Gender titles to be scrapped in Brighton.

[CVT Temp]

I wonder what the UK equivalent of -chan would be...

-chav? It's only one letter different.

[Dumb Ideologies]

You've already made your astounding ignorance of transsexuality and gender abundantly clear.

Not really, you guys just don't know an ill person from a healthy one.

The problem is more that you do know an effective treatment from an ineffective one but keep inexplicably insisting on the latter.

[Norsklow]

I wonder what the UK equivalent of -chan would be...

-Dude
(yes, yes it is gender neutral.)

With this up I will not put. ( Not with -chan either. )

[Zaras]

No.

Because a cis person is the best authority on what's best to do with trans persons.

People shouldn't have to abandon titles entirely just to avoid hurting the feelings of a handful of people.

Oh, there you go again. If you keep thinking this is just a "handful of people" whose "feelings are being hurt" instead of a real issue of societal oppression, that's your problem, not mine.

As I've said before, with 7 billion people on Earth you will get people who offended by just about anything and everything. To try and satisfy every little group would be foolish and unfeasible.

That is a nonsensical argument that trivialises the oppression and discrimination LGBT people face. Make a better one or come back after you've educated yourself on the topic some more.

[Cromarty]

Even better solution:

Add an 'other' option for title.

No, that's too Otherizing.

Is this an actual thing? I've worked with and socialised with transgendered people before and none of them ever complained of being 'otherised'.

Even better option: omit the honorifics entirely.

Why?

[Delanshar]

Cut 'em out, it means everybody can deal with the forms faster.

Because checking the box for "Mr" takes SUCH a long time.

[Britannic Realms]

But you still have certain privileges. Try using one of these: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Privilege_checklist

You and I have very different idea of 'privilege'. My idea of privilege is not having your sexual orientation featured in a television guide. I also refuse to take anything from 'Geek Feminism' wiki seriously.

[Dumb Ideologies]

I wonder what the UK equivalent of -chan would be...

-Dude
(yes, yes it is gender neutral.)

Oh gods.

I had a several-page long argument on a transgender forum with someone who claimed that "dude" erased female identities and contributed to the wholesale adoption of "male" as a social default.

Sometimes I feel like I involve myself with the wrong people.

[Zaras]

No, that's too Otherizing.

Is this an actual thing? I've worked with and socialised with transgendered people before and none of them ever complained of being 'otherised'.

It's a thing. The fact that you haven't heard about it before doesn't mean it's nonexistent.

Why?

Why bother keeping the honorifics in? They're a pointless artifact that achieves nothing.

[Zaras]

But you still have certain privileges. Try using one of these: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Privilege_checklist

You and I have very different idea of 'privilege'. My idea of privilege is not having your sexual orientation featured in a television guide. I also refuse to take anything from 'Geek Feminism' wiki seriously.

Yeah, right, dismiss one source I gave and don't bother to try and look at any other ones.

Seriously, there's a fucking wealth of info about privilege on the Internet, and you're too lazy to look it up. There's more to privilege than whatever your example is supposed to mean because I'm not even sure what you're playing at there. Is it about how damn near every TV show is about pretty, rich, straight white people, and everybody else is shoved to the sidelines?

[Zaras]

Sometimes I feel like I involve myself with the wrong people.

Considering you've been in a debate with me before... yeah, you might have a point there.

[Ostroeuropa]

Is this an actual thing? I've worked with and socialised with transgendered people before and none of them ever complained of being 'otherised'.

It's a thing. The fact that you haven't heard about it before doesn't mean it's nonexistent.

Why?

Why bother keeping the honorifics in? They're a pointless artifact that achieves nothing.

I already said.
Because pretending to be important is part of human culture.

[Britannic Realms]

People shouldn't have to abandon titles entirely just to avoid hurting the feelings of a handful of people.

Oh, there you go again. If you keep thinking this is just a "handful of people" whose "feelings are being hurt" instead of a real issue of societal oppression, that's your problem, not mine.

Calling somebody 'Mr' is not societal oppression. /thread

As I've said before, with 7 billion people on Earth you will get people who offended by just about anything and everything. To try and satisfy every little group would be foolish and unfeasible.

That is a nonsensical argument that trivialises the oppression and discrimination LGBT people face. Make a better one or come back after you've educated yourself on the topic some more.

No it's not. It seems to me that liberals wish to please very single group on the Earth which is impossible because, like the poster you quoted said, people get offended by anything and everything.

[Norsklow]

Is this an actual thing? I've worked with and socialised with transgendered people before and none of them ever complained of being 'otherised'.

It's a thing. The fact that you haven't heard about it before doesn't mean it's nonexistent.

Why?

Why bother keeping the honorifics in? They're a pointless artifact that achieves nothing.

A Gov't official writes you a letter: John Jones.
Now, you write him back.
But if YOU call him Jake James... you're in hot water.

As matters stand under YOUR proposal, he gets to call you first name, but YOU must STILL call him Sir. Unequal Dialogue. Nothnx.

[CVT Temp]

Is this an actual thing? I've worked with and socialised with transgendered people before and none of them ever complained of being 'otherised'.

The term is more commonly used in feminist circles than LGBT groups.

[Britannic Realms]

You and I have very different idea of 'privilege'. My idea of privilege is not having your sexual orientation featured in a television guide. I also refuse to take anything from 'Geek Feminism' wiki seriously.

Yeah, right, dismiss one source I gave and don't bother to try and look at any other ones.

Seriously, there's a fucking wealth of info about privilege on the Internet, and you're too lazy to look it up. There's more to privilege than whatever your example is supposed to mean because I'm not even sure what you're playing at there. Is it about how damn near every TV show is about pretty, rich, straight white people, and everybody else is shoved to the sidelines?

Your last statement is false, lots of television shows these days include minorities. EastEnders, Coronation Street, Emmerdale, Hollyoaks, Neighbours, Home and Away, etc.

[Zaras]

It's a thing. The fact that you haven't heard about it before doesn't mean it's nonexistent.



Why bother keeping the honorifics in? They're a pointless artifact that achieves nothing.

A Gov't official writes you a letter: John Jones.
Now, you write him back.
But if YOU call him Jake James... you're in hot water.

As matters stand under YOUR proposal, he gets to call you first name, but YOU must STILL call him Sir. Unequal Dialogue. Nothnx.

Solution: abolish all honorifics.

[Souseiseki]

argument on a transgender forum

Råñ¢håñ
ñ§G'§ gêñÐêr-ßêñÐïñg ♪mê†ålhêåÐ♪ ö†åkµ
Whêñ hê'§ å gïrl, hê'§ å gïrl, whêñ §hê'§ å ßö¥ §hê'§ å ßö¥
♥ǵ†êñꧧ ï§ jµ§†ï¢ê♥
Ìf Ì wå§ å gïråffê, åñÐ §ömêöñê §åïÐ Ì wå§ å §ñåkê, Ì'Ð †hïñk, ñö, 墆µåll¥ Ì'm å gïråffê ~Rï¢hårÐ Gêrê~
Ì ¢öµlÐñ'† Ðö ï†! ñö Mö†ïvå†ïöñ! Ì wåññå þlå¥! Rêl¥ öñ ö†hêr§ ïñ å þïñ¢h! ~Ìzµmï Köñå†å~
†hå† åwkwårÐ mömêñ† whêñ Ì'm å fµñÐåmêñ†åll¥ ßꆆêr þêr§öñ †håñ ¥öµ

i dunno, sounds like you were in the right place

no offence

we're just horribly bigoted against any trans forum that isn't ours because they're all piles of shit because of things like... well that...

oh hey you got izumi konata back!!!

[Zaras]

Oh, there you go again. If you keep thinking this is just a "handful of people" whose "feelings are being hurt" instead of a real issue of societal oppression, that's your problem, not mine.

Calling somebody 'Mr' is not societal oppression. /thread

Considering this is the main argument of those opposed to the Brighton council, thanks for /threading everybody else.

No it's not.

Yes it is.

It seems to me that liberals wish to please very single group on the Earth

No, it's about ensuring that everyone is treated equally. Honorifics constitute blatant gender binary favouritism.

[Alaje]

Oh, there you go again. If you keep thinking this is just a "handful of people" whose "feelings are being hurt" instead of a real issue of societal oppression, that's your problem, not mine.

Calling somebody 'Mr' is not societal oppression. /thread

That is a nonsensical argument that trivialises the oppression and discrimination LGBT people face. Make a better one or come back after you've educated yourself on the topic some more.

No it's not. It seems to me that liberals wish to please very single group on the Earth which is impossible because, like the poster you quoted said, people get offended by anything and everything.

Liberals want everyone to be seen as "normal" even if they're actually ill or perverted.

[Zaras]

Yeah, right, dismiss one source I gave and don't bother to try and look at any other ones.

Seriously, there's a fucking wealth of info about privilege on the Internet, and you're too lazy to look it up. There's more to privilege than whatever your example is supposed to mean because I'm not even sure what you're playing at there. Is it about how damn near every TV show is about pretty, rich, straight white people, and everybody else is shoved to the sidelines?

Your last statement is false, lots of television shows these days include minorities. EastEnders, Coronation Street, Emmerdale, Hollyoaks, Neighbours, Home and Away, etc.

I said damn near. How many of those shitty sitcoms actually have them as main characters instead of just support characters for the white protagonists?

[CVT Temp]

Solution: abolish all honorifics.

I like the idea of -fuck better than abolition. Hello Sandra Johnson-fuck, this is my friend, Jacob Nelson-fuck. I think you two would make a great couple.

[Delanshar]

Because a cis person is the best authority on what's best to do with trans persons.

Goddamit, stop calling me a 'cis person'. I'm not a fucking molecule with hydrogens on the same side. I'm a human male!

Oh, there you go again. If you keep thinking this is just a "handful of people" whose "feelings are being hurt" instead of a real issue of societal oppression, that's your problem, not mine.

You've got pretty low standards for 'societal oppression' if you think it includes checking Mr/Mrs on a piece of paper.

That is a nonsensical argument that trivialises the oppression and discrimination LGBT people face. Make a better one or come back after you've educated yourself on the topic some more.

No. Getting upset about checking a box on a piece of paper is what trivializes LGBT discrimination.

Gay people face execution in Iran. There are many places where they face lynch mobs and stoning. THATS oppression. There are more important issues than the title on some stupid form, yet the transgender community is so full or themselves they decide to get upset about this instead of actual oppression.

[Zaras]

Liberals want everyone to be seen as "normal" even if they're actually ill or perverted.

You don't know shit about what normality, illness or perversion is. We should care about your opinion because...?

[Norsklow]

A Gov't official writes you a letter: John Jones.
Now, you write him back.
But if YOU call him Jake James... you're in hot water.

As matters stand under YOUR proposal, he gets to call you first name, but YOU must STILL call him Sir. Unequal Dialogue. Nothnx.

Solution: abolish all honorifics.

Good luck with calling the Lord Mayor by his first name. I don't know about you... but I am not going to try that. No matter what a law says.