5 ms·

Here's one: I don't believe that gender identity is a valid concept. Does that make for a hostile work environment or "deny the existence" of anyone? I submi

Here's one: I don't believe that gender identity is a valid concept. Does that make for a hostile work environment or "deny the existence" of anyone? I submit to you that the answer is no, except for die-hard adherents of the new ideology. Well, that simply isn't my religion, and I resent attempts to force it on me.

eganist 5y ago
> Here's one: I don't believe that gender identity is a valid concept. Does that make for a hostile work environment or "deny the existence" of anyone? I submit to you that the answer is no, except for die-hard adherents of the new ideology. Well, that simply isn't my religion, and I resent attempts to force it on me. Here's the question: Are you tolerant of people who do? Or do you make the lives of those people (who viscerally feel their gender identity to be true) more difficult than those who share your belief? The line is crossed with the latter.
- kijin 5y ago
  The latter is a fairly broad concept with multiple shades and blurry lines within. Which is why people with good intentions can still disagree badly on whether something someone did was okay or not. Has GP crossed the line merely by expressing his/her/their opinion? This probably depends on his/her/their social status as well. The CEO of a company saying something in an official meeting carries a different weight for all employees than some random employee saying the same thing. Or does GP need to say or do something personal to someone in order to be considered to have crossed the line? Be careful there: add too many constraints and we will end up giving a free pass to people who genuinely offend and cause serious discomfort to those around them. These are the kinds of issues about which we as a society need to have reasonable discussions and make consensus-building efforts, but it all descends into name-calling too soon.
mcronce 5y ago
Yes, it does. You don't get to decide for other people who or what they are.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- pjbeam 5y ago
  But other people get to demand positive affirmation? This doesn't sit right.
  - throwmeariver1 5y ago
    Everyone demands positive affirmation... that's a nothing burger comment mate.
    - pjbeam 5y ago
      Big difference between "yes I'll call you Sarah" and "trans women are women".
      - tomrod 5y ago
        Elaborate?
  - ruined 5y ago
    you wouldn't consider it "positive affirmation" of most people to simply accept the name and gender they provide, it is simply the bare minimum for normal interaction. why do you consider it beyond reasonable accommodation for some people? do you think you know some deeper truth about these other people than they know about themselves? why do you think you can reliably identify that case? couldn't you simply leave them alone, and not make a big deal out of it? if you think it doesn't matter, prove it. refuse to recognize anyone's identity. start misgendering and misnaming people you wouldn't do that to before. see how far that gets you.
    - nicoburns 5y ago
      > do you think you know some deeper truth about these other people than they know about themselves? why do you think you can reliably identify that case? I think the debate is less about what someone's inner life is like, and more about whether gender words (like man, woman etc) refer to inner feelings or to someone's physical sex. Historically they have been used to refer to both, and many people. use their own gender label to refer to their physical sex rather than any inner feelings.
edent 5y ago
That's fine. You are welcome to believe that. What you can't do is harass people, deny them service, or make their lives a misery. No one is forcing you to believe in something. They're asking you not to be an arsehole about something which doesn't affect your life.
- SaintGhurka 5y ago
  >> No one is forcing you to believe in something. But they are forcing you to pretend to believe in something by dictating what you are allowed to say about it.
fosefx 5y ago
It does not really matter what your stance on that topic is. If your co-workers don't what to be called a certain way, just respect that. E.g. I don't want to be called by my full first name but rather a short version of it. If you deliberately disrespect my request that is simply hostile.
- eppp 5y ago
  How far does this extend in reasonableness though? If my co-worker asked me to refer to them as "your highness" for example?
  - jakelazaroff 5y ago
    Has that ever happened? What is the point of this hypothetical?
    - Aeolun 5y ago
      I think the idea is that you do not believe your coworker to be royalty, in the same way you do not believe them to be male/female. Even if there is no harm in calling them ‘your majesty’ it doesn’t feel right.
      - eppp 5y ago
        I think my point is more that there are tons of various requirements that people have that are at best unreasonable and as a society we don't indulge every request that people make. One day someone comes in and says I must now refer to them as xe or emself after years of knowing them without mistake is not reasonable. I still refer to lots of women as their maiden names because that how I remember them. It isnt out of meanness or vitriol. That is just the label my brain still applies to them because I knew them for many years as that. I dont care if you are male or female or whatever you want to be. I just want everyone to be happy to the extent they can be, but be tolerant of those who remember you as you were to them as well. It isnt just a switch you can turn off instantly.
ryanobjc 5y ago
So, your new colleague says their name is Richard. You decide it’s hilarious to call him “dick” and refuse to stop even after he’s asked you multiple times. Pronouns aren’t any different - if you had a masculine looking female coworker at work - say she was into bodybuilding - and you keeping calling her “he” as a “joke”… persisting when you were asked not to, by your boss, by hr perhaps even. What kind of person are you being here? You can not believe in gender identity, I don’t care. But be respectful to your colleagues at work. Is that so much to ask for? To literally not be as asshole? Is that what you’re defending - your right to be a flaming asshole to your coworkers without any consequence??
- pjbeam 5y ago
  You've picked the worst interpretation of the above. Addressing people how they'd like to be addressed is basic decency. Demands for affirmation beyond this is how I read the comment you're replying to.
  - ryanobjc 5y ago
    The poster perhaps should have noted how they intended on treating their coworkers. Instead we are left to infer that their intent was to lean into their ideology against basic decency. And in the end this is what the “culture wars” are about: the right to not be decent to certain people.
    - Aeolun 5y ago
      I think the problem is more in people automatically assuming the worst possible interpretation of any remark as soon as it is about race/religion/gender.
halfmatthalfcat 5y ago
Your supposition that it does not make for a hostile work environment is a privilege you should examine.
em-bee 5y ago
the question is how you go about it. what do you do when you are asked to respect someone else's choice of gender identity? do you go along with it, while quietly keeping your own opinion? or do you complain and purposefully ignore their request? or maybe do something else entirely? how do you keep a friendly work environment when the mere questioning of someones gender identity can be considered hostile? you ask that your rejection of the idea is considered not hostile, yet you consider the enforcement of rules of interaction as something hostile.
jleyank 5y ago
s/gender/religious/g and see how well things go down.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  Difference being that you cannot see what someone’s religion is, nor are there only two variations.
  - jleyank 5y ago
    Often you can see the religion, or at least the outward sign. This is the basis for laws about large-scale religious display such as head scarves, turbans, ... It seems that groups of people don't like seeing differences no matter what they are.
ratww 5y ago
It depends. I know people who thinks like you, but they don't shut the fuck about these things, and take every possible the opportunity to proselytise about it. I've seen it happening in workplaces, for example. But also parties, random people on the street. Not shutting the fuck about it is fucking annoying and if it's in the workplace I'll be complaining the fuck about it until you stop and/or looking for another job. Now, I'm a 100% neutral part on this, and even me don't wanna hear about your bullshit. Imagine now if you were to use this to actively hurt people.
tomrod 5y ago
> Here's one: I don't believe that gender identity is a valid concept One funny thing I learned from studying high demand religions: you don't have to believe something for it to be true. It's existence is entirely orthogonal to a person's opinion.

eganist 5y ago

> Here's one: I don't believe that gender identity is a valid concept. Does that make for a hostile work environment or "deny the existence" of anyone? I submit to you that the answer is no, except for die-hard adherents of the new ideology. Well, that simply isn't my religion, and I resent attempts to force it on me. Here's the question: Are you tolerant of people who do? Or do you make the lives of those people (who viscerally feel their gender identity to be true) more difficult than those who share your belief? The line is crossed with the latter.

kijin 5y ago
The latter is a fairly broad concept with multiple shades and blurry lines within. Which is why people with good intentions can still disagree badly on whether something someone did was okay or not. Has GP crossed the line merely by expressing his/her/their opinion? This probably depends on his/her/their social status as well. The CEO of a company saying something in an official meeting carries a different weight for all employees than some random employee saying the same thing. Or does GP need to say or do something personal to someone in order to be considered to have crossed the line? Be careful there: add too many constraints and we will end up giving a free pass to people who genuinely offend and cause serious discomfort to those around them. These are the kinds of issues about which we as a society need to have reasonable discussions and make consensus-building efforts, but it all descends into name-calling too soon.

mcronce 5y ago

Yes, it does. You don't get to decide for other people who or what they are.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
pjbeam 5y ago
But other people get to demand positive affirmation? This doesn't sit right.
- throwmeariver1 5y ago
  Everyone demands positive affirmation... that's a nothing burger comment mate.
  - pjbeam 5y ago
    Big difference between "yes I'll call you Sarah" and "trans women are women".
    - tomrod 5y ago
      Elaborate?
- ruined 5y ago
  you wouldn't consider it "positive affirmation" of most people to simply accept the name and gender they provide, it is simply the bare minimum for normal interaction. why do you consider it beyond reasonable accommodation for some people? do you think you know some deeper truth about these other people than they know about themselves? why do you think you can reliably identify that case? couldn't you simply leave them alone, and not make a big deal out of it? if you think it doesn't matter, prove it. refuse to recognize anyone's identity. start misgendering and misnaming people you wouldn't do that to before. see how far that gets you.
  - nicoburns 5y ago
    > do you think you know some deeper truth about these other people than they know about themselves? why do you think you can reliably identify that case? I think the debate is less about what someone's inner life is like, and more about whether gender words (like man, woman etc) refer to inner feelings or to someone's physical sex. Historically they have been used to refer to both, and many people. use their own gender label to refer to their physical sex rather than any inner feelings.

edent 5y ago

That's fine. You are welcome to believe that. What you can't do is harass people, deny them service, or make their lives a misery. No one is forcing you to believe in something. They're asking you not to be an arsehole about something which doesn't affect your life.

SaintGhurka 5y ago
>> No one is forcing you to believe in something. But they are forcing you to pretend to believe in something by dictating what you are allowed to say about it.

fosefx 5y ago

It does not really matter what your stance on that topic is. If your co-workers don't what to be called a certain way, just respect that. E.g. I don't want to be called by my full first name but rather a short version of it. If you deliberately disrespect my request that is simply hostile.

eppp 5y ago
How far does this extend in reasonableness though? If my co-worker asked me to refer to them as "your highness" for example?
- jakelazaroff 5y ago
  Has that ever happened? What is the point of this hypothetical?
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    I think the idea is that you do not believe your coworker to be royalty, in the same way you do not believe them to be male/female. Even if there is no harm in calling them ‘your majesty’ it doesn’t feel right.
    - eppp 5y ago
      I think my point is more that there are tons of various requirements that people have that are at best unreasonable and as a society we don't indulge every request that people make. One day someone comes in and says I must now refer to them as xe or emself after years of knowing them without mistake is not reasonable. I still refer to lots of women as their maiden names because that how I remember them. It isnt out of meanness or vitriol. That is just the label my brain still applies to them because I knew them for many years as that. I dont care if you are male or female or whatever you want to be. I just want everyone to be happy to the extent they can be, but be tolerant of those who remember you as you were to them as well. It isnt just a switch you can turn off instantly.

ryanobjc 5y ago

So, your new colleague says their name is Richard. You decide it’s hilarious to call him “dick” and refuse to stop even after he’s asked you multiple times. Pronouns aren’t any different - if you had a masculine looking female coworker at work - say she was into bodybuilding - and you keeping calling her “he” as a “joke”… persisting when you were asked not to, by your boss, by hr perhaps even. What kind of person are you being here? You can not believe in gender identity, I don’t care. But be respectful to your colleagues at work. Is that so much to ask for? To literally not be as asshole? Is that what you’re defending - your right to be a flaming asshole to your coworkers without any consequence??

pjbeam 5y ago
You've picked the worst interpretation of the above. Addressing people how they'd like to be addressed is basic decency. Demands for affirmation beyond this is how I read the comment you're replying to.
- ryanobjc 5y ago
  The poster perhaps should have noted how they intended on treating their coworkers. Instead we are left to infer that their intent was to lean into their ideology against basic decency. And in the end this is what the “culture wars” are about: the right to not be decent to certain people.
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    I think the problem is more in people automatically assuming the worst possible interpretation of any remark as soon as it is about race/religion/gender.

halfmatthalfcat 5y ago

Your supposition that it does not make for a hostile work environment is a privilege you should examine.

em-bee 5y ago

the question is how you go about it. what do you do when you are asked to respect someone else's choice of gender identity? do you go along with it, while quietly keeping your own opinion? or do you complain and purposefully ignore their request? or maybe do something else entirely? how do you keep a friendly work environment when the mere questioning of someones gender identity can be considered hostile? you ask that your rejection of the idea is considered not hostile, yet you consider the enforcement of rules of interaction as something hostile.

jleyank 5y ago

s/gender/religious/g and see how well things go down.

Aeolun 5y ago
Difference being that you cannot see what someone’s religion is, nor are there only two variations.
- jleyank 5y ago
  Often you can see the religion, or at least the outward sign. This is the basis for laws about large-scale religious display such as head scarves, turbans, ... It seems that groups of people don't like seeing differences no matter what they are.

ratww 5y ago

It depends. I know people who thinks like you, but they don't shut the fuck about these things, and take every possible the opportunity to proselytise about it. I've seen it happening in workplaces, for example. But also parties, random people on the street. Not shutting the fuck about it is fucking annoying and if it's in the workplace I'll be complaining the fuck about it until you stop and/or looking for another job. Now, I'm a 100% neutral part on this, and even me don't wanna hear about your bullshit. Imagine now if you were to use this to actively hurt people.

tomrod 5y ago

> Here's one: I don't believe that gender identity is a valid concept One funny thing I learned from studying high demand religions: you don't have to believe something for it to be true. It's existence is entirely orthogonal to a person's opinion.