretty much end with "humanoid"?

 

[gnome]

I find it interesting that the main pronoun distinguisher is gender (or sex, if you prefer) rather than some other characteristic, like long vs short hair, or skin color, or height, or anything else immediately visible. That would serve exactly the same purpose in the "See that guy over there" example. So I don't think the convenience of distinction explains it entirely.

 

[d4m10n]

I find it interesting that the main pronoun distinguisher is gender (or sex, if you prefer) rather than some other characteristic, like long vs short hair, or skin color, or height, or anything else immediately visible.

I find it interesting, but not particularly surprising.

One of the most fundamental aspects of social perception is the identification of the sex of others. Sex-based categorization occurs rapidly, spontaneously and accurately upon encountering another person. Such rapid and effective perception is consistent with the evolutionary importance of sex-based categorization. Survival may literally depend on an individual's ability to correctly identify, and procure, conspecifics for the purpose of reproduction.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203848043



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Roboramma]

So much effort in trying to find an excuse for being a jerk rather than simply admitting you want to be a jerk.

Personally I'm pretty strongly motivated by not to be a jerk. It's one reason that I don't tend to talk about politics or religion with friends. When you start contradicting people, they often take offense. A couple of days ago I was having dinner with some friends and I made an offhand comment about homelessness in San Fransisco being related to high housing prices. Another friend started in about how it's really just lowlifes coming in from out of state to take advantage of California's good weather and soft on crime policies. Rather than offend him, I just changed the subject. A week before that at another dinner one guy brings up how impressed he was by RFK Jr. and how we should be worried about vaccines, etc. I have pretty strong opinions about that, but rather than be a jerk, I just left the subject alone, and we quickly started talking about other things.

While I'm motivated by not wanting to be a jerk, I'm also motived by the truth. There's a part of me that wanted to get into an argument about those subjects, but in the end I decided not to offend anyone. But I'm still not entirely sure what the right reaction is.

In a similar vein, I'd probably use someone's preferred pronouns even when they seemed to be contrary to fact, but the part of me that's motived by wanting to state the truth would recoil slightly.

 

[Hercules56]

So much effort in trying to find an excuse for being a jerk rather than simply admitting you want to be a jerk.

If someone decides that contrary to their actual ancestry, they decide to identify as a black person, am I being a jerk by not recognizing them as black?

 

[d4m10n]

So much effort in trying to find an excuse for being a jerk rather than simply admitting you want to be a jerk.

If someone decides that contrary to their actual ancestry, they decide to identify as a black person, am I being a jerk by not recognizing them as black?

Of course! People get to make up new norms of politeness, and you must simply nod, smile, & obey like a well-behaved Victorian child. Asking them to provide an argument for the new norm is rude, and probably a bit fash. And don't you dare suggest that it's kinda jerkish to tell other people which words to use.

 

[Thermal]

If someone decides that contrary to their actual ancestry, they decide to identify as a black person, am I being a jerk by not recognizing them as black?

This is where it gets super slippery, and it's the heart of the arguments here.

Looked at one way, does the claimant actually believe that they are a black person trapped in a white person's body? Can't say I've ever heard that claim made soberly. Yet that's exactly what a trans person claims. It's literally how they are wired, and they have no more choice in the matter than you or I have in feeling like we are guys.

The flip side is that reality is reality, and it's weird to have to deny reality to assuage someone else's version. That's a double edged power play, either they get to dictate reality, or you get to...well, be on the side of actual reality, which is hard for a skeptic to criticize.

But a trans person might bring up the That Thread argument: what they feel like is really the reality, and objective facts be damned. If so, then if I see myself as an irresistible hottie, others should comply with that. Doesn't seem reasonable though, does it?

I guess the name of the game is to accept and support trans people, and at the same time say to the trans person "yo, you get that your unusual situation is going to result in misapplied pronouns once in a while, yeah? I mean, woman on the inside and man on the outside...it's gonna happen."

 

[theprestige]

Which is why I tell you.

<--

What gets me is how absolutely pointless telling us is, in this context. Nothing about your biological sex changes the strength or value of your arguments. Even if you made an argument based on appeal to your biological sex, we have no way of knowing whether you truly have the standing to make such an argument, or are just pretending, to try to give your argument more weight.

And nothing about your gender self-identity matters either. Name one thing other than which pronouns you prefer, that's supposed to change about how I perceive you, once you tell me which pronouns you prefer.

I bet you can't. I bet you can state your gender identity, but you can't describe what it actually means or what anyone else is supposed to do or think or feel about it. But you go ahead and post your preferred pronouns anyway, even though they don't actually matter for anything we do here. They don't actually matter for anything anyone does, anywhere in western civilization, other than the circular activity of using preferred pronouns because you're being asked to use preferred pronouns.

The only serious exception to this that I've seen so far in this thread - relevant to the topic of the thread, even - is if you're legitimately suicidal at the thought of someone accidentally "misgendering" you. Which, if that's the case, you need medical help, not social engineering.

 

[Thermal]

I find it interesting that the main pronoun distinguisher is gender (or sex, if you prefer) rather than some other characteristic, like long vs short hair, or skin color, or height, or anything else immediately visible. That would serve exactly the same purpose in the "See that guy over there" example. So I don't think the convenience of distinction explains it entirely.

I'm inclined to think it was originally a gesture of respect, or chivalry. Like, you might call a dog an "it", until one was a pet that you cared about. I call animals "it" if I don't know/care any different, but my dog is a good girl (I don't know what her internal identification is).