Great British Pottery Throwdown - pronouns

[TheSilveryTinsellyPussycat]

Has anyone noticed that AJ has "they, their, theirs" as their preferred pronouns? It seems to work fine, though it still gives me a moment's pause when the voice-over says things like "AJ is moving their pot into the drying room," or the subtitles say THEY LAUGH instead of SHE LAUGHS.

They (the potters) were making animal related items this week, and they (AJ) called the creature they (AJ) were making: "him."

It's the first time I've come across this particular pronoun choice in real life, so was interested to see how it works in practice.

would suggest every person in existence is non-binary
Totally agree with this. I suppose where I’m coming from is understanding why a young woman would want to renounce she/her (or any age woman, really). I wish they wouldn’t feel that was necessary but accept that they do. General ‘they’, not specifically AJ.
That society is more prepared to accept that a person can change biological sex rather than accept gender as a repressive instrument is the mystery to me as a gender critical woman.

I get why any woman would want to opt out of the gendered stereotypes typically inflicted on women, but to me opting out of sexed pronouns equates with messaging that you're opting out of your sex which is neither possible, nor a desirable message. Owning our female sex while asserting our right to not conform with gendered stereotypes is a much more powerful and progressive stance.

It makes me sad to see young women doing this even though I understand why they are doing it.

I thought the energy around the self sculpture task was fantastically interesting. I felt it as intensely feminine, and noticed one of them said “thanks, girls” in a group hug…. It’s interesting to wonder if there would have been a very different vibe if the group remained mixed sex.
and don’t start me on bloody Rose’s long skirts. Health and safety nightmare, apart from anything else

I honestly think pronouns draw more attention to the actual sex of the person.

That annoying thing where when you're told not to think of something or laugh, you do.

“Worth remembering that the reductionist notion that if you’ve “got female bits” you are therefore a woman, actually excludes women like Christine who’ve had a mastectomy, as though that makes them “less woman””
This is a disgraceful comment.
I am glad that you have found a peaceful way of living your life but DO NOT DARE suggest that women like Christine are ho has lost a breast, or women like me who are facing the removal of every single part of the female reproductive system are in ANY WAY less women. My bald head is that of a woman. My broad shoulders are those of a woman. My big feet are those of a woman. Every. Single. Cell. Of. My. Body is that of a woman and always will be.

You have chosen to see yourself as magically outside of the binary, with the faint, unpleasant suggestion that the rest of us less enlightened folk somehow ‘embrace’ the stereotypes that are what makes up femininity and masculinity: good for you but, again, DON’T YOU DARE suggest that I am so other women who don’t fit your stereotypes are less than 100% women.

You literally repeated the trope that “ if you’ve “got female bits” you are therefore a woman”. This is a deliberate TRA misrepresentation of the GC position.

And IWD has no place for people who identify as women. Women is born, not worn.

If being you believe that being non binary doesn’t “map onto your biology”, why are you involved in IWD?

What does IWD have to do with anyone who identifies as a woman but is not a woman? What do they share with women?

I just find the use of 'they' as a pronoun really confusing as I have to have a mental halt every time it comes up to work out if it is referring to one person or more than one person.

It's like that thing where you have to read a list of colour names but say out loud what colour they are printed in.

I find it irritating and confusing. I do use it when trying to anonymise the sex of someone but I try not to. I still sneak in the odd s/he.

And 'They are' sounds odd but so does 'they is'.

It saddens me that women can't even have a day to ourselves to draw attention to our oppression and celebrate our achievements anymore :(

Regardless of pronouns I just wanted to say that AJ is a phenomenal potter. Technically strong with a brilliant sense of design. One of the best they've ever had I'd say.

'they' is a nightmare at work when trying to be accurate about who does what. I have a team member who is a 'they' so it ends up being 'steve wrote a report and they added a section' and then people say 'oh ok who was working with Steve?' no one, steve is plural Steve. So at best things get muddled, at worst everyone ends up sounding deranged.

@Picklepots82
I have absolutely no doubt of your genuine desire not to offend anyone and that your intention in posting was a positive one. But your lack of understanding truly surprises me.

I am always respectful when interacting with people when it comes to my language. But accepting that an individual can choose/ change their pronouns requires the acceptance that pronouns reflect gender not sex. Anx I do not believe in gender other than as a steretypical social construct. So asking me to use pronouns that reflect something other than biology is asking me to deny what I believe.

I'm (quite a bit) older than you and I have a dd aged 17. When she was born I felt optimistic that her world might be less restricted by sexist stereotyping than mine had been starting in the 60s. I was thrilled that Eddie Izzard challenged male stereotyping in his clothing and make up "They're not women's clothes - they're mine!" was such an important and powerful statement. Women had been actively challenging sterotypes and discrimination for decades but very few men were doing likewise.

I thought dd would grow up being confident knowing she could play with whatever toys she chose, wear what she liked, choose to work in whatever field interested her (and be paid the same as her male counterparts), love and marry who she chose etc. I thought her male peers would take the baton and break the restrictions of clothing and be wearing garments that they loved and fitted the occasion- skirts, trousers, gowns, suits whatever! That makeup would be a choice for men and women, that domestic roles would be shared and occupations equally remunerated. That boys would no longer be told to 'man up' when expressing emotion.

But I find that she's faced with a world that increasingly tells her that being a woman is about how you feel and present yourself! Eddie Izzard now maintains he is non binary and has 'girl' mode and 'boy' mode. And those modes fall into stereotypical patterns. Girl mode he wears makeup and talks about feelings and boy mode he makes millions acting (male roles) and producing.

Those who feel uncomfortable with stereotypical expectations are increasingly encouraged to escape the dilemma by giving themselves an alternative label and change their pronouns.

And at first glance that may seem like a good thing to do - if it makes people feel better, why not?

Because the implications of following that route are far reaching and devastating both for individuals and the populace as a whole. And it has all happened without debate or challenge because of aggressive opposition to discussion from the likes of Stonewall.

Sportswomen are facing the prospect of losing to competitors with the advantages of male physicality.

Medicine risks confusion and miscommunication because science is taking second place to sensitivities.

Safeguarding children and vulnerable women is compromised. Not because trans individuals are an inherent danger but because the process of accepting gender self identification over sex makes safeguarding less secure.

We live in a world where a female survivor of rape is asked to leave a support group because she wasn't comfortable with a man being part of the group. He identified as female but his male physicality was triggering and traumatising for the woman. His right to self identify into the group (despite having the option of a dedicated group for trans individuals) trumped her need for a safe, single sex environment. She had to leave.

You state that mastectomy does not alter a woman being a woman. I agree. A woman who has had a double mastectomy is still a woman regardless of how she identifies.

I don't wish to actively hurt individuals so will continue to be respectful in my language. But I will continue to challenge the belief system that promotes the notion of gender over the biology of sex.

But I don't believe in gender.

Oops that last sentence is unnecessary

Worth remembering that the reductionist notion that if you’ve “got female bits” you are therefore a woman, actually excludes women like Christine who’ve had a mastectomy, as though that makes them “less woman”.

No one who is gender critical says that. Ever. It is often assigned to gender critical opinion but we talk about sex, chromosomes and not physical appearance and presentation.