Trans athletes take 1st and 2nd place in Chicago women’s cycling event

Okay. So what if my preferred pronouns are “My Lord” and “Sire”. Do people have to call me by that? Is it disrespectful not to?

 

See this is part of the problem. To you it’s polite to ask for which pronouns you should use and it’s impolite to assume. To me it’s polite to assume and impolite to ask. Why? Because I’m a 6’5” 225lbs grown man with a beard and it’s grossly offensive to me that someone feels they need to ask if I’m a man or a woman or something else. I’m obviously a man and to assume anything else is offfensive.

 

And what if I disagree? You force me to use the pronouns in the novel way you think they should be used with my job or child’s schooling at risk? See you’re okay with that because you think that it won’t swing back the other direction. But it will and when it does you won’t have any position to complain about the consequences of it because words evolve.

It’s already started to happen:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...versity-pronouns-email-signature/70243257007/

 

https://dpcpsi.nih.gov/sgmro/gender...l to use someone's,, sex, and national origin.


The Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 expressly prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Title VII’s prohibition against sex discrimination includes discrimination based on an employee’s gender identity or sexual orientation. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's technical assistance publication Protections Against Employment Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity considers the use of pronouns or names that are inconsistent with an individual’s gender identity as unlawful harassment. The EEOC guidance states, “intentionally and repeatedly using the wrong name and pronouns to refer to a transgender employee could contribute to an unlawful hostile work environment” and is a violation of Title VII.

 

Actually that's an incorrect assumption. I personally have no issue with playing the odds. If the person looks male I will typically use the male pronouns until corrected otherwise. And I make no apologies for it either, which in turn puts me at odds with some of the LBGT+ community, but not all of it. Politeness comes from trying to use what the individual prefers, assuming they are not being an arse about it, which I would include presumptuous in that. So the "My Lord" as a pronoun instead of title would go right out the window. Likewise I am not going to bother with some mouthful. Somewhere along the lines, the overall community does need to come up with an agreed format. The rest of the world cannot be expected to remember 100+ off pronoun sets. Mind you I hold that to be different than there being several different genders.

No it is not necessarily obvious. We have Sikh cis women out there with beards that may be fuller than yours and mine put together. Further there is no reason why a woman, cis or trans, might not choose to sport facial hair if they so desire. Assuming anything is idiocy in and of itself. Now please keep in mind that I am holding playing the odds as different from assuming. Playing the odds recognizes that I am working on limited information and could be wrong. We already have that happening where some people are trying to stop cis women from using women's restrooms. In that case we are looking at assumptions not playing the odds.

ETA: not ignoring the second post. Just out of time and will get back to it later.

 

Sweet so from now on my pronouns are My Lord and Sire. Instead of “he said blah blah” it will only be appropriate to use “My Lord said blah blah”. Instead of “His words were blah blah” it will be “Sire’s words are blah blah”.

And don’t try that little trick of just referring to me by my name and not my pronouns. That’s offensive as well right?

 

But see you can’t just say my pronouns are made up and ridiculous or offensive to you and not use them. So what? The guy wearing a dress’ pronouns are ridiculous and offensive to me but you still expect me to use them.

 

Your agreement or disagreement is irrelevant to the way any given word gets used in society as a whole. If the change sticks, it sticks. If it doesn't, it doesn't. Do you think that the homosexuals agreed with gay being turned into a slur against them?

I am not forcing anything. Your assumption that I am in support of any rules, regulations or laws forcing compliance is just that, an assumption. And I don't have to agree with a rule of a private organization, such as a business, to support their right to make those rules.

Another assumption on your part. I am well aware, and often warn others, that this is not a settled matter. And even at a settled matter, it can still change again years later. Such is the nature of lingual evolution.

You don't know that. You hope, but you do not know.

If and when it does revert back, that won't stop the concept from being present and the creation of new words. English is quite adept at it.
https://gizmodo.com/14-common-words-that-didnt-exist-20-years-ago-1455971367
And that's just the recent ones. English has been doing this for centuries.

What you have here is a conflation fallacy. The people in question created sig blocks outside the guidelines. Those guidelines encompass far more than just including their gender in the sig block. Further these were two cis gender people, who had names that made it unclear what their sex or gender was, and thus they wanted to make it known. For that matter, I can't tell from your profile block to the left of the posts as to whether or not you are male or female. Mine states it clearly, but you are a mystery, by that standard, and as such I could assume you as female, had you not made that comment earlier in the thread of what you were. Which also means another could misgender/mis-sex you in another thread.

 

All words were made up at one point or another. Look at those in the link of the last post. That's before we look at lingual evolution. That being said, as I pointed out, I have already called out transgender and NB's for having extreme pronouns, and will continue to do so. But there is a major difference between creating a slew of new pronoun words and expecting the world to remember them all, and the use of the previously established ones and using them in new ways. Further there is a difference between not bothering to use a person's prefered pronouns and using the unpreferred ones in a harassing manner. Most of the rules are based on harassing behavior, not the actual word use.

 

As a libertarian liberal I agree with conservatives on this issue. Either handicap transfemales or put them to their own division