Pronouns

[VincentVanLowe]

Can mumsnet please clarify, will posts be deleted if they do not use a person's 'preferred pronouns'?

The idea that people can choose their pronouns is very new and specific to the ideology of transgender activists in English speaking Western culture. I do not share this ideology and I use pronouns in the generally accepted, historically consistent, biologically accurate way. As far as I am aware it is not illegal to use pronouns this way, and certainly the general population, medical doctors, academics and other groups continue to use pronouns in the usual way rather than in the way currently popular amongst trans activists and tumblr bloggers. So - is it acceptable for us to choose not to use 'preferred pronouns' if it conflicts with our own ethical frameworks?

Many thanks.

I wouldn't be horrible to David Cameron in person either, but he's still a knob and more importantly he's wrong about almost everything

Ha I think everyone can agree on that!

Not sure i can agree i'd be polite to his face, that seems a bit of a stretch

I find it baffling that this is even an issue.

It is really not difficult to use someone's preferred pronouns. It's basic politeness. Don't be a dickhead about it. It's not hard.

Ok ugh - so if someone white 'identified' as black, and wanted everyone to refer to them as such, and insisted that everyone say 'black woman Jane Smith says....' in front of all their quotes, whilst claiming to speak for black people and racism issues etc (having experienced none of them) you'd think this was just fine?

And if said black people said 'actually, we find this pretty offensive. Black isn't a feeling - please stop appropriating us' what would you think then? Should they just suck it up and let the white pretender have their own way, regardless of how offensive it is?

It's exactly the same.

If there was a group of people doing what Rachael Dolezal did, they would be a minority group. Would that make a difference?

So, paris lees says "actually i find catcalling fantastic"...

Trans-racial person says "not only do i identify as black, but i find it empowering when you call me nigger, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong"

Okay, non?

Yes Flora, that's the question. I am baffled if MNHQ's position is defined solely on popularity of the issue and not on the principle at stake.

I am identifying as a dolphin. Please prefix any reference to me appropriately.

as if anyone would mention me

Are you a dolphin pursued by a bear then, or exit pursued by a dolphin? Or perhaps the dolphin formerly known as exit pursued by a bear?

The dolphin is implied.

Can you not see it ?

Oh well. Your loss.

exit if you're a dolphin now, won't the bear chasing you get wet? Does it think you're a large salmon? Too. Many. Questions.

🚪🐻🐬

OhShutUpThomas
The problem here, is that there really is no difference between what Dolezal did, and what transgender people are doing.

I'm not sure how you can make that claim. Gender dysphoria is a recognised condition, with resources and treatment available to support those who want it. The term might be recent but the condition isn't. Rachel Dolezal is one person, who as far as I'm aware, does not have a recognised condition, or at least not one known to the public. There seem to be no other examples of those who have done something similar. Without more information, you are not in a position to say there is no difference between the two.

On the subject of pronouns - it's possible to avoid using them altogether. I think it's pretty unpleasant and unnecessary to e.g. refer to a transwoman as he.

I think it's unnecessary to get married, unpleasant to put ketchup on chips, and impolite to call round someones house without phoning first. But I'm not calling for anyone to be banned for these things and it would be ridiculous to make them illegal.

The question is - are we (and should we be) free to decide whether or not we agree with trans ideology and express ourselves accordingly?

Whether anyone thinks it's a bit off in their personal opinion is irrelevant.

I'm a bit confused.

I was on the NUS thread at the start and used the phrase 'bloke in a dress'.

Then later on I came back to the thread to read that other posters were complaining that their post which used this/a similar phrase were deleted.

So I checked mine but it was still there.

So did my use of that phrase stand because :

1. it was missed
2. it was a statement of fact
3. it wasn't deemed to be malicious
4. it was aimed at an individual rather than a whole minority group

I've not been on mn trans threads before so didn't realise how contentious the use of language was in this topic on this forum.

Re "recognised conditions" - so the important element is that the psychiatrists or whatever recognise the condition?

Cos trans activists have been lobbying for transgender to not be viewed as a medical condition. And I'm pretty sure people who call themselves 'transabled' do have a recognised condition. And, since the number of people identifying as another race seems to be climbing and getting more extreme (see: the guy who had tons of cosmetic surgery to 'look Korean'), ditto people who identify as animals (see: the woman who got cosmetic surgery to look like a cat), if these aren't recognised disorders it can surely only be a matter of time. And there are definitely a growing number of tumblr blogs and online communities dedicated to both, and they both claim to be oppressed minorities - so when do we start changing our laws to recognise them?

Rachel Dolezal is one person, who as far as I'm aware, does not have a recognised condition, or at least not one known to the public. There seem to be no other examples of those who have done something similar.

Michael Jackson?

Seriously, there have been many instances of people trying to pass as a different race over the years.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_(racial_identity)

If i refer to A Random Celeb bloke as female (for whatever reason), will i be deleted for misgendering? Its no more true than referring to a transwoman as female. Or are only trans-people protected by the mis-gendering rules?

Okay, this person has just been convicted of murder and is awaiting sentencing, and the decision as to whether they ought to be detained in a men's or women's prison.

What do you think? Are we happy to say 'she'? The name is Claire Darbyshire btw, and they have been a 'woman' since 2008.

I refer to people the way they want to be referred to. I've seen someone burst into tears because someone referred to her with the wrong pronoun.

hennifer he also has a conviction for a sexual offence. Not that you would know it from the reporting, which conspicuously doesn't mention that he is male, and that he broke into a woman's house and used his penis to wank into her underwear. From this article you would believe it was a woman - why wouldn't you?

www.barkinganddagenhampost.co.uk/news/crime-court/five_year_restraining_order_placed_on_dagenham_woman_who_soiled_friend_s_knickers_1_2259110

bathsheba I don't feel the need to be polite to murderous sex offenders and use their preferred pronouns.

"I refer to people the way they want to be referred to. I've seen someone burst into tears because someone referred to her with the wrong pronoun."

So if I cry when someone uses the female pronoun for a male person, they should stop doing it?

Hermione in that case, I'd agree with you, I thought the OP was speaking more generally, not about that particular case.