"What are your pronouns?"

[Heloin]

Bit weird to compare someone telling you their pronouns to a lady asking you for help. However politely or rudely it might be phrased, being told someone's pronouns isn't a request that you do them a favour.

You missed part of the analogy:

The Karen in the supermarket was shouting at me for not seeing her need for assistance from another section.
She was rude to me for not being staff, not prioritising her needs over mine, not minding my own business - whatvever. She did not ask, she DEMANDED my assistance.

Respect for pronouns is - see my first answer - readily given if the pronoun is politely told: "I prefer", "Please", "Thank you".
Respect for pronouns is a lot less readily given when is it expected that I somehow divine the correct pronoun from ten different options, and have to take verbal abuse for explaining common courtesy. If pronouns become atithetical to courtesy, I will opt for courtesy.

If your respect for calling someone what they want to be called is conditional then you fundamentally don't respect them. It's not courtesy is condescending.

[HISPIDA]

man i just don't want to be killed on the street by skinheads and trump supporters

I mean, I dont know how asking them to be polite and respect your pronouns is going to help that.

cuz it'll raise general acceptance with the population. and that's not the only way, you know. protests, pride marches, and if push comes to shove, arming ourselves. if the worst comes to pass and our right become stripped away by legislation, then i'll gladly buy a gun to protect myself*, but before that day comes we can do everything in our power to push forward that the idea that we are people, that we matter.

*which i already plan on doing anyways, but i digress.

[Salus Maior]

I mean, I dont know how asking them to be polite and respect your pronouns is going to help that.

cuz it'll raise general acceptance with the population. and that's not the only way, you know. protests, pride marches, and if push comes to shove, arming ourselves. if the worst comes to pass and our right become stripped away by legislation, then i'll gladly buy a gun to protect myself*, but before that day comes we can do everything in our power to push forward that the idea that we are people, that we matter.

*which i already plan on doing anyways, but i digress.

It'd probably be too late at that point, tbh.

[Waspocalypse]

Indeed, there is no pretense on your part - and a ton of projection toward me.

Sure whateves.

More dismissive attitude.

Hence the word analogy - and the explanation of what an analogy is. You are either very oblivious, or purposefully pretending to be unaware of how the answer and its clarification were constructed.

The analogy doesn't help whatever point you intend to make, if it's even related to the topic it only works against your point. That you made a bad argument doesn't mean other people are idiots.

These assertions need to be demonstrated; just calling my argument a bad one does not make it so. But good for you for finally seeing the analogy. Now try understanding it.

EXPECTING / DEMANDING consideration = wrong
ASKING consideration = likely to get the desired result.

That scootered lady could have had my help by saying "excuse me, could you help me find staff / get something from that shelf for me" - and I´d have done so and she could have thanked me and I´d have gone home feeling good, and she´d have been on her way with her sliced meat.

Instead, she decided to unload God knows how much frustration on me, even when I wasn´t to blame for any of her situation (I didn´t put her in that scooter, I did not abscond the staff, it wasn´t my job to assist her / it wasn´t my priority to mind her business).

She felt that her special needs somehow entitled her to be rude to me. No, she was utterly wrong in thinking so.

ANALOGY

Asking to use a different pronoun is likely to be respected. Everybody is happy to do so unless...

pronouns have been demanded with a bully´s attitude of "you must guess mine correctly and if you get it wrong even once I will be horrible to you". That may, after a while, start putting people off.

FURTHER EXPLANATION:

I do not claim that a Karen in the supermarket is similar to, or of the same magnitude as, the world-wide issue of pronouns.
I used an everyday, low-key comparison, to illustrate the dynamic of the situation.
If non-cis-gendered individuals feel that the dynamic of their interactions with the wider world has now become incomparable with any and all everyday encounters, then reasonable discussion becomes impossible. That is literally a demand that discussion can only be had on terms set by the ones with the bullies´ attitude.

Analogy =/= example. Please see previous reply.

If you're upset about assumptions made on your arguments make better arguments.

1. I am not upset.
2. To assume makes an ass out of you (U) and me.
3. Your arguments so far are assertions, not demonstrations.

More examples of dismissing someone´s answer and arguments by (deliberate?) misinterpretation. And somehow implying that such misinterpretation also justifies a lack of common courtesy, or a general disbelief. Whatever your pronouns, you really are an excellent illustration of the attitude I was referring to. An attitude that bears similarities to the scootered Karen in the supermarket, whose abrasive attitude sprang from a comparable but not equal mindset, even if the situation had nothing to do with pronouns. Comparison =/= causality.

Do you have a point beyond that you feel like you're being forced to regard other people with dignity?

You are once more mischaracterising my argument.
My argument is that such dignity is easily and willingly extended when it is asked, and unwillingly extended when it is demanded. Because the demand is based on a desire to shout at someone.

And with that, ladies and gentlemen and everyone in between, the debater ran out of arguments, opting instead for baseless ridicule. And He/She/They/Zhe/Xhe/Shex wonders why there are people who are reluctant to extend a courtesy toward Him/Her/Them/Zhim/Xhem/Herx when it comes to pronouns. If you try to explain the difference between asking and demanding, you get "laughing out loud": a bully´s defense.

To be totally honest if someone being rude to you because you don't want to be even slightly polite to them is the greatest adversity you've had in your life then god I wish I could live like that.

You have no idea what the greatest adversity in my life has been.
Just because I chose an everyday example for an analogy doesn´t mean that I am unfamiliar with greater difficulties. I just don´t see how - for instance - being gaybashed is somehow relevant to a discussion about the dynamic surrounding demands / requests for pronouns. This is not the intersectionality olympics. This is - or should be - about an answer to the question "why are people reluctant to respect someone´s pronouns".

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.

Excellent use of the conjunctive perfectum.

I feel more like a Tutor than a Philosophus at this point.

And I will not be silenced. Not by assertions. Not by bad attitude. Not by mischaracterisations. Not by an inflated sense of entitlement.

[Waspocalypse]

You missed part of the analogy:

The Karen in the supermarket was shouting at me for not seeing her need for assistance from another section.
She was rude to me for not being staff, not prioritising her needs over mine, not minding my own business - whatvever. She did not ask, she DEMANDED my assistance.

Respect for pronouns is - see my first answer - readily given if the pronoun is politely told: "I prefer", "Please", "Thank you".
Respect for pronouns is a lot less readily given when is it expected that I somehow divine the correct pronoun from ten different options, and have to take verbal abuse for explaining common courtesy. If pronouns become atithetical to courtesy, I will opt for courtesy.

If your respect for calling someone what they want to be called is conditional then you fundamentally don't respect them. It's not courtesy is condescending.

I helped that scootered Karen whether she was polite or rude, didn´t I?
I respect someone´s pronouns whether they demand or ask, don´t I?

I explained my RELUCTANCE to do so after being rudely spoken to. (Which was the quintessence of the question originally asked.) The condescension was on the other person´s part.

Respect is earned. It is always conditional.
You confuse the refusal to honor a request with the reluctance to meet a demand.

edited for spelling mistake

[Heloin]

And I will not be silenced. Not by assertions. Not by bad attitude. Not by mischaracterisations. Not by an inflated sense of entitlement.

Look at you, being so brave after the scary leftist silenced you. I must be shivering in my boots.

[Waspocalypse]

And I will not be silenced. Not by assertions. Not by bad attitude. Not by mischaracterisations. Not by an inflated sense of entitlement.

Look at you, being so brave after the scary leftist silenced you. I must be shivering in my boots.

1. You did not silence me.
2. You did however use a form of the verb Tacere, which means silencing/ being silenced.
3. What you do with your boots is your business.
4. Once more, you are mischaracterising my reply. As if a refusal to accept unfounded assertions is brave! It is common sense to do so.

Did I notice a lack of substantive response to the rest of my reply?

Si taces, consentire consideris?

[Neutraligon]

Look at you, being so brave after the scary leftist silenced you. I must be shivering in my boots.

1. You did not silence me.
2. You did however use a form of the verb Tacere, which means silencing/ being silenced.
3. What you do with your boots is your business.
4. Once more, you are mischaracterising my reply. As if a refusal to accept unfounded assertions is brave! It is common sense to do so.

Did I notice a lack of substantive response to the rest of my reply?

Si taces, consentire consideris?

I assume you have no issue being called whatever the person calling you wants. If you have a preferred name too bad, you do not get to demand people call you by that name, right.

[Waspocalypse]

1. You did not silence me.
2. You did however use a form of the verb Tacere, which means silencing/ being silenced.
3. What you do with your boots is your business.
4. Once more, you are mischaracterising my reply. As if a refusal to accept unfounded assertions is brave! It is common sense to do so.

Did I notice a lack of substantive response to the rest of my reply?

Si taces, consentire consideris?

I assume you have no issue being called whatever the person calling you wants. If you have a preferred name too bad, you do not get to demand people call you by that name, right.

Alrighty.
Different analogy.
I´ll play.

Let´s say my name is Robert Smith. (It isn´t, but we are just going with a random and common name.)
If, in the course of my life, I change my first name to Charles, I should expect
1. some people to keep calling me by my old name - at least initially.
2. to gently remind them of my new, preferred name.
I should NOT expect the right to be a d**k to anyone who still calls me Robert.

Let´s say I marry a great bloke by the name of Hugh Black, and that I change my surname to Black-Smith to honour my marriage. I should expect
3. some people to still call me by my old surname, as they are unaware that I have change my name with my marital status
4. to gently remind them that I go by Black-Smith now.
I should not expect the right to be a d**k to anyone who still addresses me as Smith.

If someone calls me Bob, or Bobby, instead of Robert, I can
5. Tell them I prefer Robert (Bobby is for intimate family and friends, maybe?) - and they should honor that request. If they don´t they are a d**k/c**t. But if I demand it from a high horse right the first time, I would be the d**k.
6. Tell them it´s OK, because I know how they mean it.

If someone randomly comes up to me and says "Hey Winston!", I should
7. politely tell them they mistake me for someone else. They should then stop calling me Winston.
8. NOT call them some Bobby-phobic a**hole just because they made a mistake.

If someone comes up to me and calls me a "stupidmillennialwhyareyouignoringmeIhavebeenwaitinghereforGodknowshowlongareyoulazyaswell",
I will

9. probably not tell them my name
10. help them with their sliced meat
11. remind them that "excuse me, young man" would have been a better way to address me.

Does that answer your question, Neutraligon?

[Heloin]

If your respect for calling someone what they want to be called is conditional then you fundamentally don't respect them. It's not courtesy is condescending.

I helped that scootered Karen whether she was polite or rude, didn´t I?

No, you stated that you stopped helping her when she was rude. If you did you didn't initially state that you had.

I respect someone´s pronouns whether they demand or ask, don´t I?

You likely don't based on your still posting here complaining about it but I couldn't be certain.

I explained my RELUCTANCE to do so after being rudely spoken to. (Which was the quintessence of the question originally asked.) The condescension was on the other person´s part.

If that's what you argued then you didn't argue it well. If the person you told a story about ever existed and this isn't just a colourful metaphor.

Respect is earned. It is always conditional.
You confuse the refusal to honor a request with the reluctance to meet a demand.

It's less that and more I think you likely don't treat others with the common decency you pretend to care about.

[Heloin]

I assume you have no issue being called whatever the person calling you wants. If you have a preferred name too bad, you do not get to demand people call you by that name, right.

Alrighty.
Different analogy.
I´ll play.

Let´s say my name is Robert Smith. (It isn´t, but we are just going with a random and common name.)
If, in the course of my life, I change my first name to Charles, I should expect
1. some people to keep calling me by my old name - at least initially.
2. to gently remind them of my new, preferred name.
I should NOT expect the right to be a d**k to anyone who still calls me Robert.

It would absolutely be a dick move to keep referring to someone by a name they don't want to be called after being told what the preferred name is.

Let´s say I marry a great bloke by the name of Hugh Black, and that I change my surname to Black-Smith to honour my marriage. I should expect
3. some people to still call me by my old surname, as they are unaware that I have change my name with my marital status
4. to gently remind them that I go by Black-Smith now.
I should not expect the right to be a d**k to anyone who still addresses me as Smith.

It would absolutely be a dick move to keep referring to someone by a name they don't want to be called after being told what the preferred name is.

If someone calls me Bob, or Bobby, instead of Robert, I can
5. Tell them I prefer Robert (Bobby is for intimate family and friends, maybe?) - and they should honor that request. If they don´t they are a d**k/c**t. But if I demand it from a high horse right the first time, I would be the d**k.
6. Tell them it´s OK, because I know how they mean it.

If they know you don't like being called a name and they choose to call you that they would be a dick. If you don't mind then you are fine with being called that name.

If someone randomly comes up to me and says "Hey Winston!", I should
7. politely tell them they mistake me for someone else. They should then stop calling me Winston.
8. NOT call them some Bobby-phobic a**hole just because they made a mistake.

This fictional world doesn't fit well into real human experience and it's starting to breakdown.

If someone comes up to me and calls me a "stupidmillennialwhyareyouignoringmeIhavebeenwaitinghereforGodknowshowlongareyoulazyaswell",
I will

9. probably not tell them my name
10. help them with their sliced meat
11. remind them that "excuse me, young man" would have been a better way to address me.

Does that answer your question, Neutraligon?

Your stand up career isn't going to take off.

[Waspocalypse]

I helped that scootered Karen whether she was polite or rude, didn´t I?

No, you stated that you stopped helping her when she was rude. If you did you didn't initially state that you had.

I respect someone´s pronouns whether they demand or ask, don´t I?

You likely don't based on your still posting here complaining about it but I couldn't be certain.

I explained my RELUCTANCE to do so after being rudely spoken to. (Which was the quintessence of the question originally asked.) The condescension was on the other person´s part.

If that's what you argued then you didn't argue it well. If the person you told a story about ever existed and this isn't just a colourful metaphor.

Respect is earned. It is always conditional.
You confuse the refusal to honor a request with the reluctance to meet a demand.

It's less that and more I think you likely don't treat others with the common decency you pretend to care about.

"after she scolded me, my goodwill was through" =/= my assistance stopped.
Goodwill is about readiness, reluctance, and anger.

"I couldn´t be certain"
Yet you asserted my position. Therein lies the root of all mischaracterisations you made about me and my arguments.
Therein, too, lies the bad attitude: it is assumed that anything other than self-flagellating readiness to divine the correct pronoun is indicative of a lack of respect / refusal. Things just aren´t that balck-and-white.

"You didn´t argue well"
Yes, I made a mistake in assuming good faith on the part of those who´d read my answer.

"Colourfull metaphor"
Your refusal to accept reality as such is becoming a persistent pattern.

"You likely don´t treat"
"You pretend"

More unfounded assertions, when earlier you admitted there was no certainty on your part. Earlier you wrote that you were "not pretending to be polite". Perhaps you assume the worst in me because you assume me to be similarly disposed as yourself? Your attitude, however, is not a standard. Nor even a sub-standard. Your attitude is a problem. As are the replies that spring from it.

They really remind me of Karen on her scooter: she was utterly incapable of perspective, nuance, and courtesy. All she cared about was to shout at someone. She might have been deputed by gender as female, but a woman? Not on my terms. She was a c**t.

[Heloin]

No, you stated that you stopped helping her when she was rude. If you did you didn't initially state that you had.


You likely don't based on your still posting here complaining about it but I couldn't be certain.


If that's what you argued then you didn't argue it well. If the person you told a story about ever existed and this isn't just a colourful metaphor.


It's less that and more I think you likely don't treat others with the common decency you pretend to care about.

"after she scolded me, my goodwill was through" =/= my assistance stopped.
Goodwill is about readiness, reluctance, and anger.

"I couldn´t be certain"
Yet you asserted my position. Therein lies the root of all mischaracterisations you made about me and my arguments.
Therein, too, lies the bad attitude: it is assumed that anything other than self-flagellating readiness to divine the correct pronoun is indicative of a lack of respect / refusal. Things just aren´t that balck-and-white.

"You didn´t argue well"
Yes, I made a mistake in assuming good faith on the part of those who´d read my answer.

"Colourfull metaphor"
Your refusal to accept reality as such is becoming a persistent pattern.

"You likely don´t treat"
"You pretend"

More unfounded assertions, when earlier you admitted there was no certainty on your part. Earlier you wrote that you were "not pretending to be polite". Perhaps you assume the worst in me because you assume me to be similarly disposed as yourself? Your attitude, however, is not a standard. Nor even a sub-standard. Your attitude is a problem. As are the replies that spring from it.

They really remind me of Karen on her scooter: she was utterly incapable of perspective, nuance, and courtesy. All she cared about was to shout at someone. She might have been deputed by gender as female, but a woman? Not on my terms. She was a c**t.

Shivering in my boots.

She was a c**t.

I'm honestly not sure why you think censuring your own swear words is needed.

[Waspocalypse]

Alrighty.
Different analogy.
I´ll play.

Let´s say my name is Robert Smith. (It isn´t, but we are just going with a random and common name.)
If, in the course of my life, I change my first name to Charles, I should expect
1. some people to keep calling me by my old name - at least initially.
2. to gently remind them of my new, preferred name.
I should NOT expect the right to be a d**k to anyone who still calls me Robert.

It would absolutely be a dick move to keep referring to someone by a name they don't want to be called after being told what the preferred name is.

Let´s say I marry a great bloke by the name of Hugh Black, and that I change my surname to Black-Smith to honour my marriage. I should expect
3. some people to still call me by my old surname, as they are unaware that I have change my name with my marital status
4. to gently remind them that I go by Black-Smith now.
I should not expect the right to be a d**k to anyone who still addresses me as Smith.

It would absolutely be a dick move to keep referring to someone by a name they don't want to be called after being told what the preferred name is.

Actually, no. That would be understandable up to some point. And that goes for both above situations. Human memory is prone to keep connecting nouns/names with the same face. Human memory does not work like a word processor editing, but rather like a random test.

Assuming someone´s bad intentions or lack of good will when they make a mistake: makes you the d**k, not them.

If someone calls me Bob, or Bobby, instead of Robert, I can
5. Tell them I prefer Robert (Bobby is for intimate family and friends, maybe?) - and they should honor that request. If they don´t they are a d**k/c**t. But if I demand it from a high horse right the first time, I would be the d**k.
6. Tell them it´s OK, because I know how they mean it.

If they know you don't like being called a name and they choose to call you that they would be a dick. If you don't mind then you are fine with being called that name.

That is what I said.
What I was trying to illustrate is that different situations come with a different dynamic. Neutraligon´s argument was rather broad, you see?

If someone randomly comes up to me and says "Hey Winston!", I should
7. politely tell them they mistake me for someone else. They should then stop calling me Winston.
8. NOT call them some Bobby-phobic a**hole just because they made a mistake.

This fictional world doesn't fit well into real human experience and it's starting to breakdown.

Mistaking someone for another has never happened to you?
And because it has never happened to you, it has never happened anywhere in the world, to anyone?
Even if the first assertion were true (it probably isn´t), who made your personal experience the standard for the rest of the globe? Your perception and reality are two different things.

If someone comes up to me and calls me a "stupidmillennialwhyareyouignoringmeIhavebeenwaitinghereforGodknowshowlongareyoulazyaswell",
I will

9. probably not tell them my name
10. help them with their sliced meat
11. remind them that "excuse me, young man" would have been a better way to address me.

Does that answer your question, Neutraligon?

Your stand up career isn't going to take off.

1.The question wasn´t addressed to you
2. Mischaracterising my reply - AGAIN
3. Nothing wrong with steering the conversation back to the original reply to the question what makes people reluctant to respect pronouns.
4. Your efforts to dismiss valid points as attempt at comedy are another emerging pattern
5. Still waiting for Neutraligon to reply.

[Waspocalypse]

Shivering in my boots.

I'm honestly not sure why you think censuring your own swear words is needed.

Ad 1. This vapid reply has now been given twice. Do you have anything substantive to offer? Or shall I take it as a mostly tacid but wholly reluctant acceptance of the arguments it ignores?

Ad 2. When someone is low-key flaming, it is best not to reply with anything that can be taken out of context. Erring on the safe side and all that. As for you being honest... hope springs eternal in my mind.

[Heloin]

Shivering in my boots.

I'm honestly not sure why you think censuring your own swear words is needed.

Ad 1. This vapid reply has now been given twice. Do you have anything substantive to offer? Or shall I take it as a mostly tacid but wholly reluctant acceptance of the arguments it ignores?

Ad 2. When someone is low-key flaming, it is best not to reply with anything that can be taken out of context. Erring on the safe side and all that. As for you being honest... hope springs eternal in my mind.

If you think I'm flaming you report me.

[Waspocalypse]

As you so eloquently said

I couldn´t be certain

But until I am certain, I will be censoring my own swearwords.
Which neatly brings us back to the response to your question why I would do so.

[Armeattla]

Because it is demanded, rather than asked.

I find the assertion that the use of preferred pronouns is always demanded rather than asked rather iffy. Especially since I know most trans and enby people generally act out of a position of appeal, rather than authority.

Can I understand it that they get pissy after being misgendered? Yes.
Being misgendered quite often causes nothing short of "fight or flight", it's extremely uncomfortable after all.

[Ifreann]

Bit weird to compare someone telling you their pronouns to a lady asking you for help. However politely or rudely it might be phrased, being told someone's pronouns isn't a request that you do them a favour.

You missed part of the analogy:

The Karen in the supermarket was shouting at me for not seeing her need for assistance from another section.
She was rude to me for not being staff, not prioritising her needs over mine, not minding my own business - whatvever. She did not ask, she DEMANDED my assistance.

Respect for pronouns is - see my first answer - readily given if the pronoun is politely told: "I prefer", "Please", "Thank you".

It remains weird to expect this kind of behaviour from people. It is not normal to use please and thank you when giving someone information. That is not how people speak.

Respect for pronouns is a lot less readily given when is it expected that I somehow divine the correct pronoun from ten different options, and have to take verbal abuse for explaining common courtesy. If pronouns become atithetical to courtesy, I will opt for courtesy.

But obviously that never happens. People know perfectly well when their pronouns are evident from their appearance and when they are not, just the same as people know when their name is commonly mispronounced or misspelled. No one is going to get mad at you for not correctly identifying something they know you probably can't identify about them. And no one is going to be fooled by your sputtering complaints about lack of courtesy when they know you do know their pronouns but got them wrong anyway.

[Waspocalypse]

You missed part of the analogy:

The Karen in the supermarket was shouting at me for not seeing her need for assistance from another section.
She was rude to me for not being staff, not prioritising her needs over mine, not minding my own business - whatvever. She did not ask, she DEMANDED my assistance.

Respect for pronouns is - see my first answer - readily given if the pronoun is politely told: "I prefer", "Please", "Thank you".

It remains weird to expect this kind of behaviour from people. It is not normal to use please and thank you when giving someone information. That is not how people speak.

Respect for pronouns is a lot less readily given when is it expected that I somehow divine the correct pronoun from ten different options, and have to take verbal abuse for explaining common courtesy. If pronouns become atithetical to courtesy, I will opt for courtesy.

But obviously that never happens. People know perfectly well when their pronouns are evident from their appearance and when they are not, just the same as people know when their name is commonly mispronounced or misspelled. No one is going to get mad at you for not correctly identifying something they know you probably can't identify about them. And no one is going to be fooled by your sputtering complaints about lack of courtesy when they know you do know their pronouns but got them wrong anyway.

I feel that we are not on the same wavelength here.
You seem to assume that I am defending someone misgendering an obvious transition case, over and over again.

I was referring to the occasional mistake, or the occasional ambiguous case/ hyper-rare pronoun. And the vociferous minority´s bullying reactions.

Which makes me wonder who has been moving the goalposts here.
Right now, I am too tired to figure out your wavelength. I´ll try again tomorrow or the day after.

[Waspocalypse]

Because it is demanded, rather than asked.

I find the assertion that the use of preferred pronouns is always demanded rather than asked rather iffy. Especially since I know most trans and enby people generally act out of a position of appeal, rather than authority.

Can I understand it that they get pissy after being misgendered? Yes.
Being misgendered quite often causes nothing short of "fight or flight", it's extremely uncomfortable after all.

I did not - anywhere - use the word "always". There is a critical cumulative, though.

[Racoda]

https://public.oed.com/blog/a-brief-his ... ular-they/

I don't know, the Oxford English Dictionary is the recognized source for everything about the language: will THEY do?

As I've said in my previous post, the claim that "People have been using they/them singular pronouns for longer than singular “you” has been a thing" is misleading. Yes, singular they has been a thing for a long time (14th c.), but so has singular you (13th~15th c., depending on your standards). Singular you was criticized in the 17th century, and singular they up until now, for some reason.

Also, your snark is completely unnecessary.

[Kerwa]

I really don’t care about using “they” in a singular sense. In fact I’ve been doing it my entire life to avoid the trouble of writing “he or she”. I am very lazy.

However I do feel I am owed a massive apology from English teachers who were complete arseholes about it when I was in school. (I even made the same arguments that are proffered here and they were all firmly dismissed as completely “wrong”.)

This is further proof that school is a waste of time.

[Ifreann]

It remains weird to expect this kind of behaviour from people. It is not normal to use please and thank you when giving someone information. That is not how people speak.

But obviously that never happens. People know perfectly well when their pronouns are evident from their appearance and when they are not, just the same as people know when their name is commonly mispronounced or misspelled. No one is going to get mad at you for not correctly identifying something they know you probably can't identify about them. And no one is going to be fooled by your sputtering complaints about lack of courtesy when they know you do know their pronouns but got them wrong anyway.

I feel that we are not on the same wavelength here.
You seem to assume that I am defending someone misgendering an obvious transition case, over and over again.

I was referring to the occasional mistake, or the occasional ambiguous case/ hyper-rare pronoun. And the vociferous minority´s bullying reactions.

That doesn't happen, though. It's just a fairytale that internet losers tell themselves.

[Katganistan]

https://public.oed.com/blog/a-brief-his ... ular-they/

I don't know, the Oxford English Dictionary is the recognized source for everything about the language: will THEY do?

As I've said in my previous post, the claim that "People have been using they/them singular pronouns for longer than singular “you” has been a thing" is misleading. Yes, singular they has been a thing for a long time (14th c.), but so has singular you (13th~15th c., depending on your standards). Singular you was criticized in the 17th century, and singular they up until now, for some reason.

Also, your snark is completely unnecessary.

Not snarking, but whatever. You asked for a source, I gave you the definitive one on the English language. I never said it was used "longer", I said it was acceptable since the 14th century. If you still want to go through these gymnastics on why it's not acceptable when it has been for seven hundred years, you do you.