Mandated to give my ten year old's pronouns - how to respond

[Gofastboatsmojito]

I've recently had to fill in a form for my daughter's hobby, she's joining a group to rehearse and perform which builds on the standard teaching class.

As part of this I had to fill in a form which asked for her gender and her preferred pronouns. She's 10 FFS, and her school luckily don't go in for teaching gender ideology, sticking to a more factual PSHE curriculum. So she hasn't got a gender or pronouns.

I've filled the form in because I don't want her to miss out on this further opportunity, and I have no reason to believe the group, which is council run, are gender ideologues. I think they're just trying to be modern / some secondary children also do this hobby so maybe there have been requests from older children's parents.

I'd like to email my contact, who I email relatively often, expressing why this question is problematic.

How does the below sound? I'd like to add something about Cass but I'm not sure what the best point to include woukd be at very grateful for your ideas.

Preferred pronouns is a mandatory field (with only 3 choices! She/her, He/him, They/them - not very inclusive) but ethnicity has about 5 different questions where you can choose an Asian ethnicity or n/a, a Black ethnicity or n/a, a White non-European ethnicity or n/a, White European, or just opt out entirely. Its a badly designed form tbh.

Thanks

I hope you don't mind a little bit of feedback. I'm not happy being asked for my child's gender or pronouns. She doesn't have a gender or pronouns, she has a sex (female).

Asking for pronouns is akin to asking for a religion without giving the option of 'none', so I respectfully suggest you consider adding 'no preferred pronouns' or similar to the list of options, or adding an 'opt out' as you do for ethnicity

Massive eye roll. A person doesn't have pronouns, they belong to the person who is talking about them. I decide how I will refer to someone in the third person. Trying to control how people refer to you is unreasonable.

Well done for standing your ground.
Your proposed letter stands perfectly well as it is.

Incidentally, I wonder how many on this thread have ever heard of the New Zealand born charlatan Dr. John Money, the man who kicked off this Gender bullshite?
Anyone ignorant of his activities might like to read these links:-
https://reduxx.info/john-money-the-pervert-who-invented-gender/

https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/david-reimer-and-john-money-gender-reassignment-controversy-johnjoan-case

https://www.simplypsychology.org/david-reimer.html

So just for the sake of argument, say that this hobby group has a 14 year trans child join. Don't you think it's helpful for the organisers to be prepared in advance? What do you think should happen here - the parent could email and explain, I suppose, but it sounds easier to stick it on a form along with the dietary preferences.

lol you sound like those mother-in-laws who say “I don’t care if you want to call your son Gabe, all the first sons in this family have been called John for generations so that’s what I will be calling him.”

As you say some people feel differently and this form accounts for that. Trans, non binary and gender fluid people will continue to exist whether other people approve or not.
And men are already in female spaces. They are in our homes, work places, gyms, shops, pubs. Men don’t need to pretend to be female to get close to us, hurt us or take our rights away. They just need to marry us, live with us, be our bosses or colleagues, follow us home at night and so on.
The issue isn’t really someones’s gender identity or a form asking about pronouns. It’s the fact women aren’t safe from men and the fact there are zero safe spaces for women with or without trans people.

The argument that someone wouldn't like to be referred to as the wrong sex pronouns meaning that they have a "preferred pronoun" is the same as a mixed race person not wanting people to dismiss one aspect of their heritage - it doesn't mean they have a "preferred race", just that someone getting it wrong might cause annoyance. If we use sex based pronouns then we're very unlikely to get it wrong because you can almost always tell someone's sex (and you can never tell if someone has ze/zir, they/them/, fae/fer etc. pronouns).

Is it? Why? If someone referred to me as "he" I would correct them. I'd think they're a right weirdo if they replied with "I decide how I will refer to someone in the third person. Trying to control how people refer to you is unreasonable.".

You still seem to be confusing organic shifts in language (which people may or may not be comfortable with) and forcing a change with penalties for not complying. Pronouns are particularly embedded in language and so are cognitively more difficult to change. Of course you can try. In fascist Italy it was attempted. In fact, forced language change in this way goes very much hand in hand with totalitarian regimes.

Yup and in the very rare case you get it wrong, would it harm you to just change the pronoun you use?

Ok

you want me to believe in gender identity

I asked above if you could give the defining characteristics of the gender identity shared by all women.

I’d actually love it if you did, and have a great deal of respect for you.

help me move away from my black and white thinking. Explain women’s gender identity to me

This is a really valiant attempt to explain the obvious that will get no traction here whatsoever. Here, there are no trans women who are not rapists in a women's prison, or otherwise pretending to be trans in order to abuse and rape women.

No I don’t.

I don’t believe in gender identity personally.

I’d just ask you to acknowledge that other people have different beliefs about gender identity to you and that except for a small number of fairly extreme situations it does you no harm to tolerate and respect their perspective.

Genderists didn't invent third-person pronouns. They exist because they serve a function - to refer to someone or something without using their name and in English, third-person pronouns follow, or agree with, sex.
Genderists are trying to co-opt them to refer to gender identity.
They don't.

GII is attempting to force this change. It isn't working.
Invent your own neo pronouns.

Nobody possesses pronouns so use of the word "have" is inappropriate. You can have a name and you have a sex. You don't have pronouns.

Ah, I get you

I feel no obligation to tolerate or respect beliefs I consider to be both mad and harmful I’m afraid.

I will not be pretending I can’t tell what sex people are, and I do not believe that will cause any harm to said people

I do believe pretending things that aren’t true inevitably leads to harm and in the case of pretending about sex demonstrably has done

we shall have to agree to differ

How about they respect me by not insisting that I use wrong sex pronouns, or that I accept their right to change the function and usage of fundamental parts of language?

"Everybody also has a gender," you say. But, with respect, this isn't so.

'Gender' can be conterminous with 'sex', but that can't be your intent here (as is signalled by your "also"). And when non-conterminous with 'sex', 'gender' is not something anyone can have in the sense they have a sex. (Of course one may exhibit certain stereotypes from the collection denoted 'gender stereotypes'. But that's not the same thing at all.)

To be sure, there are those who claim there is this other meaning of 'gender', as something extant which people can 'have', (or sometimes 'be'). But this is a metaphysical claim with no reasoned justification. Simply put, 'gender' in this attempted sense is a neologism currently empty of meaning and reference.

tldr: Actually, no-one has a gender if 'gender' doesn't mean 'sex'.

[Most readers of this thread understand the consequences of this for fashionable 'pronoun' nonsense. Maybe not you, @Runninggirls26. But have a think about it.]

The ethnicity question is also terrible, I would not fit into any of those poorly described categories so I would be forced to opt out against my will.

"She doesn't have a gender or pronouns" is an oxymoron.

"She" is a pronoun. She will learn that in basic English grammar lessons, so maybe she can teach you.

And if you're saying your daughter doesn't have a gender, that means the term you're looking for is "Non-binary".

You can't avoid words.

And if you're saying your daughter doesn't have a gender, that means the term you're looking for is "Non-binary".
Erm no, "non-binary" is part of the same belief system. Not everyone has to fit a label.

Of course she has pronouns: she/her.

Just write she/her.

Neither she nor her mother subscribe to gender identity ideology, so she is not labouring under the delusion that she can possess pronouns, choose her sex or mandate how others perceive her.

'And if you're saying your daughter doesn't have a gender, that means the term you're looking for is "Non-binary".'

But gender isn't something anyone can have. Since no-one has a gender, is the term "Non-binary" something that applies to everyone? Hmm.

" Doesn't have a gender" is a ridiculous thing to say. Everyone expresses their gender identify. She sounds utterly brainwashed by your nonsense, poor kid.

Everyone expresses a gender identity? How?

Why should people be propped up in indulging in misogynistic lies?

Not a ridiculous thing to say. Just simply true.

No-one has a gender (unless 'gender' means 'sex'.) To say someone has a gender is nonsense. (Unless 'gender' means 'sex'.)

Oh, and there's no such thing as gender identity.