Using sex-based pronouns instead of their preferred gender-ID pronouns

[DuesToTheDirt]

Has anyone ever done this? What happened?

I mean for people you know in real life, not on the internet, and for adults not children.

I would love to do this, though I don't suppose I will. But I feel that by saying "she" to refer transwomen I am being forced into a lie, that I am agreeing to someone's delusion. I try to avoid using pronouns, but realistically that just results in either not talking about certain people (which is definitely one strategy!) or using really convoluted language. It's all very well being "kind" to people, but it's certainly not kind on me.

I don't know why people say it's like calling a Catholic priest "Father", when would you do that in their presence?
Maybe I'm in a very informal church culture - we go to a CofE church with fairly formal services but our vicar is just called "Jess" by everyone. Possibly Rev. Jess but if we were referring to her in another context it would just be "Jess" as no assumption would be made about the other person's belief.

@drspouse I suppose I mean that I would talk eg to a Catholic friend 'is it Father Smith who is marrying you' in respect to the beliefs of both. But I'd refer to Clare if I were talking about the local CofE vicar because thats how she introduces herself.

Oh yawn not this again
If it doesn't hurt anyone or offend why do it? I mean it cost nothing to be respectful why go out of your way to call someone a pronoun they would be upset by?
And how does this hurt you? FFS

Those demanding that people respect these identities, do we also have to respect the identities of those who have used extreme body modifications to better resemble their identity as lizards or snakes?

If not, why not? It is someone’s identity after all and they have taken significant steps to make their body suit their identity.

Yes.

Honorifics aren’t pronouns though. They’re bestowed by society and organisations. Someone who is a captain in the army has had that honorific bestowed. It’s a different set of social rules but one that doesn’t require anyone to lie. A priest IS a priest, a captain in the army IS a captain in the army. A man is NOT she and a woman is NOT he.

They don’t - but they prefer I don’t sit there saying God isn’t real, prefer I don’t blaspheme and prefer that I don’t eat or drink around them during Ramadan. All of which I oblige to. We also don’t arrange work events at venues that serve alcohol so Muslim colleagues can attend.

I oblige to those with different gender beliefs by not using any pronoun (so neither the preferred or sex based one) in their presence. It’s not hard, but I also work with a lot of individuals with titles (eg Lords, Countesses, Earls, Barons etc) who I would also never dream of referring to as he or she while they’re present as it just feels rude so it’s just the same.

It offends me to be forced to lie. So I won’t.

Fascinating discussion. It's so clear how fear and intimidation are used to enforce not only pronouns but this whole ideology. Of course those engaged in harassing others about pronoun use will inevitably find that their work colleagues minimise interactions - as a poster mentioned upthread - polite, work related but minimum contact.
Does anyone recall the Civil Service thread where women civil servants were told not to leave a women's workplace toilet if they found a man who claims to be a woman in there. They MUST enter and use the toilet as planned as exiting would be a transphobic act.
The CPS tried the same in their ill fated guidelines for schools, attempting to enforce compulsory friendships with gender questioning children and smiling acceptance of the opposite sex in changing rooms, toilets etc.

Compulsion and creating fear run through all these demands. Society is being told to eradicate facts, science and the social contract solely for the benefit of a tiny but exceptionally powerful group in society.

It's a relief to see so many people deciding to centre reality and ignore these tedious demands.

I have never known any Muslim person prefer me to not eat in front of them during Ramadan. Ever. I can’t believe that ever happens. To do so would be wholly unreasonable. I wouldn’t do it. Equally if the topic of religion was being discussed and I was asked my opinion about whether there was a god I would express my opinion on that regardless of the presence of a Christian. Why wouldn’t I? And what’s blasphemy? It’s only blasphemy if you’re a believer. If I say “Jesus fucking Christ” at work, which I’ve been know to do, I am not blaspheming. Because I don’t believe in Jesus as a god.

It’s so very British isn’t it? Laughable.

Let’s remember that McKinnon/Ivy leveraged people’s ‘respectful’ use of pronouns to convince sports organisations to change the regulations to include male people into female sports categories. Plus using ‘she’ for Wadhwa continues to obfuscate that a male is actively counselling female people who may not know that the person is male.

The argument that using pronouns are ‘harmless’ has already been proven false when regarding the needs of female people. Particularly when it is used to support the philosophical theories that destabilizing social mores to allow males to be treated as females. Theories used to change laws and policies that result in harm to woman and girls.

I won't bow down to it.

I also make a point of writing things such as 'He is a man' on Facebook posts where an obvious man is being referred to as a 'she'.

I don't lie and will not be forced to lie either. If Daniel changes his name to Danielle, i will call him Danielle but i will not call him, her or she, as that would be a lie.

But it's not "going out of your way", quite the opposite. It's going out of your way to try to remember everyone's "special identity", treading on eggshells every time you're around them.

Fuck that.

You do?

Is it not gender based pronouns?

This is the essence of the issue - there is a movement ('language evolves') to untether grammatical gender from sex, and make it individual, like a name.

Language may evolve sometimes, but sometimes it doesn't too, and I'm keeping sex-based grammatical gender thanks. Just like I don't use all sorts of other niche language evolution.

Genderism has huge parallels with Christian practice - unsurprising for a movement which originated in the US - although it's more on the medieval Catholicism side than anything else, the idea that our true and inner self (soul) is contained in a vessel of mortal flesh which must be mortified for the sake of the soul.

There's a creed (TWAW, TMAM, NB identities are valid, no debate)

A confession ("I have fallen short of the high standards I expect of myself and apologise to everyone I have hurt.... I promise to educate myself and do better" - a form of these words appears in almost every public apology)

Plenty of public penance for those who hope for absolution, although they are pretty stingy on absolution. You can buy an indulgence by publicly donating to a trans charity though.

Excommunication of heretics.

..... and as it happens, Trans Day of Remembrance falls within the Anglican church calendar of Remembrancetide, although I'm not sure that was intentional!

So for the poster above who yawned and asked how does using preferred pronouns hurt anyone - you're asking people to subscribe publicly to the above beliefs, specifically the idea that we all have a feminine or masculine or non-binary soul contained in mortal flesh, and a lot of people do not share those beliefs.

I'm personally on the fence over whether using preferred pronouns is an act of respect or one of submission. I think if genderism wasn't enforced I would be far happier to agree that it is just a matter of respect.

I think we can now easily see that to some people they will affirm any identity to prove their point.

This has always been something that we as a society was not compelled to do previously. And there is no evidence that this harmless now.

Can you explain how it's discriminatory and illegal to only interact with colleagues in a basic, professional capacity?

In that case...

If it doesn't hurt anyone or offend why do it? I mean it cost nothing to be respectful

why go out of your way to tell someone off for using a pronoun that you don't like

And how does this hurt you? FFS

This is what gets me. The whole point of pronouns is that they aren't individual. If they are going to be we might as well just do away with them and use names all the time.

Why it is important to use sex-accurate pronouns when discussing transgenderism-related issues:

Pronouns Are Rohypnol

the idea that our true and inner self (soul) is contained in a vessel of mortal flesh which must be mortified for the sake of the soul.

This is Gnosticism, which from a Catholic POV is a heresy.

@TempestTost wasn't the heresy of the Gnostics that there was a second, lesser god? A sort of substitute teacher god for the material world?

I thought mortification of the flesh for the good of the soul was a pretty standard Catholic thing especially in medieval times. But I may well be wrong!

Something about feeling unsafe and denying their existence.