"Her penis" - not at all Orwellian - argh

[icehorse]

And I'm sure it was pointed out to you that such is not your place nor a viable solution for you to label people other than how they label themselves.

I was giving an example for purposes of discussion. did you seriously think I was supposing that I would make such society-wide decisions? Give us all a break.

Your conflation of sex and gender doesn't provide a solid rationale for this. As well, never minding that some people do chose to go by "zir", yet this does not invalidate a woman that simply cannot afford or want to undergo bottom surgery.

I'm not the one conflating sex and gender, that's what the gender ideologists try to do.

To be clear, when I - FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION - proposed "zer", I was proposing a pronoun to convey a personality type AND a biological sex. And it wouldn't matter whether an individual had bottom surgery (what a misleading phrase ), or not. A "zer" could be intact or not. So any intact "zer" has a penis. But not all "zers" have penises. Simple, no confusion.

In other words, a "zer" would be any biological male who prefers to live with a female personality.

 

[icehorse]

At the drop of a hat? Nah

You need to keep up with the news - and that is NOT my responsibility. You are advocating for dangerous behaviors, you ought to know what's going on in the world.

Do they? I wonder if they'd agree with my point that we don't check everyone's genitalia before deciding what we should refer to them as.

That's your idea, not mine.

So, if trans pronouns were established then EVERYONE'S PRIVACY could be respected. Your grandma could politely ask not to be treated by a "zer".

You've not shown any life and death situations related to pronoun usage.

More arguments from ignorance. Get yourself up to speed.

I love when someone repeatedly tries telling me I don't care about women being harmed because I don't buy into their demonization of a minority group. Funny stuff.

Yet you continue to demonstrate your own ignorance of current affairs, despite having many links, repeatedly spoon fed to you.

funny stuff indeed.

 

[SkepticThinker]

OK, I'll just say that i don't have a firm opinion on #1 because I know very little about it and the current "noise level" doesn't help me in learning about it.




So let's stick to #2.



Emotionally I agree with you as I was an English major and have been strongly indoctrinated with what is 'right" and "wrong" in spelling, grammar and correct usage of words. I still grit my teeth when I hear stuff in advertising where nouns are turned into verbs ("how do you cashback?"). As I've aged though I realized more and more that a lot of this is just my personal preference and it probably doesn't matter how you say something so long as it is understandable to the listener. And language changes, whether we like it or not. Does anyone care about splitting infinitives any more?

I strongly disagree with (for example) college professors being fired because they use a particular word, assuming that's the only reason. My position would be to let everyone say what they want to say (with the usual exceptions) in whatever way they want and let it sort itself out. That means that if someone wants to pressure me into a certain way of speaking they have the right to do so, and I have the right to ignore them.

Incidentally, I don't see it as lying when a person refers to a trans woman as "she". It's more a reflection of a change in the meaning of the word.


The problem is that English lacks gender neutral pronouns for all cases. Attempts to get round it without inventing new words are dubious at best (I still wince when a poster is referred to as "they" and I have adjust my first understanding that the subject is plural). What you are suggesting I think is the invention of some new words. But how do you get them to be universally used without committing the incursion into free speech you decry? What if I exercise my right to free speech and refuse to use them? That's actually happened, as there have been some new words invented that didn't catch on. I'd guess the reason for that is split between "too much hard work to learn it" and "don't tell me how to speak".

Would it be "win-win" if it happened though? The trans people would gain some pronouns but what would be the gain to the rest of us? I'll have to think about it.

I'm not sure how the use of special different pronouns when referring to trans people is actually a win for them.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You need to keep up with the news - and that is NOT my responsibility. You are advocating for dangerous behaviors, you ought to know what's going on in the world.

I'm up with the news. GAC surgeries aren't done "at the drop of a hat." You're exaggerating.

That's your idea, not mine.

It's not my idea. It's me pointing out to you that we already address people by their preferred pronouns without ever really knowing what kind of genitalia they have.

So, if trans pronouns were established then EVERYONE'S PRIVACY could be respected. Your grandma could politely ask not to be treated by a "zer".

We already have a name for trans people - trans people.

More arguments from ignorance. Get yourself up to speed.

It's your claim. I don't see any evidence that pronoun usage is creating life and death situations. Sorry to say that it sounds like fear mongering to me.

Yet you continue to demonstrate your own ignorance of current affairs, despite having many links, repeatedly spoon fed to you.

funny stuff indeed.

Nah, I just don't believe every claim every single person makes. Also, I don't accept anecdotal claims of dubious origin, as though they're supposed to demonstrate some sort of widespread trend.

 

[icehorse]

Nah, I just don't believe every claim every single person makes. Also, I don't accept anecdotal claims of dubious origin, as though they're supposed to demonstrate some sort of widespread trend.

What did you think of the interview with the renowned Finnish doctor? Was she dubious to you?

It's not my idea. It's me pointing out to you that we already address people by their preferred pronouns without ever really knowing what kind of genitalia they have.

Sometimes that's not a problem, sometimes it matters, a lot. And again - with friggin jazz hands - this is not always about genitalia, although it is often about biological sex.

We already have a name for trans people - trans people.

Come on, this thread is about pronouns, try harder.

Sorry to say that it sounds like fear mongering to me.

So if you're not aware of a problem it's not happening? Awesome!

Could you please find a way to become unaware that trump is a candidate? While you're at it, could you become unaware of climate change? It would be wonderful if those two problems could just vanish

(And BTW, if you ARE concerned about climate change, don't you just love it when deniers tell you you're fear mongering?)

 

[icehorse]

Also, I don't accept anecdotal claims of dubious origin, as though they're supposed to demonstrate some sort of widespread trend.

As a followup question: Does it mean anything to you that the links I've provided (several times), are loaded with factual, falsifiable claims?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

As a followup question: Does it mean anything to you that the links I've provided (several times), are loaded with factual, falsifiable claims?

But is the phenomena verifiable and widespread, is the question.

For example, the claim that some lesbians are saying that trans women are trying to date them, and that the trans women are getting mad when they say "no" - I don't doubt that some lesbians do claim that. But is that the whole story? Remember, there are conflicts and factions, etc, even within the LGBT+ community.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

did you seriously think I was supposing that I would make such society-wide decisions?

Don't flatter yourself too hard there. Yet your "solutions" fall squarely in line with dehumanizing, marginalizing, and trivializing a wide range of trans people.

I'm not the one conflating sex and gender, that's what the gender ideologists try to do.

Go on then, define for us what a woman is.

 

[Alien826]

I'm not sure how the use of special different pronouns when referring to trans people is actually a win for them.

Good point. I guess we'd have to do a survey of trans people. Do you prefer to called ... or ....

I would think many trans women (for example) want to be totally accepted as a woman and therefore be referred to as she/her. But who am I to say?

What would be interesting would be a future society where medical science had advanced to a point where trans people were (short of DNA tests) indistinguishable from CIS people.

 

[icehorse]

But is the phenomena verifiable and widespread, is the question.

For example, the claim that some lesbians are saying that trans women are trying to date them, and that the trans women are getting mad when they say "no" - I don't doubt that some lesbians do claim that. But is that the whole story? Remember, there are conflicts and factions, etc, even within the LGBT+ community.

As an aside, I know a LOT of LGBs who are not interested in community with the other alphabet people.

I assume you've heard the term "TERF"? So these occurrences are widespread enough that the term TERF was coined. And it's the scenario I explained in which that term is commonly used.

 

[icehorse]

Don't flatter yourself too hard there

Your words not mine, buckwheat.

Yet your "solutions" fall squarely in line with dehumanizing, marginalizing, and trivializing a wide range of trans people.

Yes, yes, that's right out of the activist's playbook. But can you reason your way past your talking point and explain WHY pronouns reserved for trans people would do any of the things you just listed?

Go on then, define for us what a woman is.

Well if reality has anything to do with it, it's simple. A woman is an adult, human, female. It is a biological term, not a gender term.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

As an aside, I know a LOT of LGBs who are not interested in community with the other alphabet people.

I've encountered some.

I assume you've heard the term "TERF"? So these occurrences are widespread enough that the term TERF was coined. And it's the scenario I explained in which that term is commonly used.

I'd say there are good justifications for the term "TERF". I've encountered online LGBT+ communities where trans people literally mind their own business, and get bullied by LGBs who fit the description of "TERF".

Which is why I said, "But is that the whole story?"

Remember, there are agendas out there that want to erase trans people. Now, more so than ever. So if one presents certain proofs, I will tend to scrutinize them and the source as necessary to determine the truth and validity of the claims and see if they're accurate.

 

[icehorse]

Remember, there are agendas out there that want to erase trans people. Now, more so than ever.

No doubt on the first claim. The second claim, I'm not so sure of. I've seen conflicting stats on that.

But my broader point is that those trans activists who are trying to violently bend society to their will are doing no favors to the vast majority of trans people who just want to live their lives. I suspect some trans activists are happy to use trans people as cannon fodder to further whatever weird agendas they have.

So if one presents certain proofs, I will tend to scrutinize them and the source as necessary to determine the truth and validity of the claims and see if they're accurate.

Mostly agreed. Again, heavily politicized topics like this one lead me to look for an abundance of factual claims more than worrying about the source. Because it's darned near impossible to find neutral sources for topics like this.

 

[Yerda]

Well if reality has anything to do with it, it's simple. A woman is an adult, human, female. It is a biological term, not a gender term.

This goes back to a question I asked previously: is it ever appropriate to refer to a trans man as "he"?

 

[Brian2]

You're still not understanding my argument. It's okay - sometimes explaining it three times isn't enough.

I won't be explaining it a fourth time, though.

This 5 minute video on the subject is an interesting view which incorporates facts and not just opinion.

 

[icehorse]

This goes back to a question I asked previously: is it ever appropriate to refer to a trans man as "he"?

Forgive me if I've given you this answer before:

In general in society we applaud when people "punch up" and we abhor when people "punch down". For example, we applaud the young chess master who can compete against adults, that kid is "punching up". But we would abhor it if a large college student wanted to play on a junior high school football team, he'd be "punching down".

Much of my argument is focused on women's safety. In general women are smaller and not as strong as men. So when a trans woman wants to go to a women's prison or compete against women in sports, that MAN is punching down, it's abhorrent.

So your question is a punching up question. I would fear for a trans man punching up, but it would be her choice. As for it being appropriate, meh. I think adding confusion is not a great idea, even when punching up.

 

[Revoltingest]

Forgive me if I've given you this answer before:

In general in society we applaud when people "punch up" and we abhor when people "punch down". For example, we applaud the young chess master who can compete against adults, that kid is "punching up". But we would abhor it if a large college student wanted to play on a junior high school football team, he'd be "punching down".

Much of my argument is focused on women's safety. In general women are smaller and not as strong as men. So when a trans woman wants to go to a women's prison or compete against women in sports, that MAN is punching down, it's abhorrent.

So your question is a punching up question. I would fear for a trans man punching up, but it would be her choice. As for it being appropriate, meh. I think adding confusion is not a great idea, even when punching up.

Your posts "punch down"
on trans women. Thus you
encounter hostile responses.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Well if reality has anything to do with it, it's simple. A woman is an adult, human, female. It is a biological term, not a gender term.

I see you literally just Googled "define woman" and went with the first result.

Whereas if we continue down these lists of definitions, we can see that it clearly is also a gendered term, not just a biological term. "A person with the qualities traditionally associated with females."

...explain WHY pronouns reserved for trans people would do any of the things you just listed?

Which to return to this, your proposed "trans pronouns" is a flawed and ineffective "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist, because you're tying to assign gender pronouns to how you identify biological sex, which childishly and simplistically reduces biological sex to reproductive organs. Stemming from your conflation of gender, )which is a social construct and how one mentally views themselves and socially presents) and the still-not-so-binary issue of biological sex.

 

[icehorse]

Your posts "punch down"
on trans women. Thus you
encounter hostile responses.

First off, I appreciate the few posters who have had civil discussions with me on this topic!

That said as far as "punching down", trans women are biological men, so there's that.

And yes, I know I get hostility from folks who have absorbed the trans activist talking points, but won't think any more deeply than that.

How do I know? After providing multiple links over the span of many months, not a single poster has commented on any of the details of any of the links. It seems quite obvious that mostly, my opponents' minds are made up and they do not want to consider any new evidence.

So yes, when faced with that sort of cognitive dissonance, hostility is a common response.

 

[SkepticThinker]

What did you think of the interview with the renowned Finnish doctor? Was she dubious to you?

I am talking about your supposed examples of the things you listed, to which I referred in my last post.



"- Male convicts are claiming to be trans, being put in women's prisons, and then assaulting female prisoners.
- Biological males are demanding that they be allowed to attend lesbian only events, shutting these events down when they don't get their way, and attempting to "cancel" women who disagree with their demands.
- Women who want same-sex health care are having biological males - most of whom are intact - foist upon them, and being criticized if they refuse to receive healthcare from these men.
- In courtrooms, victims of rape are made to say idiotic phrases like "she raped me with her penis". Apparently not hurting the feelings of the rapist has become more important than the dignity of the victim?"

Sometimes that's not a problem, sometimes it matters, a lot. And again - with friggin jazz hands - this is not always about genitalia, although it is often about biological sex.

This was in response to, "t's not my idea. It's me pointing out to you that we already address people by their preferred pronouns without ever really knowing what kind of genitalia they have."

Come on, this thread is about pronouns, try harder.

We already have pronouns for trans people. You seem to want special pronouns, as some sort of way to call them out or something.

So if you're not aware of a problem it's not happening? Awesome!

You keep trying to push this on me, because you can't make your case. So it's my fault. Gimme a break.

Could you please find a way to become unaware that trump is a candidate? While you're at it, could you become unaware of climate change? It would be wonderful if those two problems could just vanish (And BTW, if you ARE concerned about climate change, don't you just love it when deniers tell you you're fear mongering?)

This was in response to, "Sorry to say that it sounds like fear mongering to me."


Sounds like a long winded way to say "I don't have evidence backing up the claims I've made."