Common courtesy, a non-malicious question from a transgender person

[WhiteFlagHeldAloft]

Hello,

I wanted to ask a question that perhaps some of you may have an answer for. This is not intended to be malicious in any way, or to incite a flame war.

I am another person among many who identifies as transgender. My chromosomes are XY, I lived out my childhood and adolescence as a boy and began taking estrogen and testosterone suppressors at age 18. I identify as a woman and ask that others respect me in that identity. I am in a relationship with a woman who identifies as a lesbian, she was born and has lived her entire life as a woman.

I feel the need to clarify who I am before asking my question as the answer to this question is very relevant to me. I rarely leave me and my partners home, and without fail avoid any kind of sex-segregated environment as much as I can. I work from home, so don't have to do much there. I am not a part of any activism. I am not a vocal member of any kind of community, and avoid social media like a plague ridden rat. I have only ever engaged in sexual contact with my present partner, and for fear that I would not be accepted by her I was never the one to initiate such contact. I understand and uphold consent as a universal necessity, particularly as I have experienced sexual violence myself as an adult.

Alright, that's me. There's a lot more to me than that, but for the purposes of the topic at hand I feel its relevant to state the above.

Why is it okay to not be respectful of my wishes with regards to my identity and how am I spoken to? Why is a simple request regarding language when talking to me such an unreasonable demand? Is it not a common courtesy to be respectful towards someone who is being respectful of you? Whenever I mention that I am transgender and was not born a woman, a lot of gender critical people i encounter immediately start referring to me as a man even when they had been referring to me as a woman before. Over the years and pre pandemic I used to occasionally frequent LGBT spaces and still frequent some private LGBT groups online.

I'm not claiming anything about my biology or genetics or trying to argue that ive somehow changed my genetic makeup. I'm upfront about who I am. I have no recourse in situations where someone just decides to remind me in every sentence of how I was born. It might seem stupid, trivial, ludicrous even that it hurts me but it does. I am very aware of how I was born. I am very aware that I am different. I hate everything about how I was born. To be reminded of that constantly, sometimes even aggressively is mentally and emotionally exhausting. I don't understand why, its not as though its so hard to refer to me respectfully. You don't even have to agree with me, you can think I'm crazy or insane or delusional or whatever else. But at the end of the day its still a slight change in how you speak to me. Benign, and inconsequential to you maybe but to me it isn't.

Theres so much hatred in this discussion I feel like its become so polarized to that point that the lives of unrelated individual people are being dragged through the mud for no reason. I don't want to change your opinions on my identity or convince you of anything. I dont want to hurt anyone or make anyone uncomfortable. I just want to be allowed to exist and engage with other people who will respect me. That's all.

So, to reiterate, why is it okay to just outright not afford me common courtesy? Why is it encouraged, even endorsed, by many gender critical people to not give me that respect? I havent done anything to gender critical people. Im not even involved in any kind of activism or social media. I've been dragged into this unwillingly. I just want to live my life and feel free to frequent LGBT spaces where I won't be harassed by virtue of my very existence and nothing at all to do with the content of my character.

This is coming from a cisgendered straight woman who understands basic empathy and respect.

No you don't, as evidenced by your use of "cis" on this forum.

That's neither empathetic or respectful.

My sex does not require a prefix that subjugates me as a sub class of being woman.

You may not "get it", but someone who is a nice person will use the preferred pronouns anyway.

Can you not see the irony here? As women we are socialised to please people.

You come to a feminist forum and tell us to be "nice"......

Do you agree women should be able to vote?

Do you think the suffragette movement should have been "nicer"?

Do you think in response to the hostility of TRA's we should just say nothing and let woman's rights be eroded? #BeKindToMen....

Goodness me you're naive.

You're making moral judgments on a persons worth based on the factual language used to refer to a persons sex when used when that person is not even in situ? That's when you use pronouns - to refer to a person who is not "there".

In person you use names or "you". In their absence you say "she/he went to the shop" and you think to control that language is "nice"?

How is that different from me saying "when not in my presence you must never say anything I perceive as negative about me"?

Anything. Anything negative at all. EVER.

Can you not see how controlling that line of thinking is?

Can you see how that slides into totalitarianism?

It's the antithesis of nice.

Just do a quick online search of how many oppressive regimes suppress language and dissent in both public and private.

I someone demands asks that I call a male “she”, I am not being asked to respect their ideology, I’m being asked to take part in it, like being asked to pray when I don’t believe in a god. No thank you.

I have no problem calling someone Mary, who was previously known as Martin. I have no problem referring to someone as “she”, when I’ve grown up with them being a “he”.

What I do have a problem with is how women have no say in who enters female only spaces. For example, my 13 year old GD is a member of a local theatre group. Within this theatre there are two changing rooms - one male, one female. Why should my teenage GD and her friends have to share a space with anyone who is not female? Why can’t Transwomen use the male changing room?

Why do Transwomen think their rights trump the rights of women/girls?

Babdoc - Why would you assume in the analogy below that the Christian doesn't understand Islam but respects the belief? What if the Christian understands Islam but disagrees with its tenets? Or do you think the GC position really doesn't understand transgenderism?

@flygirl1983

Babdoc - Why would you assume in the analogy below that the Christian doesn't understand Islam but respects the belief? What if the Christian understands Islam but disagrees with its tenets? Or do you think the GC position really doesn't understand transgenderism?

Sorry- message was meant for motheroffour824

You need to give an example of how they referencing you a man ??

You know, I think many people for a long time would as a matter of courtesy simply accepted the "social facts" they were given about someone in most settings, even if they knew there was something funny about it. In part simply from a MYOB perspective.

ut there were a few caveats with that, though unspoken, one being that there was no implication as to what, when accepting those social uses, one had to believe. I could use words and seemingly accept Joan was a woman socially, whatever that means, without it implying anything about my private belief, or that it should imply anything about it. And in fact, in most cases I wouldn't speculate too much about Joan because is wasn't my business.

But that two way street, where we stay out of people's business, has been destroyed. It now wants to invade my beliefs and actions in a much more significant way, so that's a problem. If being polite and minding your business begins to mean that you have to accept certain ideologies that is a different kettle of fish.

And what's more, there are now, supposedly on the basis of that earlier sense of politeness, demands that there be concrete policy changes that affect a lot of people. Women in particular, but also children, that affect the shape of the law, etc. Some of these might be totally justified, but even if so, this is well beyond a myob situation, it needs to be discussed in a clear way using clear language and people need to set out their boundaries and what they think is true.

All that being the case, of course it becomes increasingly impossible to simply use the old call people what they ask to be called approach, at least not in every situation without weighing the implications. If you do, you are basically accepting all kinds of questionable things that are being attached to that action.

Essentially as soon as a political project is attached to using preferred pronouns, it becomes a problem to use them unless you are really on board with that political program. I always feel like the people who should be taken to task for the change is those who have attached it to things like de-funding shelters for women who have been raped or putting women with male genitals in women's prisons, rather than feminists. Why not ask them why they want to make things impossible?

This is such a piss poor analogy. You're acting like someone who is trans is a bloody Avon rep for choosing an alternative gender. The correct analogy would be, in your case, that a Christian wouldn't demand someone who subscribes to Islam to call their god "God". You treat people of different faiths with respect - you accept that you do not understand their beliefs but respect their wishes. This is the same with gender pronouns. You may not "get it", but someone who is a nice person will use the preferred pronouns anyway.

This is coming from a cisgendered straight woman who understands basic empathy and respect.

I think that the analogy that you are critiquing was correct and your analogy fails to convey the degree of coercion that OP is exhibiting. Because like the original poster, you have conveniently left out what happens when everyone acquiesces and the changes become embedded.

And frankly your reference to Avon reps is also ludicrous. On all levels. At what point do ‘Avon reps’ demand significant law changes to prioritise their own group- door to door sales people that are involved in multi-level marketing ? They are covered by the same laws as all sales people. Although they have protections in place specific to MLM that are also part of anti-fraud legislation. They still have to abide by all the laws every other door to door sales person has to abide by. They certainly should not be allowed, for instance to enter someone’s home without permission, or to apply undue pressure on someone to purchase, or even to accept an Avon facial or make up session.

No. Perhaps you have only thought about this issue superficially, hence you are actually missing the mark with your comments.

And none of us care one iota about your ‘cisgendered straight’ status. It is also irrelevant.

And that superficiality means you fail to grasp the significance and repercussions of that ‘basic empathy and respect’ being demanded. It is in fact, not ‘basic’ at all (which is the entire point and a fallacy). That it in addition, it should be going both ways, and is not.

The analogy of demanding active and adherent participation is the correct analogy. That is what is demanded and the result of the demands.

Could it be that you have let the Avon rep in, hosted a party for them, encouraged all your friends and family to have facials and then convinced them to join up as future hosts, allowed that Avon rep to pass your name on to the Amway distributor too.

All under the guise of being ‘basically empathetic and respectful’? Without realising just where you fit in the scheme? And when you realise the products really are not that great, you now cannot stop the party bookings you have made with each and every one of your friends and family who you agreed to have parties for, without losing that relationship.

I mean, Avon products are probably good, but are they worth it in comparison to products of similar quality? And are they worth the cost ultimately?

Now imagine if you were contractually obligated to have those parties because the Avon reps worked to get the laws changed to offer them better protection than other sales people… and that you have now retrospectively signed up to host parties for each of them while you are still alive.

That even while you were ill, at your lowest financially or emotionally, even on holiday. The law changes mean there is no respite from that contractual agreement.

Oh…. And that contract gets passed onto your children too. And their children. You have just signed them up for perpetuity

And by the way, I have nothing against Avon reps OR trans people. But I do not believe that it is respectful to command someone to do something when that someone has a greater understanding of where that action leads or how it is being used by the group demanding it. And I certainly don’t respond to pressure to conform when, hypocritically, the action itself is about not ‘conforming’ for that person demanding it.

Or their allies, even those who have inadvertently become allied.

Essentially as soon as a political project is attached to using preferred pronouns, it becomes a problem to use them unless you are really on board with that political program.

Just read this. And yes, anyone denying the political value of this action has either an agenda or lacks the depth of knowledge to see the political machinations behind it.

The correct analogy would be, in your case, that a Christian wouldn't demand someone who subscribes to Islam to call their god "God". You treat people of different faiths with respect - you accept that you do not understand their beliefs but respect their wishes. This is the same with gender pronouns. You may not "get it", but someone who is a nice person will use the preferred pronouns anyway.

Christians, Muslims and Jews only believe in one God who therefore must be the same God. They disagree on how God interacts and relates to people and through people - so for Christians Jesus is the Son of God but for Muslims he is a prophet. There is no way a Muslim would recite the Nicene Creed and no way a Christian would recite the shahada regardless of how 'nice' they are. These are statements of faith. In the same way using pronouns like thus is a statement of faith and any demand that we use them is a refusal to accept our faith. They represent a coercive forcing of people to abide by a faith they do not hold. Insisting people use them is about as nice as the Spanish Inquisition.

This is coming from a cisgendered straight woman

So as a genderist you are demanding to be nice people must do as you say and follow the precepts of your faith? Isn't that rather bigoted?

This is coming from a cisgendered straight woman who understands basic empathy and respect.

But not when it comes to other women it seems. I see you've packaged yourself up nicely in a box there as requested, in order to make yourself a subset of woman. What next? How far will you go in order to display your womanly empathy to those who, ultimately do not care for you, only for what they can take from you?

Good posts Helleofabore

The word " invasion" has been used a few times and it struck me each time as its just so appropriate. Hostile or benign, an invasion is an invasion. It requires the invaded to be subsumed, for their way of life to be eliminated and the invaders way of life to replace it. Whether they were welcome or not. During some of these past invasions, there were active collaborators, but there was always a resistance too. This is a war on women, females, and if you're too ignorant to see that then you are a collaborator.

This is coming from a cisgendered straight woman

It makes no difference if it's coming from a frost gendered vegan Libra.

You educate yourself. You understand. There's a whole thread here of women patiently explaining, reasoning, expressing their half of the conversation. Start there and try actually reading it.

It must surely be dawning that this relying entirely on what amounts to 'do what I say you stupid meanie heads (stamp)' is really not working. Women have been really quite staggeringly patient considering the ruddy awful behaviour and treatment they've been drenched with by this political lobby.

It's past time that the lobby started doing some leg work themselves, and started re thinking their own issues with intolerance, prejudice and an absolute inability to listen to or show willingness to compromise with anyone else.

"You treat people of different faiths with respect - you accept that you do not understand their beliefs but respect their wishes. This is the same with gender pronouns. You may not "get it", but someone who is a nice person will use the preferred pronouns anyway."

Firstly, what respect is being shown to women and girls of faith who can no longer use their own single sex spaces if they become mixed sex by accepting Males in them?
Secondly, my wish is to not have my speech compelled or to deny reality.

Surely a nice person would understand these points and respect them?

Ahhh damn it.

Could it be that you have let the Avon rep in, hosted a party for them, encouraged all your friends and family to have facials and then convinced them to join up as future hosts, allowed that Avon rep to pass your name on to the Amway distributor too.

Should be

Could it be that you have let the Avon rep in, hosted a party for them, encouraged all your friends and family to have facials and then convinced them to join up as future hosts, AND then convince them all to become future distributors/sales reps themselves. And allowed that Avon rep to pass your name on to the Amway distributor too.

(Note: you know how it works, for each party the hostess gets bigger rewards the more sales, future parties they get at their parties and I imagine a huge bonus if those leads adds the next layer of pyramid for the sales person that the hostess had the party. That is the usual MLM scheme)

I’m completely confused by the avon rep

And why people feel the need to say ‘as a cis gendered….’ Or ‘I’m as gc as they come…..’ just say what you think

The trans women I have met are some of the most lovely people who have faced incredible adversity. They may never understand the struggles of women in the way you all for some reason are concerned with, but they'll go through struggles more severe than I'll ever know. I open my arms to them. I find all of your insecurity staggering. By calling someone a "woman" when they biologically are otherwise isn't signing myself up for something. If people are genuinely scared rather than this superficial anger these "feminists" are spouting, I am sorry! The world moves quickly, but we'll move with it.

The issue of mixed sex/gender neutral spaces is a problem regarding men, not trans women. If someone has legally transitioned and their birth certificate is now altered, you have no leg to stand on. They are a woman now.

@Artichokeleaves

This is coming from a cisgendered straight woman

It makes no difference if it's coming from a frost gendered vegan Libra.

You educate yourself. You understand. There's a whole thread here of women patiently explaining, reasoning, expressing their half of the conversation. Start there and try actually reading it.

It must surely be dawning that this relying entirely on what amounts to 'do what I say you stupid meanie heads (stamp)' is really not working. Women have been really quite staggeringly patient considering the ruddy awful behaviour and treatment they've been drenched with by this political lobby.

It's past time that the lobby started doing some leg work themselves, and started re thinking their own issues with intolerance, prejudice and an absolute inability to listen to or show willingness to compromise with anyone else.

Well quite.

See the ridiculous assumption of:

This is the same with gender pronouns. You may not "get it", but someone who is a nice person will use the preferred pronouns anyway.

Of course we 'get it'.

There are thousands of threads about it. From the testimony of trans widows to the incisive opinion piece 'pronouns are rohypnol'.

Not to mention the millions of words expended over the issue of compelling women into actions which are self evidentially detrimental to them under the guise of being 'nice'.

Avon? Yes that is a bit off the wall.

There are two issues with pronouns, I think.

First is the compelled speech aspect, it's effectively asking someone to mouth something like they accept JC as their personal Lord and saviour when they don't. Some people are okay with this kind of lie. Some people aren't. I baulk at lies and always have, so while I'm happy to sing a wee hymn I would feel dishonest chanting a prayer and forcing someone to do so is wrong. Personally I feel it is disrespectful to a religion to mouth the tenets without actually believing, but I appreciate I am a pedant.

Second are the implied consequences. To use female pronouns for a male is to suggest one endorses and supports the idea that people can change sex and that males should be included in women's spaces.

This is akin to forcing a minority to accede to an oppressor. To further the religious analogy, like forcing a Rohingya Muslim to chant the four Noble Truths of Buddhism, perhaps (not a theology expert).

@motheroffour824

The trans women I have met are some of the most lovely people who have faced incredible adversity. They may never understand the struggles of women in the way you all for some reason are concerned with, but they'll go through struggles more severe than I'll ever know. I open my arms to them. I find all of your insecurity staggering. By calling someone a "woman" when they biologically are otherwise isn't signing myself up for something. If people are genuinely scared rather than this superficial anger these "feminists" are spouting, I am sorry! The world moves quickly, but we'll move with it.

If you're not 'genuinely' scared that this ideology's political agenda fights for things like giving rapists access to incarcerated women are part of their sentence, then you're either callous behind belief or haven't been paying attention.

Superficial anger? Bloody hell, that takes some arrogance.