[discussion] pronoun silliness

[Imperial Union of America]

Let's just ignore him and get back on topic.

Call people what they wish to be called so it doesn't become an argument, I want people to express their opinion how they want, pro or anti trans they have the right.

I think I'm fine with using generic pronouns out of respect. But I think it's an unnecessary rule. Other sites do without such a rule just fine and don't descend into a trollfest. Requiring pronouns is both unnecessary and forces the opposition to agree with the premise.

[The Blaatschapen]

If a poster is merely pretending to be transgender and demanding specific pronouns while not actually identifying as such, do the rules still apply to them? If so, it certainly seems like this rule can easily be abused as a form of persistent trolling.

A person is not required to release their actual gender. After all, how would we check? Besides, some people already pose as another gender on the Internet (eg. women that do not want certain attention).

So if a person state that they're prefer a certain set of pronouns we're fine with that. As long as it is reasonably consistent.

[Imperial Union of America]

If a poster is merely pretending to be transgender and demanding specific pronouns while not actually identifying as such, do the rules still apply to them? If so, it certainly seems like this rule can easily be abused as a form of persistent trolling.

A person is not required to release their actual gender. After all, how would we check? Besides, some people already pose as another gender on the Internet (eg. women that do not want certain attention).

So if a person state that they're prefer a certain set of pronouns we're fine with that. As long as it is reasonably consistent.

Were you the one who nuked the troll? if so, thanks.

So you require consistency on the part of the individual involved? What if they decide to change the gender they identify with?

[The Blaatschapen]

A person is not required to release their actual gender. After all, how would we check? Besides, some people already pose as another gender on the Internet (eg. women that do not want certain attention).

So if a person state that they're prefer a certain set of pronouns we're fine with that. As long as it is reasonably consistent.

Were you the one who nuked the troll? if so, thanks.

So you require consistency on the part of the individual involved? What if they decide to change the gender they identify with?

I said reasonable consistency. Someone that changes gender pronouns every week, well we can't hardly expect people to keep up.

But someone that changes once, different story. Kannap comes to mind (not a transgender poster).

[Drasnia]

Showing respect towards someone's 'preferred gender' is basically requiring people to agree with the premise that transsexualism is legitimate in the first place.

Aww, the poor dears.

It's exactly this attitude that makes people not want to comply with the pronoun rule. Why should they respect a transgender's opinions and preferences when that person doesn't respect theirs? The only way to maintain civil and constructive debate is when both sides have mutual respect (or at the very least reverence) for the other.

[Imperial Union of America]

Aww, the poor dears.

It's exactly this attitude that makes people not want to comply with the pronoun rule. Why should they respect a transgender's opinions and preferences when that person doesn't respect theirs? The only way to maintain civil and constructive debate is when both sides have mutual respect (or at the very least reverence) for the other.

I concur, that sort of attitude is not helpful at all.

[Cerillium]

I agree with Sedg. We "allow people to argue that you're the gender of your birth - a widespread view - yet punish people when they use the pronouns appropriate to that belief. I think we've given an unnecessary protection to a vocal group of players, some of whom are too easily offended and need to grow a thicker skin."


I look at Gren's "I'm Androgyne...Please use they/them/their when referencing me, as I do NOT appreciate the other pronouns." sig. They have a point. Androgynous persons don't or can't identify with any single gender. "They/Their" is perfectly acceptable. Gren, and other people in their situation, have patiently corrected pronoun misuse in the past.

Unlike the androgynous person, trans people do identify with a single gender. Transwomen are women. Transmen are men. I understand using the trans prefix is a matter of pride or a means of clarification for some. I also wonder if there's a bit of baiting with some sigs and posts, as though the person is daring anyone to argue with them over their correct gender label. I don't see it as promoting the transgender movement when certain people (who shall remain nameless) do it on NS. I see it as a form of trolling, an excuse to belittle those who believe differently, and a means to force others to accept things regardless of the other person's beliefs. "Accept me for who I am or Mods will force you to!"

A person's gender is nobody else's business. If someone is having a hard time transitioning IRL and feels defeated at every turn, it's perhaps best to not paint a target on themselves while online. Declare your true gender without tagging "trans" on it until you gain enough confidence to politely address pronoun misuse. Don't let yourself be dragged into arguments which overly upset you. Don't respond to trolls that frequent the trans-supportive threads where you go to relax and socialize.

Also: "Trans-trender"? REALLY? That's low, man.

No, it's not. I've encountered a lot of people that aren't trans at all, and they'll ask me to refrain from mentioning it in public. They're young. They want to fit in. They're unhappy IRL. They see the trans crowd as extremely popular and supported/supportive. They'll take on a trending persona because it allows them to be part of that crowd.

Or, worse, they're older and using the label to groom young transgirls or transboys (getting their victims to trust them over time). I haven't encountered groomers on NS but rest assured I'll report those I suspect of doing this.

[Imperial Union of America]

I agree with Sedg. We "allow people to argue that you're the gender of your birth - a widespread view - yet punish people when they use the pronouns appropriate to that belief. I think we've given an unnecessary protection to a vocal group of players, some of whom are too easily offended and need to grow a thicker skin."


I look at Gren's "I'm Androgyne...Please use they/them/their when referencing me, as I do NOT appreciate the other pronouns." sig. They have a point. Androgynous persons don't or can't identify with any single gender. "They/Their" is perfectly acceptable. Gren, and other people in their situation, have patiently corrected pronoun misuse in the past.

Unlike the androgynous person, trans people do identify with a single gender. Transwomen are women. Transmen are men. I understand using the trans prefix is a matter of pride or a means of clarification for some. I also wonder if there's a bit of baiting with some sigs and posts, as though the person is daring anyone to argue with them over their correct gender label. I don't see it as promoting the transgender movement when certain people (who shall remain nameless) do it on NS. I see it as a form of trolling, an excuse to belittle those who believe differently, and a means to force others to accept things regardless of the other person's beliefs. "Accept me for who I am or Mods will force you to!"

A person's gender is nobody else's business. If someone is having a hard time transitioning IRL and feels defeated at every turn, it's perhaps best to not paint a target on themselves while online. Declare your true gender without tagging "trans" on it until you gain enough confidence to politely address pronoun misuse. Don't let yourself be dragged into arguments which overly upset you. Don't respond to trolls that frequent the trans-supportive threads where you go to relax and socialize.

Also: "Trans-trender"? REALLY? That's low, man.

No, it's not. I've encountered a lot of people that aren't trans at all, and they'll ask me to refrain from mentioning it in public. They're young. They want to fit in. They're unhappy IRL. They see the trans crowd as extremely popular and supported/supportive. They'll take on a trending persona because it allows them to be part of that crowd.

Or, worse, they're older and using the label to groom young transgirls or transboys (getting their victims to trust them over time). I haven't encountered groomers on NS but rest assured I'll report those I suspect of doing this.

100% agree

[Katganistan]

As a native English speaker ... singular "they" has been used in everyday speech for as long as English has been a language. Chaucer used it. Shakespeare used it. The idea that "they" can only ever be plural was promoted by a bunch of Latin-obsessed Victorian classicists ... and, quite frankly, who cares what they thought? They're dead now, and English is not a dead language. You really shouldn't let prescriptivist grammar get in the way of basic civility.

I think you're making this discussion much broader than it needs to be. If someone informs you that they'd prefer to be referred to using a specific set of pronouns, use those pronouns. It's not impacting your ability to disagree with them to say "I don't think transgenderism is a real thing, but since I can see that this is important to you, I'll humour you so as not to be a jerk."

I mean, the Chicago Manual of Style has gone on board with the singular "they" in informal language, but rather ungrammatical in formal writing, although in formal writing you are expected to know some biographical information about who you are rebutting or making an expository piece about.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage ... ersus-they
"Some people object to the use of plural pronouns in this type of situation on the grounds that it’s ungrammatical. In fact, the use of plural pronouns to refer back to a singular subject isn’t new: it represents a revival of a practice dating from the 16th century. It’s increasingly common in current English and is now widely accepted both in speech and in writing."
Oxford English Dictionary is the definitive source of what's grammatical in English.. If they accept it (as well as Merriam-Webster and others) then there's no excuse not to use it.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at ... inary-they

[Imperial Union of America]

I mean, the Chicago Manual of Style has gone on board with the singular "they" in informal language, but rather ungrammatical in formal writing, although in formal writing you are expected to know some biographical information about who you are rebutting or making an expository piece about.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage ... ersus-they
"Some people object to the use of plural pronouns in this type of situation on the grounds that it’s ungrammatical. In fact, the use of plural pronouns to refer back to a singular subject isn’t new: it represents a revival of a practice dating from the 16th century. It’s increasingly common in current English and is now widely accepted both in speech and in writing."
Oxford English Dictionary is the definitive source of what's grammatical in English.. If they accept it (as well as Merriam-Webster and others) then there's no excuse not to use it.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at ... inary-they

I ain't gonna listen to no oxford. We Americans got our own thang and all ya'll limeys can pack yer dictionaries up or we gonna throw em in a harbor, see?

[Katganistan]

I see the rule as no different to my telling a poster not to call me kid. Once I have done that with that poster, them then deciding to call me kid clearly is baiting.

Being called one gender over the other or having one pronoun used with you over one you would prefer is a different than being called a kid.

Because being called a kid is attributing a negative attribute to you. Being a man as opposed to being a woman or vis versa are not negative traits.

It is exactly the same. You are being called a name you have specifically asked not to be called.

If your name is Richard and I call you Dick, and you tell me, "Don't call me that, call me Rich, or Rick" and I insist on calling you Dick, and tell you, "well, that IS the proper nickname for your given name," even after you've made it clear I don't like it, that's baiting.

There is literally no difference between that and intentionally and repeatedly misgendering someone.

[Imperial Union of America]

Being called one gender over the other or having one pronoun used with you over one you would prefer is a different than being called a kid.

Because being called a kid is attributing a negative attribute to you. Being a man as opposed to being a woman or vis versa are not negative traits.

It is exactly the same. You are being called a name you have specifically asked not to be called.

If your name is Richard and I call you Dick, and you tell me, "Don't call me that, call me Rich, or Rick" and I insist on calling you Dick, and tell you, "well, that IS the proper nickname for your given name," even after you've made it clear I don't like it, that's baiting.

There is literally no difference between that and intentionally and repeatedly misgendering someone.

Yeah, maybe. Except forcing you not to call me dick instead of rick isn't forcing you to accept a specific ideological premise.

You declare yourself trans, and then force everyone to agree with it by using your preferred pronoun.

[Katganistan]

It is exactly the same. You are being called a name you have specifically asked not to be called.

If your name is Richard and I call you Dick, and you tell me, "Don't call me that, call me Rich, or Rick" and I insist on calling you Dick, and tell you, "well, that IS the proper nickname for your given name," even after you've made it clear I don't like it, that's baiting.

There is literally no difference between that and intentionally and repeatedly misgendering someone.

Yeah, maybe. Except forcing you not to call me dick instead of rick isn't forcing you to accept a specific ideological premise.

You declare yourself trans, and then force everyone to agree with it by using your preferred pronoun.

It is not forcing you to accept an ideology. It is telling you to respect the name I have chosen for myself rather than substituting your own.

Because that is what a pronoun is -- a word to stand in for a proper name.

[Amadel]

Really? Because everywhere I look, I see the opposite. Fedora-sporting MRAs, tryharding edgelords, and trans-bashers.

What's wrong with being MRA? Isn't that and MGTOW a logical counter-symptome to the 3rd wave feminist BS?

I'm also not a trans-basher. Transgender people exist and they should be respected. I do draw the line on some bullshit. My position is that the human species is gender-binary, and that transgender people, genuine ones, engage in transition strategies to change their body to better reflect the person inside.

Anything outside the binary and gender-transition model to me is delusional fantasy. And by forcing me to play ball in "gender-neutral/agender/non-binary/genderqueer" and whole host of other 52 gender constructs recently adopted by the Facebook crowd, 31 of which are official in NY. To me this is forcing me to humor somebody's delusions as part of some personal roleplay they want everybody to participate in. Part of it is this whole charade of prefered gender pronouns. Fuck your pronouns. If I don't entertain your nutty flavor of "trans" I'm even less obliged to use your prefered gender pronouns. If you don't like it, don't engage me, it's that simple. And that's the most reasonable approach that one can adopt without resorting to be forced to engage in PC rhetoric by a moderator.

That's not trans-bashing. If I don't entertain somebody's hipsterish personal identity in a world where biological uniqueness seems to have become an olympic contest, that's not me bashing. It's me exercising my reason. Not enabling somebody's delusions of grandeur. I make a distinction between transgender and trans-wannabes. The latter hurt the reputation of the former. Most people being ignorant because of the latter will bash the former too, putting them in the same category. And I hate that. That's why I'm so vocally against it, and any other iteration of the leftist ideology, who push for acceptance of this without questioning or criticism, and by any means necessary.

[Communal Ecotopia]

If a poster is merely pretending to be transgender and demanding specific pronouns while not actually identifying as such, do the rules still apply to them? If so, it certainly seems like this rule can easily be abused as a form of persistent trolling.

You actually think this happens beyond the obviously mocking, "I identify as a ship..."?

[Communal Ecotopia]

A person is not required to release their actual gender. After all, how would we check? Besides, some people already pose as another gender on the Internet (eg. women that do not want certain attention).

So if a person state that they're prefer a certain set of pronouns we're fine with that. As long as it is reasonably consistent.

Were you the one who nuked the troll? if so, thanks.

So you require consistency on the part of the individual involved? What if they decide to change the gender they identify with?

In my experience with friends IRL, that's not a petty or casual decision.

[Imperial Union of America]

Yeah, maybe. Except forcing you not to call me dick instead of rick isn't forcing you to accept a specific ideological premise.

You declare yourself trans, and then force everyone to agree with it by using your preferred pronoun.

It is not forcing you to accept an ideology. It is telling you to respect the name I have chosen for myself rather than substituting your own.

Because that is what a pronoun is -- a word to stand in for a proper name.

Maybe to a degree. But forcing someone to use your preferred pronoun still forces them to accept an ideological premise that we are otherwise permitted to disagree with.

I empathize with transsexual individuals but I don't think they should expect other people to conform to their agenda. They should just grow some balls instead of getting mods to silence their critics.

You can't go though life expecting that people aren't going to disagree with you. I may think you are not a mod, and deny the facts. I believe that can be trolling if done in a certain way, but should I be forced to call you "mod" everytime I talk to you, simply because you identify as a mod? Would doing otherwise be trolling?

The only difference I can see is that being a mod is visible and being trans is something you declare, when you could simply say, "I am a woman".

I mean no disrespect, I'm only trying to make a point.

[Valystria]

If a poster is merely pretending to be transgender and demanding specific pronouns while not actually identifying as such, do the rules still apply to them? If so, it certainly seems like this rule can easily be abused as a form of persistent trolling.

A person is not required to release their actual gender. After all, how would we check? Besides, some people already pose as another gender on the Internet (eg. women that do not want certain attention).

So if a person state that they're prefer a certain set of pronouns we're fine with that. As long as it is reasonably consistent.

If you can't check then why enforce such a rule? If no one is required to release their actual gender or information on it then why have a rule forcing everyone to cater to preferred pronouns? What is the point? It honestly seems to be a result of political correctness campaigning.

Certain sorts appear to be using the rule as an aggressive mechanism to force everyone else to comply with it. No one is making anyone place their gender in their sig or to mention their gender at all. It's entirely avoidable. They don't have to mention it, but they insist on it, and then proceed to be upset when unsurprisingly someone eventually doesn't want to go along with it.

It's a very particular sort of person that not only sigs their preferred pronouns and a flashing sign saying transgender, lobbying for a rule forcing everyone to respect their proclaimed identity and pronoun preferences, and then taking every opportunity to use that rule to force compliance. It's catering run amok, when arguably no other vocal minority within a minority has been given such privileges and accommodations.

If a poster is merely pretending to be transgender and demanding specific pronouns while not actually identifying as such, do the rules still apply to them? If so, it certainly seems like this rule can easily be abused as a form of persistent trolling.

You actually think this happens beyond the obviously mocking, "I identify as a ship..."?

Constantly. And rather than being allowed to question their sincerity, either the rules are cited or accusations of transphobia are made.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I mean, the Chicago Manual of Style has gone on board with the singular "they" in informal language, but rather ungrammatical in formal writing, although in formal writing you are expected to know some biographical information about who you are rebutting or making an expository piece about.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage ... ersus-they
"Some people object to the use of plural pronouns in this type of situation on the grounds that it’s ungrammatical. In fact, the use of plural pronouns to refer back to a singular subject isn’t new: it represents a revival of a practice dating from the 16th century. It’s increasingly common in current English and is now widely accepted both in speech and in writing."
Oxford English Dictionary is the definitive source of what's grammatical in English.. If they accept it (as well as Merriam-Webster and others) then there's no excuse not to use it.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at ... inary-they

Sure, but I wasn't talking about informal writing when I said the CMS found "they" ungrammatical in formal writing. There's a difference between what the Oxford Dictionary, a descriptive team of people, recommend, and what the CMS, which is a prescriptive team of people, does.

A forum is rather informal, so I would definitely side with Oxford and Merriam-Webster. When doing a paper for my university on the other hand I would side with S&W or the CMS, even if your personal opinion is that Oxford is better or more authoritative than the CMS and S&W. All I'm pointing out is that prescriptive manuals like the Chicago Manual of Style considers singular "they" in informal writing acceptable, even though Strunk and White does not.

[Communal Ecotopia]

A person is not required to release their actual gender. After all, how would we check? Besides, some people already pose as another gender on the Internet (eg. women that do not want certain attention).

So if a person state that they're prefer a certain set of pronouns we're fine with that. As long as it is reasonably consistent.

If you can't check then why enforce such a rule? If no one is required to release their actual gender or information on it then why have a rule forcing everyone to cater to preferred pronouns? What is the point? It honestly seems to be a result of political correctness campaigning.

Certain sorts appear to be using the rule as an aggressive mechanism to force everyone else to comply with it. No one is making anyone place their gender in their sig or to mention their gender at all. It's entirely avoidable. They don't have to mention it, but they insist on it, and then proceed to be upset when unsurprisingly someone eventually doesn't want to go along with it.

It's a very particular sort of person that not only sigs their preferred pronouns and a flashing sign saying transgender, lobbying for a rule forcing everyone to respect their proclaimed identity and pronoun preferences, and then taking every opportunity to use that rule to force compliance. It's catering run amok, when arguably no other vocal minority within a minority has been given such privileges and accommodations.

You actually think this happens beyond the obviously mocking, "I identify as a ship..."?

Constantly. And rather than being allowed to question their sincerity, either the rules are cited or accusations of transphobia are made.

I'll assume sincerity until proven otherwise, thanks.

[USS Monitor]

If a poster is merely pretending to be transgender and demanding specific pronouns while not actually identifying as such, do the rules still apply to them? If so, it certainly seems like this rule can easily be abused as a form of persistent trolling.

You actually think this happens beyond the obviously mocking, "I identify as a ship..."?

Posting as a ship doesn't affect my preferred pronouns. The Monitor was pretty consistently referred to with female pronouns, which are the same ones I use IRL.

[The Horror Channel]

I agree with Sedg. We "allow people to argue that you're the gender of your birth - a widespread view - yet punish people when they use the pronouns appropriate to that belief. I think we've given an unnecessary protection to a vocal group of players, some of whom are too easily offended and need to grow a thicker skin."


I look at Gren's "I'm Androgyne...Please use they/them/their when referencing me, as I do NOT appreciate the other pronouns." sig. They have a point. Androgynous persons don't or can't identify with any single gender. "They/Their" is perfectly acceptable. Gren, and other people in their situation, have patiently corrected pronoun misuse in the past.

Unlike the androgynous person, trans people do identify with a single gender. Transwomen are women. Transmen are men. I understand using the trans prefix is a matter of pride or a means of clarification for some. I also wonder if there's a bit of baiting with some sigs and posts, as though the person is daring anyone to argue with them over their correct gender label. I don't see it as promoting the transgender movement when certain people (who shall remain nameless) do it on NS. I see it as a form of trolling, an excuse to belittle those who believe differently, and a means to force others to accept things regardless of the other person's beliefs. "Accept me for who I am or Mods will force you to!"

A person's gender is nobody else's business. If someone is having a hard time transitioning IRL and feels defeated at every turn, it's perhaps best to not paint a target on themselves while online. Declare your true gender without tagging "trans" on it until you gain enough confidence to politely address pronoun misuse. Don't let yourself be dragged into arguments which overly upset you. Don't respond to trolls that frequent the trans-supportive threads where you go to relax and socialize.

Also: "Trans-trender"? REALLY? That's low, man.

No, it's not. I've encountered a lot of people that aren't trans at all, and they'll ask me to refrain from mentioning it in public. They're young. They want to fit in. They're unhappy IRL. They see the trans crowd as extremely popular and supported/supportive. They'll take on a trending persona because it allows them to be part of that crowd.

Or, worse, they're older and using the label to groom young transgirls or transboys (getting their victims to trust them over time). I haven't encountered groomers on NS but rest assured I'll report those I suspect of doing this.

Also, transtrender is very much a thing

[Amadel]

Also: "Trans-trender"? REALLY? That's low, man.

Yes, it's a thing. If it's low, it's low for them. Because they try to take over a mantle for selfish reasons, not because they are genuinely part of that population. The only reason you see so many "trans" people is because of those. Realistically, genuine transgender folk are a very small percentage even within the LGB community, let alone general population.

You can disagree with transgender rights, plenty of prominent forum posters have. You just can't misgender them, it's that simple. If you had no problem referring to people with the proper pronouns, you wouldn't have needed to make this thread.

If you don't recognize transgender folk as a thing, why should you comply with preferred gender pronouns? Seems a tad bit dumb to request that, when that person is not trans-supportive in the first place. You are basically saying, I respect your position, but I don't respect your freedom of speech exercising that position, when referring to me or others like me.

Language policing for the win.

Believe it or not, i don't think most people give a fuck about the 0.3% of the population that is actually trans and 99.9% of planet earth believe that there are only two genders.

I'd say 0.2%, and within the LGBT population, not general one. Which makes the number far, far lower than what popular media tries to push.

You think 2/3 of trans people believe there are only 2 genders?

All should, not just two thirds of them. Because there are, only two genders.

Now to be honest I think when someone calls someone else "honey", or "dearie", referring to a male coupled with a put down, that should count as misgendering as well, but I think that is a different topic.

People shouldn't be calling anyone "honey" or "dearie" on this forum. It's condescending as fuck at the very least.

Honey, sweetheart and deary are now offenses? Equal to misgendering? Or condescending?

Remind me again how you are pro-freedom-of-speech.

Well, then maybe you shouldn't allow that bullshit here either? Maybe you (not you personally, you collectively now) should start considering shit like "transwomen aren't real women" as trolling. While you're at it, maybe start going after some of the other kinds of bigotries that are festering here too before it becomes Stormfront lite.

How do you gauge it's trolling? The amount of smileys and sarcasm accompanying the sentences? What if there isn't anything of the sort present? What if they are not trolling but that's what they actually believe in?

The problem with the "Gender of your birth" is that this isn't always accurate, a lot of people assume either male or female and in some cases Doctors choose male or female which is later been changed as it was wrong. There are examples of natural gender changes. Also there are examples people being non-binary (completely natural and biological not psychological). For example, hermaphrodites, those born without gender characteristics and those who have some weird chromosomal structure. Misgendering someone who was a hermaphrodite at birth as either male or female is literally wrong unless they have chosen to identify as one or the other. They are literally and biologically speaking both male and female. The opposite goes for those who are born without any gender characteristics (and it does happen).

Non-binary is not a thing. Or agender, genderfluid, or whatever. Using it is enablist.

If a person is born with a combination of sexual and reproductive organs of both sexes, and look/behave/dress androgynous, I (and I think, any rational person), would use the singular "they". They carry aspects of both genders, so the plural makes much more sense in usage here than elsewhere. Everything else is pandering to attention whores who were not cuddled enough growing up. Society at large is not responsible to fill in those parental gaps and failures.

[The first Galactic Republic]

It is not forcing you to accept an ideology. It is telling you to respect the name I have chosen for myself rather than substituting your own.

Because that is what a pronoun is -- a word to stand in for a proper name.

Maybe to a degree. But forcing someone to use your preferred pronoun still forces them to accept an ideological premise that we are otherwise permitted to disagree with.

I'll try to break the circular reasoning here. Why do you think that?

[USS Monitor]

NSG-style debate about what gender trans people REALLY belong to, how many genders there are, etc. does not belong in a Moderation thread.