Taskmaster: if you don’t use ‘correct’ pronouns you’re a philistine…

[Sugarleaf]

…Who’s stuck in the past. To be ‘cool and curious’ you need to use non- biological sex based pronouns. And this is about a ‘certain generation.’ I mean I’m 32 and think it’s bollocks.

plus, as a bonus, ‘if you don’t like me, fine, as long as you use my correct pronouns.’

ffs

You are advocating to redefine "woman" and "man" as people of either sex who "enjoy" living by these stereotypes rather than simply the two human sexes with no expectations of social "gender" assumed though?

You don't understand what advocating is. Explaining how identity is formed & how our liberal culture accepts individuals are entitled to their own identity isn't advocating for anything.

First, the obvious - why is it somehow better to label people by their stereotypical consumerist choices than simply by sex, especially in contexts where histtorically sex has been the significant, even the defining factor?

Right or wrong by another's subjective moral standards isn't relevant to personal identification (unless they break the law) in a liberal society. Perhaps you may be more aligned to dictatorial regimes. I hear the weather is nice in South Korea & Afghanistan at this time of year.

But also - what about the negative stereotypes that also have power over us? Making a consumerist choice for girly stuff over blokey stuff, fine, but what about the shit that comes with that like being assumed to be superficial, or impractical, or over-emotional? Is there a gender checklist where someone decided which stereotypes are foundational to the identities of "women" and "men" and which are outmoded sexist shite?

The foundational 'check list' so to speak is rooted in typical sexed behaviours that society has deemed to be more associated to one sex than the other. How an individual determines which particular one's are relevant to them is purely subjective.

Sorry, this was to the FlirtsWithRhinos poster. I know, my audacity as a genderist sexist, aka tired mum with a sandwich who just doesnt want her kid to die, how very dare I.

All because of the greatest emergency women have ever known: being polite to people who are different. That's real feminism right there.

Your misrepresentation is as tedious as it is transparent.

Everything both you and I have posted is visible on the thread, including the post where far from "demanding" you do anything, I replied to your insulting and dismissive claim that women who believe as I do that your belief systen is fundamentally sexist are merely uneducated or unaccepting of difference.

It's abundantly clear from your posts here and on other threads that you consider it entirely reasonable for you to sling offensive assertions at others, but that it is utterly beyond the pale, an attack of the basest order, for anyone to expect you to back up what you say. Your double standards shine so bright and clear for all to see.

And still, despite your blatant bad faith replies to me, my genuine offer - not a "demand", simply an open and honest invitation - still stands.

If you can give me one coherent, non-sexist reason that the same word "woman", or the pronoun "she", should mean both me because of body and a transwoman because of his mind to the degree that any laws, conventions and writing using the word "woman" means both of us I will happily engage with that.

It is only while you avoid answering by throwing shade or accusations of hate, bigotry or lack of intelligence, that I will continue to highlight your choice not to give a straight answer as evidence that you are simply unable to, because no such answers exist.

Um… don’t you mean North Korea? South Korea is not à dictatorship. It’s actually a democracy where people can and do protest about anything they see wrong, including there government.
if this “check list”; is rooted in sexed behaviours, then it has nothing to do with gender right, as we have been told a billion times that sex and gender are different. In that case, a male will always have typical male “sexed behaviours” even if he claims to be be a woman, as humans can’t change sex, so you have just pointed out that a male will always be a man (adult human male) and not a woman. Well played sir, well played.

Hold on. I thought you were non binary. Did you just misgender yourself?

why should women be polite to anyone if they don’t want to? Why women particularly? Why not men?

Um… don’t you mean North Korea?

Yes!

if this “check list”; is rooted in sexed behaviours, then it has nothing to do with gender right,

Maybe if you read on you would notice this bit:

The foundational 'check list' so to speak is rooted in typical sexed behaviours that society has deemed to be more associated to one sex than the other.

In other words gender is socially constructed from sexed behaviours. Society categorises these behaviours in distinct groups: man/woman.

So in that case, if more men decided adopt the “sexed behaviours” society deems attributable to women, then won’t those behaviours no longer be classed as attributable to women, but to both sexes?

what behaviours are we discussing here? Male violence? In that case, even if a male claims other “sexed behaviours” more aligned with women in your opinion, then he would still retain his propensity to male violence, as humans cannot change sex.
if as we have just decided, males retain their sexed behaviours, which you claim are innate, why should some males gain access to to female spaces because they claim they also have attributes more “aligned with women”?

“if more men decided adopt the “sexed behaviours” society deems attributable to women, then won’t those behaviours no longer be classed as attributable to women, but to both sexes?”

I have always thought this was kind of obvious but always gets hand waved away or the ‘look over there, there’s a squirrel’ treatment.

But the weather is nice at this time of year in South Korea.

True. And the food looks amazing!

So in that case, if more men decided adopt the “sexed behaviours” society deems attributable to women, then won’t those behaviours no longer be classed as attributable to women, but to both sexes?

Bingo!

what behaviours are we discussing here? Male violence? In that case, even if a male claims other “sexed behaviours” more aligned with women in your opinion, then he would still retain his propensity to male violence, as humans cannot change sex.

There's this thing called 'individuals'.

if as we have just decided, males retain their sexed behaviours, which you claim are innate, why should some males gain access to to female spaces because they claim they also have attributes more “aligned with women”?

I said behaviours are both nature nurture. While some behaviours are more common to each sex, the sexes also share behavioural traits. See above for: Individuals.

Also note, this thread is about pronouns usage not single sex spaces so see if you can maintain at least one thread that doesn't involve your obsession with loo etiquette so we all don't die of boredom.

It is from memory and from eating Korean food elsewhere.

Who mentioned toilets? You seem a little obsessed with them…..

So you’d have to be swapping your pronouns round all the time depending on societal changes?

”Oh look, more women are going to university, I must be a woman now”

”Chelsea has a women’s football team - am I no longer a man?”.

All sounds terribly complicated.

"why should some males gain access to to female spaces because they claim they also have attributes more “aligned with women”?

Let's just say experience on this forum indicates exactly where this kind of comment is going.

The foundational 'check list' so to speak is rooted in typical sexed behaviours that society has deemed to be more associated to one sex than the other.

So it is noted that there are some human traits which are more common in men and others more common in women. There is, of course, a massive overlap in behaviour which is common to both sexes.

How an individual determines which particular one's are relevant to them is purely subjective.

So we are free to reject any or all stereotypes if we wish.

So a woman is an adult female human with any personality, and regardless of whether she conforms to stereotypes, and a man is an adult male human with any personality, and regardless of whether he conforms to stereotypes.

I knew you'd get there in the end.

So you have no answer?

Eddie Izzard doesn’t seem to have changed over the years despite preferring different pronouns.

Is that doing it wrong?

Still not getting the self determination bit? Why am I not surprised.

If everyone else thinks that somebody really isn’t complying with the societal expectations of their claimed gender where does that leave them?

Do we need some kind of voting system to settle it?

Ive already answered this on other threads as you know see the JKR one. This thread is about pronouns not single sex spaces.

Honestly, you need to seek assistance with this obsession.

It really is telling of the gender critical movement that they just can't comprehend how self determination works.

Did you not read this paragraph?

So a woman is an adult female human with any personality, and regardless of whether she conforms to stereotypes, and a man is an adult male human with any personality, and regardless of whether he conforms to stereotypes.

That's self determination. The fact that the stereotypes exist doesn't, in a free society, stop anyone from having their own personality and living their life as they wish.

‘Self determination’ usually refers to your ability to make choices about your own life, e.g. being able to vote.

It does not confer a power to change how others see you or to become something that you are not.

It’s you that is suggesting that we should categorise oeople according to societal expectations. I’m just trying to understand your system. I acknowledge that I have no idea how it is supposed to work.