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).

I'm very sorry for not being as precise in my wording as I could have been. What I should have said to less ambiguously reflect my feelings on the matter is that I do not see it as a problem because the alternative (everyone being free to address others as they wish) is, in my opinion, much more harmful to women.

I would much rather be socially obligated to occasionally have to address biological males as if they were biological females and, at the same time, demand that (males in particular) not use terms such as darling or bird to address or describe me.

Out of interest, would you prefer a situation like we had some 20-30 years ago where you have to endure being addressed or described in derisive terms in exchange for being free to use whatever terms you want and, if not, how do you justify what seems to me like a double standard (If it's not, I'm genuinely interested in why it's not)? I understand that people have differing views on the matter but what I've read so far just describes why enforced protection against misgendering is unpleasant/potentially harmful, not how it differs from the aforementioned example.

I would much rather be socially obligated to occasionally have to address biological males as if they were biological females and, at the same time, demand that (males in particular) not use terms such as darling or bird to address or describe me.

It's not an either or situation. I'm not anyone's darling, so nobody has the right to call me that.

Female means something. Just because some males want everyone to pretend that it doesn't, doesn't make it true. As previous posters have said, being forced to call someone something they are not can be a sign of an abuse of power or forcing others to be part of a fetish.

Thank you, I think I understand the difference now. Along that line of reasoning, what about other pronouns, like Zie or Xir?

It's not an either or situation. I'm not anyone's darling, so nobody has the right to call me that.

This. It's completely different.

Along that line of reasoning, what about other pronouns, like Zie or Xir?

I don't think anyone should ever have to walk on eggshells around narcissists. It's manipulative controlling bullying. What possible reason is there for calling yourself those pronouns, and why would other people have to go along with it?

I would much rather be socially obligated to occasionally have to address biological males as if they were biological females and, at the same time, demand that (males in particular) not use terms such as darling or bird to address or describe me.

Wouldn't that be great?

Progress so far shows new derogatory pejoratives have been devised to use against women who are transphobic if they object to being called cis or terf and women are expected to do as they are told with regard to preferred pronouns.
8th rule of misogyny: Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are.

I'm not an expert on transgender issues but my understanding is that it signifies a separation from binary gender options, in other words, both recognising their differences without encroaching on biological female space.

I agree that walking on eggshells is unfair but, when misunderstandings are accounted for, it doesn't seem like bullying in the way enforced use of he and she does.

it doesn't seem like bullying in the way enforced use of he and she does.

What bullies enforce the use of 'he' and 'she'? Who bullied Shakespeare? Austen? The Pankhursts? Victoria Wood?

I agree that walking on eggshells is unfair but, when misunderstandings are accounted for, it doesn't seem like bullying in the way enforced use of he and she does.

Well it might not to you, no. I think the whole concept of non binary is unmitigated nonsense perpetuated by confused teenagers, controlling narcissists or people with other mental health issues. I am not sure, as I have said, why my feelings and distress about coercive control as a DV survivor would be less important than their need for validation and control.

With the greatest of respect, Gronky, I don't think you grasp the issue.

With the greatest of respect, Ereshkigal, I'm trying to, through a discussion. If that is not in keeping with the nature of this forum then I will cease to discuss.

Regarding you being a DV survivor, I'm very sorry that you have had to endure such abuse but I would have hoped that you would understand how important a sense of self and validation of your identity from others is to mental well-being. I appreciate your efforts to educate me on the harmful enforced use of traditional pronouns but I respectfully disagree that it's fair to dismiss newer pronouns out of hand.

No one cares what you call yourself. It is the insistence that others submit to your demands because your validation depends on other people's obedience to you where the red flags for abuse start flying.

What do you call a genderfluid person who is whoever they say they are on any given day? Big red flag right there.
Trying to convince women who have experienced domestic abuse that the validation of the perp is something they need to commit to is
a bug mistake, Gronky.

My apologies for the cat typing.

What do you call a genderfluid person who is whoever they say they are on any given day?

Perhaps it would be better to ask them. I now understand that appropriation of purely biological female pronouns is a form of imposition (and I appreciate the provided explanations) but it still seems to me that using alternative pronouns is within the same realm of logic as expecting others to address a biological female by common respectful pronouns as a signifier of validation by others.

My apologies for the cat typing

Please don't apologise. The meaning was clear and we're all fallible.

Gronky you contradict yourself in the same paragraph. Damn right it's an "imposition". I am a woman, they aren't. It is not the same. It is controlling behaviour to make me use the language of a harmful belief system I don't subscribe to.

Trying to convince women who have experienced domestic abuse that the validation of the perp is something they need to commit to is a bug mistake, Gronky.

Thank you. I don't need any more gaslighting, thanks.

Regarding you being a DV survivor, I'm very sorry that you have had to endure such abuse but I would have hoped that you would understand how important a sense of self and validation of your identity from others is to mental well-being.

Please don't lecture me on how you think I should feel.

It seems we're at something of an impasse. I appreciate your input regarding the use of traditional pronouns but I must again respectfully disagree with your assessment of alternative pronouns. Please do enjoy what remains of the weekend and thank you for a somewhat edifying discussion.

"Alternative pronouns" are if anything worse. Why do you feel the need to pander to narcissism?

Please don't lecture me on how you think I should feel.

I would never presume to lecture or even instruct someone on how they should feel, in this case I merely conveyed what I hoped you would understand.

I guess I don't. Bad me.

What do you call a genderfluid person who is whoever they say they are on any given day?
An abusive controlling jerk.

Why do you feel the need to pander to narcissism?

Personally, I don't view it as narcissism. Rather, I view it as an attempt to create an identity and, unlike appropriation of existing biological identities, I see it as an attempt at compromise.

I guess I don't. Bad me.

Not understanding something doesn't inherently make you a bad person. As I said, I won't direct you or anyone else how to feel but I sincerely wish you didn't feel bad about it.

Is it supposed to sound smarmy?