7 ms·

"Correct" is silly to even discuss relative to this topic. What you're saying is people's genders are now up for debate but the pronouns are not? Completely i

"Correct" is silly to even discuss relative to this topic. What you're saying is people's genders are now up for debate but the pronouns are not? Completely illogical. And somehow people still believe the "slippery slope" is a fallacy.

henrikschroder 10y ago
> "Correct" is silly to even discuss relative to this topic. How about "polite"? It's exactly as rude to use the wrong pronoun about a person, as it is to use the wrong name. It's common decency to call people what they want to be called, and it's not exactly hard to do either.
- lliamander 10y ago
  Politeness is culturally contingent. For example, I have lived in places where making a special effort to hold open doors for women is a social obligation, as well as places where it is deeply offensive. Is it appropriate sometimes to violate those norms? Certainly, when those norms involve a violation of higher moral principles. Principles such as not saying things you believe to be false. > How about "polite"? So, you're saying that people should not openly disagree merely because it is impolite?
  - henrikschroder 10y ago
    - Hello, my name is Henrik. - I disagree, I'm going to call you Steve. - ???
    - lliamander 10y ago
      I agree that your interlocutor is being ridiculous. But the analogy doesn't hold because your interlocutor doesn't have any reason to disagree with your statement; they're just being a troll. In any case, someone might rationally object to any such analogies because they disagree that there is an equivalence between names and pronouns.
- frogpelt 10y ago
  Ok, that makes sense. However, hypothetically speaking if someone wanted to be called a name that I considered to be vulgar or offensive, I would not call them that.
  - henrikschroder 10y ago
    Yes, but we're not talking about a vulgar name, we're talking about a person that presents as female, has a female name, looks female, but was born a male, who simply wishes people would adress her as a "she". This is not burdensome. This is not onerous. This does no harm. Just honour her wish. Why wouldn't you?

henrikschroder 10y ago

> "Correct" is silly to even discuss relative to this topic. How about "polite"? It's exactly as rude to use the wrong pronoun about a person, as it is to use the wrong name. It's common decency to call people what they want to be called, and it's not exactly hard to do either.

lliamander 10y ago
Politeness is culturally contingent. For example, I have lived in places where making a special effort to hold open doors for women is a social obligation, as well as places where it is deeply offensive. Is it appropriate sometimes to violate those norms? Certainly, when those norms involve a violation of higher moral principles. Principles such as not saying things you believe to be false. > How about "polite"? So, you're saying that people should not openly disagree merely because it is impolite?
- henrikschroder 10y ago
  - Hello, my name is Henrik. - I disagree, I'm going to call you Steve. - ???
  - lliamander 10y ago
    I agree that your interlocutor is being ridiculous. But the analogy doesn't hold because your interlocutor doesn't have any reason to disagree with your statement; they're just being a troll. In any case, someone might rationally object to any such analogies because they disagree that there is an equivalence between names and pronouns.
frogpelt 10y ago
Ok, that makes sense. However, hypothetically speaking if someone wanted to be called a name that I considered to be vulgar or offensive, I would not call them that.
- henrikschroder 10y ago
  Yes, but we're not talking about a vulgar name, we're talking about a person that presents as female, has a female name, looks female, but was born a male, who simply wishes people would adress her as a "she". This is not burdensome. This is not onerous. This does no harm. Just honour her wish. Why wouldn't you?