17 ms·

> What would be productive is allowing kids to use different pronouns The debate is not about whether somebody can use a pronoun. It’s whether everyone else is

> What would be productive is allowing kids to use different pronouns The debate is not about whether somebody can use a pronoun. It’s whether everyone else is compelled to use it as well. It’s the difference between positive and negative rights - whether you have the right to compel others to behave a certain way vs whether you have the right to behave a certain way yourself. Legally compelled speech creates a real Pandora’s box. I think you should feel good for being respectful and for using whatever terms people prefer, but punishing people for not doing so seems wrong minded

docmars 5y ago
Nailed it. If someone required me to chant "Chocolate is god" whenever I enter their home, and my refusal to do so is a punishable / jailable offense, then that is a massive breach of my own rights to control my own speech. I would probably choose to no longer spend time with those people if they felt they could compell (or more accurately, coerce) me to speak a certain way. The same applies to identity, given that immediate obvious biological traits are present that can be used to infer a person's identity, and if asked to refer to them as something different, to respect that as long as the request is as respectful as me asking someone to do me a small favor. Anything beyond that is toxic, purely from an emotional/verbal abuse lens.
- justinjlynn 5y ago
  > I would probably choose to no longer spend time with those people if they felt they could compell (or more accurately, coerce) me to speak a certain way. This is the solution to your problem; and, if you were continually offensive to those people, one you may be forced to enact - by their rejection of your presence. However, if you do choose to interact with them, or choose to engage in activities where you will interact with them (during your work duties, for example) - that's the social contract you're going to have to adhere to if you want to continue doing so. You wouldn't argue that you should be able to go around verbally assaulting people without consequence because that would be an infringement to your right to free speech (which has always been limited, by the way; like it or not - you can't shout fire in a crowded theatre), would you?
  - docmars 5y ago
    Yup, precisely. In a nutshell, you're saying this goes both ways, and I think that's perfectly acceptable. I will caveat that I believe people who are opposed to the gender pronoun salad should also have the right to share that publicly, and in the event a person who subscribes to that way of life stumbles upon those public comments would benefit most by live-and-let-live, and simply write off or ignore those individuals if they feel upset. Unfortunately every single permutation within intersectionality, whether "normative" or not, are going to face mild disagreement or prejudice towards their own ideologies. A humble response is one that lives beyond it, rather than consuming all of one's time fighting it in the name of justice, IMHO. Seeking perfect insulation from disagreement is unachievable in society without also severely marginalizing a few groups at any given moment. That is, unless there is a clear sign that said prejudice is on track to grow rapidly in the direction of genocide or overt societal exclusion and/or the belief that reeducation is necessary. All of these are unacceptable. Though we are witnessing this being done against normative groups en masse in companies and public institutions today, unfortunately. It appears that most are reaching a breaking point and pushing back, and those who do represent many different races, creeds, and backgrounds. It's encouraging to see.
    - justinjlynn 5y ago
      > I will caveat that I believe people who are opposed to the gender pronoun salad should also have the right to share that publicly, and in the event a person who subscribes to that way of life stumbles upon those public comments would benefit most by live-and-let-live, and simply write off or ignore those individuals if they feel upset. What do you mean by this? In what circumstances do you think it's acceptable to make these comments? What qualifies as "stumbling upon"? Do you mean to include group interactions in non-dedicated forums of discussion? Personal interactions? Should neither party be permitted to raise objection? Why should either party be expected to simply leave the discussion without contributing? > That is, unless there is a clear sign that said prejudice is on track to grow rapidly in the direction of genocide or overt societal exclusion and/or the belief that reeducation is necessary. All of these are unacceptable. Who judges this and how are they chosen to do so?
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  > to respect that as long as the request is as respectful as me asking someone to do me a small favor. Is someone asking you to use their name a small favor or common societal expectation? Also, since when is pronoun use punishable? Who is talking about jail time? People are just asking for respect, that shouldn't be too much to ask. If everytime you see someone, you call them a rude name, and that person tells everyone you're rude, who is in the wrong?
  - nate_meurer 5y ago
    Canada's C19 has the potential to criminalize misgendering: https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/features/canadas-gender-identity-rights-bill-c-16-explained https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/features/canadas-gender-identi... And note that the pronouns subject to misgendering include the "personal pronouns" such as ze/zir that are now being pushed by trans rights activists: https://www.mypronouns.org/how https://www.mypronouns.org/how
    - justinjlynn 5y ago
      The "potential"... the article you link refutes your claim: > In the Criminal Code, which does not reference pronouns, Cossman says misusing pronouns alone would not constitute a criminal act. https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/features/canadas-gender-identity-rights-bill-c-16-explained https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/features/canadas-gender-identi...
      - nate_meurer 5y ago
        If you're going to cherry-pick, at least recognize some of the other cherries: > If someone refused to use a preferred pronoun — and it was determined to constitute discrimination or harassment — could that potentially result in jail time? > It is possible, Brown says, through a process that would start with a complaint and progress to a proceeding before a human rights tribunal. Sure sounds like "potential" to me, no matter how unlikely its proponents claim that will be. And any talk of tribunals always makes my ears perk up, as it should anyone who values representative democracy.
    - 5y ago
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  "that is a massive breach of my own rights to control my own speech" Nope. It's a constraint on where you can go. You come into my home, then you follow my rules.
  - docmars 5y ago
    Fair point -- then I suppose I won't come over to your home if I find the rules unreasonable. The ball is in your court at that point, because I have a choice that you can't take away from me outside of an unreasonable or immoral means. Would I be the "Karen" in this situation? Perhaps. The critical party is always seen as the enemy, so no loss there. At that point, it all boils down to control on either side. One side is demanding control of one's speech (in one's own home, in this example, let's be specific). On the other side, they are demanding respect for one's right to think and speak freely without being compelled by complete strangers, and in the case of Canada, by the government. Just as I am free not to participate in a religion and all of its chants and sayings, I am also free not to participate in the demands of a fellow human who uses personal rules and boundaries in excess to exert control over others. It's really no different than someone 50 years ago screeching "you will call me sir," -- in fact, I would argue a good portion of Leftists would absolutely flip their shit if they learned someone's father demanded their children call them "sir". "What gives?", they'd ask. In that situation, there's an authority figure using that as a way to teach his children respect in the context of an authority/subordinate relationship, yet something about it still seems silly, especially if the father was using it as a way to strong-arm his children leading to a poorer relationship later. In a nearly identical way, some (not all) in the trans community, especially in the public sphere, exert that same control by strong-arming their way into gaining respect from complete strangers they never earned it from, and without overt and obvious physical traits to denote one's gender falling into 1 of 2 major buckets by deduction. "Don't guess what I am, know what I am," and guessing wrong is minus 3 points on the relationship building scale. Nice way to start! It could have been much simpler. For those who are more forgiving of those mistakes and ask politely for others to call them a certain way -- that would make it more reasonable; and I would venture to say that the majority in this community are that way. The only other issue now is the sheer complexity of remembering 50+ genders and growing. Many people can barely remember others' names after asking 3 times, much less N number of possible genders. "Don't take yourself too seriously" never had a better moment to shine. The world would be so much different if everyone treated those genders as something faddish or silly, where one's job, reputation, standing with friends, and even criminal status aren't hinging on a few mistakes not remembering others' preferred pronouns, especially for public figures and celebrities. God forbid they mess up or setup boundaries against more angry/coercive types. The same goes for employers or anyone else refusing employment or service to members of the trans community. That also is a real shame. What good is a society not built on grace, rather than punishment, for something so frivolous as pronouns? I'm a male, and I've been called "she" by accident (and even jokingly) too many times to count. All of those people still have jobs and good standing in society because I didn't take to social media to mount a campaign against them. I'm proud of that. :) Though, it didn't take much for me to brush it off, because that's what good people do. Turning it into a harmless joke only evolved the interactions into something memorable that left both parties feeling seen and respected.
danShumway 5y ago
> but punishing people for not doing so seems wrong minded That's not really what I was getting at, what I was getting at is that creating an environment where people refuse to use proper pronouns or provide even basic accommodation for trans kids is going to make them more interested in medically transitioning, not less. If you're a kid, and you suspect you might be a girl, and everyone around you is refusing to use pronouns because you don't look like a girl... it wouldn't be unbelievable for that situation to increase your risk of body dysphoria, because everyone around you is telling you you'll never be a girl until you look enough like one. It can be someone's right to avoid referring to people by their proper pronouns, but I don't believe them if they turn around and say they're doing it to protect the kids from rash decisions about transitioning. Making kids feel safer and more accepted is how you protect them from rash decisions. Making them feel like you respect them and their identity is how you encourage them to seek outside advice and to be open about their doubts about their own gender. > if people are genuinely worried about invasive surgery, the policing of trans identity is counterproductive to addressing that concern.
- btilly 5y ago
  Do you have any research supporting this? Your theory is that being accommodating on the first request makes more extreme requests less likely. An alternative theory is that bending over backwards to the first request makes such requests feel OK, and therefore makes more extreme requests more likely. Do you have any research indicating that one theory is more likely to be true than the other?
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    Without having done any research, it certainly feels more plausible that experimenting on a small scale should satisfy curiosity more than it would engender (heh) some burning desire to take things further just for the sake of it. And tendentious language, such as calling simple things like not giving detentions for a boy arriving to school in a skirt or a girl declaring she wants to be known as Pete "bending over backwards", really only weakens your argument.
  - danShumway 5y ago
GavinMcG 5y ago
> The debate is not about whether somebody can use a pronoun. It sort of is, though: someone's use of a pronoun only exists to the extent that others refer to them that way. My pronouns for myself are I/me/mine. Your avoidance of the pronouns I prefer denies me the "use" of those pronouns. I can't use them without your help. Not disagreeing about the positive/negative rights characterization. And bigger picture: you're right that this really is about respect. Many people want to demand (even if not compel) more attention to mutual respect; many others want to use disrespectfulness as an indicator of their independence, because they view that as a more important value.
- wlesieutre 5y ago
  Right? It's like if someone asked me "Hey, I'd prefer you call me Robert instead of Bobby" and I got pissed about it because they're trying to infringe on my free speech. It's their identity, they're asking you to identify them a particular way. Are they asking you to expend a small amount of effort to mentally adjust how to refer to them? Yes. Have people been changing nicknames over their lives for probably hundreds or thousands of years? Also yes. But you ask someone to use a different pronoun and suddenly it's just too much.
  - justinjlynn 5y ago
    Well, they say it's too much - but really it's just that they believe you aren't a valid member of the group you're claiming to be and they can't directly call you a liar. They're wrong, of course; but they're also lying when they say it's too much effort - that's not why.
    - wlesieutre 5y ago
      Yes, very much a lack of respect for someone's choice of identity. Forget nicknames, how would these people feel if somebody just said "Hey I'm going to call you Arnold now, because you fit my mental image of Arnold." Wildly inappropriate thing to do? If you want to go and impose whatever pronoun you want on someone based on how they look, don't act shocked when you get called out for being a dick to them.
treeman79 5y ago
Lost a job for not using pronouns. Tried very hard to stay out it, but kept being cornered o the topic.

docmars 5y ago

Nailed it. If someone required me to chant "Chocolate is god" whenever I enter their home, and my refusal to do so is a punishable / jailable offense, then that is a massive breach of my own rights to control my own speech. I would probably choose to no longer spend time with those people if they felt they could compell (or more accurately, coerce) me to speak a certain way. The same applies to identity, given that immediate obvious biological traits are present that can be used to infer a person's identity, and if asked to refer to them as something different, to respect that as long as the request is as respectful as me asking someone to do me a small favor. Anything beyond that is toxic, purely from an emotional/verbal abuse lens.

justinjlynn 5y ago
> I would probably choose to no longer spend time with those people if they felt they could compell (or more accurately, coerce) me to speak a certain way. This is the solution to your problem; and, if you were continually offensive to those people, one you may be forced to enact - by their rejection of your presence. However, if you do choose to interact with them, or choose to engage in activities where you will interact with them (during your work duties, for example) - that's the social contract you're going to have to adhere to if you want to continue doing so. You wouldn't argue that you should be able to go around verbally assaulting people without consequence because that would be an infringement to your right to free speech (which has always been limited, by the way; like it or not - you can't shout fire in a crowded theatre), would you?
- docmars 5y ago
  Yup, precisely. In a nutshell, you're saying this goes both ways, and I think that's perfectly acceptable. I will caveat that I believe people who are opposed to the gender pronoun salad should also have the right to share that publicly, and in the event a person who subscribes to that way of life stumbles upon those public comments would benefit most by live-and-let-live, and simply write off or ignore those individuals if they feel upset. Unfortunately every single permutation within intersectionality, whether "normative" or not, are going to face mild disagreement or prejudice towards their own ideologies. A humble response is one that lives beyond it, rather than consuming all of one's time fighting it in the name of justice, IMHO. Seeking perfect insulation from disagreement is unachievable in society without also severely marginalizing a few groups at any given moment. That is, unless there is a clear sign that said prejudice is on track to grow rapidly in the direction of genocide or overt societal exclusion and/or the belief that reeducation is necessary. All of these are unacceptable. Though we are witnessing this being done against normative groups en masse in companies and public institutions today, unfortunately. It appears that most are reaching a breaking point and pushing back, and those who do represent many different races, creeds, and backgrounds. It's encouraging to see.
  - justinjlynn 5y ago
    > I will caveat that I believe people who are opposed to the gender pronoun salad should also have the right to share that publicly, and in the event a person who subscribes to that way of life stumbles upon those public comments would benefit most by live-and-let-live, and simply write off or ignore those individuals if they feel upset. What do you mean by this? In what circumstances do you think it's acceptable to make these comments? What qualifies as "stumbling upon"? Do you mean to include group interactions in non-dedicated forums of discussion? Personal interactions? Should neither party be permitted to raise objection? Why should either party be expected to simply leave the discussion without contributing? > That is, unless there is a clear sign that said prejudice is on track to grow rapidly in the direction of genocide or overt societal exclusion and/or the belief that reeducation is necessary. All of these are unacceptable. Who judges this and how are they chosen to do so?
vineyardmike 5y ago
> to respect that as long as the request is as respectful as me asking someone to do me a small favor. Is someone asking you to use their name a small favor or common societal expectation? Also, since when is pronoun use punishable? Who is talking about jail time? People are just asking for respect, that shouldn't be too much to ask. If everytime you see someone, you call them a rude name, and that person tells everyone you're rude, who is in the wrong?
- nate_meurer 5y ago
  Canada's C19 has the potential to criminalize misgendering: https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/features/canadas-gender-identity-rights-bill-c-16-explained https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/features/canadas-gender-identi... And note that the pronouns subject to misgendering include the "personal pronouns" such as ze/zir that are now being pushed by trans rights activists: https://www.mypronouns.org/how https://www.mypronouns.org/how
  - justinjlynn 5y ago
    The "potential"... the article you link refutes your claim: > In the Criminal Code, which does not reference pronouns, Cossman says misusing pronouns alone would not constitute a criminal act. https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/features/canadas-gender-identity-rights-bill-c-16-explained https://www.cbc.ca/cbcdocspov/features/canadas-gender-identi...
    - nate_meurer 5y ago
      If you're going to cherry-pick, at least recognize some of the other cherries: > If someone refused to use a preferred pronoun — and it was determined to constitute discrimination or harassment — could that potentially result in jail time? > It is possible, Brown says, through a process that would start with a complaint and progress to a proceeding before a human rights tribunal. Sure sounds like "potential" to me, no matter how unlikely its proponents claim that will be. And any talk of tribunals always makes my ears perk up, as it should anyone who values representative democracy.
  - 5y ago
denton-scratch 5y ago
"that is a massive breach of my own rights to control my own speech" Nope. It's a constraint on where you can go. You come into my home, then you follow my rules.
- docmars 5y ago
  Fair point -- then I suppose I won't come over to your home if I find the rules unreasonable. The ball is in your court at that point, because I have a choice that you can't take away from me outside of an unreasonable or immoral means. Would I be the "Karen" in this situation? Perhaps. The critical party is always seen as the enemy, so no loss there. At that point, it all boils down to control on either side. One side is demanding control of one's speech (in one's own home, in this example, let's be specific). On the other side, they are demanding respect for one's right to think and speak freely without being compelled by complete strangers, and in the case of Canada, by the government. Just as I am free not to participate in a religion and all of its chants and sayings, I am also free not to participate in the demands of a fellow human who uses personal rules and boundaries in excess to exert control over others. It's really no different than someone 50 years ago screeching "you will call me sir," -- in fact, I would argue a good portion of Leftists would absolutely flip their shit if they learned someone's father demanded their children call them "sir". "What gives?", they'd ask. In that situation, there's an authority figure using that as a way to teach his children respect in the context of an authority/subordinate relationship, yet something about it still seems silly, especially if the father was using it as a way to strong-arm his children leading to a poorer relationship later. In a nearly identical way, some (not all) in the trans community, especially in the public sphere, exert that same control by strong-arming their way into gaining respect from complete strangers they never earned it from, and without overt and obvious physical traits to denote one's gender falling into 1 of 2 major buckets by deduction. "Don't guess what I am, know what I am," and guessing wrong is minus 3 points on the relationship building scale. Nice way to start! It could have been much simpler. For those who are more forgiving of those mistakes and ask politely for others to call them a certain way -- that would make it more reasonable; and I would venture to say that the majority in this community are that way. The only other issue now is the sheer complexity of remembering 50+ genders and growing. Many people can barely remember others' names after asking 3 times, much less N number of possible genders. "Don't take yourself too seriously" never had a better moment to shine. The world would be so much different if everyone treated those genders as something faddish or silly, where one's job, reputation, standing with friends, and even criminal status aren't hinging on a few mistakes not remembering others' preferred pronouns, especially for public figures and celebrities. God forbid they mess up or setup boundaries against more angry/coercive types. The same goes for employers or anyone else refusing employment or service to members of the trans community. That also is a real shame. What good is a society not built on grace, rather than punishment, for something so frivolous as pronouns? I'm a male, and I've been called "she" by accident (and even jokingly) too many times to count. All of those people still have jobs and good standing in society because I didn't take to social media to mount a campaign against them. I'm proud of that. :) Though, it didn't take much for me to brush it off, because that's what good people do. Turning it into a harmless joke only evolved the interactions into something memorable that left both parties feeling seen and respected.

danShumway 5y ago

> but punishing people for not doing so seems wrong minded That's not really what I was getting at, what I was getting at is that creating an environment where people refuse to use proper pronouns or provide even basic accommodation for trans kids is going to make them more interested in medically transitioning, not less. If you're a kid, and you suspect you might be a girl, and everyone around you is refusing to use pronouns because you don't look like a girl... it wouldn't be unbelievable for that situation to increase your risk of body dysphoria, because everyone around you is telling you you'll never be a girl until you look enough like one. It can be someone's right to avoid referring to people by their proper pronouns, but I don't believe them if they turn around and say they're doing it to protect the kids from rash decisions about transitioning. Making kids feel safer and more accepted is how you protect them from rash decisions. Making them feel like you respect them and their identity is how you encourage them to seek outside advice and to be open about their doubts about their own gender. > if people are genuinely worried about invasive surgery, the policing of trans identity is counterproductive to addressing that concern.

btilly 5y ago
Do you have any research supporting this? Your theory is that being accommodating on the first request makes more extreme requests less likely. An alternative theory is that bending over backwards to the first request makes such requests feel OK, and therefore makes more extreme requests more likely. Do you have any research indicating that one theory is more likely to be true than the other?
- CRConrad 5y ago
  Without having done any research, it certainly feels more plausible that experimenting on a small scale should satisfy curiosity more than it would engender (heh) some burning desire to take things further just for the sake of it. And tendentious language, such as calling simple things like not giving detentions for a boy arriving to school in a skirt or a girl declaring she wants to be known as Pete "bending over backwards", really only weakens your argument.
- danShumway 5y ago

GavinMcG 5y ago

> The debate is not about whether somebody can use a pronoun. It sort of is, though: someone's use of a pronoun only exists to the extent that others refer to them that way. My pronouns for myself are I/me/mine. Your avoidance of the pronouns I prefer denies me the "use" of those pronouns. I can't use them without your help. Not disagreeing about the positive/negative rights characterization. And bigger picture: you're right that this really is about respect. Many people want to demand (even if not compel) more attention to mutual respect; many others want to use disrespectfulness as an indicator of their independence, because they view that as a more important value.

wlesieutre 5y ago
Right? It's like if someone asked me "Hey, I'd prefer you call me Robert instead of Bobby" and I got pissed about it because they're trying to infringe on my free speech. It's their identity, they're asking you to identify them a particular way. Are they asking you to expend a small amount of effort to mentally adjust how to refer to them? Yes. Have people been changing nicknames over their lives for probably hundreds or thousands of years? Also yes. But you ask someone to use a different pronoun and suddenly it's just too much.
- justinjlynn 5y ago
  Well, they say it's too much - but really it's just that they believe you aren't a valid member of the group you're claiming to be and they can't directly call you a liar. They're wrong, of course; but they're also lying when they say it's too much effort - that's not why.
  - wlesieutre 5y ago
    Yes, very much a lack of respect for someone's choice of identity. Forget nicknames, how would these people feel if somebody just said "Hey I'm going to call you Arnold now, because you fit my mental image of Arnold." Wildly inappropriate thing to do? If you want to go and impose whatever pronoun you want on someone based on how they look, don't act shocked when you get called out for being a dick to them.

treeman79 5y ago

Lost a job for not using pronouns. Tried very hard to stay out it, but kept being cornered o the topic.