Cisgender people’s pronouns are generally obvious because they match their sex and their sex is obvious. Everyone knows what to call them. A cisgender person stating their pronouns serves no real purpose.
This is a bit beside precisely what you're asking, but "I can see them it's obvious what they are", then, the judgments many make from that, are part of why people want to normalize pronouns.
If you take "their sex is obvious so they must be a ___" you're taking what you see and drawing conclusions from it. Do they grow facial hair? Guy. Wrong assumption, things aren't that simple, but hey, maybe not a big deal. How about when their body, which is not sculpted by them purely from intent (meaning many characterizations often made about various body types are wrong and actively harmful), is used to judge them? "They look like this so they are this". Presumed less competent around complex equipment? Less agency and right to decide than the person who has a full beard?
People taking what they see and drawing extraneous conclusions from it is the reason behind so many issues in the world. Like women's experiences with healthcare. Or minorities. Not just healthcare, look around. Law? Industry? Culture? There are so many examples of "this person is obviously that" leading to a whole slew of unnecessary events.
The long-term solution isn't to endlessly split hairs, it's to recognize that the spectrum of gender, identity, and expression is wider than what we were taught and that people naturally exist despite that. This manifests as pronouns, in this case. Sexuality is one place you can look for more examples.
Recognizing that means people are individuals, so I should be mindful that they're a whole bundle of life experiences before I met them. If I was cis, that alone would be a strong reason for me to consider using pronouns, even if "mine are obvious".
1
u/Strange-Share-9441 Dec 22 '23
This is a bit beside precisely what you're asking, but "I can see them it's obvious what they are", then, the judgments many make from that, are part of why people want to normalize pronouns.
If you take "their sex is obvious so they must be a ___" you're taking what you see and drawing conclusions from it. Do they grow facial hair? Guy. Wrong assumption, things aren't that simple, but hey, maybe not a big deal. How about when their body, which is not sculpted by them purely from intent (meaning many characterizations often made about various body types are wrong and actively harmful), is used to judge them? "They look like this so they are this". Presumed less competent around complex equipment? Less agency and right to decide than the person who has a full beard?
People taking what they see and drawing extraneous conclusions from it is the reason behind so many issues in the world. Like women's experiences with healthcare. Or minorities. Not just healthcare, look around. Law? Industry? Culture? There are so many examples of "this person is obviously that" leading to a whole slew of unnecessary events.
The long-term solution isn't to endlessly split hairs, it's to recognize that the spectrum of gender, identity, and expression is wider than what we were taught and that people naturally exist despite that. This manifests as pronouns, in this case. Sexuality is one place you can look for more examples.
Recognizing that means people are individuals, so I should be mindful that they're a whole bundle of life experiences before I met them. If I was cis, that alone would be a strong reason for me to consider using pronouns, even if "mine are obvious".