Mandated to give my ten year old's pronouns - how to respond

And if you're saying your daughter doesn't have a gender, that means the term you're looking for is "Non-binary".
Erm no, "non-binary" is part of the same belief system. Not everyone has to fit a label.

The ethnicity question is also terrible, I would not fit into any of those poorly described categories so I would be forced to opt out against my will.

"She doesn't have a gender or pronouns" is an oxymoron.

"She" is a pronoun. She will learn that in basic English grammar lessons, so maybe she can teach you.

And if you're saying your daughter doesn't have a gender, that means the term you're looking for is "Non-binary".

You can't avoid words.

"Everybody also has a gender," you say. But, with respect, this isn't so.

'Gender' can be conterminous with 'sex', but that can't be your intent here (as is signalled by your "also"). And when non-conterminous with 'sex', 'gender' is not something anyone can have in the sense they have a sex. (Of course one may exhibit certain stereotypes from the collection denoted 'gender stereotypes'. But that's not the same thing at all.)

To be sure, there are those who claim there is this other meaning of 'gender', as something extant which people can 'have', (or sometimes 'be'). But this is a metaphysical claim with no reasoned justification. Simply put, 'gender' in this attempted sense is a neologism currently empty of meaning and reference.

tldr: Actually, no-one has a gender if 'gender' doesn't mean 'sex'.

[Most readers of this thread understand the consequences of this for fashionable 'pronoun' nonsense. Maybe not you, @Runninggirls26. But have a think about it.]

How about they respect me by not insisting that I use wrong sex pronouns, or that I accept their right to change the function and usage of fundamental parts of language?

Ah, I get you

I feel no obligation to tolerate or respect beliefs I consider to be both mad and harmful I’m afraid.

I will not be pretending I can’t tell what sex people are, and I do not believe that will cause any harm to said people

I do believe pretending things that aren’t true inevitably leads to harm and in the case of pretending about sex demonstrably has done

we shall have to agree to differ

Genderists didn't invent third-person pronouns. They exist because they serve a function - to refer to someone or something without using their name and in English, third-person pronouns follow, or agree with, sex.
Genderists are trying to co-opt them to refer to gender identity.
They don't.

GII is attempting to force this change. It isn't working.
Invent your own neo pronouns.

Nobody possesses pronouns so use of the word "have" is inappropriate. You can have a name and you have a sex. You don't have pronouns.

No I don’t.

I don’t believe in gender identity personally.

I’d just ask you to acknowledge that other people have different beliefs about gender identity to you and that except for a small number of fairly extreme situations it does you no harm to tolerate and respect their perspective.

This is a really valiant attempt to explain the obvious that will get no traction here whatsoever. Here, there are no trans women who are not rapists in a women's prison, or otherwise pretending to be trans in order to abuse and rape women.

Ok

you want me to believe in gender identity

I asked above if you could give the defining characteristics of the gender identity shared by all women.

I’d actually love it if you did, and have a great deal of respect for you.

help me move away from my black and white thinking. Explain women’s gender identity to me

Yup and in the very rare case you get it wrong, would it harm you to just change the pronoun you use?

You still seem to be confusing organic shifts in language (which people may or may not be comfortable with) and forcing a change with penalties for not complying. Pronouns are particularly embedded in language and so are cognitively more difficult to change. Of course you can try. In fascist Italy it was attempted. In fact, forced language change in this way goes very much hand in hand with totalitarian regimes.

Is it? Why? If someone referred to me as "he" I would correct them. I'd think they're a right weirdo if they replied with "I decide how I will refer to someone in the third person. Trying to control how people refer to you is unreasonable.".

The argument that someone wouldn't like to be referred to as the wrong sex pronouns meaning that they have a "preferred pronoun" is the same as a mixed race person not wanting people to dismiss one aspect of their heritage - it doesn't mean they have a "preferred race", just that someone getting it wrong might cause annoyance. If we use sex based pronouns then we're very unlikely to get it wrong because you can almost always tell someone's sex (and you can never tell if someone has ze/zir, they/them/, fae/fer etc. pronouns).

As you say some people feel differently and this form accounts for that. Trans, non binary and gender fluid people will continue to exist whether other people approve or not.
And men are already in female spaces. They are in our homes, work places, gyms, shops, pubs. Men don’t need to pretend to be female to get close to us, hurt us or take our rights away. They just need to marry us, live with us, be our bosses or colleagues, follow us home at night and so on.
The issue isn’t really someones’s gender identity or a form asking about pronouns. It’s the fact women aren’t safe from men and the fact there are zero safe spaces for women with or without trans people.

lol you sound like those mother-in-laws who say “I don’t care if you want to call your son Gabe, all the first sons in this family have been called John for generations so that’s what I will be calling him.”

So just for the sake of argument, say that this hobby group has a 14 year trans child join. Don't you think it's helpful for the organisers to be prepared in advance? What do you think should happen here - the parent could email and explain, I suppose, but it sounds easier to stick it on a form along with the dietary preferences.

Well done for standing your ground.
Your proposed letter stands perfectly well as it is.

Incidentally, I wonder how many on this thread have ever heard of the New Zealand born charlatan Dr. John Money, the man who kicked off this Gender bullshite?
Anyone ignorant of his activities might like to read these links:-
https://reduxx.info/john-money-the-pervert-who-invented-gender/

https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/david-reimer-and-john-money-gender-reassignment-controversy-johnjoan-case

https://www.simplypsychology.org/david-reimer.html

Massive eye roll. A person doesn't have pronouns, they belong to the person who is talking about them. I decide how I will refer to someone in the third person. Trying to control how people refer to you is unreasonable.

They actually don’t. Black and white thinking is how things usually start out and a reasonable balance is developed over time as is literally happening right now.

They have the same root in that both start from pretending the person in front of you is a different sex to the one you know them to be

one leads to the other

Mmmm because giving someone you work with the courtesy of a preferred pronoun even though you don’t believe they have literally changed sex and accepting male rapists in a woman’s prison are exactly the same.

Perhaps you’re not old enough to remember the social penalties associated with not “bowing” to the shift in meaning of the word gay. It became socially unacceptable to object to it as not being an appropriate word for homosexuals and it also became socially unacceptable to redeploy it as an insult (“That shirt is so gay”).

Mmm, because tolerating people having sex in ways that cause no harm but you disapprove of and being asked to pretend that you think someone has changed sex and to tolerate medical experiments on children and rapists in women’s prisons are almost entirely identical

There are social penalties to not bowing to gender ideology's pronoun use. This has nothing to do with the word gay changing in meaning. You seem confused about how language develops.

If we're being pedantic, no, she does not 'have' pronouns. Other people use particular pronouns about OP's DD, and they use what their eyes are telling them is spectacularly obvious. Unlike with a name that is specific to them people do not retain ownership over language in this way. To specify pronouns is to instruct others on the way in which they use language and it assumes a hell of a lot. Not least, it assumes everyone we interact with on a daily basis can remember every idiosynchrasy of address each individual has required us to use. Presumptious, much?

My faith is not of the monotheistic variety. I don't end prayers with 'Amen', observe the passover, or praise 'Allah'. That is the language of the believer. Equally, the rest of the world does not need this periodic enforced language of an ideology they've not bought into, and in which they don't believe.

OP - your objection is fine (without the apologetic language). I also say 'no', and I'll say it until I'm blue in the face.