Misgendering.

[FloralBunting]

I've been musing about this for some time, given that it's billed as almost the very worst thing you can do to some people.

I've been pondering why that is. Obviously there's surface level stuff about it not affirming or validating an identity.

But the offensive nature of it, as billed, is a really interesting idea that I am trying to get the the nub of.

It's been used as a comedy trope forever - Miranda being the most recent example that springs to mind. So I suppose there is an undercurrent of mockery, culturally speaking.

But why should being called by the pronouns of the opposite sex being a shameful or embarrassing thing? What are the psychologies in play here?

Women not being stereotypically feminine enough? Men not being manly? That's part and parcel of the comedy trope, and absolutely part of the gender binary that restricts everything.

What is nonsensical about the TRA attempted enforcement of pronoun usage is it's entirely the other way. The offence in the older version of getting someone's sex wrong was because you assumed their sex based on whether or not they confirmed to external stereotypes. If they didn't look sufficiently manly, they were female, which was a great insult for a man (which is probably the heart of why I find it distasteful - being assumed to be 'lesser' if thought of as female.)

But the newspeak offense of misgendering is not about mistaking someone for a sex they do not belong to. It's about correctly assessing their sex and then being shamed for noticing it.

'Tis probably too late to get any more clarity in my thinking here, but I'd be interested in your thoughts. ( Though I don't doubt at this late hour, I'll probably get some stirrers too).

R0wantrees - that crimes are being reported as committed by women when they are is shocking. If it continues (taken to a logical conclusion), the data could then be used for agendas where people would like to demonstrate that women commit fewer crimes and that women's' prisons now contain more violent criminals, so a self ID opposite gender person would not benefit from being placed in a women's' prison.

MyWeaponofChoiceisWords awful if they are doing it on purpose. Bit pathetic of them really!

I think it's quite common to do it on purpose Italian. It often is a power play.

O think o have led a bit of a sheltered life!

It's quite difficult for a junior person or someone who doesn't like confrontation to challenge this, especially if someone does it multiple times and you would have to keep picking them up on it every time.

If a bearded bro in sparkly wellies demands that I remember that the correct pronoun is they and not he it is a demand for emotional labour.

I am supposed to work to override my natural reaction to what my eyes are telling me, to pay attention, to give importance to the emotional well-being of someone to whom I would not normally give one iota of brain space.

I will perform emotional labour for someone I care about, for someone I know, at work, or if I believe that misgendering would cause pain to someone who is genuinely disphoric.

But the person in the sparkly wellies and those like him can fuck right off. It’s purely a power game and I refuse to play.

It is always about validation of a delusional belief. Why should anyone encountering someone who says something that is not true have to believe it too? I know that some people believe in something called God. I can be polite to them but if they wanted me to believe they were God, I would not do so..most of us are polite, but we are not going to validate the untruth that men are women or vice versa. It is not violence and for those of us that have been eg taken for male , in our lives, we mange to get over it as compared to the other stuff that happens to us as women it is a minor annoyance.

As with all of this, there are two things happening at once. One for genuine transsexuals, one for dominant men.

For the latter I totally agree that it's a powerplay and a demonstration of intimidation. But even for the former, their socialisation is impossible ignore.

How Bespin can claim that 99% of people gender them correctly without any pressure, when at the same time knowing that you will be thrown off almost every online forum for doing the same, is beyond me.

All it does is reinforce, to me at least, that power is exactly what it is. Because its denial is all part and parcel of it. It's gaslighting at worst and blind ignorance of privilege at best.

(left to right) Edward Lord & Gregor Murray

Both Lord and Murray identify as non-binary
Preferred pronouns are they /them

Both hold public positions and have/ had significant power & influence.

threads:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3316098-Childrens-Convenor-Elected-Councillor-calls-women-cunts-on-Twitter-rants

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3332582-Trans-councillor-leaves-roles-after-threats-to-life

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3323475-Surprise-The-Masons-now-welcome-Transwomen-but-not-women

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3320557-City-of-Londons-sneaky-Consultation-to-end-its-Single-Sex-Spaces-in-Sunday-Times

(left to right) Edward Lord & Gregor Murray

Both Lord and Murray identify as non-binary
Preferred pronouns are they /them

Both hold public positions and have/ had significant power & influence.

What have either of these two clowns done to justify their claims to specialness except make demands of others?
"I'm a feminist, I'm anti-patriarchy blah,blah,blah". But I'm not willing to actually give up any of my privilege - so I'll just demand that everyone use my chosen pronouns and there you go - job done, woke credentials established.

Edward Lord explained recently at Trans Pride Brighton:

"I am non-binary because I am a feminist; because I hate toxic masculinity; because I want to bring an end to patriarchy and misogyny; and because I feel love, affinity and solidarity for trans and queer siblings of whatever gender."

twitter.com/edwardlord/status/1020622342974734336

Funny how, despite the mention of feminism he doesn’t mention love for or solidarity with natal women. Ho-hum.

The use of "they" is all about feeling special, isn't it? The truth is, we could all insist on being called "they" (after all, we're all non-binary when it comes to gender), and then that would instantly remove the specialness from it.

There's something that I call "disgendering" and it has nothing to do with transphobia. Rather, it has everything to do with a refusal to validate particular transfemmes.

No-one has the right to insist on particular pronouns when they exhibit behaviour more associated with men. Tara Wolff is a case in point, where (I felt) the judge was wholly wrong in insisting that a strapping, violent man be given the courtesy of "she".

Disgendering is not unfair, or discriminatory, or hateful or any of those other words. It recognises that I will go along with a fiction, and the courtesies, for a small group of transexuals - so long as they are not a threat to me and other women.

But I have a need to maintain my boundaries - for my safety and for safeguarding others. I have a right to disgender a man who identifies as a woman but exhibits all the traits of the male sex.
That's not transphobic. That's me, protecting myself from the likes of Jess Bradley.

People who find it perfectly acceptable to refer to women as TERFs, bitches and cunts will derail conversations about heinous crimes, including murder and the rape of a child, to scream about the violence of misgendering the perpetrator.

Not only is misgendering violence, it is the worst violence. In fact, the actual violence committed cannot even be named unless everybody acquiesces to using the ‘correct’ pronouns. There is a very obvious move to make misgendering a moral failure and accepting that transwomen are women a moral imperative.

Funny how, despite the mention of feminism he doesn’t mention love for or solidarity with natal women. Ho-hum.

Edward Lord is possibly the furthest thing from a feminist that I can imagine right now.

I would not call a male by the wrong pronoun for his sex for many reasons:

1. It is based on a ideological belief.

I don’t believe in the ideology that men can be women, and will not reinforce the ideology by using the wrong pronoun for his sex.

1. It’s sexist.

A man does not become a woman because of how he dresses, or how he feels, or even if he has plastic surgeries. I think it is extremely sexist to suggest otherwise. I never liked it when drag queens referred to themselves as ‘she’, I always thought it was sexist and disrespectful to women and girls. So this idea of it being ‘disrespectful’ to refer to males by the correct pronoun for their actual sex, does not wash with me, I just consider it to be a manipulative reversal of the truth.

1. It can be part of a fetish.

We don’t have to look far on the net to see that many men openly admit to getting sexually aroused by being called the wrong pronoun for their sex. There is no way I am willingly participate in a men’s sexual fetish by calling him ‘she’ ‘her’ etc.

1. It is narcissistic.

The idea that others should validate their false idealised view of themselves is narcissistic and I am not willing to act as someone’s source of supply.

1. It is controlling and abusive.

Forcing someone go along with an ideology they don’t believe in, pretend they don’t think it is sexist when they do, participate in someone’s sexual fetish when they don’t want to, and validate someone’s false sense of their self, under-threat of consequences if they refuse, is controlling and abuse.

For these reasons I refuse to use the wrong pronouns for their sex, I would use their name at a push, but that is all.

We shouldn't forget that the term 'misgendering' has been stolen from butch lesbians and effeminate gay men.

The whole edifice of trans ideology is built on stealing the history and terms of intersex, black, lesbian, gay and transexual people.

R0wantrees

you have every right to misgender me

That's not true though is is? For example as a consequence of pressure from TRAs MN include as part of the new guidelines on this board:

I did not say it did not come with consequences you have the right to misgender me I can not stop you doing it, but that does not mean that if you did it here it would stand as there is a consequence to doing it on here. that's there to help this remain civil but you don't have to Respect that no one is making you. but I think you will find free speech does not mean free from consequences.

See, that's just sinister, Bespin. This isn't a free speech issue, this is about people being forced to lie.
But the fact that you have decided to frame it as a free speech issue, with the particular angle of the limits of free speech, is really quite disturbing, tbh.

Bespin I was commenting on your assertion to FloraBunting,

"you have every right to misgender me"

I gave a number of examples where clearly this assertion was not true this eg police, newspaper reporting of crime and also this forum.

At no point did I express a wish or intention to mispronoun/ misgender you.

give over FloralBunting you can choose not to conform to societal norms and agree social practices people do it all the time at no point is anyone making you conform to them you have a choice just like other people who don't use words or say things that people might find offensive you have the right not to lie as you see it what I am. pointing out is that others may not share. your view and ask you not to do it. they may have policies that ask you not to and set out the consequences of not doing so it. this is totally about if you want to follow social excepted current conventions on how people are addressed you don't want to and I have to respect that just as you will have to respect that I can ask you not to.

Bespin

You can ask. Of course you can. Be prepared for a "nope", though.

You can wave policies and guidance under our noses and threaten with legal action. And the answer will not only be "Nope", it will galvanise a grassroots resistance.

Grassroots resistance outside social media is what drives me, now.

See, that's just sinister, Bespin. This isn't a free speech issue, this is about people being forced to lie.
But the fact that you have decided to frame it as a free speech issue, with the particular angle of the limits of free speech, is really quite disturbing, tbh.

Agree.

They frame it as just being an issue of being polite or a free speech issue, which is disingenuous at best, and gaslighting at worse. Forcing people to use the wrong pronouns for someones sex, on threat of negative consequences if they don’t, is forcing people to lie and pretend they agree with an ideology when they don’t. It is forced compliance which is a regular feature of dictatorships.

this is totally about if you want to follow social excepted current conventions on how people are addressed you don't want to and I have to respect that just as you will have to respect that I can ask you not to.

This is the FWR board where we dispute the dominance/submission paradigm that you are insisting is the socially accepted current convention, despite the fact that it is not.