5 ms·

I don't think you've mischaracterized me, but you've given undue attention to statements that I consider tangental and would be okay with discarding. Let me res

by yepguy 8y ago

I don't think you've mischaracterized me, but you've given undue attention to statements that I consider tangental and would be okay with discarding. Let me restate my position, which I think I can do more clearly now: 1. The general rule that English speakers use to choose a gendered pronoun depends on what the speaker believes a person's gender is, not what the referent prefers or believes. You don't get to choose their words for them. 2. You should clearly be offended if someone uses the opposite gender that they believe you to be. (If someone thinks you're male but refers to you as female). 3. It's not at all clear whether or not you should be offended when someone uses the opposite gender that you believe yourself to be, even if they know what you prefer. (If you believe you're male, but they believe you're female). The fact that I'm neutral or uncertain in this case might be why you couldn't pin down my argument.

CocaKoala 8y ago
So if I say that I'm a man and somebody doesn't believe me, what can I do? Wouldn't it be easier to say "An individual is the ultimate authority on what pronouns are correct, and their word should be taken over that of everybody else because everybody else might be mistaken"? Specifically, you've stated that people _don't have the right_ to choose their pronouns, and that's where you lose me. What does it mean to "choose" a pronoun, and what harm does allowing people to confidently assert "This is how I am properly referred to, all other ways are incorrect"?
- yepguy 8y ago
  This just happens to be where pronouns clash with free speech, which I consider a sacred value. You don't get to choose the words that other people speak. It's invasive and destructive to a person's integrity, and potentially dangerous to do even with good intentions.
  - jakelazaroff 8y ago
    You're totally free to refer to other people however you want; no one's debating that. But everyone else has the same right to free speech, and many people will use it to call out the act of ignoring someone's preferred pronouns. It's a two-way street. Free speech aside, I'm confused as to why you're pushing back so hard on this. You've used "they" as a singular third-person gender-neutral pronoun multiple times in ancestor posts ("Someone referred to you with the wrong gender because they mistook you for a girl") so clearly this isn't a principle in which you're particularly invested.
    - yepguy 8y ago
      Well the principle isn't to avoid singular they at all costs. Although there are contexts that call for a gendered pronoun and where it's difficult to interpret they in the singular ("Alice isn't here, they are over there"). Part of my problem with the way I've seen people get corrected "with free speech" is that there seems to be no tolerance for making mistakes, and no time allowed for people to think. You're assumed to be a bigot if you're not already 100% on board the PC train. It seems quite unreasonable given that most peoples' experiences with transfolk can be measured in seconds.
      - CocaKoala 8y ago
        As somebody who has misgendered people on accident and been accidentally misgendered, I've never seen anything other than gentle, polite correction when it occurs. When it occurs more than once, it starts to move from the realm of "accident" to "deliberate", and I can easily imagine that in such a scenario, the corrections would become less gentle and less polite. That doesn't strike me as unreasonable, nor does it strike me as a free speech issue. But notably, you're giving rather more power to free speech than is usually ascribed, which I find interesting. You're asserting that your right to free speech trumps my right to self-definition; if you want to call me a woman, you have that right under free speech, and if I want to correct you by explaining that actually, I'm a cisgender male, I can't do that because you have the right to free speech. This seems patently ridiculous to me, and hopefully it does to you too. I don't see a way to reconcile your desire for free speech with my desire for bodily autonomy and self-definition. Can you clarify how allowing other people to choose the proper referential terms for me doesn't erase my ability to define who I am?
        yepguy 8y ago
        Why exactly can't you explain that you're male? Why would you be defined by other people? I don't see how these points follow from mine in the slightest. And how did bodily autonomy enter into the conversation? EDIT: At least one of my comments about this was regarding strategy rather than rights. Think about the scenarios like this: If someone misgenders you as a mistake, then a polite correction is appropriate. But if they do it as an insult, than a correction is probably not the best response. If they do it because they don't even believe you're the gender that you claim to be, then a correction is a terrible tool for changing their mind. Both sides will only dig their heels in and come away feeling hostility for each other.

by yepguy 8y ago

CocaKoala 8y ago

So if I say that I'm a man and somebody doesn't believe me, what can I do? Wouldn't it be easier to say "An individual is the ultimate authority on what pronouns are correct, and their word should be taken over that of everybody else because everybody else might be mistaken"? Specifically, you've stated that people _don't have the right_ to choose their pronouns, and that's where you lose me. What does it mean to "choose" a pronoun, and what harm does allowing people to confidently assert "This is how I am properly referred to, all other ways are incorrect"?

yepguy 8y ago
This just happens to be where pronouns clash with free speech, which I consider a sacred value. You don't get to choose the words that other people speak. It's invasive and destructive to a person's integrity, and potentially dangerous to do even with good intentions.
- jakelazaroff 8y ago
  You're totally free to refer to other people however you want; no one's debating that. But everyone else has the same right to free speech, and many people will use it to call out the act of ignoring someone's preferred pronouns. It's a two-way street. Free speech aside, I'm confused as to why you're pushing back so hard on this. You've used "they" as a singular third-person gender-neutral pronoun multiple times in ancestor posts ("Someone referred to you with the wrong gender because they mistook you for a girl") so clearly this isn't a principle in which you're particularly invested.
  - yepguy 8y ago
    Well the principle isn't to avoid singular they at all costs. Although there are contexts that call for a gendered pronoun and where it's difficult to interpret they in the singular ("Alice isn't here, they are over there"). Part of my problem with the way I've seen people get corrected "with free speech" is that there seems to be no tolerance for making mistakes, and no time allowed for people to think. You're assumed to be a bigot if you're not already 100% on board the PC train. It seems quite unreasonable given that most peoples' experiences with transfolk can be measured in seconds.
    - CocaKoala 8y ago
      As somebody who has misgendered people on accident and been accidentally misgendered, I've never seen anything other than gentle, polite correction when it occurs. When it occurs more than once, it starts to move from the realm of "accident" to "deliberate", and I can easily imagine that in such a scenario, the corrections would become less gentle and less polite. That doesn't strike me as unreasonable, nor does it strike me as a free speech issue. But notably, you're giving rather more power to free speech than is usually ascribed, which I find interesting. You're asserting that your right to free speech trumps my right to self-definition; if you want to call me a woman, you have that right under free speech, and if I want to correct you by explaining that actually, I'm a cisgender male, I can't do that because you have the right to free speech. This seems patently ridiculous to me, and hopefully it does to you too. I don't see a way to reconcile your desire for free speech with my desire for bodily autonomy and self-definition. Can you clarify how allowing other people to choose the proper referential terms for me doesn't erase my ability to define who I am?
      - yepguy 8y ago
        Why exactly can't you explain that you're male? Why would you be defined by other people? I don't see how these points follow from mine in the slightest. And how did bodily autonomy enter into the conversation? EDIT: At least one of my comments about this was regarding strategy rather than rights. Think about the scenarios like this: If someone misgenders you as a mistake, then a polite correction is appropriate. But if they do it as an insult, than a correction is probably not the best response. If they do it because they don't even believe you're the gender that you claim to be, then a correction is a terrible tool for changing their mind. Both sides will only dig their heels in and come away feeling hostility for each other.