Why I won’t use ‘preferred’ pronouns – and why you shouldn’t either (Toronto Sun - Jordan Peterson) - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For discussion of moral and ethical issues.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14739848
Bulaba Jones wrote:This silly 60-some pronoun fad presents some problems for basic grammar. Verbs following a third person singular like he, she, it take -s or -es, such as He drives the car. A verb that follows plural pronouns like we and they as well as I and you doesn't. It's common parlance to use they (I do it fairly often) when there's no need to identify gender (this is useful in some professional settings where you are keeping the identity of a client, a student, or a peer confidential, but I've also used it in more informal settings), like This person I helped today told me that they drive a car, rather than This person I helped today told me that they drives a car (since they is used in the singular sense to refer to one particular person).

What happens when people insist they identify as multiple identities/beings and should be referred to in the plural sense (e.g. He drive the car rather than the correct He drives the car)? Or if they take on a plural gender but insist on verb forms that correspond to a singular pronoun? The current use of a pronoun such as they to refer to someone of an unspecified gender does use verb forms that continue to correspond to a plural pronoun, but how long until some idiot makes a big fuss out of using a plural pronoun and then complains about grammar rules concerning their chosen pronoun not referring to them as one single individual?

Some people do choose the they pronoun as their prefered pronoun. So actually if you're already keen on accepting that prefered pronoun, why not extend it to other pronouns? Seems a bit like you're making something out of nothing to me. How many people could possibly want to be called an alternative pronoun that you actually meet that are not on a university campus? Seeing as the man is a professor, he should be aware of the fact that his position of power dictates a higher degree of responsibility than many other jobs, such as @Decky, who is a bricklayer that doesn't need to have nuance in his articulation. Decky can just continue being ignorant no problem, because nobody is actually expecting anything better of him. People in positions that are paid for by the government or receive money from the government or are conferred special status by the government, they should have to have the responsibility to every one of their constituents and not just the cisgendered ones.

However, it's not a big issue to me because it personally doesn't affect me. But I respect those that it does affect enough to give them their credence and let them be who they are.

Cookie Monster wrote:But as a solution why not extend the use of it and its to also transgenders, non-genders, etc?! After a generation it won't sound ackward anymore and it would be much more sensible than adopting new pronouns and adjectives for each gender identity.

Probably because it and its refers to objects, not people. Although I am sure there are some people out there that do prefer that pronoun, they are probably few and far in between.

Sabbaticus wrote:As I said, a 'Ghost in the Shell' response. Having to rely on electronic devices for basic social interaction.

As far as I can tell, her argument was that it's not that difficult to remember it and used a smart phone as an example of how to remember it. My suggestion was that, as a teacher, they can write down the preferred pronoun on the role sheet or simply call people by their name. How many opportunities does he actually have to misgender people on a daily basis? I am sure it happens quite rarely, even for someone that refuses to adhere to the person's desired gender. I bet it has barely even happened if at all.

Except that the constant need to bring out an electronic device for basic social interaction could also be perceived as bigotry and indirect misgendering.

I think I may have misgendered you as a man because you're acting like a whiny mouse.
#14739859
It’s another giant step for members of the LGBTQ community as the House of Commons passed Bill C-16, amending the Canadian Human Rights Act to add gender identity and gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination.

It also proposes to amend the Criminal Code to add gender identity or expression to the definition of “identifiable group” for the purpose of the hate propaganda offences and to the list of aggravating circumstances for hate-crime sentencing.


In Canada, it's considered a criminal offence, punishable by up to 2 years' imprisonment, to wilfully promoting hatred, concerning all protecting “identifiable groups”: colour, race, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, or mental or physical disability. There have been only 3 successful prosecutions under the law thus far but adding sexual orientation to the protected identifiable groups would have a deterrent effect on far-right propagandists in Canada. But I don't think you would be arrested for uttering anti-gay slurs in public.
#14739868
LV-GUCCI-PRADA-FLEX wrote:Some people do choose the they pronoun as their prefered pronoun. So actually if you're already keen on accepting that prefered pronoun, why not extend it to other pronouns? Seems a bit like you're making something out of nothing to me.


I don't actually care about this issue and this isn't a problem for me. If people want to identify as something other than what they're born as, it's not my business. However, I'm not going to change the way I speak (beyond calling them him/her/it/they as they prefer) or memorize a list of words like "xir" or "ze." There are already pronouns in existence to account for ambiguity or neuter gender: it, they, etc. Hopefully, no one is actually stupid enough to think that my lack of interest in memorizing pronouns that don't exist outside a niche on the internet makes me a bigot.

As for "they," I don't have an issue with using that, since as I noted, people widely use "they" to refer to someone when there's no reason to specify their gender. I was commenting on the particular grammar involved and wondering, aloud, how grammar would be different if someone insists that a plural pronoun should be explicitly defined instead as a singular one as well.
#14739873
Bulaba Jones wrote:I don't actually care about this issue and this isn't a problem for me. If people want to identify as something other than what they're born as, it's not my business.

What if they are born as intersex? Do they have to just choose one gender and stick to it, or else they are considered special snowflakes? Or they have to go with "they" because you find that the most easy? Seems like you're the one being the special snowflake who prioritizes your own feelings over the feelings of others. My parents raised me to be sympathetic/empathetic.


However, I'm not going to change the way I speak or memorize a list of words like "xir" or "ze." There are already pronouns in existence to account for ambiguity or neuter gender: it, they, etc. Hopefully, no one is actually stupid enough to think that my lack of interest in memorizing pronouns that don't exist outside a niche on the internet makes me a bigot.

No one is actually asking you to memorize pronouns, just be considerate of what someone wants to be called. If someone has a preferred list of pronouns and you don't want to use them, call them by their name. It shouldn't be too hard.

If it makes it easier, whenever someone lists their pronouns, in your mind just make a mental note that they don't like to be referred to by pronouns and just call them by their name instead. So if you hear someone say, "my preferred pronoun is 'xir'", then substitute that for "I would like to be called by my name". In essence, they just want to have their identity affirmed rather than being forced to confrom with how society sees them.

As for "they," I don't have an issue with using that, since as I noted, people widely use "they" to refer to someone when there's no reason to specify their gender. I was commenting on the particular grammar involved and wondering, aloud, how grammar would be different if someone insists that a plural pronoun should be explicitly defined instead as a singular one as well.

Yes, and I'm just noting that if you are ok with "memorizing" that pronoun, how hard is it to memorize other pronouns? I think we can all agree that language conventions are not immutable and there are examples in other languages of having to memorize dozens of pronouns, oftentimes a dozen per each of the binary genders based on social factors. Korean is a good example of a language where you have to memorize the proper pronouns and it is considered extremely rude to go against the pronoun conventions. Acting like it's some crazy idea just makes you sound like you want to make an argument without considering the merits of the other side of the argument.

Like I said though, I don't agree with codifying these language conventions into laws, just as a code of politeness/conduct. If universities want to put these conventions in their bylaws, that's different because of the special character of universities.
#14739924
LV-GUCCI-PRADA-FLEX wrote:What if they are born as intersex? Do they have to just choose one gender and stick to it, or else they are considered special snowflakes? Or they have to go with "they" because you find that the most easy? Seems like you're the one being the special snowflake who prioritizes your own feelings over the feelings of others. My parents raised me to be sympathetic/empathetic.


Where did I ever say that I take issue with someone who doesn't feel they are male or female? And why this "special snowflake" thing? When did I say that? When did I say I don't feel sympathetic towards people who struggle with themselves and their place in society, or say that I don't feel empathy?

You seem to be confusing me with other posters, or you were deliberately bringing up strawman points. You should reread what I wrote instead of projecting what you think I said, because I never said any of that.

No one is actually asking you to memorize pronouns, just be considerate of what someone wants to be called. If someone has a preferred list of pronouns and you don't want to use them, call them by their name. It shouldn't be too hard.

If it makes it easier, whenever someone lists their pronouns, in your mind just make a mental note that they don't like to be referred to by pronouns and just call them by their name instead. So if you hear someone say, "my preferred pronoun is 'xir'", then substitute that for "I would like to be called by my name". In essence, they just want to have their identity affirmed rather than being forced to confrom with how society sees them.


I'm going to rephrase what I said earlier, because somehow you got a whole string of phantom things I never said or argued or implied. There already exist words in English, pronouns, which cover gender. Some neuter gender pronouns exist such as "they" or "it." What does "identifying as xir" actually mean? What identity is that? It's a gender-neutral pronoun for which "it" and "they" already exist. If someone is not referred to as a word that does not exist in our lexicon outside of an extremely small niche, such as "xir," what happens? Their identity "isn't affirmed"?

My point is that doesn't mean anything, and if someone wants to be referred to in neutral gender terms, that's fine, but there already exist gender neutral pronouns. Words like "xim" or "zir" and "ze" are rather redundant, without meaning (again, how do you identify as an XYZ or a qwertyfish if you decide to use those words instead of "me" or "she"?), and there's no way I am going to remember those words. Someone's nickname being "Zir," sure, but there's no way I will remember a strange pronoun that will eventually disappear as the niche fad it is.
Last edited by Bulaba Khan Jones on 20 Nov 2016 21:44, edited 1 time in total.
#14740046
LV-GUCCI-PRADA-FLEX wrote:What if they are born as intersex? Do they have to just choose one gender and stick to it, or else they are considered special snowflakes? Or they have to go with "they" because you find that the most easy? Seems like you're the one being the special snowflake who prioritizes your own feelings over the feelings of others. My parents raised me to be sympathetic/empathetic.


Speaking standard English = special snowflake

0.018% of population insisting on special pronouns = not special snowflakes

:lol: :lol: :lol:

(Note that true intersexuals aren't "trans" people, who are either following the latest left-liberal "special snowflake fad" or are in need of psychiatric help.)
#14740057
TL;DR Transgenders/Transvestites/Transexuals/whatever are confused. They invent a social construction to justify a social construction, which just so happens to be built on another social construction.

If you want to pretend to be the other sex, then be my guest. I could do without all the BS about being born in the wrong body though.
#14740100
@Decky, who is a bricklayer that doesn't need to have nuance in his articulation. Decky can just continue being ignorant no problem, because nobody is actually expecting anything better of him. People in positions that are paid for by the government or receive money from the government or are conferred special status by the government, they should have to have the responsibility to every one of their constituents and not just the cisgendered ones.


Exactly. If you only work with working class people you don't need to worry about this identity politics shit as there will be no middle class people around to offend. How many transpeople are you going to meet in a outdoors job in November where it is 3 only degrees and you are shivering in a muddy hole doing psychical labour?

You don't even get women doing it never mind middle class people and gender benders and gays etc. It seems they only want equal representation in the easy jobs. ;)
#14740159
LV-GUCCI-PRADA-FLEX wrote:Probably because it and its refers to objects, not people. Although I am sure there are some people out there that do prefer that pronoun, they are probably few and far in between.
I know, as said before it would sound awkward; but it's just a matter of social convention to change this restriction. Certainly introducing new pronouns and adjectives for the sake of gender identities is not going produce a workable language.
#14740160
Bulaba Jones wrote:Where did I ever say that I take issue with someone who doesn't feel they are male or female? And why this "special snowflake" thing? When did I say that? When did I say I don't feel sympathetic towards people who struggle with themselves and their place in society, or say that I don't feel empathy?

You seem to be confusing me with other posters, or you were deliberately bringing up strawman points. You should reread what I wrote instead of projecting what you think I said, because I never said any of that.

I'm sorry I misinterpreted what you said. It was not intentional. It seemed to me that you didn't care about people who want an alternative pronoun, and to me that shows a lack of empathy because some people really don't want to be called "they" or as another poster suggested "it".

But my apologies for the special snowflake thing if you took offense to it.

I'm going to rephrase what I said earlier, because somehow you got a whole string of phantom things I never said or argued or implied. There already exist words in English, pronouns, which cover gender. Some neuter gender pronouns exist such as "they" or "it." What does "identifying as xir" actually mean? What identity is that? It's a gender-neutral pronoun for which "it" and "they" already exist. If someone is not referred to as a word that does not exist in our lexicon outside of an extremely small niche, such as "xir," what happens? Their identity "isn't affirmed"?

I never said "identify as xir", now you're putting words in my mouth. I said that their preferred pronoun is as such. And my solution is to not call them by pronouns if you don't want to call them that. Seems simple enough to me. Calling them "it" or "they" when the person specifically tells you not to seems impolite at best.

My point is that doesn't mean anything, and if someone wants to be referred to in neutral gender terms, that's fine, but there already exist gender neutral pronouns. Words like "xim" or "zir" and "ze" are rather redundant, without meaning (again, how do you identify as an XYZ or a qwertyfish if you decide to use those words instead of "me" or "she"?), and there's no way I am going to remember those words. Someone's nickname being "Zir," sure, but there's no way I will remember a strange pronoun that will eventually disappear as the niche fad it is.

lol so if they just say that it's their nicname then you'll call them that? Now who is being arbitrary? If you can remember it as a nicname why not remember it as a pronoun?

The reason that they don't want to be called qwertyfish or XYZ is that they don't want to be called qwertyfish or XYZ. I doubt you'll ever meet anybody who wants to be called that. I would bet a hefty sum on it too.

That's why I don't care and I don't plan to remember pronouns like "ze" and such.

...unless they say that it's their nicname. Then you'll remember it, right? :excited:

But obviously I hate trans people, and I feel no empathy for the plight of people who struggle at home, in their relationships, at school, and at work. Obviously I am a hateful bigot and it's all because I love Trump or something. Obviously I have no interest in addressing someone as XYZ or whatever qwertyfish pronoun they've constructed just because I'm such a hateful person. Since it's likely you have no intention of responding to me without lying about what I've said, putting words in my mouth, and saying I've said things or argued things when I did no such thing, there's a whole mess of strawman points for you to play with, enjoy.

Image

You talk about how you are concerned about identity, and yet you deliberately mischaracterize someone. What business do you have trying to lecture someone on identity and affirming someone's identity?

Cis-gendered heterosexual white male, right? If you want your identity reafirrmed, turn on the TV. :excited:

Frollein wrote:Speaking standard English = special snowflake

0.018% of population insisting on special pronouns = not special snowflakes

(Note that true intersexuals aren't "trans" people, who are either following the latest left-liberal "special snowflake fad" or are in need of psychiatric help.)


Nah, my argument is that if you have to put your feelings ahead of a tiny portion of the population because everything is about you, you are in fact the special snowflake.

A huge percentage of trans people attempt suicide at some point in their life. Doesn't sound like something anybody would identify as if they had a choice.

Decky wrote:Exactly. If you only work with working class people you don't need to worry about this identity politics shit as there will be no middle class people around to offend. How many transpeople are you going to meet in a outdoors job in November where it is 3 only degrees and you are shivering in a muddy hole doing psychical labour?

You don't even get women doing it never mind middle class people and gender benders and gays etc. It seems they only want equal representation in the easy jobs.

True, we need only men that can't do anything else to do all the jobs that nobody else wants to do. That is before we replace them with robots. :excited:

cookie monster wrote:I know, as said before it would sound awkward; but it's just a matter of social convention to change this restriction. Certainly introducing new pronouns and adjectives for the sake of gender identities is not going produce a workable language.


I'm curious as to why everybody ignored my point that, for example, the Korean language has a dozen or so pronouns for each of the binary sex. They don't seem to have a problem memorizing pronouns.
#14740167
I enjoyed reading HMS post. HMS is a strong, confident, beautiful warship and I'd like to affirm and celebrate that fact about HMS.

Being a trans-temporal Mongol myself, I sympathize with your plight to express yourself fully, Warship Decky.
#14740172
Without thinking or asking you first, I microaggressed upon your identity and silenced your voice, thus attacking you in the harshest of ways and distorting your sense of identity and self, by believing that your chosen pronoun might be HMS. I sincerely apologize if this is not your new pronoun.
#14740177
As long as nobody triggers me by mentioning the Washington Naval Treaty I should be fine. What right did the nations of the world have to decide what displacement a certain class of ship should have anyway? Curvy ships needs love too!

This is a lie. You're not that stupid or ignorant[…]

Neither is an option too. Neither have your inte[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

@JohnRawls There is no ethnic cleansing going o[…]

They are building a Russian Type nuclear reactor..[…]