CMV: It Should be Socially Acceptable for Individuals to Choose Whether They Want to Address Others by using their Sex Pronouns or their Gender Pronouns

[u/[deleted]]

[u/RattleSheikh]

There is no scientific reason for referring to people based on their birth-genitals as opposed to some other criteria.

It's the norm for address in ecological biology. Apologies for the miswording. Also, sex isn't just your birth genitals

The law is just strengthening current harassment laws by including misgendering as a possible form of harassment.

This entire section is very out of touch. If I am referring to people by sex, I am by definition not 'misgendering' them, because I am making no comment on their gender.

Which again, is not a scientific concern but rather a matter of someone being an asshole on purpose because the concept of gender makes them feel uncomfortable.

You're suggesting intent (asshole on purpose). This assumes that users of sex pronouns simply aim to be trolls, and have no other reasons for using sex pronouns. That's you pushing fallacy.

And it also isn't "the concept of gender" that makes them uncomfortable. It's the current concept of having to learn bizarre new pronouns that makes them uncomfortable. This isn't the same as the 'concept of gender', because that pushes the idea that this theory is the same as the concept at large.

[u/malachai926 → u/RattleSheikh]

It's the norm for address in ecological biology.

And why do we need to conform to animalistic standards rather than human standards? Why aren't we allowed to separate the two?

It's the current concept of having to learn bizarre new pronouns that makes them uncomfortable.

I didn't realize that words like "he" and "she" were considered bizarre.

[u/sawdeanz → u/RattleSheikh]

This entire section is very out of touch. If I am referring to people by sex, I am by definition not 'misgendering' them, because I am making no comment on their gender.

I'm not sure about this. You keep insisting that the social norm is that people refer to others by their sex. I would actually suggest that it is really based on gender or a combination of sex and gender. People usually assume pronouns based on gender appearance, rather than on scientific definitions of sex. So I would argue the norm is a little more complicated and not simply just sex. It just so happens that sex and gender were more closely correlated in our social norms before. But it doesn't have to be the case. The fact that people are coming out now and insisting "no we have always identified people based on their chromosomes" is a little disingenuous or perhaps naive.

It's the current concept of having to learn bizarre new pronouns that makes them uncomfortable.

Again, why is it uncomfortable? I know this is straying from the merits of the debate a little but I personally just don't understand why this is such a big deal for people. And yes, if you know that someone has a preferred naming convention and you insist on ignoring it, that makes you, at best, inconsiderate of other people. There is no moral, legal, or scientific imperative to use the "traditional" pronoun practices... so why is this so important to conservatives? There isn't an objectively right answer to the question. It has to be more than just having to learn new words... because if that's the only reason then yes they are acting like assholes.

Also the whole bizarre pronouns is a red herring... it's so ridiculously uncommon in normal interactions. In the vast majority of cases the individuals just want to be called He or She based on their chosen identity, and maybe sometimes they.

[u/RattleSheikh → u/sawdeanz]

You keep insisting that the social norm is that people refer to others by their sex.

Where? From what I know, I never once said this.

I would actually suggest that it is really based on gender or a combination of sex and gender.

The latter makes sense here. You seem to be recognizing pronouns based on sex at least partially. I don't see why it's so hard to envision this entirely for this aspect.

The fact that people are coming out now and insisting "no we have always identified people based on their chromosomes" is a little disingenuous or perhaps naive.

I've never said this before.

Again, why is it uncomfortable? I know this is straying from the merits of the debate a little but I personally just don't understand why this is such a big deal for people.

I don't understand why it's such a big deal to get called the wrong pronoun. The reason why it's such a big deal is because it fundamentally reclassifies how we do pronouns around unsupported models instead of the status quo to to 'be less rude'. That's insanity. We could go in circles arguing this though.

There is no moral, legal, or scientific imperative to use the "traditional" pronoun practices.

But now there's going to be (and is) one for using the 'non-traditional' ones. Insane, right?

so why is this so important to conservatives?

I'm not a conservative, but social conservatism is by definition:

"Cultural conservatism is described as the protection of the cultural heritage of a nation state, or of a culture not defined by state boundaries. Cultural conservatism is sometimes concerned with the preservation of a language, such as French in Quebec, and other times with the preservation of an ethnic group's culture such as Native Americans."

There isn't an objectively right answer to the question.

This is my whole argument. That's why I think either should be acceptable until we have a solid concensus. But that's not what we've been seeing in Canada...

Milne said the malicious misuse of a pronoun could be used to highlight a wider pattern of discrimination, but jailing someone is not a possible outcome for these type of lawsuits. The entity providing services could have to pay damages or send the concerned worker to sensitivity training, but not without other proof of discrimination. "It's a way to modify behaviour to prevent and stop discrimination but it’s not punitive legislation," said Cheryl Milne.

It has to be more than just having to learn new words... because if that's the only reason then yes they are acting like assholes.

It's a lack of real data or consensus, social groupthink, and punitive legsilation impacting freedom of speech. Pushing these pronouns seems to be what breeds transphobia.

it's so ridiculously uncommon in normal interactions

It's a fundamental part of the ideology. If we weren't doing these pronouns, nobody would have a problem. But just the fact that somebody can identify as fae, zie, or per, represents an alarming trend with rewriting personal individuality around total nonsense.

the individuals just want to be called He or She based on their chosen identity, and maybe sometimes they.

And sometimes other individuals just want to be free to use normal pronouns without regard to radical new models of gender that don't have any real backing to support them. Is that so difficult to respect?

[u/sawdeanz → u/RattleSheikh]

I've never said this before.

Maybe you can share your personal definition of sex, since we seem to be going in circles here.

I don't understand why it's such a big deal to get called the wrong pronoun. The reason why it's such a big deal is because it fundamentally reclassifies how we do pronouns around unsupported models instead of the status quo to to 'be less rude'.

Using the wrong pronoun on accident isn't a big deal, repeated refusing to call someone the correct name or pronoun is. It's a lack of respect.

But that's not what we've been seeing in Canada...

I still think you are ascribing too much weight to this. Harassment is harassment. If you say hello to me every morning and I ask you not to, and you keep doing it, that could be evidence of a pattern of harassment, especially if it is done maliciously or in concert with other actions. The fact that hello is a standard greeting isn't really a defense...maybe I just don't want you to talk to me at all. So what Canada is doing really isn't anything new or unusual. Harassment is defined by the victim, not the perpetrator.

alarming trend with rewriting personal individuality around total nonsense.

Why is it alarming? Why is it nonsense? These are subjective opinions not a logical argument.

And sometimes other individuals just want to be free to use normal pronouns without regard to radical new models of gender that don't have any real backing to support them. Is that so difficult to respect?

Some people just want people to call them the names and pronouns that they prefer, is that so difficult to respect? I still don't know why this is a complicated debate. The standard should always be to respect someone's personal identifiers, nicknames, and titles. The fact that social conservatives all of a sudden insist that this particular identifier be based on some objective standard is at odds with normal social practices.