To shriek from the rooftops that there is No Such Thing as “preferred pronouns”?

Yes it has, because I will call
out hate. I will stand up for what is right. The hate speech here is heinous.

Mumsnet should actually be shutting down this thread as it is inciting hate.

Many, many people. Possibly intentionally. Just so they can cause offence and then call people “woke”.

If a person is hurt by reference to their sex, they need therapy. Not everyone else to lie to them about their reality.

It was once illegal to be gay.
it was once illegal for a woman to own property.
‘It’s the law’ doesn’t mean it’s not morally reprehensible to intentionally want to hurt a person who has done nothing to you or anyone else.

No, because you’re being totally disingenuous. You know how pronouns can be misused

It isn’t truth though. Just a bigoted rant from people who have no empathy.

Well I hope you feel better after your little tantrum.

Calling me names doesn't change anything. Men can't become women and I'm not going to pretend they can. Women who identify as trans are of course welcome in women's spaces, where they belong.

This the law as clarified by the recent FWS case. So I'm not sure what you think calling me names for my lawful position is going to achieve.

Yes, quite. Heaven forfend we might rely on the actual, you know, truth to support our opinion.

That’s a bit of an embarrassing tantrum, @Atina321
It’s really rattled your cage, eh?

Ooo, someone who thinks all people are deviants (probably because they themselves are deviant and measure others by their standards).

You do realise that trans men use the other toilets as well?

Why hate on something that really doesn’t affect you?

Stop hiding behind language and “truth” and stop being a bigot.

How someone chooses to define themself does not affect you. It doesn’t stop you from living your life. It doesn’t make you any less safe (I can confidently say you will have shared a public bathroom with a trans person on multiple occasions and not known, you have probably also been served by a trans person and it had absolutely no effect on you. A trans person may have made your lunch, built your car or taught your children and still had no effect on your day to day life because they use different pronouns).

Has someone berated you for using the wrong pronouns? No? Didn’t think so. Would you feel embarrassed if you accidentally called someone by the wrong pronouns if they weren’t trans? So why does someone telling you their pronouns and avoiding embarrassment upset you? Probably because you are a bigot.

How many more ways can someone tell you to keep your nose out of other peoples business that doesn’t effect you?

Let. It. Go…

‘How can you misuse a preference?’
You don’t misuse a preference, you misuse a pronoun. Obviously.

Fine for you. I personally don’t feel anyone needs my “support” to live a lie.
You do you.

Nothing about his actions or the hospital actions was deemed a crime. At the time at least

Its not a criminal case. Nurse Peggy was disciplined for calling a man in the woman's changing rooms a man. She then took a tribunal against nhs Fife.

I wonder if a man repeatedly using women's facilities is a crime?
It was not by accident, he knew that another person identified him correctly as male and knew he was in the female facilities.
Or the crime is that the hospital did not warn him against his actions, which infringe women's rights?

@Lex345 You've got it. The use of Dr Upton's preferred pronouns support a 'legal fiction' that a man was a woman in more ways than merely wearing clothing stereotypically associated with adult human females, while the use of accurate sex-based pronouns reveal the failure to respect those same persons' right to dignity and privacy. This example shows why 'preferred pronouns' are dangerous.

No. Not a crime. Dr Upton has not been accused of any crime.

The tribunal is about Sandi Peggy, a nurse, being disciplined because she called Dr Upton a man when she found him in her changing rooms.

Because respect for reality matters, because clear language matters, because women's ability to define themselves and their rights matter.

I'm not sure why it's women who are being asked to 'live and let live' when at the same time TRAs have been the ones demanding access to our spaces and services.

Certainly, one assumes from inference of context here that we are referring to a potential crime and then the legal definition of biological sex would apply?

Liverpool University have updated their guidance
https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/equality-diversity-inclusion/our-initiatives/lgbtqia-equality/why-pronouns-matter/what-you-can-do/

Final sentence is v important IMHO and useful for anyone whose employer demands they declare their pronouns "Finally, do not force other people to share their pronouns, it is a personal choice that should be respected"

Liverpool University have updated their guidance
https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/equality-diversity-inclusion/our-initiatives/lgbtqia-equality/why-pronouns-matter/what-you-can-do/

Final sentence is v important IMHO and useful for anyone whose employer demands they declare their pronouns "Finally, do not force other people to share their pronouns, it is a personal choice that should be respected"

I don't see why the SC ruling means I have to go out of my way to disrespect people. I am more than happy to support people in whatever choices they make, so long as they don't harm other people. That extends across other issues too.

I fully support transpeople to live in society in the gender they identify as, and other than in very specific circumstances covered by the SC ruling-see no reason to not support them in that choice. The legitimate concerns I had about biological men in women only spaces have been obviated by the ruling. That doesn't mean on a societal level there cannot be acceptance and support.

For me, the SC ruling was much more about the legal standing of women, women's safety and women's protections and rights. A pronoun threatens none of these; the legal definition stands.

It would be useful if people gave some thought to language and how it affects people's ability to articulate and safeguard their rights.

Thankfully the SC ruling has made great strides here, but pronouns are not unimportant. Particularly with many organisations dragging their heels on its implementation.

Take this example from the Sandi Peggy case, which has still not been resolved.

Here are two ways of describing Dr Upton's behaviour.

He went into the woman's changing room and took his clothes off in front of the women present.

Or

She went into the woman's changing room and took her clothes off in front of the women present.

These sentences describe exactly the same eventz One uses preferred pronouns, one uses sex based pronouns. The impact of each is quite different, don't you think?