5 ms·

Do you think legislators and employers should get involved in decisions about nicknames? If so, that would make you some sort of authoritarian. And this is wh

Do you think legislators and employers should get involved in decisions about nicknames? If so, that would make you some sort of authoritarian. And this is what the debate is really about: authoritarian vs libertarian political attitudes. I’m certainly ready to have that debate, but it would require the “woke left” [0] to abandon the moral high-ground. [0] There’s surely a better term to use, but I can’t think of it right now.

mike00632 5y ago
My point was that this is not about how personally difficult it is for you to respect someone else's preferences. It's actually very easy and we do it all the time for other things, like nicknames. If you're so against trans people having similar status as you then you shouldn't claim that it's because trans people are causing you a burden.
- omginternets 5y ago
  >If you're so against trans people having similar status as you then you shouldn't claim that it's because trans people are causing you a burden. Yes, I understand. But, much of the opposition you're seeing isn't because people are "against trans people". It's because they're opposed solving the problem of intolerance through authoritarian methods.
  - mike00632 5y ago
    Aren't you being the "authoritarian" by insisting on calling people by the wrong nicknames (gender), promoting laws that outlaw nickname (gender) preference and going as far as violence if that person continues to disagree with your name (gender)? The proposed protections for trans people are in response to real acts of violence that are not in line with laws like the 14th Amendment which promotes equality for all people. And let's remember that these laws to protect trans people are only being proposed. Many laws on the books are against trans people. What you're reacting to is social pressure to treat trans people with respect, not authoritarian legal pressure. If anyone is feeling authoritarian legal pressure it's trans people.
    - omginternets 5y ago
      >Aren't you being the "authoritarian" by insisting on calling people by the wrong nicknames (gender) ... Of course not. I'm perhaps being an asshole, but authoritarianism is a concept applied to policymaking, not manners. It roughly translates to the belief that institutions should have more power over individuals. Calling people the wrong name, no matter how mean-spirited, is expressing no such belief. The point is that certain things -- bad though they may be -- are not to be legislated. You may disagree with this premise, and you may even be correct, and that would definitionally make you lean towards authoritarianism. To reiterate, many people -- myself included -- agree with you that it is unkind to call trans people the wrong name. Where you seem to disagree with us is that we find the prospect of things like compelled speech to be terrifying and fundamentally at odds with the principles of liberal government.
      - mike00632 5y ago
        But you're not just calling people by the wrong gender, you're acting as a gender authority and upholding the laws and restrictions against trans people that the authorities put in place. Look at it from a trans person's perspective and it's clear that their struggle is a clash with authority. If your company forbids you from creating a toxic work environment for trans people then that is an extremely minor brush with authority compared to what trans people endure.
        omginternets 5y ago
        No. Sorry, but no. Nothing in expressing an opinion (much less indulging in name-calling) makes me a gender authority. Even if it amounted to a bona fide claim of authority, you can rightly dismiss it. No need to involve the law. In fact, I could just as well retort that you are currently positioning yourself as an authority on becoming a authority, which is just as ludicrous, and just as irrelevant to the question at hand. Again, this kind of conflation of ideas and Jesuit argumentation is precisely why CRT is opposed by a great many liberals.
        5y ago
klyrs 5y ago
Freedom to choose one's gender is a libertarian value. Would you rather the government pick one for you?
- omginternets 5y ago
  As I've said before: we agree on this point. Where we seem to disagree is on the question of whether government, employers or other institutional powers have the power to silence those who don't see it our way. If we do indeed disagree, then by definition you lean towards authoritarian politics. You are willing to go further than I in restricting freedom of expression to defend trans people. You may even be right, but that makes you more authoritarian than me. Why does this matter? Because it's the actual subject of debate. I want trans people to be treated with respect too, but my political opinion is that authoritarianism is the wrong way to achieve this outcome. I think you will find that many people who reject identity politics / CRT / etc don't actually hate trans people. They fear authoritarian mobs and the governments they elect. (Apologies for the multiple stealth-edits. It sometimes takes me a few tries to articulate my thoughts.)
  - klyrs 5y ago
    Woah there, you're putting a whole lot of assumptions on me. I'm not against the rights of white men being up for debate in the public sphere any more or less than the rights of transgender people. But we live in an authoritarian system which limits the rights of transgender people by various means. It's better in the US than it is in the UK, which in turn is much better than Saudi Arabia. The Gender Critical folks want more authoritarianism. They want the government to decide your gender, and segregate transgender people from cisgender people.
    - omginternets 5y ago
      >you're putting a whole lot of assumptions on me Not at all, I promise. If you reread, you'll surely notice the qualifier "seems". I used it precisely because I can't be sure what you actually think, and can therefore only talk about surface-level appearances. Please be assured that I am doing my best to interpret your comments charitably, and assuming the best of your character :) >But we live in an authoritarian system which limits the rights of transgender people by various means. I believe you are confusing authoritarianism with something else. Authoritarianism is roughly the idea that institutions (government, businesses, etc.) should exert more control over individuals. The presence of inequities don't qualify as authoritarianism on their own, and neither does outright discrimination. To illustrate: discriminating against a group doesn't imply that government should have more control over individuals. It's definitely bad, but it's something else. I would urge you not to conflate the two, as this is precisely what prevents the majority of liberals from adhering to CRT et al. >They want the government to decide your gender, and segregate transgender people from cisgender people. I don't know if you're talking about the US, the UK or Saudi Arabia here, but in the US and UK -- two countries in which I have, incidentally, lived for quite some time -- this is not what the majority of CRT-critics want. The majority are attached to liberal values, and are concerned that the confusion of ideas that permeates CRT discourse (of which your earlier conflation is an example) lead its proponents to the conclusion that authoritarian measures are desirable.

mike00632 5y ago

My point was that this is not about how personally difficult it is for you to respect someone else's preferences. It's actually very easy and we do it all the time for other things, like nicknames. If you're so against trans people having similar status as you then you shouldn't claim that it's because trans people are causing you a burden.

omginternets 5y ago
>If you're so against trans people having similar status as you then you shouldn't claim that it's because trans people are causing you a burden. Yes, I understand. But, much of the opposition you're seeing isn't because people are "against trans people". It's because they're opposed solving the problem of intolerance through authoritarian methods.
- mike00632 5y ago
  Aren't you being the "authoritarian" by insisting on calling people by the wrong nicknames (gender), promoting laws that outlaw nickname (gender) preference and going as far as violence if that person continues to disagree with your name (gender)? The proposed protections for trans people are in response to real acts of violence that are not in line with laws like the 14th Amendment which promotes equality for all people. And let's remember that these laws to protect trans people are only being proposed. Many laws on the books are against trans people. What you're reacting to is social pressure to treat trans people with respect, not authoritarian legal pressure. If anyone is feeling authoritarian legal pressure it's trans people.
  - omginternets 5y ago
    >Aren't you being the "authoritarian" by insisting on calling people by the wrong nicknames (gender) ... Of course not. I'm perhaps being an asshole, but authoritarianism is a concept applied to policymaking, not manners. It roughly translates to the belief that institutions should have more power over individuals. Calling people the wrong name, no matter how mean-spirited, is expressing no such belief. The point is that certain things -- bad though they may be -- are not to be legislated. You may disagree with this premise, and you may even be correct, and that would definitionally make you lean towards authoritarianism. To reiterate, many people -- myself included -- agree with you that it is unkind to call trans people the wrong name. Where you seem to disagree with us is that we find the prospect of things like compelled speech to be terrifying and fundamentally at odds with the principles of liberal government.
    - mike00632 5y ago
      But you're not just calling people by the wrong gender, you're acting as a gender authority and upholding the laws and restrictions against trans people that the authorities put in place. Look at it from a trans person's perspective and it's clear that their struggle is a clash with authority. If your company forbids you from creating a toxic work environment for trans people then that is an extremely minor brush with authority compared to what trans people endure.
      - omginternets 5y ago
        No. Sorry, but no. Nothing in expressing an opinion (much less indulging in name-calling) makes me a gender authority. Even if it amounted to a bona fide claim of authority, you can rightly dismiss it. No need to involve the law. In fact, I could just as well retort that you are currently positioning yourself as an authority on becoming a authority, which is just as ludicrous, and just as irrelevant to the question at hand. Again, this kind of conflation of ideas and Jesuit argumentation is precisely why CRT is opposed by a great many liberals.
        5y ago

klyrs 5y ago

Freedom to choose one's gender is a libertarian value. Would you rather the government pick one for you?

omginternets 5y ago
As I've said before: we agree on this point. Where we seem to disagree is on the question of whether government, employers or other institutional powers have the power to silence those who don't see it our way. If we do indeed disagree, then by definition you lean towards authoritarian politics. You are willing to go further than I in restricting freedom of expression to defend trans people. You may even be right, but that makes you more authoritarian than me. Why does this matter? Because it's the actual subject of debate. I want trans people to be treated with respect too, but my political opinion is that authoritarianism is the wrong way to achieve this outcome. I think you will find that many people who reject identity politics / CRT / etc don't actually hate trans people. They fear authoritarian mobs and the governments they elect. (Apologies for the multiple stealth-edits. It sometimes takes me a few tries to articulate my thoughts.)
- klyrs 5y ago
  Woah there, you're putting a whole lot of assumptions on me. I'm not against the rights of white men being up for debate in the public sphere any more or less than the rights of transgender people. But we live in an authoritarian system which limits the rights of transgender people by various means. It's better in the US than it is in the UK, which in turn is much better than Saudi Arabia. The Gender Critical folks want more authoritarianism. They want the government to decide your gender, and segregate transgender people from cisgender people.
  - omginternets 5y ago
    >you're putting a whole lot of assumptions on me Not at all, I promise. If you reread, you'll surely notice the qualifier "seems". I used it precisely because I can't be sure what you actually think, and can therefore only talk about surface-level appearances. Please be assured that I am doing my best to interpret your comments charitably, and assuming the best of your character :) >But we live in an authoritarian system which limits the rights of transgender people by various means. I believe you are confusing authoritarianism with something else. Authoritarianism is roughly the idea that institutions (government, businesses, etc.) should exert more control over individuals. The presence of inequities don't qualify as authoritarianism on their own, and neither does outright discrimination. To illustrate: discriminating against a group doesn't imply that government should have more control over individuals. It's definitely bad, but it's something else. I would urge you not to conflate the two, as this is precisely what prevents the majority of liberals from adhering to CRT et al. >They want the government to decide your gender, and segregate transgender people from cisgender people. I don't know if you're talking about the US, the UK or Saudi Arabia here, but in the US and UK -- two countries in which I have, incidentally, lived for quite some time -- this is not what the majority of CRT-critics want. The majority are attached to liberal values, and are concerned that the confusion of ideas that permeates CRT discourse (of which your earlier conflation is an example) lead its proponents to the conclusion that authoritarian measures are desirable.