Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Max™]

Cuddlefish like to crossdress and sneak in under the radar of big studly males to mate with their harem but they do it cutely enough that I deliberately use d's instead of t's in the name.

Dwarves are theorized to be a land-dwelling cephalopod which learned how to construct large mobile habitat-tool-storage devices that resemble fleshy human bodies but are largely powered by alcohol. Until a baby beard learns how to pilot it's dorflet after around 12 y ears or so it is impossible to predict what they may or may not do.

[George_Chickens]

they do it cutely enough that I deliberately use d's instead of t's in the name.

Judging by what you said, they must use a lot of d's too.

[Folly]

While this stuff is interesting, the core of the issue is people caring far too much about other people's innocent behaviors.  I personally don't care how someone chooses to identify themselves.  So long as they can function reasonably in society without harming anyone, it doesn't matter.  Anyone who can't accept this is overstepping their bounds by any metric.

What right do you have to dictate how much other people are allowed to care about issues?
Regardless of how misguided their feelings may be, the fact remains that a very large number of people feel uncomfortable around people who are different from them. Certain differences must be tolerated for practical reasons due to large numbers on both sides. However when it comes to gender-fluid identities, there are a large number of uncomfortable people on one side and a relatively small number of uncomfortable people on the other. So why must the many be uncomfortable so that the few don't have to?

[SalmonGod]

While this stuff is interesting, the core of the issue is people caring far too much about other people's innocent behaviors.  I personally don't care how someone chooses to identify themselves.  So long as they can function reasonably in society without harming anyone, it doesn't matter.  Anyone who can't accept this is overstepping their bounds by any metric.

What right do you have to dictate how much other people are allowed to care about issues?
Regardless of how misguided their feelings may be, the fact remains that a very large number of people feel uncomfortable around people who are different from them. Certain differences must be tolerated for practical reasons due to large numbers on both sides. However when it comes to gender-fluid identities, there are a large number of uncomfortable people on one side and a relatively small number of uncomfortable people on the other. So why must the many be uncomfortable so that the few don't have to?

Because there's no practical justification for enforcing one's sensibilities on another's lifestyle, absent that lifestyle's tangible detriment to anyone else.

This is the ideological underpinning of the U.S. legal system and much of western political philosophy -- "Your rights end where mine begin".

And your concern about a large number of people suffering discomfort for the sake of the few is a perfect case example of why so many (myself not necessarily included, but I'm going to use the argument here anyway) consider it so important that the USA is a democratic republic, not a pure democracy, because supposedly pure democracies result in a tyranny of the majority and angry mob overrule of the interests of innocent minorities.  Exactly what you are describing is at stake when you say that the many are suffering discomfort from exposure to lifestyles of a few that they consider distasteful.

Discussion about the biological vs socialized nature of gender identity is academically interesting, but politically irrelevant.  Because whatever the answer is, so long as someone can function in society without harming anyone, their personal paths of self-discovery and lifestyle choices are their own to make.  Anyone who says otherwise is advancing the issue from an offense to their own personal sensibility, which is not the same as an infringement on their freedom, to an actual tangible infringement on someone else's freedom.  This flies fully in the face of every value our culture and political system claims to be about.  Not that slowly unraveling such hypocrisy hasn't pretty much been the story of this country's history.

Freedom does not mean freedom from ever being weirded out by anyone, and anyone who acts like it is doesn't deserve to ever say they believe in the word.

[Il Palazzo]

@SalmonGod: you have to recognize though, that while one doesn't want to live under the tyranny of the majority, one doesn't want to live under the tyranny of the minority either. So while a minority shouldn't be forced to do X to alleviate the discomfort of the majority - such as pretending to follow traditional gender roles, the majority similarly shouldn't be force do do Y to alleviate the discomfort of the minority - such as having to refer to each person by one of 120 different gender pronouns.

[Ghills]

@SalmonGod: you have to recognize though, that while one doesn't want to live under the tyranny of the majority, one doesn't want to live under the tyranny of the minority either. So while a minority shouldn't be forced to do X to alleviate the discomfort of the majority - such as pretending to follow traditional gender roles, the majority similarly shouldn't be force do do Y to alleviate the discomfort of the minority - such as having to refer to each person by one of 120 different gender pronouns.

Basing your argument on a false equivalence is not a good look and neither is attempting to argue against your own strawman (no one in this thread is propsoing 120 pronouns, and in fact I don't believe anyone is doing so).

Forcing someone to live in ways that harm them is really bad.  Making a slight tweak to the rules of polite social engagements has happened since the dawn of time. It's upsetting and irritating to some people but not detrimental, and a significant good to others. Just like the changing rules about when you can wear white shoes or who can wear pants was upsetting and irritating to some people, but not actual detrimental to anyone and a significant boon to others.

[Il Palazzo]

No, I'm not saying anybody has proposed 120 pronouns.

[Reelya]

It's hyperbole, but it's not hyperbolic hyperbole. New York State legally recognizes 31 distinct genders. "120 pronouns" isn't far off that, since each pronoun has cases: "he/him/his" is three pronouns for one gender. If you grant it that each distinct gender may have their own custom pronouns, then the 31 genders in New York means 93 potential pronouns. Sure, a lot of the pronouns will double-up, but that's still 93 distinct pronouns if you understand how language works. If a gender that's not "cis male" also borrows "he" then that's a distinct usage of "he" in the same sense that the same word in different contexts can have a distinct meaning.

If it's recognized that transmale is a distinct gender from cismale, and that both genders use "he" as their base pronoun, then that pronoun is now doing double-time to indicate two distinct genders, therefore it's really split the meaning of "he". To say there's still only one meaning of "he" is contradictory with the statement that there are two distinct genders of transmale and cismale that just happen to both use the "he" set of pronouns. There is now a distinct difference in the semantic meaning of "he" for either context, thus it's a different pronoun.

[Rowanas]

It's hyperbole, but it's not hyperbolic hyperbole. New York State legally recognizes 31 distinct genders. "120 pronouns" isn't far off that, since each pronoun has cases: "he/him/his" is three pronouns for one gender. If you grant it that each distinct gender may have their own custom pronouns, then the 31 genders in New York means 93 potential pronouns. Sure, a lot of the pronouns will double-up, but that's still 93 distinct pronouns if you understand how language works. If a gender that's not "cis male" also borrows "he" then that's a distinct usage of "he" in the same sense that the same word in different contexts can have a distinct meaning.

This doesn't appear to be about American politics, so how about we stop talking about it and take it another, more appropriate thread.  I come here to laugh at the citizens and leadership of the USA.

[Reelya]

Why isn't point out that there are 31 legal genders in New York some to "laugh at the citizens and leadership of the USA" about.

(1) it's a USA thing. (2) the situation is kinda preposterous (3) it's a legally mandated thing, thus it's political and related to the leadership.

Other than it being on the liberal end there's no reason to say we can't laugh at this like we can about conservative idiocy.

[smjjames]

It's hyperbole, but it's not hyperbolic hyperbole. New York State legally recognizes 31 distinct genders. "120 pronouns" isn't far off that, since each pronoun has cases: "he/him/his" is three pronouns for one gender. If you grant it that each distinct gender may have their own custom pronouns, then the 31 genders in New York means 93 potential pronouns. Sure, a lot of the pronouns will double-up, but that's still 93 distinct pronouns if you understand how language works. If a gender that's not "cis male" also borrows "he" then that's a distinct usage of "he" in the same sense that the same word in different contexts can have a distinct meaning. If it's recognized that transmale is a distinct gender from cismale, and that both genders use "he" as their base pronoun, then that pronoun is now doing double-time to indicate two distinct genders, therefore it's really split the meaning of "he". To say there's still only one meaning of "he" is contradictory with the statement that there are two distinct genders of transmale and cismale that just happen to both use the "he" set of pronouns. There is now a distinct difference in the semantic meaning of "he" for either context, thus it's a different pronoun.

That's the first time I've ever heard of 'butch' being used as a gender pronoun or identity. As a description of physique (or a nickname), yes, but not gender.

[Karnewarrior]

  Remind me never to go to New York, then, because I'm going to be arrested. I have no intention of changing my speech patterns just to avoid bothering someone's gender identity. Especially since I learn social niceties by rote, like maths, so New York effectively just started counting in base 31 AFAIC.

I'm not sure I quite understand why one would even *want* to select their gender from the class list of a particularly large JRPG, but I suppose some people must enjoy the pointless drudgery. ...Gosh, this is the most right-wing I've sounded on here in a long time.

My problem isn't so much the identification as Gender WHAZZZUUUP?! as when people get offended you aren't using the proper pronouns for them. I'm sorry I don't have time to rewrite my mental dictionary ma'am-sir, here's your cheeseburger now please stop blocking the other customers.

[Rowanas]

Remind me never to go to New York, then, because I'm going to be arrested. I have no intention of changing my speech patterns just to avoid bothering someone's gender identity. Especially since I learn social niceties by rote, like maths, so New York effectively just started counting in base 31 AFAIC.

I'm not sure I quite understand why one would even *want* to select their gender from the class list of a particularly large JRPG, but I suppose some people must enjoy the pointless drudgery. ...Gosh, this is the most right-wing I've sounded on here in a long time.

My problem isn't so much the identification as Gender WHAZZZUUUP?! as when people get offended you aren't using the proper pronouns for them. I'm sorry I don't have time to rewrite my mental dictionary ma'am-sir, here's your cheeseburger now please stop blocking the other customers.

He. She. They. We have an appropriate gender-neutral term - it is correct and it applies regardless of gender. Perhaps I should stop using anything but gender neutral terms at all.

Why isn't point out that there are 31 legal genders in New York some to "laugh at the citizens and leadership of the USA" about.

(1) it's a USA thing. (2) the situation is kinda preposterous (3) it's a legally mandated thing, thus it's political and related to the leadership.

Other than it being on the liberal end there's no reason to say we can't laugh at this like we can about conservative idiocy.

(1) No it isn't, we have it over here as well. Otherwise, I suppose you might be right. Perhaps I was too hasty.

[smjjames]

Remind me never to go to New York, then, because I'm going to be arrested. I have no intention of changing my speech patterns just to avoid bothering someone's gender identity. Especially since I learn social niceties by rote, like maths, so New York effectively just started counting in base 31 AFAIC.

I'm not sure I quite understand why one would even *want* to select their gender from the class list of a particularly large JRPG, but I suppose some people must enjoy the pointless drudgery. ...Gosh, this is the most right-wing I've sounded on here in a long time.

My problem isn't so much the identification as Gender WHAZZZUUUP?! as when people get offended you aren't using the proper pronouns for them. I'm sorry I don't have time to rewrite my mental dictionary ma'am-sir, here's your cheeseburger now please stop blocking the other customers.

He. She. They. We have an appropriate gender-neutral term - it is correct and it applies regardless of gender. Perhaps I should stop using anything but gender neutral terms at all.

Why isn't point out that there are 31 legal genders in New York some to "laugh at the citizens and leadership of the USA" about.

(1) it's a USA thing. (2) the situation is kinda preposterous (3) it's a legally mandated thing, thus it's political and related to the leadership.

Other than it being on the liberal end there's no reason to say we can't laugh at this like we can about conservative idiocy.

(1) No it isn't, we have it over here as well. Otherwise, I suppose you might be right. Perhaps I was too hasty.

It being an USA thing means it's relevant to the thread, is what Reelya was making a point on for (1). Plus, local politics is fair game, though we don't often talk local politics here.

[Dunamisdeos]

So, to me, ultra-specific gender pronouns so seem silly by the same logic that I don't go around demanding that people refer to my religion as Baptist or Non-denominational or Methodist or whatever.

The point isn't to get people to constantly acknowledge the specific minutiae of my belief by making them use a specific term, because the point of my belief and identity has nothing to do with being unique. It's a non-issue to me. I find that people who do insist on this kind of pedantic rote consider religion to be more of a cool kids club that they get to a member of and you don't, which is the opposite of what religion is meant to be, and furthermore it fosters a toxic, cult-like mindset. I also find that these people are often the ones who constantly and loudly insist that their shortcomings are caused by outside persecution. People don't like you because you're an abrasive asshole Bob, not because the diner hates Baptists.

I find it hard not to apply this logic to people who make a huge scene when you use the wrong obscure pronoun. You don't even use pronouns when talking directly to a person. These are people who worry about the way people refer to them when they aren't in the room to the point of lobbying.

I acknowledge that it is different overall because Christians have not been ostracized for generations by society. I am willing to entertain the possibility that I am negatively biased in this regard. I do what I can to view people as individuals rather than extensions of past experience, but I've dealt with a lot of negative BS from people who profess the same beliefs as me but refuse to live by them and it affects how I view people. I still can't help but see the parallel between people who flip out over specific pronouns they made up on the internet and the guy who insists Jiffy Lube took longer on his oil change because they saw the cross on his rear-view mirror.