Gender titles to be scrapped in Brighton.

[Delanshar]

Does commonsense ring a bell with you perhaps?

Citing common sense to defend your fringe opinion is usually a sign that you don't have any arguments.

Since when is saying humans and flamingos are different species a fringe opinion?

[Shofercia]

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10007505.Is_it_the_end_for_Mr___Mrs_/?ref=mr

I find the proposal utterly ridiculous. The fact of the matter is that you are male or female, there is simply no discussion. You are born as a male or female and you will be male or female until you die. What the hell to they propose putting on letters instead of 'Mr', 'Mrs' or 'Miss'? The introduction of 'Ms' was bad enough, you're either married or you're not (you're technically still married if you're a widow), there's no middle ground.

What do you think, should we succumb to political correctness once again?

Here's a novel idea: if you want to be called a "mister" you can be called a "mister". And if you want to be called something else, you can be called else. And if you don't want to be either a "Mr" or a "Ms" or a "Mrs", you can be whatever you want, or even be none of the above, or have no symbol attached to your name. Is Brighton and Hove aware of this thing called "free will"? It's a title that you apply to yourself. We're allowed to do this kind of thing, last time I checked.

I disagree with the council and the OP. We have three common ones:

Mr - someone who's male
Ms - someone who's female and hasn't been married
Mrs - someone who's female and been married at least once (in a Church, during a civil ceremony, or otherwise, (i.e. in Vegas).

However, there are other titles. Just because they're not so well known, or have never been used, doesn't mean that they shouldn't be used. If a transgender wants to call him/her/itself Msr, or something like that, why not?

Edit: transgender instead of pansexual, editing on Seriong's recommendation

[Zaras]

Also I know it's just forms in Brighton. But Brighton could set a precedent and that's what concerns me.

You're terrified of the idea that language changes? Or are you terrified about having to acknowledge that transgender persons are people?

The idea that the entire language could be changed over the long run by a handful of whining activists and their PC cheerleaders is worrisome.

The way you dismiss transgender persons' real concerns as "whining activists" is so obnoxiously condescending.

Or you just disagree with me and find it easier to spam links to random articles rather than consider what I have to say.

Fun fact: I have considered what you have to say, and I think it's a pile of bullshit. I'm quite sure you think the same.

[Linux and the X]

I said it before and I'll say it again.
There is a simple solution.
People who are transgendered can register and have their own separate forms sent to them that omit the offending titles.
The rest of us keep the regular forms.
People who want Mr/Mrs can keep it, and people who don't can have their own forms.

It seems like a good compromise to me.

Better idea: those who feel a need to advertise their gender can register and get special forms.

[Zaras]

Since when is saying humans and flamingos are different species a fringe opinion?

Saying transgender persons are mentally ill is a fringe opinion. Actually, it's worse: it's a crank opinion.

[Zaras]

I said it before and I'll say it again.
There is a simple solution.
People who are transgendered can register and have their own separate forms sent to them that omit the offending titles.
The rest of us keep the regular forms.
People who want Mr/Mrs can keep it, and people who don't can have their own forms.

It seems like a good compromise to me.

Better idea: those who feel a need to advertise their gender can register and get special forms.

Why are we asking people to advertise their gender in the first place? Shouldn't we be asking about their biological sex instead?

Better solution: have the form go like this:

If you have a preferred form of address, state it here: ________________________

[CVT Temp]

Saying transgender persons are mentally ill is a fringe opinion. Actually, it's worse: it's a crank opinion.

Sadly, it isn't exactly fringe.

[Seriong]

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10007505.Is_it_the_end_for_Mr___Mrs_/?ref=mr

I find the proposal utterly ridiculous. The fact of the matter is that you are male or female, there is simply no discussion. You are born as a male or female and you will be male or female until you die. What the hell to they propose putting on letters instead of 'Mr', 'Mrs' or 'Miss'? The introduction of 'Ms' was bad enough, you're either married or you're not (you're technically still married if you're a widow), there's no middle ground.

What do you think, should we succumb to political correctness once again?

Here's a novel idea: if you want to be called a "mister" you can be called a "mister". And if you want to be called something else, you can be called else. And if you don't want to be either a "Mr" or a "Ms" or a "Mrs", you can be whatever you want, or even be none of the above, or have no symbol attached to your name. Is Brighton and Hove aware of this thing called "free will"? It's a title that you apply to yourself. We're allowed to do this kind of thing, last time I checked.

I disagree with the council and the OP. We have three common ones:

Mr - someone who's male
Ms - someone who's female and hasn't been married
Mrs - someone who's female and been married at least once (in a Church, during a civil ceremony, or otherwise, (i.e. in Vegas).

However, there are other titles. Just because they're not so well known, or have never been used, doesn't mean that they shouldn't be used. If a pansexual wants to call him/her/itself Msr, or something like that, why not?

(You know a pansexual is one who is attracted to all genders/non-gendered people, right? It has no bearing on the gender they identify as)

[CVT Temp]

No one has pointed out how the titles are sexist as well. A woman's honorific depends on her marital status but a man's does not. This signifies a societal belief that the most central thing to a woman's identity is whether or not she is a wife.

[Zaras]

No one has pointed out how the titles are sexist as well. A woman's honorific depends on her marital status but a man's does not. This signifies a societal belief that the most central thing to a woman's identity is whether or not she is a wife.

I doubt anybody would've paid attention if I'd said that earlier. But it reinforces the point about how language reflects dominant prejudices and oppression.

[CVT Temp]

I doubt anybody would've paid attention if I'd said that earlier.

Honestly, the whole institution of marriage still has a lot of sexism in it that needs rooted out.

[Esternial]

Ideally there would be an introduction of a gender neutral title which would then be adopted by people who actually care.

There is.

Professor.

Henceforth, we should all get a doctorate.

[Seriong]

I doubt anybody would've paid attention if I'd said that earlier.

Honestly, the whole institution of marriage still has a lot of sexism in it that needs rooted out.

I know the cultural ideas of how to propose, etc. still has sexism, but what is sexist in the institution? (There is the cultural idea of it being 'tacky' for a woman to propose, etc.)

[Shofercia]

Here's a novel idea: if you want to be called a "mister" you can be called a "mister". And if you want to be called something else, you can be called else. And if you don't want to be either a "Mr" or a "Ms" or a "Mrs", you can be whatever you want, or even be none of the above, or have no symbol attached to your name. Is Brighton and Hove aware of this thing called "free will"? It's a title that you apply to yourself. We're allowed to do this kind of thing, last time I checked.

I disagree with the council and the OP. We have three common ones:

Mr - someone who's male
Ms - someone who's female and hasn't been married
Mrs - someone who's female and been married at least once (in a Church, during a civil ceremony, or otherwise, (i.e. in Vegas).

However, there are other titles. Just because they're not so well known, or have never been used, doesn't mean that they shouldn't be used. If a pansexual wants to call him/her/itself Msr, or something like that, why not?

(You know a pansexual is one who is attracted to all genders/non-gendered people, right? It has no bearing on the gender they identify as)

Then they can identify as being all of the genders, being none of the genders, or something unique to pansexuals. Or they can have no identification at all. I'm against Brighton & Hove telling me how to identify me, I'm not against them telling me how to identify pansexuals.

[Blouman Empire]

One more reason not to go to Brighton.

Seriously, instead of forcing people to lose their titles if they are happy to have them, why not just give people the option for people not to have a title?

I guess we can't do that because we have to force our views and beliefs on everyone and they better all live the way we want to live.

[Seriong]

Ideally there would be an introduction of a gender neutral title which would then be adopted by people who actually care.

There is.

Professor.

Henceforth, we should all get a doctorate.

I feel bad for the spanish speaking gender neutral people. (There are few to no gender neutral nouns.)

[Blouman Empire]

However, there are other titles. Just because they're not so well known, or have never been used, doesn't mean that they shouldn't be used. If a pansexual wants to call him/her/itself Msr, or something like that, why not?

I thought the reason was about transgendered people and not hipster bisexuals.

[Shofercia]

One more reason not to go to Brighton.

Seriously, instead of forcing people to lose their titles if they are happy to have them, why not just give people the option for people not to have a title?

I guess we can't do that because we have to force our views and beliefs on everyone and they better all live the way we want to live.

Because using that common sense approach won't placate the huge egos of Brighton & Hove's politician quacks.

[Seriong]

Then they can identify as being all of the genders, being none of the genders, or something unique to pansexuals. Or they can have no identification at all. I'm against Brighton & Hove telling me how to identify me, I'm not against them telling me how to identify pansexuals.

No, pansexuality only refers to attraction. It does not refer in any way to identifying as any, or all genders.

[Shofercia]

Then they can identify as being all of the genders, being none of the genders, or something unique to pansexuals. Or they can have no identification at all. I'm against Brighton & Hove telling me how to identify me, I'm not against them telling me how to identify pansexuals.

No, pansexuality only refers to attraction. It does not refer in any way to identifying as any, or all genders.

Oh, I see. Fair enough. Should I change my initial post to transgender then?

[Delanshar]

You're terrified of the idea that language changes? Or are you terrified about having to acknowledge that transgender persons are people?

Since when have I said they aren't people? For someone whose constantly whining about other people misinterpreting his opinions you sure do it a lot to others.

The way you dismiss transgender persons' real concerns as "whining activists" is so obnoxiously condescending.

Anyone who gets upset over a title box on a stupid piece of paper is worthy of nothing but condescension. It shows an incredible amount of narcissism to think that the entire world should revolve around your every whim.

Fun fact: I have considered what you have to say, and I think it's a pile of bullshit. I'm quite sure you think the same.

If you think my argument is bullshit, I'm doing it right. The last thing I want to do is please the people that take PC to it's extremes.

I'll wear your insult like a badge of honor.

[Souseiseki]

I said it before and I'll say it again.
There is a simple solution.
People who are transgendered can register and have their own separate forms sent to them that omit the offending titles.
The rest of us keep the regular forms.
People who want Mr/Mrs can keep it, and people who don't can have their own forms.

It seems like a good compromise to me.

separate but equal forms

creating 2 forms is kind of dumb, because requesting special ones is, well

[Blouman Empire]

One more reason not to go to Brighton.

Seriously, instead of forcing people to lose their titles if they are happy to have them, why not just give people the option for people not to have a title?

I guess we can't do that because we have to force our views and beliefs on everyone and they better all live the way we want to live.

Because using that common sense approach won't placate the huge egos of Brighton & Hove's politician quacks.

Nor would it satisfy the trans-activist groups because it won't get everyone to follow their ideals.

[Seriong]

No, pansexuality only refers to attraction. It does not refer in any way to identifying as any, or all genders.

Oh, I see. Fair enough. Should I change my initial post to transgender then?

If you want.

[CVT Temp]

I know the cultural ideas of how to propose, etc. still has sexism, but what is sexist in the institution? (There is the cultural idea of it being 'tacky' for a woman to propose, etc.)

Marriage used to be an institution where a man paid a dowry to the father in order to transfer ownership of the daughter over to him. It was a system where men would purchase women almost like property. This still hasn't been removed completely.