Thoughts around wearing symbols of belief

[Chernobog]

No one bats an eye at someone wearing a cross to show they believe in God, or Sikhs wearing items in the paragraph below (not picking on Sikhs, it's just what I found on wiki)

With this is mind, if you are offended by someone wearing a pronoun badge but not by a cross, then that is illogical. Why is one person's belief in something religious

I don't believe in God(s), but I do believe it's possible for others to, in the same way that I think people who believe they are Trans truly believe they are born in the wrong body.

I guess what I am clumsily trying to say, is why is one belief more tolerated than others?

^https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_clothing^
Baptized Khalsa Sikhs are mandated to wear the 5 Ks: Kesh (unshorn hair), strapped Kirpan (sword), Kachhehra (prescribed shorts), Kanga (Comb tucked in the tied up hair), Karha (Steel bracelet). He/she must not have on his/her person any token of any other faith. He/she must not have his/her head bare or be wearing a cap. He/she must not be wearing any ornaments piercing through any part of the body.

But surely you would act with appropriate respect for that religion
So why not act with appropriate respect for preferred pronouns.

If I was very well known as a women's rights advocate, I wouldn't be comfortable with anyone who has access to any of my private info that displayed pronoun badges or similar.
Remember, we had an incident here on Mumsnet not too long ago.

Apart from that, I'll just agree with and quote MonsteraMama:

‘A cross necklace is not asking anything of me. A cross necklace is someone expressing their belief, nothing more. It's personal.

A pronoun badge is an indicator of expectation that others will alter their own beliefs to make someone else feel more comfortable.

The two are not comparable. No one wearing a cross is expecting me to address them as "your holiness".’

I respect anyone’s right to wear a badge. I don’t respect compelled speech, so I won’t be ‘respecting’ a pronoun badge by pretending someone is not their biological sex.

I do respect faith and religion, because the followers of those faiths generally don’t insist I swear allegiance to their deity. If they did then see above: I don’t respect compelled speech.

Christians have been penalised for wearing a cross to work though.

People wear a symbol of religion such as a cross or star etc don't ask to be treated or called a different name - so it really does not impact others, there is a difference with a pronoun badge.

Personally I believe you have a pronoun and that it is not possible to change it and it therefore impinges on others who have this belief as they then need to compromise their views by using the pronoun.

I have yet to see anyone wearing a badge with their preferred pronouns on it, and I doubt it would have any discernible effect on me if I did.

On the other hand, if anyone insisted that I wear one, then I would say fuck off no.

If I wasn't sure of someone's sex or if I encountered a male person dressed up in traditionally female clothing, hair, jewellery etc. I'd simply refer to them as 'they'. You're not offending anyone then, but neither are you required to lie to yourself or others by referring to them as 'she' if that's what their badge demanded. You can't require others to buy in to your belief system and they shouldn't demand it either.

I’m not offended by a pronoun badge

I am not offended by a Tzizit

I use preferred pronouns to those who express a preference

I would not serve pork when Jewish guests came

Courtesy.

I am opposed to bio males competing in women’s sports or being in s single sex rape crisis group

I would be opposed to a Jewish person expect me to circumcise my son.

TRAs expect me to comply with their belief in a way that affects my life

Jewish people do not.

Is a pronoun badge asking you to change your beliefs? Or is it asking you to refer to a person in a way they prefer?

A badge asking me to address a person in the way they prefer would be, for example, “Mary Bloggs”. Or just “Mary”. I would have no problem addressing a biological male with the name they prefer. What I won’t do is adopt a pronoun that suggests that Mary is female if Mary is a biological male. That compels me to refer to Mary as female when talking about Mary to others and my line is right there. Mary is not female, I will not use language that suggests Mary is.

Weak argument. If you want to wear a badge wear one, but don't expect me to believe in or pretend to believe in the same thing as you (religious or any other make believe).

The difference is most Christians and Sikh live side by side because they accept and respect they have different beliefs and do not insist on others giving up their own beliefs.

Can you image the Sikh community insisting that even if you don't follow or believe their religion no one else is allowed piercings as it doesn't fit in with their beliefs. Apply that logic to pronouns, or the more serious topic of single sex spaces etc.

I don't mind if religious people wear signs of their religion. I do mind if they proselytise as it's intruding into my beliefs.

I don't mind if people wear badges. I do mind if they try to change my beliefs and behaviours based on their badges.

I wouldn't call a priest Father, I don't say PBUH if I mention the prophet, I don't change my eating habits if I'm lunching with a vegan, I would prefer not to have to carefully police my speech when a trans person is part of the conversation. Only one of these things is likely to get me into trouble at work.

It's not a weak argument, because it's not an argument.

It's called a discussion- why is one set of beliefs allowed/tolerated/encourage while another set of beliefs are persecuted.

Not all trans people are TRAs, in the same way not all Christians belong to Westboro Baptist Church

It's not persecution to reject another's belief system. Genderists like to claim it is, though!

I'm not persecuting anyone by "misgendering" them, same as I'm not persecuting Christians when I blaspheme. They don't like it, that's all.

Both sets of beliefs are tolerated. The only difference is that by wearing a pronoun badge, you are expecting my words or actions to change in a way that I don’t believe in. A turban or a kippah or a hijab or a cross doesn’t expect anything from me in the way a pronoun badge does.

Any belief that does not expect a 'disbeliever' to engage in is fine.

A man expecting me to refer to him as a woman because that is HIS belief, not mine, is not fine.

Because I'm not going to have my thoughts and speech policed to protect feelings. If I'm speaking to a man who is wearing a 'she/her' pronoun badge, I'm not going to use those pronouns when I know they are definitely not a biological female. I see the badge, but it's not going to compell me to use what I know are the wrong pronouns. It's compulsion vs convincing, it's social conditioning/engineering.

I wear a cross pendant, I am a Christian, I don't expect people to call me anything religious just because I'm a theist. I get mocked from time to time, but that comes with the territory in today's social climate and is water off a duck's back. I don't start personally attacking and calling them any -ist or -obe I can think of, unless they're attacking me for being English, in which case I will call them an Anglophobe.

So yes, belief in God and believing you are what you're not are two different things.

I'm my eyes the only reason to wear a pronoun badge would be if you were trans or chose to look and dress like the opposite gender, and you were worried people would 'misgender' you.
I wouldn't care particularly, but I guess if I met someone and had no idea what they felt comfortable being called, then it would help me be polite.
I don't think religious dress is the same. It's not being worn with the expectation that people have to address them in a certain way. A Sikh wearing a turban doesn't want you to refer to them as 'Sikh billy smith' or whatever. It doesn't affect anyone else whatsoever.

With this is mind, if you are offended by someone wearing a pronoun badge but not by a cross, then that is illogical. Why is one person's belief in something religious

Not offended by them wearing a badge proclaiming their own belief, offended and won't acquiesce with them demanding I share, buy into and validate their belief.

I don't believe in God(s), but I do believe it's possible for others to, in the same way that I think people who believe they are Trans truly believe they are born in the wrong body.

They can believe that all they want, I don't believe it and won't play along with it, why should I? I am not expected to do that regarding religion, I am not expected to validate, agree with, pretend or play along with religious beliefs held by others. I find it offensive that men declare they are women and the manner in which they proclaim aspects of their dress, feelings, likes and presentation mean that they are.

why is one set of beliefs allowed/tolerated/encourage while another set of beliefs are persecuted.

The belief is allowed, how is it persecuted?

Neither. It's stating their belief in a system I consider politically harmful to women. I see wearing a pronoun pin as being the same as wearing a symbol of any regressive, imperialistic political movement.

A person adopting cross sex language is asserting their belief not only that that womanhood and manhood are personality traits not physical sex, but that physical sex is so irrelevent that it doesn't even need a name.

If they go past simply displayng the badge to expecting me to honour their preference, for example a man who believes his pronoun is "she" and expecting me to comply with that, he is not doing the equivalent of saying "Hi My given name was Robert but i prefer people to call me Bob", or even "Hi, I believe Jesus Lord is my saviour", he is saying "Hi! you and me are both "she"! We both have wommany personalities! And if you see yourself differently to my idea of women I don't care!"

It's kind of like a step dad insisting his partners' kids call him "dad" and his partners' family and friends refer to him as the kids' dad even though the kids themselves don't feel the same relationship to him as they do to the man they already call dad. His relationship with their mother and his possibly entirely genuine self image of himself as their father does not overwrite their reality. He has a right to feel how he does, but they have a right to define the terms of their own self knowledge as well.

Do you see the problem?

Because trans people have appropriated the existing language of sex to label their feelings of gender, it's not just about what they believe and how they see themselves, it's also redefining everyone else who uses the pronouns she and he (so pretty much everyone) regardless of whether those people experience the same feelings of gender or simply consider themselves a man or a woman because of their body sex.

If people who identify as trans, and indeed people who identify as cis, had coined new language for their feelings of shared gender there would be no issue at all. It's the appropriation and denial of sex based identities and experiences that is the reason cross sex pronouns are rejected by so many people including me.

Why have you used the word "persecuted"?

If a Christian asked me to pray with them and I refused no one would accuse me of persecution. If I aggressively tried to stop a Christian praying then they might be able to make that claim.

I'm not trying to stop anyone wearing a pronoun badge, I'm simply refusing to participate in the belief in gender. That is neither discrimination or persecution.

Ah @GrumpyPanda you're right but I wear a Rangers badge on my snorkle, my sons dad has George Best on his, pronouns are forcing an idealogy on others beyond expectations

Beautifully explained, @FlirtsWithRhinos.