Tinkerbell syndrome, pronoun badges and trans existence

[Alltheprettyseahorses]

Inspired by some posts in a now-full thread:

Someone in the workplace who is trans is literally existing as trans in public. Yet we are told that disagreeing with accessories like pronoun badges means we don't want transpeople to exist in public.

So - must trans necessarily involve others and is it so fragile an identity that it will disappear like Tinkerbell if not constantly affirmed by everyone around the transperson? Is not noticing the badge transphobic? As most people, including those with specific protected characteristics and including most transpeople to be honest, don't wear badges announcing their identity, does this mean they don't exist in public?

I would argue the sole purpose of pronoun badges is to involve others in the validation of a specific type of trans identity whether they consent to this or not and even if they don't understand they have been allocated as having a supporting role in someone else's main-character life. But speaking on a personal level, I have my own priorities and interests - I find it an imposition to be subjected to the macroaggression of being expected to change my natural language processes for someone who will never be part of my concerns.

(I don't normally start threads so if I don't come back I'm not shaving my hairy feet, I've probably forgotten or something)

Nope. The current position of many posters on this board is as extreme as the TRA position, just at the opposite end of the spectrum. I find both ridiculous.

"I don't want to live in some kind of authoritarian dictatorship where only "approved views" are tolerated."

Can't you see how ironic that statement is?
When you have someone gaslighting you to your face saying "it's a MAN, it's a MAN, it's "he" not "she" etc etc., and "I'm not listening to you anymore" etc etc.
Soon we'll ALL have pronoun badges ........etc etc.

What's that if it's not authoritarian nonsense? Only approved views tolerated or you'll have to face some kind of consequence?

Well, Christmas and Easter are long established public holidays, however you feel about what the occasions celebrate 🤷🏻‍♀️
And you certainly don't have to engage with any of that other crap you've described from your colleagues. Nobody can make you listen, you can make an excuse and walk away anytime you please.
It is not on a par with compelling other's speech, in any sense.
@CassieMaddox

I don't think it is.

My innate sense is of womanhood. My biology and experiences are not just human, they're specifically woman IYSWIM.

It's interesting to find that yours is different. Thanks.

No it isn't. Because a lot of this thread is about the principle of pronoun badges and that they should be banned in the NHS and that people shouldn't be talking about preferred pronouns.

I have no issue with individuals not using preferred pronouns. That's their choice. I have an issue with them telling others what they can and can't do, and saying the badges/use of preferred pronouns should be banned. That's authoritarian nonsense thats imposing their views over someone else's. Not OK.

I'd say the same about employers banning crucifixes or headscarves too. Same thing in my view.

Same. Noone can make you use the pronouns, you can make an excuse and walk away any time you please too

I've heard of womanhood (and childhood and adulthood and manhood). It's a noun, it has some legal meaning. But why tf would I have a 'sense' of it? It just is. I'm a woman, a human, an adult.

None of those depend on my having a 'sense' of them, and I really can't work out what 'having a sense of' them would be, or in what way that 'sense' would change or enhance them.

If someone in the NHS was wearing a badge that declared that they were also a Methodist preacher and demanded to be called "Minister", that would be the religious equivalent of a pronoun badge.

And it would be as ridiculous as expecting people to honour a pronoun badge.

Really? Can you explain how it's different, without making a value judgement about whether sex or gender are more important?

As I've said, I'm not religious.
But isn't that literally the point of the dog collar? Wouldn't many religious people find it very rude to address a priest in religious clothes as Mr?

Without consequence? Not always, as well you know.

Maybe "awareness" instead of "sense" would be more understandable to you. My awareness of my womanhood.

It doesn't make any more sense to me, making it all the more unfathomable that a male would claim to feel this way.

TooBigformyBoots

My innate sense is of womanhood. My biology and experiences are not just human, they're specifically woman IYSWIM.

So why do you think that other women, with this biology and these experiences have a fragile sense of womanhood? Why is a refusal to mangle language evidence of their sense of womanhood being threatened?

Can you have a sense of womanhood if you're not a woman?

I am not convinced I have an 'awareness of womanhood' as I think that in order to have one I'd need to be able to compare it with something else. It just is. I might be aware of some aspect of my specifically female body parts in the same way as I am aware of my sore knees, or aware of the subtly different ways women and men treat me as a woman.

But that doesn't make me develop an awareness of a descriptive noun that ultimately describes a physical state, not an abstract essence. I do not see how it could.

CassieMaddox

Really? Can you explain how it's different, without making a value judgement about whether sex or gender are more important?

First you should tell us what you mean by "gender".

Showing pronouns on badges arguably makes it easier for second language English speakers, and those who struggle to remember or use pronouns.

Surely it does the opposite: confuses non-native English speakers and anyone who doesn’t know they’re meant to pretend someone is the sex that they’re visibly not.

Hardly anyone struggles to use pronouns. They’re one of the first things you learn in a foreign language.

OK it may be a bit difficult if your native language has, say, just one word meaning he or she, as in Chinese. Or more than one way to say you, as in several languages.

But pronoun badges don’t help with those. They just make a demand that your eyes and brain may not accept.

They might, but I wouldn't. And the dog collar means any of "father/mother", "reverend", "vicar", "minister", "padre/madre", "your reverence", "your grace", "your holiness", or a bunch of Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic honorifics that I don't even know, depending on a set of other circumstances and symbols that I don't even know how to decode.

So I'll stick with Ms and Mr, thanks.

I never made any claims about how other women feel.

No, I don't believe you can have a sense of womanhood if you are not a woman or girl. However it seems some women don't have a sense of womanhood either.

Sure.
One group is saying that the established way of referring to men and women using pronouns should be changed, and people should be punished for not adhering to their new system.

Another group are saying people can refer to themselves, their friends, colleagues however they like, but they can't expect to force others to.

For example, I have a TW colleague. Some people refer to him as a she, I'm not trying to get these people fired, I have never heard of someone being disciplined for using preferred pronouns, but we all know lots of instances where people are disciplined for not using them. The two situations are not equally authoritarian.

Nope. Not needed to respond to my point. All you need to know about it is there is an extreme at one end that says sex is paramount and an extreme at the other that says gender is paramount. I think the extreme sex based position is as ridiculous as the extreme gender based position. PP said it wasn't. I was asking why.

You can answer if you like, I'm interested to know, just not interested in some kind of diversion to paint me as a TRA. Been there too many times and I'm bored of it.

I'm very aware that I'm not a cat. But I doubt that cats have a sense of cathood.

You said:

I do know that my sense of womanhood is not so fragile that I fear erasure and annihilation when I see someone wearing an ID badge

The implication is that some posters' comments are due to their "fragile" sense of womanhood.
The principles we are actually defending are freedom of belief and freedom of expression. We are also defending women's rights.

Thank you. I see. I don't think I was clear enough about extremes.
Another group are saying people can refer to themselves, their friends, colleagues however they like, but they can't expect to force others to. This is my position too, I don't think this is extreme.

Extreme is banning people from using preferred pronouns because "they are compelling speech", banning pronpun badges and insisting on giving anyone using pronouns different to their sex a good talking to about why they are wrong, offensive and should not be allowed. Like KJK in that video.

I find it authoritarian and it turns my stomach in much the same way as a TRA insisting TWAW - no debate! does.