Pronouns
 

So many work emails and social media accounts have pronouns like he/him and she/her on them these days, even when it is very obvious what their pronouns are from their name.

What are your views on this current state of pronoun affairs?

Do you judge anyone with with these in their profiles or signatures as ***** as I do?

Re: Pronouns
 

Honestly I think a lot of it is undiagnosed mental illness.

IMO if your gonads are testis then you are male a man and he/him
If your gonads are ovaries then you are female a woman and she/her

I believe all these people who try to argue sex is different to gender are delusional and need therapy.

Yes a person could have a medical condition where there are hormonal imbalances that could lead to confusion but again this can be treated or even an issue with genitalia these are a totally different case entirely

As I am sure you are aware people go to extreme lengths when they "identify" as a different gender literally mutilating themselves in their search for happiness I guess if this makes them happy then that has to be a good thing but seriously feeling the need to mutilate themselves shows their mental state

And now living in a society where parents encourage their children to question their sexual identity should be a labelled as child abuse

I know these views do not follow what society says I have to believe well screw society

Re: Pronouns
 

If someone told me they were Napoleon Bonaparte, I would not reinforce their delusion by addressing them as such.

The Australians have the ideal solution, they just address everyone as "C***".

Re: Pronouns
 

I think a lot of it is attention seeking and/or wanting to belong to a group that is different from the norm and this is one thing that grabbed on to. I mean now someone who might have been bisexual before might now claim to be non-binary pansexual instead as they think it sounds so much cooler.

We might differ in opinion as I do believe some people genuinely feel they are in the wrong body and I fully support those. I mean part of it is just balances of certain chemicals which determine what gender we are and the amount can vary from person to person. I do think the genuine cases are a very small percentage though.

If someone wants to dress as a woman because they like womens clothes, all the power to them. But changing their pronouns on a whim?

in the current situation, even though I am a male with a male name and face hair, I can claim I am non-binary or that I want to identify as a female today. I don't want to shave or change my name or have my gonads removed, I am just she/her today and you have to accept that or you are a bigot. I might choose to identify as a male again tomorrow if I feel like it. That is the crazy situation we are in at the moment.

But the pronouns in signatures and profiles is just virtue signalling IMO but its spreading where some businesses request employees to add it to their email correspondence now

Re: Pronouns
 

I thought they called each other Bruce. To avoid confusion. :D

Re: Pronouns
 

Or Sheila?

Re: Pronouns
 

Chromosomes decide gender X+X or X+Y it really is as simple as that. Feeling you are in the wrong body is Dissociative identity disorder.

Re: Pronouns
 

What harm is it actually doing, if it makes them feel better or like they belong or make a difference let them get on with it, doesn't cause me any problems so I don't see the need to cause them any by questioning it, plus I don't want to listen to lectures from activist types that will be all over pronoun appropriation

Re: Pronouns
 

I ain't got time for any of that. If someone asked me to call them by some weird pronoun(s), they'll be just labelled as 'It', 'Thing' or 'That'.

Re: Pronouns
 

If someone asks me to use a different pronoun for them or if they changed their name and wanted me to use their new name I would do so. Doesn't hurt me. Then again I've never been asked.

I don't really see what the point of refusing that would be.

Re: Pronouns
 

I think that if it's not ambiguous by their name then anything uncontroversial doesn't need to be stated. If someone's name is Craig or Jane then it'd be a bit obvious if they say their pronouns are he/him or she/her respectively. But if they are Sam or Chris then that could be either gender.


I also think that biologically (certainly genetically at least) sex can't be changed; though people can request to be identified as the opposite, and that this preference should be respected if possible, no amount of hormone therapies or operations can change a man into a woman and vice versa - if you're genetically male you can have your penis removed and hormones to grow breasts and a high voice, remove hair etc, but you can't add a functioning womb into the body and have it produce a child can you? So there's always going to be a limit to "being the opposite sex" which will stop short of the full thing.


Non-binary is another question and if people really don't want to be referred by gender-specific pronouns that's again their choice but ultimately genders aren't physically or genetically like that either...

Re: Pronouns
 

I agree chromosomes and gender but I was getting at some women for example have high levels of testosterone and some guys have high levels of oestrogen which can affect the body and make someone look/feel more manly or feminine.

---------- Post added at 18:42 ---------- Previous post was at 18:40 ----------

That's the thing. If someone asks or has a reason to, fair enough.

On the minuscule chance you ever got a pronoun wrong, someone would correct you and you get it right from there onwards. No need for workplaces to make a huge thing over it and and request they be used in correspondence.

This cat gets it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-J2ZkiC_HGk

Re: Pronouns
 

Don’t care but if you’re an inept Government badly managing the economy why not ask the sheeple to knock themselves out over culture wars than over your own inadequacies.

Re: Pronouns
 

I don’t engage in it, and am quite happy to mis-pronoun anyone.

Re: Pronouns
 

It can be hard if someone is pronouned as they but looks clearly female or male. You start off with "they" but you soon find yourself describing them by the gender you see them as.

Re: Pronouns
 

and the thing is they should accept that instead of getting all triggered just because someone gets it wrong. Calling it hate crime and all that.

I identify as a slim young attractive male no one looking at me can see that hahahaha

Re: Pronouns
 

How many times has that happened to you?

Everyone on here seems to have this problem a lot more than I do. I've literally only seen this on e-mail signatures.

Re: Pronouns
 

I don't think they get triggered or call it a hate crime or indeed even know. I normally use pronouns when I'm talking about them, not talking to them.

Re: Pronouns
 

I dont pay that much attention to email signatures tbh.
I would not go out of my way to use something other than what was asked.
However, I would not go out of my way to try and remember oddities either.

I have little time for all this "I identify as a toaster (or whatever)"
It generally means I Identify you as a pita, and avoid if possible. :erm:

Too much attention given to a vocal minority.
I put the blame on [anti] social media for that.
Far too many people care about what a few "twits" think. :dozey:

Re: Pronouns
 

I have an acquaintance who dresses as a woman.However it's clear they are male. I like them.They are a nice,kind person.I just use the term you when speaking to them at the moment.When I have got a better acquaintance with this person and I have a name it will all become so much easier.I prefer to use a little patience as I also regularly have to deal with a delivery person who also seems to identify as female.

I see nothing wrong in dealing kindly with the people who inhabit my village.

Re: Pronouns
 

I'm not suggesting being unkind to anyone.

My gripe is the majority of normal people virtue signalling pronouns (and describing themselves as cisgender in some cases) in their social media profiles, signatures etc and some companies encouraging it among staff.

Re: Pronouns
 

People's reaction to it in my experience is largely generational. People joining organisations in their 20s think it's inclusive and a sign of a good employer, most are agnostic whilst those closer to retirement feel it's all stuff and nonsense.

I think the business logic is that it is seen as being more inclusive helping the organisation attract and retain the best customers and workforce. A lot of the organisations doing it are consultancies and accountancy firms who are ruthlessly commercial. They're focused on the bottom line, not on virtue signalling.

Re: Pronouns
 

I know a "People in their 20s" who think its nonsense.
Thy certainly dont view it as a sign of a "good employer".
They dont see it as a sign of a bad employer either, they just think its a gimmick.

Re: Pronouns
 

My local Morrisons had a 'come in for a cup of tea' type sign but half the sign was taken up with a pride rainbow banner it that made no sense to have there. I see that stuff a gimmick and not needed in any way.

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

Spot on, they need their heads looked at.

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

Pretty sure it wasn’t deliberate…

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

No it just shows up YOUR prejudices.

---------- Post added at 08:51 ---------- Previous post was at 08:50 ----------

Prejudiced much?

Re: Pronouns
 

Gender Ideology, the driving idea behind the whole Pronouns thing, and which only really started to appear to most of us around 2015, is just that.....an ideology.

Like any other ideology you can choose to participate in it, or not.

I choose not, because if I was to recognise it out of politeness or any other reason, would be to acquiesce to something I don't believe in, or can plainly see.

It would be like saying to a christian that I believe in god, just so I don't hurt his feelings.

Perfect example is Eddie Izzard. He is a man. Plainly a man. There is no way I would address him as She. No matter how hurt his feelings may be.

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

‘They’ is also perfectly acceptable third person singular for referring to an individual whose sex is unknown. It has been co-opted by those who wish to make a deliberately ambiguous statement about their ‘gender’ but that shouldn’t stop you using it as grammar has long permitted.

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

Already exist - ze/zir/hir/hirself

https://pronouns.org/ze-hir

Re: Pronouns
 

Not in my vocabulary.

Re: Pronouns
 

Nothing in that website suggests these terms “already exist.” And by already exist I’m looking for more than the pet project of a tiny subculture. There is no evidence of provenance, just a lot of manufactured grammar and a huge amount of waffle about how to deal with the equally manufactured social faux pas that inevitably arise in situations where its use is normalised.

The idea that it is somehow ignorant or hateful to use language that the entire human race has developed over millennia is absurd. If an individual looks in the mirror and chooses to see there something other than what their biology immutably says they are, then that’s their business. But their right to their self image doesn’t impinge on my right to behave in a perfectly normal human manner and assume someone is he or she - and let’s face it, out in the real world in the overwhelming majority of cases it is crystal clear which is which. The idea that it ought to be normal for people to provide their pronouns when introducing themselves is likewise absurd, and simply demonstrates just how pernicious the social media echo chamber has become.

Re: Pronouns
 

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2022/08/1.gif

---------- Post added at 12:12 ---------- Previous post was at 12:08 ----------

Will the Oxford English Dictionary suffice?

https://public.oed.com/updates/new-w...st-march-2019/

Re: Pronouns
 

I’d prefer the full Oxford definition, which includes provenance (if it has any) rather than an entry in the 2019 new words list.

I’d also point out that the new words list frequently includes pop culture artefacts that come and go, and also that proponents of pronouns aren’t simply trying to get recognition for the language of their subculture but rather to affect significant change to a fundamental aspect of English grammar.

According to Oxford, “the dogs b0ll0cks” entered the lexicon in 2002 but nobody gets offended when someone else fails to use it as a superlative.

https://public.oed.com/updates/new-w...december-2002/

Re: Pronouns
 

Doesn't this just come down to acceptance, if Eddie Izzard wants to use the pronouns she/her then so what? individuals might not agree with it but there is zero cost to respecting someone's wishes.

people (not necessarily you) who refuse to go this type of request will usually be the first to complain when their own requests aren't listened to or their feelings are being imposed on.

I'm an atheist but I'm not going to run round refusing to acknowledge people's religious beliefs just because it's something i don't believe in.

Protestant? Good for you
Catholic? Good for you
Non binary? Great
Pastafarian? Touch me with your noodly appendage

Re: Pronouns
 

There's lots of stupid and silly words in the OED that I don't use. These will just be more of that.

Re: Pronouns
 

The issue isn’t with people believing what they want (though I’m sceptical that in many cases society is dealing effectively with emerging mental health issues by being so laissez-faire). The problem lies in this movement’s assertion that others are being ignorant or hateful if they do not fundamentally adjust their use of English grammar to accommodate them.

Obviously if someone I don’t know presents themselves to me with a female name, wearing a dress and makeup I’m going to continue to refer to them as “she”, even if it later transpires they’re biologically male. I’m not about to look for opportunities to be offensive. But the multitude of gender states invented by critical gender theory are preposterous and I have no intention of miring myself in the language of that subculture in order to avoid giving “offence,” any more than I would bother to learn the correct way to discuss trainspotting.

Re: Pronouns
 

If at the time of presentation you're asked to use a specific set of pronouns then what is the harm in using them as requested?

Why is the number of gender states so important to you that the quantity becomes preposterous ?

Re: Pronouns
 

Who refers to someone as she/ he when they're present anyway, that's ruder than mispronouning imo

Re: Pronouns
 

You wouldn't, people generally ask you to use pronouns when referencing them

Slack, one of our main collaboration tools has fields for pronouns, some people fill them in, some people don't (mine are not' filled in)

Re: Pronouns
 

Sorry … nice try but no cigar.

I speak English; I refer to individuals as ‘he’ or ‘she’. This is based on a prima facie determination of an individual’s biological sex. That is normal and has been so for millennia. I understand the strategy of attempting to make the revolution appear to be the reasonable proposition, but it isn’t - most especially if it presents itself as individuals making choices about themselves but seeks ultimately to compel others to change their behaviour (in this case, their speech).

The absurdity of critical gender theory doesn’t lie in a specific number of supposed gender states but in its elevation of these psychological states above the fundamentals of human biology and the linguistic contortions required by a vast number of unaffected individuals, to accommodate it.

Ultimately critical gender theory is just another theory of self. Freud had a stab at producing one and his was wildly influential in its time, but it’s almost entirely discredited today. This too shall pass - either that or our grandchildren will be so hung up on what they are that they forget that it takes a man to fertilise a woman and a woman to birth a baby, the birth rate will fall off a cliff and the world will carry on with only those cultures that didn’t allow themselves to be so distracted.

Re: Pronouns
 

Generally you don't. But if it's a speaker at an event or conference, you might read out their biography which usually includes pronouns so you don't keep repeating their name.

Re: Pronouns
 

Isn't critical gender theory that of people who are sceptical of the notion that gender and sex can be different?

As for pronouns and people whose identified gender and sex don't match that predates modern gender theory. Gender Dysphoria has been a recognised medical condition for decades and we had 'transexuals'. If someone had completed transitioning would you still refer to them as their old pronoun?

It's just there was been a widening of that to encompass the idea gender can be fluid - i.e multiple states other than the binary views - and more. I'll admit I don't really follow the theory that closely or understand it that well.

But the base idea that someone's view/expression of their gender can differ from their biological sex is much older.

Re: Pronouns
 

No. A critical theory, in the words of the great wiki, is:

“any approach to social philosophy that focuses on reflective assessment and critique of society and culture to reveal and challenge power structures.”

Critical Gender Theory promotes its theory of gender by criticising the status quo.

Re: Pronouns
 

I might be getting confused with 'gender-critical'

Re: Pronouns
 

It was a question in answer to your response, i was genuinely trying to understand how you formed your view not entrap you.

Saying something has been the normal for millenia doesn't mean it will stay that way. everything is subject to change, we might not like it, we might argue against it but ultimately change wins. Desperation to cling to the status quo driven by fear or other methods often means positives that may arise are lost.

I can admit my own fallibility on the above with regards to the B word :D

Personally, I would think our grandchildren will have bigger fish to fry then if we refer to someone as he/she/they/it

Interesting conversation , brings the whole question of tolerance, empathy and how we only utilise it when it conforms to our beliefs

Re: Pronouns
 

Perhaps.

Sorry for my incomplete earlier reply, due to stuff happening.

Yes, gender dysphoria is a thing. It is also (whisper it) disproportionately present in those with an autistic spectrum condition compared to the general population. As a disorder, it deserves appropriate medical treatment and management. That, however, is becoming mired in loaded terms like “conversion therapy” at the same time as others are being accused of hate speech for “misgendering” people through use of incorrect pronouns.

This is the effect of critical gender theory, which is using gender issues as just another line of attack on what are identified as “power structures”. In other words it’s one front on the culture war that those waging it are always quick to deny exists.

---------- Post added at 14:08 ---------- Previous post was at 13:56 ----------

Fair points all, though it appears here that you are (unconsciously I think) casting tolerance and empathy as a one-way street. Compelled speech is outlawed by the HRA for good reason. One person’s right to believe something does not demand any other person’s affirmation. I consciously do not affirm the hypothesis that there are multiple genders because I believe the arguments are loaded in pursuit of a wider social agenda that has little concern for those who are genuinely suffering a psychological disorder that deserves to be treated without social theorists watching for opportunities to scream about patriarchy, prejudice and hatred. Someone may decide they are non-binary. That’s their business - and thus far is a tolerant attitude. If however my position is to be critical of the entire framework that permits them to declare themselves non-binary, do they tolerate me responding, “live how you like, but I believe you’re mistaken?” Or do they attempt to go to law, using weasel words like “hate speech” or “-phobia” to try to circumvent a simple philosophical disagreement?

“Things always change” isn’t a convincing argument in favour of any given proposition. The proposals put by gender theorists are not inevitable. And in point of fact I think millennia of things *not* changing in this regard is very persuasive. We are being asked to believe that human power structures have somehow totally suppressed something that, if true, would be fundamental to human nature, through all recorded history and possibly for as long as humans have walked the earth. And that those working in shiny new queer studies departments in western universities have somehow only now blown the lid off it.

I find that to be staggering in its arrogance and in its lack of self awareness and humility, given the magnitude of the issues they profess to be expert in.

Re: Pronouns
 

Fair points also....

Tolerance & empathy as you say is a two way street, I'd expect someone who requested you to adhere to their pronouns to give you the same respect to something that held a deep and meaningful significance to you.

Whilst the proposals put in motion as you say are not inevitable it stands to reason that there will be a degree of resultant change, how big or significant a change? who knows. Butterflies... flapping wings... earthquakes......

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

Why would i just be referring to trans people?

to add, my original post should have had in things such as email/collab tooling

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

We used to have a member on here who, in any religious thread, was always sure to repeatedly refer to the God of the Bible as a “genocidal tyrant”. As we no longer have stringent blasphemy laws in this country he was entitled to do so, and while I would occasionally attempt to engage in discussion on that point I would never challenge his right to believe, or to express that belief - despite it being somewhat offensive to me, given my wholly different understanding of who God is (to the point of going to a church to actively worship him on a weekly basis).

When I talk about human beings as “he” or “she” I’m talking about them in their immutable biological state, just as we’ve always done. I’m firmly of the view that that is the only fundamental division in the human race and it is fair and reasonable to acknowledge it. I’m not going to be offended if someone tries to correct me by asserting they are a “ze” or whatever - but I expect them to manage their sense of offence in a mature, adult manner when I politely decline to use any such terms.

A truly tolerant society is one that can find a way for very different people to live side by side without insisting their neighbour change their world view, no matter how much they might want them to. And that tolerance absolutely must flow equally in both directions, not simply in favour of whoever seems to represent the current zeitgeist.

Re: Pronouns
 

So to cherry pick on one thing here, if a man undergoes gender reassignment surgery, are they male or female ? If the answer is male, and an individual expressed this in a workplace, then that individual would be out on their arse quick smart... considering gender reassignment is a protected characteristic

Id argue that a truly tolerant society is one whereby people are open to their view of the world changing and accept that sometimes their inherent beliefs MAY need to change.

Re: Pronouns
 

Therein lies the devilish detail, though as a starting point I would refer back to my comments on gender dysphoria from earlier. It is a thing. It is a serious psychological condition and current medical opinion is that in some cases the best solution is to surgically alter the patient’s body to (superficially) represent the sex they believe they should have been born with. This is then followed up by a legal recognition, though in UK law you still only have the choice of male and female. It seems unlikely that there will ever be legal recognition of any of the other postulated gender states when academics are still arguing over exactly what they might be, and how many there are.

As I also said earlier, I’m not going out of my way to cause offence. If someone presents to me as a she, then that’s how I’ll know them - apart from anything else I have no other frame of reference by which I could make a different decision.

Turn it around though. If you got into an intimate relationship with someone who at the point it began to turn intimate turned out to be the opposite of what you expected, are you intolerant for breaking off the relationship, even though by implication you’re refusing to affirm the gender they presented to you?

Re: Pronouns
 

Is this case though would you use the pronouns of their new gender?

Transmen and Transwomen by far represent the bulk of people who believe their gender doesn't match their biological sex. I know there are people who believe that there are other genders but these are a small minority within a minority.

Re: Pronouns
 

If you genuinely have gender dysmorphia (which is mental condition) and ultimately have surgery (which should be after years of counselling after all other options are exhausted and certainly only when you are adult). You are still biologically male, but polite society should accept you as female. This btw is an extremely tiny number of people.

What has been conflated now is that men that have a dressing up fetish, we used to call transvestites, are demanding to be called by female pronouns, wanting access to female spaces. They are intact males with no intention of losing their male genitalia. This is what needs to be checked.

Then of course you have the whole spectrum of other manufactured identities, so people can feel special and privileged white kids can feel like their in an oppressed minority group.

---------- Post added at 15:11 ---------- Previous post was at 15:08 ----------

No.

Re: Pronouns
 

Well I’ll let you into a secret - I have an acquaintance (I’d call friend, but not close) who is transitioning; taking hormones and changed name. No longer a she. And yes, I use ‘his’ new name and refer to him as ‘he’ most of the time, though it depends on context. Legally she is still female and her birth certificate still has her given name on it.

This individual is under proper medical care and insisting on referring to them by their chromosomally-determined sex would be socially and psychologically unhelpful.

Tolerance and respect isn’t two dimensional. A bit of contextual wisdom is required, and there is always going to be a grey area that needs careful navigation. However, I am yet to come across a convincing reason why I should affirm the critical theory that underlies gender studies by choosing to affirm what appears to me to be a fiction or to indulge individuals who believe their gender is theirs to choose from a seemingly infinite continuum.

Re: Pronouns
 

So to take you back to this comment.

'I speak English; I refer to individuals as ‘he’ or ‘she’. This is based on a prima facie determination of an individual’s biological sex. That is normal and has been so for millennia.'

A male has gender reassignment surgery and identifies as she/her - to you is that person male or female? Based on your statement I believe that privately you would refer to them as male. However, I suspect publicly in a situation where your career (or something else that could have negative financial or social impact) was potentially at risk you would refer to them as female.

No evidence for the above, and placing no judgement on the above either.


regarding the latter I'm not sure it holds the same relevance, As i understand it you're talking about deception in an attempt to obtain something ?

There have been as I'm sure you're aware legal cases regarding similar scenarios.

---------- Post added at 15:18 ---------- Previous post was at 15:15 ----------

What female spaces are they demanding access to?

Re: Pronouns
 

If my career was at risk for refusing to affirm a personally selected gender, my employer would be hearing from a human rights lawyer. Compelled speech is illegal. ;). To my knowledge, to date, all British cases of dismissal, whether direct or constructive, have been lost by employers if not at tribunal then on appeal, on that very point.

If someone has transitioned and obtained legal recognition, then there’s nothing inconsistent in using legally assigned terms to refer to them, whilst also questioning philosophically whether a legal statement is necessarily a true statement. All of us believe what we believe about the world, but most of us are polite enough to pick and choose when we attempt to articulate those beliefs.

Is an ‘intact male’ (to use Pierre’s term), self-affirming as female and not in a position of a gender recognition certificate, obtaining something by deception if they gain access to a female-only space or service?

Re: Pronouns
 

Toilets, changing rooms, shelters, hospital wards, specific female swimming sessions………hell I’ll even throw in female sports.

Re: Pronouns
 

Eddie at one stage was saying they are genderfluid so might one day choose to be he/him and the next she/her. Should we really pander to that type of stuff on the whim of someone which makes it unnecessarily awkward for everyone else?

Genderfluid is one of those I put down to either confused, attention seeking or thinking they are cool with that label.

---------- Post added at 17:35 ---------- Previous post was at 17:15 ----------

Its a real problem in some physical sports where a man transitions to a woman and wants to compete despite having a huge muscle advantage over others that years of more testosterone and such has given them.

Police are spending so much time painting the cars rainbow coloured and forces telling their staff not to use sir or madam and to use LBTQ+ friendly terms instead while 70% of met officers have not made an arrest in the last month and most robberies do not even get investigated so are unsolved.

Worrying about gender pronouns and virtue signalling instead of working on crimes.

---------- Post added at 17:50 ---------- Previous post was at 17:35 ----------

I have an acquaintance who transitioned to become a her. I could probably say friend as they sometimes message me to meet up for a pint and we spoke about their transition before it happened and they sent me pictures while in the hospital having the surgical part too.

Of course I respect their choice. I feel anyone should be able to do whatever they want or put whatever they want in their body if its not affecting anyone else.

Speaking with them before and after, I'm not convinced they did it for what people might consider the right reasons. They not once told me they felt like they were in the wrong body/ felt feminine although its possible they just didn't say this to me. The relationship they have with their boyfriend is a very...risk/kink/hard to describe without going in to a lot of detail but there was a thrill in doing things in their relationship that was extreme. I get the feeling it was more to do with that and maybe a bit of being on the spectrum that lead to it all.

Obviously anyone going for surgery is going to have nerves but they were having second thoughts about right up until the day they went in for surgery, despite all the years it took to get there and the hormone side of it. Even after it was done and there was no going back, they wondered if they had done the right thing.

The point being, not everyone is what you would think 100% sure that transitioning is what they want, even if they have fantasised about it for a long time and made a good for years of their life about it.

Re: Pronouns
 

I couldn't care less what people want to pretend to be, that is on them, however, don't insist the rest of us suspend science and reality to cater to your confusion or illusions. I refuse to call a person with a penis a woman or a person with a vagina a man because they are not. If they chose to dress as the opposite, go for it, but don't make me repeat a lie to make you feel better. Similarly, a person cannot be two people at the same time, and there is no "them"; instead, there is a person with perception issues. This is not judgemental, personal, or transphobic, but merely reality. I cannot choose to identify as a dalmatian dog, a pine tree, Donald Trump, or an alien, as it is both untrue and absurdly ridiculous.

Re: Pronouns
 

This is a topic coming up increasingly more everywhere I g, I'm umm quite sceptical of all this and I've still yet to pin down where it began or necessarily came from. Transsexuals or as I refer the OG "trans" has been an accepted fact or reality for over 20 years now (though the GRA became law in 2004). They've been in the "community" despite being a very distinct group of their own within the original initialism. LGB was about sexuality, the T was about sex and transitioning to the opposite (putting biological reality aside for a moment)....again so far so clear.

So for most of my adult life before I got to 30, there was the likes of me a gay man, lesbian women, bisexual men and women, transsexual men and women. The latter were a settled issue, they were relatively few in number but had a series of rights afforded to them which I believe are correct and fair....with some exemptions of course....and the transsexuals I know are understanding of that (access to some womens spaces and sports). Now the transsexuals I know got their GRC...so far so good and the protections with that.

There was non of this pro noun business, it was simple he/she/her/him.

Then out of nowhere a load of others jumped on the "trans" bit and expanded the meaning or as I think *******ised it to the point said OG transsexuals are now having to fight for their rights again (even though previously settled) because of the gender ideology movement. Those that are non binary or genderfluid etc are not really trans...that always belonged to transsexuals whom as mentioned already here have been diagnosed with GD and sort the appropriate treatment for themselves.

Now anyone can identify as trans, you put on a frock, die your hair blue and you can call yourself trans.....

So some on here think some of us are precious about language, well language has a purpose, some new language comes into common parlance but it should not replace language which has been accepted for centuries and defines boundaries.

If you allow the expansion of a specific word is loses its meaning and becomes hard to define or draft in law. Take trans....look what has happened to it. Now homosexuality despite for decades if not centuries has meant same sex attraction...but now you have Stonewall telling the world and anyone signed up to their indoctrination programme that it means "same gender attraction".

Its fine to acknowledge someones pro nouns and if you feel so obliging use them, but you shouldn't be forced to. That doesn't mean one should use their former pro nouns but people on here are smart enough to figure a way round that.

I refuse to use any pro nouns in any email signature etc and when I introduce myself they get my name, not my a/s/l or whatever identity I'm seemingly connected to. The gender ideology movement and associated trans activists are the reason acceptance of the so called LGBT+ community is falling in the western world IMHO. So much so there is a grass roots movement to uncouple LGB from the T+.

I believe biological sex is immutable, you are not assigned it at birth, you are it no ifs or buts. But if we accept at at large, pro nouns and de facto gender ideology then we will cease to be able to define or protect in law the charisteristics of the equality act.

The HRA guarrantees freedom of expression, say or identify how you want, that does not entitle you to additional rights. But the protected characteristics of the Equality Act and associated examptions in that law arguably means it takes precendence due to its specificity, which should not change at all.

Ideology always starts with language......

Re: Pronouns
 

You may (or may not) find this informative.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelse...h=5641c24c76b9

tl:dr - it’s not that simple…

Re: Pronouns
 

Actually it is - even in cases of androgen insensitivity, the individual is genetically male while not properly developing as such. Something that should happen, does not, because of a clinical disorder, not because biological sex is a myth.

Biology is the fatal flaw in gender theory and unsurprisingly I have seen numerous attempts like this one to undermine it. But all of them amount to obfuscation and claims that black is white.

Re: Pronouns
 

I prefer to take on board Dr Robert Winston's view, rather than some internet hack.

https://youtu.be/pFHVV_GcykI

You are male or female right down to every cell in your body.

Now, there will of course be exceptional cases, there always is.

But as I heard quoted many times when someone tries to pull out a "gotcha" moment with intersex examples etc

"there are people born in the world with only one leg, that doesn't mean that the human race is not a bipedal species"

Re: Pronouns
 

you are right. But, this is where semantics or perspective comes into play. The average number of legs in the world for the human race is 1.97 therefore by it's very meaning we are not a bipedal race.

It is by intention we should be a bipedal race. However circumstance beyond our control mean that's not possible in all cases.

Re: Pronouns
 

Which is why, by the time you sit GCSE maths, you’re told about the limitations of mean average and are introduced to other statistical tools, like the modal average which in this case is 2.

Re: Pronouns
 

Of course but modal average wasn't specified in the original statement. like i said semantics or perspective

Re: Pronouns
 

It is that simple, even those with DSD or what used to be called intersex are born male or female in the majority of circumstances. Thats where Assigned Male/Female at Birth was originally used, those instances where the sex was difficult to determine. AFAB/AMAB was never meant to be used in the general population as their sex was already determined (in the womb).

So it is immutable, you can't change your biological sex. This is not to say those who experience GD shouldn't get treatment and a broadbased one at that. I have immense sympathy for someone who is suffering with GD, we should be accommodating of that and encourage them to seek the treatment and support they need.

It used to be the understanding that those who underwent transitioning had surgery especially in the MTF sense, thus at least appearance wise reducing the perceived risk to other women. There wasn't much issue around this, hence why I suggested or said it was settled. Now the current situation has brought all that into question, why?

I certainly believe you can transition your identity to the opposite sex and live as that socially. However that still doesn't change the fact your body is still biologically what it was/is, there is no escaping that. Again though we should treat people as they wish to be treated, with respect, kindness and dignity. We can do that without feeling like we are betraying our beliefs or views, some will indulge more than others, others less so.

Re: Pronouns
 

Jake the Peg has pushed that up a bit though.

Re: Pronouns
 

So, it would appear that the Equalities Act of 2010 actually gives rights in areas such as work toilets ? I’m assuming (possibly incorrectly) that these rights may expand outside the workplace ?

https://cgprofessional.co.uk/transgender-employees/

Is this still good law?

Whilst there doesn’t appear to be any conclusive case law to dispute Croft, there is large speculation as to whether this does indeed remain good law. This is because in accordance with the Equality Act 2010 there is no requirement for medical intervention to take place for an individual to be deemed transsexual.

Moreover, in accordance with the GEO guidance, it dictates that individuals should be free to select the appropriate facilities for the gender in which they identify and that where the individual starts to live in their required role on a full-time basis, they should have the rights to use the facilities of that gender. Understandably employers may encounter difficulties in respect of other employees in how they perceive the individual’s use of these facilities, however, the Guide clearly stipulates that any objection or inappropriate comments made by work colleagues, as a result of the individual using these facilities, should be treated as unreasonable and potentially discriminatory. Employers should, therefore, ensure that their staff are educated in terms of equality and diversity in the workplace and that this information is disseminated to the wider workforce.

Re: Pronouns
 

No, that is not good law. The guidance appears to give any man the right to enter a female toilet at work as long as they say they identify as female, and that any woman objecting to this is to be warned that it’s their behaviour that’s unreasonable and possibly even unlawful.

I suspect when this law was drafted there was too little appreciation of just how militant certain sections of the transgender lobby was getting. But it is now the case that women who have campaigned for equality, and safety for women, when they dare speak out on this issue, are at times slurred with the perjorative ‘TERF’ (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) by certain sections of the transgender lobby. You don’t have to look very hard to see that the (probably unintended) consequence of this law has actually been to give *men* licence to trespass on the hard-earned rights of women. That isn’t progress.

Re: Pronouns
 

I'd agree with that rather than the "oh well I casually identify as what I like to go where I want" lobby which will be an inevitable consequence of militance, entitlement, and law allowing it.


In a workplace less so (as presumably someone casually identifying as what they like when they like to avoid waiting for the bogs would hit management radar eventually) but in public, the behaviour would become more concerning.


Specifically on the point of toilets, i'm probably missing something but I don't know why more places don't just have a load of rooms with self-contained toilet/sink (and actual rooms, too, not cubicles) accessible off a central / open atrium/corridor area, which are entirely gender-neutral and anyone can use them? I don't really like the idea of urinals anyway and it'd mean it didn't matter who used the toilet, and you wouldn't get say for example blokes having to queue to use 1 toilet when the ladies have 2 or 3 as they don't have urinals, or vice versa.

Re: Pronouns
 

Such arrangements are more common in the newest buildings, but the reason they are uncommon overall is that they require a lot more space, reducing the space available for the building’s primary purpose. They also cost more to build. It can be difficult to retrofit them in the oldest buildings where the bare minimum toilet facilities were provided, or none at all.

Re: Pronouns
 

Also on a side note, have you ever seen the state of toilets in a mens…….seats are usually covered in pish!

Re: Pronouns
 

IMHO its down to how and why men and women use the toilets........

Men going to the toilet its business like, go in do your business, wash your hands out you go.

Women going to the toilet can be more social and more involved. For instance when on a night out even amongst a mixed sex group of friends the women will go to the toilet together (men don't), they chat, touch up their make up and other girly things. But its also more involved for women, depending on that time of the month and also what other personal care needs they have. A lot of women when using private areas like toilets or changing rooms feel very exposed and vulnerable, if a man were to be present even more so.

I don't think gender neutral spaces are the answer, why should single sex spaces bet gotten rid of to appease a minority? I'm all for creating additional spaces that are gender neutral, but not in place of what already should be there i.e. men and women's toilets along with a disabled space.

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

I'd tell the lot of these weirdo's to basically **** off.

Re: Pronouns
 

I'm sure they'd give you a personal pronoun too....

Up to the individual and doesn't affect you.

Re: Pronouns
 

No! As I understand ladies sit down to urinate, and not try to hit a bowl from a couple feet above with an inaccurate weapon.

Unless you know different ladies to me.

Re: Pronouns
 

I know plenty of ladies who profess to hover above, rather than sit on a seat in a public toilet. I have no idea what that does for accuracy though.

Re: Pronouns
 

Indeed, Mrs Pierre is a hoverer when necessary, but you get my drift.

It’s a sad fact that men, especially when in drinking establishments ( but not isolated to those) have very poor toilet etiquette.

Some toilets I’d be happier in a pair of Hunters than a pair Nikes.

In the wider argument it’s a small point, as I said from the outset, but shared (gender neutral) toilets are not an answer.

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

? Does not compute

Re: Pronouns
 

Seriously? This is the level that we have arrived at?

Re: Pronouns
 

Re: Pronouns
 

Arrived at, we've been here 19 years... :)

Re: Pronouns
 

It's yoghurt knitters like you that would accept any old shite by these loony's, there are only two genders, male and female, anyone who thinks otherwise needs their heads examined.

Re: Pronouns
 

It must be nice to live in a such a simple place
. . Unfortunately it isn't that simple for some. Personal pronouns I've declined to use at work my choice, just like anybodies else's choice to use one. Both choices should be respected. It really doesn't affect me or you, so no need to get so angry. It's a non issue in a world with much bigger issues.

P.s. I've never tried knitting and f I did it certainly wouldn't be with yoghurt...

Re: Pronouns
 

Aside from wokery/gammonism(*), there is a genuine use for this. Working in a multinational company, and communicating mainly by email, I can't tell the gender of many of my colleagues from their name. Yes, you can always work around it, but knowing the pronoun to use makes things easier.


(* Have I offended everyone yet?)

Re: Pronouns
 

We have managed to survive without it for the last 30 years or so email has been around without any major issues, even in multinational companies.

I spent some time working at a translation company with worldwide offices and translators in most countries and I never once had to find out if anyone was male or female. Maybe twice I wasn't sure of their sex but it made no difference to any correspondence.

I noticed today by chance that there is a pregnant man emoji on my phone. I seriously thought I had got it wrong and it was just my eyesight but I looked it up and yes, the EMOJI consortium added a pregnant man emoji last year to their standard emoji list. You couldn't make this stuff up

Re: Pronouns
 

As you may know, my niece is in a same-sex relationship.


An ex-girlfriend "Shelia" (not the real name) is transitioning to male and now called "Bruce" (not the real name). They are taking testosterone and have a light beard.


My niece says he, and not she, the gender change was not a reason for the break-up.


I do believe that the He/him, she/her is a this generation thin.


I want to add that my niece and girlfriend have exchanged promise rings so that when they can afford it, they will get engaged. Not only that, but I told the GF that she to me is now a niece and that means she has all the rights and privileges my niece gets.

Re: Pronouns
 

I’ve worked in a multinational company and communicated mainly by email for 27 yrs.

Never needed a pronoun indicator to verify somebody’s sex*


(* sex, as the word gender has been hijacked to be meaningless construct about how a person feels) - hope I haven’t offended anyone! If I have I don’t care.

Re: Pronouns
 

yeah it is wrong that some think they can appropriate parts of a language and just expect everyone to just fall in