4 ms·

I don't know the details of the stackexchange case linked above. But, in general, it doesn't seem that complicated to me. The language you are using -- "weaponi

I don't know the details of the stackexchange case linked above. But, in general, it doesn't seem that complicated to me. The language you are using -- "weaponized pronouns" -- is pretty distorted. If one is aware of how someone prefers to be called and the preference is completely reasonable (such as a trans individual preferring their transitioned pronoun), then one is simply being an asshole by refusing. Not only that, they are doing so to a group that has historically been treated terribly by most of society -- essentially kicking someone while they are down. Innocent mistakes are one thing, but stubborn refusal to treat someone decently is inexcusable. P.S. I understand a very small number of vocal individuals may take things past requests for treating people decently, but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

nabdab 7y ago
Why would someone, care at that others refer to them (sorry I’m talking about a hypothetical person so I don’t know preferred pronoun) by name or gender neutral? If you know that I prefer to be addresses “their royal highness”(I do btw), does that make it rude of you to refer to me by name or as OP? I get calling someone who prefers he, she is insulting. But that’s not what the supposed crime was here. It was a moderator preferring gender neutral, which seems completely reasonably. And the language is perfectly fitting. Someone used preferred pronouns to get a moderator canned for just discussing the merits of the rules, not even breaking the yet un-published rules. That is a weapon.
- qzxzxzxq 7y ago
  The Kim family, hailing from North Korea, cares very much how others refer to them. Fail to call the current boss "Great Leader", and you'll find yourself, and possibly your family, a social pariah, sent to the work camps for reeducation. That is the only other instance of policing third party speech that I am aware of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_cult_of_personality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_cult_of_personali...
- ictebres 7y ago
  You can’t refuse to use someone’s preferred pronoun just because you want to. If someone wants to be called he, using them is insulting and demeaning. You would be literally not accepting how he is. Obviously this is not the case in generic writing. But I don’t think that is how 2 people want to communicate.
  - braindeath 7y ago
    Yes! I absolutely can refuse to use someone's "preferred pronoun." I summarily reject your assertion that using the gender neutral and grammatically correct "they" in place of "he"/"she" (not them) to refer to anyone is ever insulting or demeaning. You can say it's insulting and I just don't agree that is true in general. Yelling loudly and with outrage doesn't make your claim stronger than mine. I am not rejecting anyone's gender, I am simply not acknowledging it because it is usually not germane to the discussion. It's not that I don't believe people deserve respect, trans or otherwise. I just don't think it is an appropriate point for discussion in most instances. If a white man says they wish to always be referred to as "the white guy" am I also obligated to do so? Is it not "accepting" of their whiteness if I don't use language to refer to it everytime? Especially so if they are on the internet and I can't even see them? I don't know what color you are. I really don't care. I have no interest in referring to your race when addressing you, likewise your gender. I communicate with people everyday and gender, race, creed, and nationality just never come up. And if someone insists on sharing their pronouns or their race or creed unsolicited, that is on them. That should not obligate me to do anything with it. Edit: I've been downvoted. But would anyone actually like to explain how referring to someone in a gender neutral way is somehow more insulting than referring to them in a race, religion, ethnicity, or any other identity-forming aspect neutral way? Things we take for granted all the time when we use the neutral (not just gender) pronouns them/they?
    - bchanudet 7y ago
      As you said, race, religions, genders and so on are all about identity. And people are defined by their identities. If you know the person you're talking about is a cisgender woman, using the gender-neutral pronoun will feel insulting, because by assuming she may or may not be a woman, you look like you're not accepting her as a woman. It gets yet more offending if you're doing this for a transitioning person. The change of pronoun is their first way to make their transition known, well before having expensive surgery or getting a court order for having their name changed. Refusing the use of their preferred pronoun means you don't accept their transition nor their new gender. Whether these people are here to see your messages or to hear you talk doesn't matter. You could be as insulting when talking about ethnicity or religion, in some way. But gender is special because it finds its way in every conversation at some point. Pronouns are used everywhere and every time, you cannot escape it. Finally, it all boils down to what it costs you not using the preferred pronoun of someone, when you know it. What are you winning for doing this? What's the expected outcome of this "active and voluntary refusal" for you? I don't think you assume all people you encounter on HN are bald and blind just because you don't know the color of their hair or their eyes. Why would you be so adamant doing this specifically for their gender?
- dwaltrip 7y ago
  I specifically mentioned I wasn't talking about the StackExchange case, just the concept of pronoun usage in general. The comment I replied to seemed to be making a broader statement on this topic, hence my response.
NeedMoreTea 7y ago
It's a Q&A site, is it stubborn refusal to be decent? It doesn't seem so to me. I don't see how neutrality could possibly be offensive on a gaming or programming sub-site, or dozens of others. Neutral writing is both common and should be inoffensive to all readers, whatever their preferred terms. That's rather the point. That shouldn't affect being able to helpfully answer their esoteric question. I don't expect to form a friendship, or even converse again, just to answer the question asked. Adding @dwaltrip or he/she/they as you prefer, doesn't affect that answer, or my intended, and hopefully perceived courtesy. So by principle of least harm and for avoidance of mistakes I'd aim to keep my replies neutral. If there are SE sites where it really does matter, perhaps trans or gender related, yes I can easily see that it might be important to choose more carefully, and for different and more precise terms to apply to those boards.
- dwaltrip 7y ago
  I was referring to topic in general, not the specific case from StackExchange.

nabdab 7y ago

Why would someone, care at that others refer to them (sorry I’m talking about a hypothetical person so I don’t know preferred pronoun) by name or gender neutral? If you know that I prefer to be addresses “their royal highness”(I do btw), does that make it rude of you to refer to me by name or as OP? I get calling someone who prefers he, she is insulting. But that’s not what the supposed crime was here. It was a moderator preferring gender neutral, which seems completely reasonably. And the language is perfectly fitting. Someone used preferred pronouns to get a moderator canned for just discussing the merits of the rules, not even breaking the yet un-published rules. That is a weapon.

qzxzxzxq 7y ago
The Kim family, hailing from North Korea, cares very much how others refer to them. Fail to call the current boss "Great Leader", and you'll find yourself, and possibly your family, a social pariah, sent to the work camps for reeducation. That is the only other instance of policing third party speech that I am aware of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_cult_of_personality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_cult_of_personali...
ictebres 7y ago
You can’t refuse to use someone’s preferred pronoun just because you want to. If someone wants to be called he, using them is insulting and demeaning. You would be literally not accepting how he is. Obviously this is not the case in generic writing. But I don’t think that is how 2 people want to communicate.
- braindeath 7y ago
  Yes! I absolutely can refuse to use someone's "preferred pronoun." I summarily reject your assertion that using the gender neutral and grammatically correct "they" in place of "he"/"she" (not them) to refer to anyone is ever insulting or demeaning. You can say it's insulting and I just don't agree that is true in general. Yelling loudly and with outrage doesn't make your claim stronger than mine. I am not rejecting anyone's gender, I am simply not acknowledging it because it is usually not germane to the discussion. It's not that I don't believe people deserve respect, trans or otherwise. I just don't think it is an appropriate point for discussion in most instances. If a white man says they wish to always be referred to as "the white guy" am I also obligated to do so? Is it not "accepting" of their whiteness if I don't use language to refer to it everytime? Especially so if they are on the internet and I can't even see them? I don't know what color you are. I really don't care. I have no interest in referring to your race when addressing you, likewise your gender. I communicate with people everyday and gender, race, creed, and nationality just never come up. And if someone insists on sharing their pronouns or their race or creed unsolicited, that is on them. That should not obligate me to do anything with it. Edit: I've been downvoted. But would anyone actually like to explain how referring to someone in a gender neutral way is somehow more insulting than referring to them in a race, religion, ethnicity, or any other identity-forming aspect neutral way? Things we take for granted all the time when we use the neutral (not just gender) pronouns them/they?
  - bchanudet 7y ago
    As you said, race, religions, genders and so on are all about identity. And people are defined by their identities. If you know the person you're talking about is a cisgender woman, using the gender-neutral pronoun will feel insulting, because by assuming she may or may not be a woman, you look like you're not accepting her as a woman. It gets yet more offending if you're doing this for a transitioning person. The change of pronoun is their first way to make their transition known, well before having expensive surgery or getting a court order for having their name changed. Refusing the use of their preferred pronoun means you don't accept their transition nor their new gender. Whether these people are here to see your messages or to hear you talk doesn't matter. You could be as insulting when talking about ethnicity or religion, in some way. But gender is special because it finds its way in every conversation at some point. Pronouns are used everywhere and every time, you cannot escape it. Finally, it all boils down to what it costs you not using the preferred pronoun of someone, when you know it. What are you winning for doing this? What's the expected outcome of this "active and voluntary refusal" for you? I don't think you assume all people you encounter on HN are bald and blind just because you don't know the color of their hair or their eyes. Why would you be so adamant doing this specifically for their gender?
dwaltrip 7y ago
I specifically mentioned I wasn't talking about the StackExchange case, just the concept of pronoun usage in general. The comment I replied to seemed to be making a broader statement on this topic, hence my response.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

It's a Q&A site, is it stubborn refusal to be decent? It doesn't seem so to me. I don't see how neutrality could possibly be offensive on a gaming or programming sub-site, or dozens of others. Neutral writing is both common and should be inoffensive to all readers, whatever their preferred terms. That's rather the point. That shouldn't affect being able to helpfully answer their esoteric question. I don't expect to form a friendship, or even converse again, just to answer the question asked. Adding @dwaltrip or he/she/they as you prefer, doesn't affect that answer, or my intended, and hopefully perceived courtesy. So by principle of least harm and for avoidance of mistakes I'd aim to keep my replies neutral. If there are SE sites where it really does matter, perhaps trans or gender related, yes I can easily see that it might be important to choose more carefully, and for different and more precise terms to apply to those boards.

dwaltrip 7y ago
I was referring to topic in general, not the specific case from StackExchange.