GC: What is so hard about using people's preferred pronouns?

submitted by GenderbenderShe/her/hers from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

  1. I don't think stating someone's sex (aka "misgendering") is violence.

  2. I don't even think stating someone's sex is offensive, but a matter a fact and a neutral descriptor. Trans identified people are the ones taking offense where none is intended.

  3. I think it's quite arrogant for some people to expect everyone else's see them as they see themselves regardless of reality.

  4. Someone who is secure on their own identity doesn't need the "validation" of other people, especially, not the "validation" of complete strangers. Someone getting angry about being refered as their own sex is admitting that even they don't believe in this stuff.

  5. Why should I use language I don't believe in? That is I know Buck Angel is not a man, and by using he or him for her, I would be sending the opposite menssage.

  6. Why should I lie to talk about someone who is not in the room? Why should I lie to talk about someone I have not even met?

  7. You cannot change reality through language. Even if everyone in the world used her "prefered pronouns", Buck would still not be a man.

  8. Using "inclusive language" is not a neutral act and it only serves to ofuscate the facts. A newspaper saying "She was convicted for murder and sent to a women's prison" instead of "He was convicted for murder and sent to a women's prison" is shamelessly misleading the public.

  9. We've evolved to recognize other people's sex (and without the need of pulling anyone's pants down). Asking us to ignore our own eyes and to put constant attention to any potential "misgendering" is exhausting and it slows our thoughts. Be honest, genderbender, if not with us, at least with yourself. Even you have to carefully think all those "prefered pronouns" to get them right, aren't you?

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I don't think stating someone's sex (aka "misgendering") is violence.

I don't even think stating someone's sex is offensive, but a matter a fact and a neutral descriptor. Trans identified people are the ones taking offense where none is intended.

Pronouns are not based on biology.

Someone who is secure on their own identity doesn't need the "validation" of other people, especially, not the "validation" of complete strangers. Someone getting angry about being refered as their own sex is admitting that even they don't believe in this stuff.

I am a cis woman and I am secure in my own identity. Yet when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity. Why is different about trans people?

Why should I use language I don't believe in?

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you. I don't know if Buck can be considered GC but he holds GC beliefs.

You cannot change reality through language. Even if everyone in the world used her "prefered pronouns", Buck would still not be a man.

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

Using "inclusive language" is not a neutral act and it only serves to ofuscate the facts. A newspaper saying "She was convicted for murder and sent to a women's prison" instead of "He was convicted for murder and sent to a women's prison" is shamelessly misleading the public.

Using preferred pronouns is absolutely a neutral and respectful act. Most major news and information sources use preferred pronouns, and if they didn't TRAs would boycott them. If TRAs were such a tiny minority of people, we wouldn't have this much influence.

Be honest, genderbender, if not with us, at least with yourself. Even you have to carefully think all those "prefered pronouns" to get them right, aren't you?

I know a few trans people from work and my community. Using their preferred pronouns has never been difficult.

[–]BiologyIsReal 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pronouns are not based on biology.

Pronouns that change depending on which sex someone is (like "he" and "she" in English) are indeed based on biology. In Spanish, a group of men and women may be refered to as "ellos" because of the generic masculine, but that still is because there are at least a person of the male sex in the group. That is because sex is an easily observable characteristic we have evolve to recognize; while "gender identity", besides being unobservable, is a modern concept. You won't find references to "gender identity" prior to the mid 20th century. And it's only in the 21st century this new concept became more widespread. You could argue there is an language change going on, but I would point out this "change" is being forced from top to bottom. How can it be a natural change when "misgendering" may get you baned from social media, fired from your work, be the target of bullies, etcetera?

I am a cis woman and I am secure in my own identity. Yet when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity. Why is different about trans people?

Pronouns are not a tool to validate anyone's identity, but a way to ease communication. A text flows much better when you uses pronouns instead of repeating someone's name all the time. That is why "neopronouns" like zim or xim don't stick. Who has time to memorize the "correct" pronouns for each new person they meet?

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you. I don't know if Buck can be considered GC but he holds GC beliefs.

I don't know how you expect I return respect to someone I've never met or talked to. It's unlikely that Buck reads this forum, so who I would be offending by refering to her sex? Also, I don't think is a given that she would respect me.

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

I have a natural deep voice, I've even been mistaken for a boy in the phone/interphone, and yet I'm a woman. We'gone through this already. Female refers to the sex that produces large gametes (egg) and male, to the one who produces small gametes (sperm); and humans cannot change sex. You only named secondary sex characteristics, which are (usually) indicative of someone's sex, but they don't define someone's sex. Besides, you're being inconsist: when asked to define the words "man" and "woman", you claim none of this matters.

Using preferred pronouns is absolutely a neutral and respectful act.

You say so because you believe this stuff and because you don't think it's harmfull to women in spite of the proof we have been providing you.

Most major news and information sources use preferred pronouns, and if they didn't TRAs would boycott them. If TRAs were such a tiny minority of people, we wouldn't have this much influence.

It's not about numbers, but about who holds the power. Women are slightly more than 50% of the population and yet you'll find sexism and misogyny all around the world. Just 1% of the world populations holds most of world's wealth. The whole world is hostage to the nine nuclear powers. In the International Monetary Found the richest countries have the most number of votes ( i.e. it's not a vote per country); guess which countries are always screwed up. And I could keep going on...

If TRAs have gotten so far is because there are powerfull and rich men pushing this stuff up in the West (where it began) and in the rest of the world (though, it helps that English has become a sort of lingua franca and that there is no lack of people parroting whatever the West says).

I may expand this point some other day, but now it's getting late here.

[–]BiologyIsReal 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most major news and information sources use preferred pronouns, and if they didn't TRAs would boycott them. If TRAs were such a tiny minority of people, we wouldn't have this much influence.

I'm going to continue my reply from yesterday. TRAs have been trying to cancel J.K. Rowling for more than two years by now. However, no matter how much they they demonize her, she is still quite popular and selling lots of books worldwide. For example, I went to a bookstore recently and the Harry Potter books were visibly displayed, including the 20th aniversary editions. The movies are still broadcasted at TV, too. Moreover, their attempst at cancelling her have backfired and many people have changed their views because of the discrepance between what she actually said and TRA's overreaction, which includes countless death and rape threats (just check the peaking threads on Ovarit, for instance). Even public figures who have "denounced" her are quite happy to keep profitering off her works.

This huge failure by TRAs may be explained by: (a) TRAs are not that numerous as they claim to be, (b) she is too big to be cancelled, (c) both. In any case, this put into question TRAs' capability to influence MSM through boycotts. It's more likely they have lobbied them. Actually, scratch the "likely": they have lobbied them. Transactivists (and here I'm refering to the people at the top, not any radom saying TWAW on an random forum/social media) are very aware they need to control the narrative and, for that, they have set their eyes on MSM from the begining.

For instance, Argentine TRA have admited (*) this and explained how they "educated" local media, so they in turn could (mis)inform the public about the inconming gender identity law. They even had a media guide in Spanish to do so. Surely there must be other guides of this kind elsewhere. Although I don't remember who wrote it, it's have been linked on Ovarit an English journalist redaction manual which deals specifically on how news articles must talk about trans identified people.

And I have little doubts somehow there is money behind Media support for transgenderism, too. Truth is secondary for newsmedia; they are not going to go against their own interest. That is why you need to read the news with a critical mind.

(*) Here is an old article where they admit this and here a quotation from that article (bolding is not mine):

But perhaps the most important effect of the Court injunctions campaign has been its educational effect on public opinion. Each recognition (especially at the beginning) received much media attention and was thus a great opportunity for activists to explain to our society the importance of recognizing self-perceived gender identity, why a medical diagnosis should not be required and other issues. I must say, it was surprising to hear journalists using terms like "self-perceived identity", "de-pathologization" or "gender expression" among others.

It was also very important that we develop a "Guide for Communicators on Gender Identity" (http://www.lgbt.org.ar/archivos/folleto_identidad2_web.pdf), especially trying to educate journalists for them to use appropriate vocabulary, understanding that this would also influence the rest of society. During the campaign for equal marriage we had already noticed that many times journalists supported our cause but had no tools or knowledge to defend it. At that time we developed a little material that gave them very useful arguments, and then we did the same on gender identity.

THEIR words, not mine.

[–]pollyesther 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pronouns are not based on biology.

Pronouns are supposed to be an indicator of someone's sex, not someone's made up sense of gender identity. Sex is strictly defined by the gametes your body was designed to produce, regardless whether your body is actually capable of producing them. Sex cannot be changed no matter what you call yourself, what hormones you take or how many plastic surgeries you have.

I am a cis woman and I am secure in my own identity. Yet when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity. Why is different about trans people?

We use "she" because you are biologically female, not to validate your identity. If you decided to call yourself a man, take hormones and insist other people use he for you we would still use she.

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you. I don't know if Buck can be considered GC but he holds GC beliefs.

So, just because Buck is nice to us means we are morally obligated to change how we speak?

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

Buck is a woman and will always be a woman.

Using preferred pronouns is absolutely a neutral and respectful act. Most major news and information sources use preferred pronouns, and if they didn't TRAs would boycott them. If TRAs were such a tiny minority of people, we wouldn't have this much influence.

No. Saying "he" for a woman is absolutely lying. When I say "women" I am referring to all AFAB adults, regardless how they identify. Just like "man" refers to all AMAB adults as I don't believe in gender identity or that sex can be changed. Like you said TRAs bully people who dare to question the trans narrative. It doesn’t mean most people agree with them, it means TRAs are effective at silencing people.

[–]adungitit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pronouns are not based on biology.

Either pronouns are based in biology (which they are), or they're based in misogynistic stereotypes that a woman is someone with a pink brain, someone who enjoys misogynistic oppression, someone who likes to wear "women's" clothes etc. etc. The alternative to pronouns rooted in biology is pronouns rooted in defining men and women according to utter misogyny, and that's why radical feminists have an issue with them and don't want to use them.

Also, pronouns have always been based in biology. Trans people themselves are extremely vocal about how oppressive this societal norm is. So claiming that actually, everyone already uses pronouns based in genderfeels and trans people have nothing to complain about feels like intentionally playing dumb, since that is one of the biggest points of contention and confusion between trans activists and the majority of people.

when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity. Why is different about trans people?

People do not use "she" to validate your identity. They use "she" because it is an objective fact that you are an adult human female. Feelings, politeness, niceness, wishful thinking, your zodiac sign etc. have nothing to do with it. If I call you a vertebrate, or a mammal, I am saying that because that's what the reality is, rather than because that's what you want to hear.

If we're talking politeness, trans activists could start by not lying about and supporting the oppression that women endure as a result of their sex, and by not erasing, downplaying and twisting the language needed for feminist discourse because it hurts their feelings.

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

That's not what being male is. There are plenty of non-trans women who have deep voices, facial hair and abnormal testosterone levels. There are also plenty of non-trans men with no facial hair, high voices and significantly lower testosterone levels. Science has long since accounted for this. These are not people of the opposite sex, or third sex or whatever, they're either just a natural variance of male or female biology, or they have a disorder of sexual development. If anyone with male testosterone levels was automatically male, it wouldn't be possible to define a disorder where a male has male hormone levels, or any disorder defined by the sexual biological function malfunctioning. That's why no-one would bat an eye at a boy claiming he needs to see the doctor because his period didn't come in, regardless of whether that boy identified as a girl, a menstruator or a dragon.

Buck's body is a woman's body, morphed through years of maintaining an artificial hormonal imbalance (which has also lead to debilitating health issues). This is completely different from a male body that is male because it's MALE. This is a masculinised female body, not a male body, just as a castrated male with an inverted penis has nothing to do with an actual female. It is simply not scientifically possible to change one's sex in any way. The only thing you can do is artificially induce a hormonal disorder.

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you.

Acknowledging reality is not something you do out of "niceness" or "respect". I will not pretend the Earth is only a few thousand years old just to be respectful to Creationists, nor do I expect anyone to acknowledge the actual age of the Earth solely out of politeness and to not get me offended, but rather because this is an objective, measurable fact.

[–]strictly 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pronouns are not based on biology.

You wouldn’t be here complaining about us basing pronouns on biology if we were not doing that.

Yet when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity.

So it validates your identity that we see you as being of the same sex as Buck Angel and Elliot Page? Why complain then?

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you. I don't know if Buck can be considered GC but he holds GC beliefs.

If Buck is GC then Buck knows why we find it morally wrong to misgender men in masse with false gender identities just to make some man-identifying females feel better. Respect can’t be given on the expense of disrespecting others. Pronouns isn’t based on preferences for anyone so Buck is getting the same respect here as everyone else. And Buck is GC then Buck is not going to feel hurt by sex-based pronouns either as Buck would know it’s impersonal and that it says nothing about Buck’s gender feelings.

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

Women can have beards, deep voices and high levels of testosterone (especially if they are taking external testosterone).

Using preferred pronouns is absolutely a neutral and respectful act.

Had all non-transitioning males said they rather wanted to be called “zi” or always picked a different pronoun then females who want to be men, do you think they would have been called transphobic by transactivists? I think they would, which means trans activists are actually only for preferred pronouns for trans people but against the same freedom for non-trans people, which is worse than being against preferred pronouns for everyone.