Two years imprisonment for "misgendering" a man who calls himself a woman

@Baileyonice, do you speak any other languages? In most, gender runs through absolutely everything. It's not a case of a quick 'trans' and 'they'.

Bianca Barreto's case wasn't about pronouns; she was convicted of saying the politician is a man because he's male.

She went on to say people try to impose things on us that are not real, that are a product of her imagination. By ‘her’ I mean the person, because a man is a man, a woman is a woman.

This is a handy illustration of the way gender gets lost in translation. Portuguese for 'the person' is 'a pessoa' - a feminine noun, which takes feminine agreement. There's no getting round it. You can't evade the issue by pluralising it, as your 'they' would also be gendered. The noun for 'people' is also feminine ('a gente').

Third-person pronouns aren't only for talking about someone, as in English. In formally addressing someone by their title, Portuguese uses the third person directly. So a waiter would ask: A senhora gostaria de gelo? 'Would the lady like ice?' This simply does not lend itself to a 'trans' prefix, it'd be like yelling that the lady is transgender. And linguistically wrong - Brazil, like many other countries, has a language authority.

Moreover, all further address must use the matching third-person pronoun. You'd end up sounding like 'Would the trans-lady like ice, or shall I bring trans-her something else?'

English speakers make a lot of assumptions about pronouns being trivial, titles being disposable and linguistic flexibility. Our own language was as observant as others until around a century ago, though mainstream English has never had comprehensive gender. Now it's a bit of a free-for-all, we easily forget that most other languages have gender baked into everything, most use formalities that we abandoned long ago, and many value linguistic integrity so highly that their governments protect it.

Way back when, this forum saw long discussions about whether this makes it easier for English-speakers to dismiss 'trans' language issues. There's also a significant concern that gendered languages make it incredibly hard to separate 'acquired gender' from reality, since reality must be described using fixed genders.

Your reply prompted me to make this additional observation. Someone else might choose to start a fresh thread on languages and genderisation?

@Baileyonice, do you speak any other languages? In most, gender runs through absolutely everything. It's not a case of a quick 'trans' and 'they'.

Bianca Barreto's case wasn't about pronouns; she was convicted of saying the politician is a man because he's male.

She went on to say people try to impose things on us that are not real, that are a product of her imagination. By ‘her’ I mean the person, because a man is a man, a woman is a woman.

This is a handy illustration of the way gender gets lost in translation. Portuguese for 'the person' is 'a pessoa' - a feminine noun, which takes feminine agreement. There's no getting round it. You can't evade the issue by pluralising it, as your 'they' would also be gendered. The noun for 'people' is also feminine ('a gente').

Third-person pronouns aren't only for talking about someone, as in English. In formally addressing someone by their title, Portuguese uses the third person directly. So a waiter would ask: A senhora gostaria de gelo? 'Would the lady like ice?' This simply does not lend itself to a 'trans' prefix, it'd be like yelling that the lady is transgender. And linguistically wrong - Brazil, like many other countries, has a language authority.

Moreover, all further address must use the matching third-person pronoun. You'd end up sounding like 'Would the trans-lady like ice, or shall I bring trans-her something else?'

English speakers make a lot of assumptions about pronouns being trivial, titles being disposable and linguistic flexibility. Our own language was as observant as others until around a century ago, though mainstream English has never had comprehensive gender. Now it's a bit of a free-for-all, we easily forget that most other languages have gender baked into everything, most use formalities that we abandoned long ago, and many value linguistic integrity so highly that their governments protect it.

Way back when, this forum saw long discussions about whether this makes it easier for English-speakers to dismiss 'trans' language issues. There's also a significant concern that gendered languages make it incredibly hard to separate 'acquired gender' from reality, since reality must be described using fixed genders.

Your reply prompted me to make this additional observation. Someone else might choose to start a fresh thread on languages and genderisation?

@Baileyonice, do you speak any other languages? In most, gender runs through absolutely everything. It's not a case of a quick 'trans' and 'they'.

Bianca Barreto's case wasn't about pronouns; she was convicted of saying the politician is a man because he's male.

She went on to say people try to impose things on us that are not real, that are a product of her imagination. By ‘her’ I mean the person, because a man is a man, a woman is a woman.

This is a handy illustration of the way gender gets lost in translation. Portuguese for 'the person' is 'a pessoa' - a feminine noun, which takes feminine agreement. There's no getting round it. You can't evade the issue by pluralising it, as your 'they' would also be gendered. The noun for 'people' is also feminine ('a gente').

Third-person pronouns aren't only for talking about someone, as in English. In formally addressing someone by their title, Portuguese uses the third person directly. So a waiter would ask: A senhora gostaria de gelo? 'Would the lady like ice?' This simply does not lend itself to a 'trans' prefix, it'd be like yelling that the lady is transgender. And linguistically wrong - Brazil, like many other countries, has a language authority.

Moreover, all further address must use the matching third-person pronoun. You'd end up sounding like 'Would the trans-lady like ice, or shall I bring trans-her something else?'

English speakers make a lot of assumptions about pronouns being trivial, titles being disposable and linguistic flexibility. Our own language was as observant as others until around a century ago, though mainstream English has never had comprehensive gender. Now it's a bit of a free-for-all, we easily forget that most other languages have gender baked into everything, most use formalities that we abandoned long ago, and many value linguistic integrity so highly that their governments protect it.

Way back when, this forum saw long discussions about whether this makes it easier for English-speakers to dismiss 'trans' language issues. There's also a significant concern that gendered languages make it incredibly hard to separate 'acquired gender' from reality, since reality must be described using fixed genders.

Your reply prompted me to make this additional observation. Someone else might choose to start a fresh thread on languages and genderisation?

Baileyonice Pronouns aren't a forced belief but rather like all other social conventions designed to enhance social cohesion via respect & dignity for others.

I agree that * *Pronouns aren't a forced belief , but neither are they a social convention.
They are a general kind of noun that replaces specific nouns, to avoid repetition of the specific noun.
A pronoun should agree with its antecedent in number, gender, and person - that's grammar, not a forced belief nor a social convention.

Is it just pronouns that you maintain are social conventions designed to enhance social cohesion via respect & dignity for others, or do you believe adverbs, adjectives, verbs, conjunctions etc also have a role in enhancing social cohesion?

"The elu system (Portuguese: sistema elu) is based on a set of linguistic proposals created with the purpose of preparing the Portuguese language with a neuter grammatical gender.[1][2] The most prominent proposal is the personal neopronouns[3] elu, delu, nelu, and daquelu, intended to be a proposal for how to refer to non-binary people (whose gender identity is not male or female) or whose gender is unknown, or irrelevant, as well as groups with different genders, without resorting to the "generic masculine". These proposals can be used by and for anyone, regardless of gender.[4][5][6]
The pronoun elu tries to present the least number of problems in its use when trying to function smoothly in oral speech, listening, writing and visual identification, creating similarity between ela ("she"), ele ("he"), and elu (functionally similar to singular they).[7][8]
Nouns in Portuguese all have grammatical gender, and this gender impacts some grammatical inflections. Grammatical gender is different from personal gender identity―rather, words referring to a generic individual with unknown gender identity still carries grammatical gender. For example, the word pessoa ("person") is grammatically feminine, but indicates no specific gender of the person referred to. The gender inflection appears explicitly when in the context of an inflectied adjective. With the feminine nouns such as cidade ("city"; plural cidades), the adjective meaning "beautiful" (currently written generically as belo in dictionaries) would become cidade bela, cidades belas ("beautiful city/cities"). Likewise, this works with a masculine noun such as carro ("car"; plural carros): carro belo, carros belos ("beautiful car/cars").[9][10]
The Portuguese language as a rule determines that the plural of nouns, when covering individuals of the feminine and masculine gender, is made based on the generic masculine: a collective of vinte alunas ("twenty female students") and dez alunos ("ten male students"), is said as trinta alunos ("thirty students"). This form of plural formation is considered sexist by certain groups and individuals, resulting in proposals for a neutral gender to be adopted, such as "thirty children" (trinta menines).[11][12]
A similar known neopronoun in Portuguese is ile,[13][14] also called sistema ile ("ile system"), was popularized in 2020.[15] The systems happen to be same when applying neolanguage beyond pronouns, they use ⟨-e⟩ suffixes.[16][17]"

Here's a discussion about how languages other than English manage.

https://www.reddit.com/r/NonBinaryTalk/comments/shl7tw/translatingtheythempronounsinotherlanguages/

Mate, you really think people should go to prison for “misgendering”? 😮

Did you type your AI prompt in US English there? Behaviour. And no, you don’t go to prison here for “misgendering” alone. It’s not a crime.

I’m not getting into this with you because you’re not worth my time but obviously a civil case Isn’t going to back up your false claim, is it? Get a better AI.

Already answered that. You won’t go to prison in the U.K. for misgendering alone. Go well.

This is an excellent documentary about the effect of trans rights on women around the world, and particularly in Brazil. Among many others things, it features KJK in Brazil.

Neither was Barreto with her public protestations. She was stirring up hatred….& that's a hate crime even in the UK.

"You can go to prison for verbal harassment or abusive language in the UK if your behavior violates criminal legislation such as the Public Order Act 1986 or the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. 1, 2]

Potential Prison Sentences

• Intentional Harassment, Alarm, or Distress (Section 4A Public Order Act): Using threatening, abusive, or insulting words with the intent to cause distress carries a maximum sentence of 6 months in prison. 1]
• Fear of Violence (Section 4 Protection from Harassment Act): If verbal threats cause a person to fear that immediate or future unlawful violence will be used against them, sentences can be significantly higher, reaching up to 5 years in prison for severe indictable offenses. 1]
• Racially or Religiously Aggravated Offenses: If the verbal abuse or harassment is motivated by or demonstrates hostility based on race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or transgender identity, it acts as an aggravating factor that increases the severity of the sentence. 1]"

• Fear of Violence (Section 4 Protection from Harassment Act): If verbal threats cause a person to fear that immediate or future unlawful violence will be used against them, sentences can be significantly higher, reaching up to 5 years in prison for severe indictable offenses. 1]

I guess you agree that all those TRAs who have threatened women including JKR, with death and rape, should be put in prison then, right?
Your friends over on reddit won't like you much for that.

“he’s a guy who says he’s a trans woman, but he’s married to a woman and has a son or daughter.”

Barreto repeated how it was insane that someone was being sued “for calling a man a man.”

This is discussing a high-profile legal dispute, and taking a position on the verdict. It isn't stirring up hatred.

If she'd urged followers to attack Salabert or all 'trans women', that would be criminal in English law as well as Brazilian. She didn't.

We are allowed to say the law is an ass, thanks to the persistently rational work of members of this forum with others. And to our higher courts' commitment to neutrality.

In Brazil, Australia and elsewhere, citizens are not allowed to say their law is an ass. I wish success for protesters against nonsense laws everywhere.

• Fear of Violence (Section 4 Protection from Harassment Act): If verbal threats cause a person to fear that immediate or future unlawful violence will be used against them, sentences can be significantly higher, reaching up to 5 years in prison for severe indictable offenses. 1]

I guess you agree that all those TRAs who have threatened women including JKR, with death and rape, should be put in prison then, right?
Your friends over on reddit won't like you much for that.