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 -  (2 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 -  (1 child)

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.

[–]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.