Pronouns annoyance

[crochetmonkey74]

I support every human being having the right to be who they are. This is not a bashing thread but I do want views on this.
Today , my friend messaged something about a non binary celeb. I replied with "I like him I think he's great" she then sent a text lecture about misgendering.
I actually didn't do it deliberately. My thoughts are these though: how can you insist on how others (who you will never hear or even know about) talk about you?
I agree with referring to people however they want you to in real life of course, am I just being a grumpy old bag? I genuinely want to get better at understanding the pronoun thing. What are your thoughts?

I would compare it to whether you feel ok to speak about black people using the n word, or speak about how "crazy" your bipolar friend is behind their back

Some people would do both and would intentionally misgender others behind their back. I would rather not do.----

I would compare it to whether you feel ok to speak about black people using the n word

Why? That's a ridiculous comparison. A racist slur isn't the same as using a sex based pronoun the way they're intended to be used.

‘You said a pale person cannot be racially black.’ I did not say anything of the sort. You must have difficulty with comprehension or are deranged.
Medicine does not change our biology. Your sex can’t be changed.

It’s a completely different thing- although there is a narrative that’s being pushed that tries to equate these things.

Being a different race doesn’t affect anyone, being gay doesn’t affect anyone. gender ideology affects women’s hard fought for rights. It’s not about a 13 year old convinced they’re born in the wrong body, transrights is an extremely misogynistic movement who concentrate on controlling a silencing women.

Totally outrageous comparisons. It’s not the same at all. A man in a dress is still a man and calling him her is in no way equivalent to using offensive language to black people.

No, you're right. It was someone else I was responding to and had quoted who had said a pale person cannot be racially black. Since you responded to that post, I mistakenly assumed it was you.

But then you did say it's grossly insulting to say that race is a social construct when a) it's not insulting at all and b) it is a social construct since there is no biological basis

But if someone doesn’t believe in gay marriage they don’t have to call a gay married couple spouses?? It’s not legally mandated. The state recognises the marriage, all public bodies do and gay marriages have the same protection under law as straight marriages. You can’t compel people to say things they don’t mean though. It’s not an apt comparison at all.

There's nothing 'respectful' about coercing people to ignore the evidence of their eyes and ears.

There's nothing respectful about compelled speech.

There is no equivalence with homophobia or racism.

There is only the truth.

I said it was grossly offensive to base your idea that race is a social construct on the racist ideas of a racist system. The racist ideas are the offensive bit, Christ.

Ah I get you- all words are meaningless and can just be changed on a whim. If all words are meaningless why do people get so upset if people call Sam Smith “he” surely it’s just a word with a fluent meaning? Presumably I can decide myself what a word means? I mean the downside the whole system of communication built up over thousands of years collapses but heh ho, at least I’m being respected- but then I could change the meaning of respect to “behaving like an absolute twat”. Maybe I could change the word “transgender” to be a synonym for “unicorn”. Actually this is fun, let’s undermine the whole English language

It's insulting to recognise racism for what it is? What a bizarre thought.
Race is a social construct. Racism comes out of that. Absolutely nothing insulting or offensive about that. In fact, it's insulting to insinuate that racism has a biological basis. It doesn't, humans created it.

Also it's not my idea that race is a social construct. It is a fact that is 100% backed up by scientific evidence.
It's the nazis (for example) who believed that there was a genetic basis to race.

They also don't have to use pronouns they don't want to use either. Just would be very offensive to those affected. Same as a refusal to recognise a gay married couple as such.
Is use of different pronouns legally mandated?
As an aside, i live in a country where someone's own gender determines the langauge they use (way beyond pronouns). It would be very weird if you didn't reply to that person using the same gendered language that they use for themselves. In a way, it makes the identification easier. But they're also more easy going about third gender and have traditionally recognised gender fluidity., not a new thing here.

What other people thing about us is none of our concern.

The pronoun police would be well off remembering this. Use them/they if you want by all means, but do resisted being the theys pronoun enforcement brigade. Horrible behaviour.

Think- not thing

Wouldn't it be "fisherhe" (can't believe we are even discussing this ). He is the subject pronoun and him the object.

Although man is a noun so really there's no equivalent so it should be "fisher person".

Oh who cares.

Fisherman is a funny one. We can neutralise police officer, fire fighter but fisher person feels all wrong.

I don't see these as the same issue though. Neutralising terms where the default was always male to terms that include both sexes - police officer for example- is kind of the opposite of making everyone use non sexed pronouns.

Also assuming someone's pronouns is just nuts and ends up with people talking about women with short hair, or men with dangly earrings being theyed or asked what their pronouns are. Which reveals just how sexist & cultish the whole pronoun thing is.

this is such a minefield. My BFF has a 30 something child who grew up alongside my D.C. This now adult child is over 6ft tall, weighs over 100 kg and has transitioned from male to female. After playing rugby for over 10 years at county level against other natal men against whom they were physically equally matched she has made a valid choice but it doesn't change her biological history.

I completely respect this persons choice. I will address them by their new chosen name and pronouns. But is it fair she/they can now compete in sports against my 5ft tall, 55kg natal women children? To equate her life experience and physical prowess to that of a natal woman is a denial of reality.

I'm all for trans equality but equality doesn't mean identical. We need to acknowledge this and accommodate reality.

Absolutely well said. Such a thought provoking post.

No it's not fair. Of course it's not.

But by going along with the ridiculous notion that this man has magicked himself into a woman, you are complicit in promoting this unfairness I'm afraid.

It must be difficult as this is your friends adult child. But do look into AGP. /autogynophilia. You might find some clarity as to what is going on. And feel better equipped to deal with it.

I support every human being having the right to be who they are.

But not enough to use their chosen pronouns?

It’s absolutely ridiculous and I won’t be calling anyone they/them ze/zir fur/cur mur/wur (ok I’m taking the piss) whatever other made up rubbish these snowflakes are spouting. It’ll be she or he.

Compelling the speech of others is authoritarian- it's not progressive.

I don’t believe it’s progressive and I refuse to indulge in it myself. But I’m not going to delude myself or other by throwing around old tropes like ‘I support everyone’ ‘be who you want’ ‘wear what you want’. That sounds abusive and part of the problem. Pick a side and stand for it. But don’t lie to me.

Gaslighting bollocks.

Who has the actual time for this fantasy?

I want my youngsters to know what a man and a woman is. I won't be coerced into lying.