Author Topic: Episode #700  (Read 25428 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fuzzyMarmot

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 704
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #525 on: February 18, 2019, 01:24:31 am »
bachfiend, I really hope you reevaluate your position on gendered pronouns. I'm don't think you appreciate what an important issue this is, or how harmful your attitudes can be.

If you don't open yourself to learning about this stuff and changing your attitude, you risk looking back on things with a huge amount of shame and regret in 5-10 years. You also risk being the person that nobody wants at family holiday dinners because your ideas are embarrassing and offensive.

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2815
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #526 on: February 18, 2019, 05:38:50 am »
bachfiend, I really hope you reevaluate your position on gendered pronouns. I'm don't think you appreciate what an important issue this is, or how harmful your attitudes can be.

If you don't open yourself to learning about this stuff and changing your attitude, you risk looking back on things with a huge amount of shame and regret in 5-10 years. You also risk being the person that nobody wants at family holiday dinners because your ideas are embarrassing and offensive.

No, I won’t.  I’ll look back at it with pleasure.  And I’m actually the most liberal member of my family.

The fact that the LBGBT (or whatever) community can’t agree on a non-ambiguous non-gendered 3rd person singular pronoun means it’s not generally regarded as important.  And doesn’t give some of them the right to steal ‘they’ and pervert its meaning.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück

Offline daniel1948

  • Happy Man in a Boat
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10025
  • I'd rather be paddling
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #527 on: February 18, 2019, 09:22:57 am »
bachfiend, I really hope you reevaluate your position on gendered pronouns. I'm don't think you appreciate what an important issue this is, or how harmful your attitudes can be.

If you don't open yourself to learning about this stuff and changing your attitude, you risk looking back on things with a huge amount of shame and regret in 5-10 years. You also risk being the person that nobody wants at family holiday dinners because your ideas are embarrassing and offensive.

No, I won’t.  I’ll look back at it with pleasure.  And I’m actually the most liberal member of my family.

The fact that the LBGBT (or whatever) community can’t agree on a non-ambiguous non-gendered 3rd person singular pronoun means it’s not generally regarded as important.  And doesn’t give some of them the right to steal ‘they’ and pervert its meaning.

No large group of people ever agrees on anything. In fact, if they didn't regard an issue as important, they'd come to an agreement more easily. It's when an issue is important that people argue long and hard. Which also disproves Parkinson. Note also that "important" is not a value that can be determined by science. What's important to Jill won't be important to Jack. Parkinson is using "important" as though it were an unambiguous quality. It is apparently of utmost importance to you that "they" not be used as a singular pronoun. To me it's somewhat important, but less important than people's feelings. And to a growing number of people, it's not important at all. But the entire construct of "Parkinson's corollary to Parkinson's law" collapses when you recognize that "important" is entirely subjective.

I would like people to conform their language usage to the grammar that I learned growing up. But when it comes right down to it, when it causes real human pain and anguish, then it's time to let go. It's time to let go of this one.

“You say you love your children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes.”
-- Greta Thunberg

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2815
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #528 on: February 18, 2019, 12:56:41 pm »
My argument is limited.

‘They’ should not be used as the default 3rd person singular pronoun for single specified persons of readily identifiable gender.  The readily identifiable gender is important.  Most people want to be referred to as ‘he’ or she,’ and would probably object, albeit mildly, if they were referred to as ‘they’ when they’re being referred to singly and specifically.

If it’s considered important to have a non-gendered 3rd person singular pronoun, then one should be devised.  The failure of transgender and non-binary gender persons (and their progressive running dogs) to agree on one doesn’t give them the right to steal ‘they,’ pervert its meaning and insist that everyone else uses it with its new meaning, else they’ll invoke the guilt card.

I’ve suggested using ‘dey’ as a non-gendered 3rd person singular pronoun.  Why not?
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück

Offline daniel1948

  • Happy Man in a Boat
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10025
  • I'd rather be paddling
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #529 on: February 18, 2019, 02:43:32 pm »
My argument is limited.

‘They’ should not be used as the default 3rd person singular pronoun for single specified persons of readily identifiable gender.  The readily identifiable gender is important.  Most people want to be referred to as ‘he’ or she,’ and would probably object, albeit mildly, if they were referred to as ‘they’ when they’re being referred to singly and specifically.

If it’s considered important to have a non-gendered 3rd person singular pronoun, then one should be devised.  The failure of transgender and non-binary gender persons (and their progressive running dogs) to agree on one doesn’t give them the right to steal ‘they,’ pervert its meaning and insist that everyone else uses it with its new meaning, else they’ll invoke the guilt card.

I’ve suggested using ‘dey’ as a non-gendered 3rd person singular pronoun.  Why not?

There is no such thing as a person of "readily identifiable gender." There are people who have told you their gender or who have made their gender known publicly, and there are people whose gender you do not know. In the latter group, you may think you know, or you may be aware that you do not know. And of course there are situations where the individual is not specified, such as "a carpenter."

But there's nobody of readily identifiable gender. Just people who have revealed their gender to you and people who have not.
“You say you love your children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes.”
-- Greta Thunberg

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2815
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #530 on: February 18, 2019, 04:22:12 pm »
My argument is limited.

‘They’ should not be used as the default 3rd person singular pronoun for single specified persons of readily identifiable gender.  The readily identifiable gender is important.  Most people want to be referred to as ‘he’ or she,’ and would probably object, albeit mildly, if they were referred to as ‘they’ when they’re being referred to singly and specifically.

If it’s considered important to have a non-gendered 3rd person singular pronoun, then one should be devised.  The failure of transgender and non-binary gender persons (and their progressive running dogs) to agree on one doesn’t give them the right to steal ‘they,’ pervert its meaning and insist that everyone else uses it with its new meaning, else they’ll invoke the guilt card.

I’ve suggested using ‘dey’ as a non-gendered 3rd person singular pronoun.  Why not?

There is no such thing as a person of "readily identifiable gender." There are people who have told you their gender or who have made their gender known publicly, and there are people whose gender you do not know. In the latter group, you may think you know, or you may be aware that you do not know. And of course there are situations where the individual is not specified, such as "a carpenter."

But there's nobody of readily identifiable gender. Just people who have revealed their gender to you and people who have not.

Yes, there are.  Arthwollipot is of readily identifiable male gender, since he has an image of himself as a male (unless he wants to be identified as male, and I’m quite happy to go along with that).  As is CarbShark who used to have as his signature the claim that he’s just a guy who’s done a non-metric tonne of research on diet and nutrition until this storm on a teacup started and he changed it to someone.

I’m more circumspect when I’m not certain as to the gender of the person concerned.  When it’s a generic person or a person not of readily identifiable gender.  Or if hypothetically I’m asked by a hypothetical person to use a particular pronoun (it’s never happened, although arthwollipot once did ask for me to use ‘they’ to refer to him, but I refused, since he was obviously staging - he’s not transgender or of non-binary gender.  If he was, he could give a very interesting and illuminating perspective).  But I won’t use ‘he’ or ‘they’ as the default 3rd person singular pronoun.

German doesn’t have this problem with gender, since it’s riddled with gender.  ‘Carpenter’ is ‘Zimmermann,’ which is masculine and takes ‘er’ (he).  I’m not certain if there’s a feminine equivalent - it should be ‘Zimmerfrau,’ but that has a different meaning of landlady (the female equivalent of landlord).  There’s a female sports journalist with the family name of Zimmermann, who has the domain address of @zimmerfrau .  German is hyperconcerned with gender unlike English.  When referring to a particularly person, it’s often ‘die Zimmermann,’ indicating that it’s a female not a male with the name of Zimmermann.

German names often mean something as they do in English too.  John Carpenter is an American film director (I was hoping that he’s dead, since I looked up his biography to check, and I found that ‘Memoirs of an Invisible Man’ was one of his films.  As was ‘Vampires,’ which apparently is now a cult film - there’s no accounting for taste).
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück

Offline daniel1948

  • Happy Man in a Boat
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10025
  • I'd rather be paddling
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #531 on: February 18, 2019, 08:19:57 pm »
As I said, there's no such thing as a person of readily identifiable gender, unless they have made their gender public or confided it in you.

ETA: And German is irrelevant when discussing English grammar. You'd like English to be more like German. I'm glad it isn't. Not relevant to this discussion.
“You say you love your children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes.”
-- Greta Thunberg

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2815
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #532 on: February 18, 2019, 09:23:15 pm »
As I said, there's no such thing as a person of readily identifiable gender, unless they have made their gender public or confided it in you.

ETA: And German is irrelevant when discussing English grammar. You'd like English to be more like German. I'm glad it isn't. Not relevant to this discussion.

I mention German, because it gives me a perspective on English pronouns.  Compared to other languages, English is remarkably ungendered.  Some languages have gendered 2nd person singular pronouns.  Some languages have even gendered 1st person singular (even if not pronouns at least) verb endings.

If English had gendered 1st and 2nd person singular pronouns, then transgender and non-binary gender persons would have reasons to complain.  Being forced to use ‘we’ instead of a gendered ‘I’ or being insulted by having other people address them by the pronoun for the wrong gender.

But English doesn’t have them.  Transgender and non-binary gender persons have much to complain about, but having someone refer to them with the ‘wrong’ 3rd person singular pronoun on the Internet is very much the very least of them.

And despite your repeated many statements, almost everyone are single specified persons of readily identified gender.  Almost everyone you meet on the street are of readily identified gender on first glance.  Humans are very good at doing that.  If a person can’t do that, then it’s an indication that the person is being rude and not paying attention.  Actually, this reminds me of an event I once observed.  I was waiting to board a British Airways flight at Heathrow to Oslo, and someone I think a Nigerian in colourful national dress, had gone to the wrong gate.  The rather harassed boarding agent didn’t look up and addressed the passenger as a woman (having seen only the colourful national dress, before looking up and realising that she was wrong (it was obvious at one glance that the passenger was male - the beard sort of gave it away).

If you can identify a person’s gender, then use the appropriate gender.  If you can’t identify the person’s gender (or it’s a generic person), be more circumspect.

Anyone can succeed if they try is correct because anyone is of non-identified gender and generic.  John Smith can succeed if they try is incorrect because it’s ambiguous.  John Smith can succeed because other people try?  It’s better to write John Smith can succeed if he tries.  John Smith is a single specified person of male gender, and he (not someone else) needs to try.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück

Offline arthwollipot

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9761
  • Observer of Phenomena. Pronouns: he/him
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #533 on: February 18, 2019, 09:28:27 pm »
If you're basing your behaviour on "readily identifiable gender" then you are going to misgender someone. Absolutely, 100%. There are women who are "readily identifiable" as men, and men who are "readily identifiable" as women. And you are going to misgender them by making assumptions on the basis of their appearance, which is about the worst thing you can do. John is not an exclusively male name - no name is - and you have just misgendered every woman named John.

Sticking your head in the sand and saying "oh, I never run into trans people" is not going to help, because I absolutely guarantee that either you have and you just haven't known it, or you will. Unless you seal yourself into a box for the rest of your life, in which case you can do whatever the fuck you like.

And by the way, saying "the LBGBT (or whatever) community" is incredibly disrespectful as well. It demonstrates that you don't give a shit about the members of that community, their concerns or their preferences. I mean, we know that, but this makes it clear. The initialism is LGBT. Four letters. It's not hard, and it'll get you by in most situations. It stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender. If you want to be inclusive, add I for Intersex and/or Q for Queer and/or + for members of related communities. If you're going to refer to these communities at all, for the love of dog please don't be so incredibly rude as to say "or whatever".

You have a LOT to learn. Start learning some of it. Or seal yourself up in that box so that you don't damage anyone.
Self-described nerd.

Offline brilligtove

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7679
  • Ignorance can be cured. Stupidity, you deal with.
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #534 on: February 18, 2019, 10:30:49 pm »
Is this hate speech? Have we met the threshold yet?
Large data of text  or Mediumtext or Longtext

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2815
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #535 on: February 18, 2019, 10:41:27 pm »
If you're basing your behaviour on "readily identifiable gender" then you are going to misgender someone. Absolutely, 100%. There are women who are "readily identifiable" as men, and men who are "readily identifiable" as women. And you are going to misgender them by making assumptions on the basis of their appearance, which is about the worst thing you can do. John is not an exclusively male name - no name is - and you have just misgendered every woman named John.

Sticking your head in the sand and saying "oh, I never run into trans people" is not going to help, because I absolutely guarantee that either you have and you just haven't known it, or you will. Unless you seal yourself into a box for the rest of your life, in which case you can do whatever the fuck you like.

And by the way, saying "the LBGBT (or whatever) community" is incredibly disrespectful as well. It demonstrates that you don't give a shit about the members of that community, their concerns or their preferences. I mean, we know that, but this makes it clear. The initialism is LGBT. Four letters. It's not hard, and it'll get you by in most situations. It stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender. If you want to be inclusive, add I for Intersex and/or Q for Queer and/or + for members of related communities. If you're going to refer to these communities at all, for the love of dog please don't be so incredibly rude as to say "or whatever".

You have a LOT to learn. Start learning some of it. Or seal yourself up in that box so that you don't damage anyone.

Readily identifiable gender means that the person’s gender is easily identifiable.  Most people have readily identiable gender.  If I’m uncertain, I’m circumspect in my choice of pronoun.  But I don’t use ‘he’ or ‘they’ as default 3rd person singular pronouns.  Specified persons almost always have readily identifiable gender because it’s also specified.  Agreed - given names can be ambiguous. I used one earlier; Alex left the room carrying her laptop.

Are the authors who choose to use ‘she’ as the default 3rd person singular pronoun, which is a common practice, wrong?

Agreed.  I live in a ‘box.’  I’m not interested in being a gender activist.  They can fight their own fight.  I have too many other concerns.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2815
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #536 on: February 18, 2019, 10:46:34 pm »
Is this hate speech? Have we met the threshold yet?

No.  What makes you think it is?  Transgender and non-binary gender persons face many problems, include bullying, ridiculing and mobbing.  Being referred to with the ‘wrong’ 3rd person singular pronoun almost always in the non-physical world of the Internet is very very trivial, and hardly justifies using ‘they’ as the default for everyone, regardless.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück

Offline arthwollipot

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9761
  • Observer of Phenomena. Pronouns: he/him
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #537 on: February 18, 2019, 11:01:54 pm »
Is this hate speech? Have we met the threshold yet?

No.  What makes you think it is?  Transgender and non-binary gender persons face many problems, include bullying, ridiculing and mobbing.  Being referred to with the ‘wrong’ 3rd person singular pronoun almost always in the non-physical world of the Internet is very very trivial, and hardly justifies using ‘they’ as the default for everyone, regardless.



Misgendering pronouns is bullying. It is abuse, and it is harassment. And it happens in the real world, if anything, more than online. We have given you the evidence. How many times must we say it before you get the message?

At this time you are leaving me no choice but to label you not only a transphobic bigot, but a deliberately and maliciously transphobic bigot.
Self-described nerd.

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2815
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #538 on: February 18, 2019, 11:27:24 pm »
Is this hate speech? Have we met the threshold yet?

No.  What makes you think it is?  Transgender and non-binary gender persons face many problems, include bullying, ridiculing and mobbing.  Being referred to with the ‘wrong’ 3rd person singular pronoun almost always in the non-physical world of the Internet is very very trivial, and hardly justifies using ‘they’ as the default for everyone, regardless.



Misgendering pronouns is bullying. It is abuse, and it is harassment. And it happens in the real world, if anything, more than online. We have given you the evidence. How many times must we say it before you get the message?

At this time you are leaving me no choice but to label you not only a transphobic bigot, but a deliberately and maliciously transphobic bigot.

OK, you can do that.  You can do whatever you want.  But you’re wrong.  I’m not a transphobic bigot.  I’m just uninterested (or perhaps disinterested). I voted yes in the Same Sex Marriage plebiscite for much the same reason.  People can do whatever they want, provided it doesn’t cause real harm to others.

Undoubtedly I offend many Christians with my complete lack of belief in God and Their existence.  But it’s not real harm, so I don’t worry about it.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück

Offline arthwollipot

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9761
  • Observer of Phenomena. Pronouns: he/him
    • View Profile
Re: Episode #700
« Reply #539 on: February 18, 2019, 11:44:16 pm »
OK, you can do that.  You can do whatever you want.  But you’re wrong.  I’m not a transphobic bigot.  I’m just uninterested (or perhaps disinterested). I voted yes in the Same Sex Marriage plebiscite for much the same reason.  People can do whatever they want, provided it doesn’t cause real harm to others.

WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS CAUSING REAL HARM TO OTHERS.
Self-described nerd.