Pronouns

[Bramblethorn]

Do you have a similar objection to doctors expecting to be addressed as Doctor or priests as Father?

I'd also like to hear her position on whether somebody who changes their name after marriage can expect people to start using the new name.

 

[gordo12]

What are your thoughts on how to navigate the they/them trend in your writing, and whether there should be new pronouns?

https://www.literotica.com/stories/memberpage.php?uid=5116173&page=submissions

Straight out of the OP's post. Yet anyone not drinking the cool-aid is getting shit on.

I do have thoughts whether anybody likes them or not. I don't think we need new pronouns.

And we certainly don't need a bunch of wanna-be-woke morons telling us we're wrong.

I sympathize with the issues they have, I DO NOT sympathize with the demand we all
address it in their invented terms.

 

[SimonDoom]

I am not clear on whether you're talking about actual compelled speech here ("you will go to jail if you don't use a trans person's pronouns") or merely about a request ("if you don't use the pronouns they've requested, some of us will think you're a dickhead and treat you accordingly"). The phrasing "have to" kind of suggests you might be referring to compulsion, but I don't think that's what the rest of us were discussing.

Could you please clarify which of the two you mean here? Because they're very different things, and should probably be considered quite separately.


See, to a great many of us, misgendering isn't "civil" and there is not a great deal of value in including people who've made it clear that they have no interest in being persuaded.

I'm definitely not talking about the former. I'm talking about the latter. "Have to" in the sense of, "if don't act the way I want you to, and say what I want you to, in the words I want you to, I'm going to treat you like a dickhead." It's the attitude behind deplatforming and canceling and firing people in the private sector, not government punishing people. It's the attitude of trying to shame people to shut up in this forum, and to tell people, because of their race/gender/gender orientation, that they have no role in the discussion. I do not believe that, ever, about anything. My view is that everybody has a place at the table in the discussion, and that we should encourage participation and welcome many views.

There's a role for intolerance of bad views. There are some beliefs that should be criticized, and that we shouldn't accept. "[Blank group of people] are bad and should be discriminated against" is an example of that. I don't accept that belief, and I support criticism of that belief.

But that attitude has not been on display anywhere in this thread. That's not what's going on.

I also don't think anyone in this thread is guilty of "misgendering." I haven't advocated that. I'll let Gordo speak for his views, but I don't think that's an accurate description of what he's doing.

From the perspective of world history, the gender/sex issue is new. And it is based upon a principle--"you are what you identify as"--that is fairly new and has never been widely accepted, and still is not accepted in many ways. I gave two examples. That doesn't make it wrong in the context of gender, and it doesn't mean I reject it. But it's worth discussing, and it's worth not shutting down the discussion just because some people think bigoted people will use it for bad political purposes. That's extremely unlikely to happen in this forum, or as a result of anything anyone in this forum says.

My view is that everything is open for discussion by everybody. I do not agree with the "we can't talk about these things because the bad people might misuse our words" concept. It seems to me that a forum for authors of erotic stories is an especially good forum to let everybody have their say on these issues.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Straight out of the OP's post. Yet anyone not drinking the cool-aid is getting shit on.

I do have thoughts whether anybody likes them or not. I don't think we need new pronouns.

And we certainly don't need a bunch of wanna-be-woke morons telling us we're wrong.

I sympathize with the issues they have, I DO NOT sympathize with the demand we all
address it in their invented terms.

I'm not clear here on what you mean by "invented terms". It seems to imply that only some words enter the language by human invention, and that the rest of the language comes from... some other process??? But I have no idea what that process would be.

Can you clarify what a "non-invented term" would look like? Are we talking like Enochian or something?

 

[Winter_Fare]

I do have thoughts whether anybody likes them or not. I don't think we need new pronouns.

And we certainly don't need a bunch of wanna-be-woke morons telling us we're wrong.

I sympathize with the issues they have, I DO NOT sympathize with the demand we all
address it in their invented terms.

Double down then and say it. Is any trans man worthy enough of your respect that you could bring yourself to consider using the well established uncontroversial pronoun "he" when referring to him?
OP asked about gender neutral options, they/Ze, you dug this hole all by yourself.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I'm definitely not talking about the former. I'm talking about the latter. "Have to" in the sense of, "if don't act the way I want you to, and say what I want you to, in the words I want you to, I'm going to treat you like a dickhead." It's the attitude behind deplatforming and canceling and firing people in the private sector, not government punishing people.

If I was working retail, and I was purposely rude to a customer - even if they thoroughly deserved it - I'd expect to be fired. If I publicly say bad things about my employer, same. That's a very powerful and pervasive kind of "cancel culture" that silences millions of people, and yet it never seems to attract the same kind of pearl-clutching as the idea that somebody who already has a gigantic platform and is using it for harm might lose an engagement here or there and end up with a slightly smaller megaphone as a consequence.

Society, in general, doesn't actually believe that every opinion should be heard. It just professes to believe that as a way of protecting certain types of opinion.

It's the attitude of trying to shame people to shut up in this forum, and to tell people, because of their race/gender/gender orientation, that they have no role in the discussion. I do not believe that, ever, about anything. My view is that everybody has a place at the table in the discussion, and that we should encourage participation and welcome many views.

There's a role for intolerance of bad views. There are some beliefs that should be criticized, and that we shouldn't accept. "[Blank group of people] are bad and should be discriminated against" is an example of that. I don't accept that belief, and I support criticism of that belief.

But that attitude has not been on display anywhere in this thread. That's not what's going on.

I also don't think anyone in this thread is guilty of "misgendering." I haven't advocated that. I'll let Gordo speak for his views, but I don't think that's an accurate description of what he's doing.

What she said was: "To me, it's a mark of disrespect when someone expects me to remember their preferred designation."

My view is that everything is open for discussion by everybody. I do not agree with the "we can't talk about these things because the bad people might misuse our words" concept. It seems to me that a forum for authors of erotic stories is an especially good forum to let everybody have their say on these issues.

If you want to do Just Debating on these issues, you do you. I have no power to stop you, and I wouldn't exercise it if I did.

But if you choose to do Just Debating in a week when people are being criminalised merely for being supportive of their transgender children, don't expect people who have more at stake than yourself to adhere to a code of "civility" that was formed by, and for the benefit of, comfortable straight cis people. I may respond to it if the fancy takes me, but I'm not going to go out of my way to make the tone of that reply comfortable to genteel ears.

 

[gordo12]

I'm not clear here on what you mean by "invented terms". It seems to imply that only some words enter the language by human invention, and that the rest of the language comes from... some other process??? But I have no idea what that process would be.

Can you clarify what a "non-invented term" would look like? Are we talking like Enochian or something?

Wikipedia:

"Cisgender (sometimes cissexual or shortened to cis) describes a person whose gender identity is the same as their sex assigned at birth.[1] The word cisgender is the antonym of transgender.[2][3] The prefix cis- is not an acronym or abbreviation of another word; it is derived from Latin meaning on this side of. Coined in 1994, cisgender began to be added to dictionaries in 2015 as a result of changes in the way gender is conceived in popular Western discourse.[4][5]

The term has at times been controversial and subject to critique."

Most of the terms that have been getting tossed around in here didn't exist years ago. They've been invented. Mostly starting in the 90's

 

[gordo12]

Double down then and say it. Is any trans man worthy enough of your respect that you could bring yourself to consider using the well established uncontroversial pronoun "he" when referring to him?
OP asked about gender neutral options, they/Ze, you dug this hole all by yourself.

Unlike you, I respect everyone until they no longer deserve it. I don't need a list of pronouns to help me decide how to treat them.

You seem to think that they need to be addressed as something special to show respect. Frankly, like Simon, I like to know things. My first question to a trans man wouldn't be what do I call you. It would be:

May I ask you some things about your experience if it's OK?

Learning about problems is the solution, not pasting a label on it.

 

[AlinaX]

It's the attitude behind deplatforming and canceling and firing people in the private sector, not government punishing people. It's the attitude of trying to shame people to shut up in this forum, and to tell people, because of their race/gender/gender orientation, that they have no role in the discussion.

Are there any examples of people actually being cancelled? And that doesn't include anyone talking in mainstream media about having been cancelled, because that's just a gravy train.

Deplatforming is just people telling bigots to fuck off. Why is that a bad thing? Surely telling bigots to fuck off is a good thing.

The trouble with saying everyone should have a seat at the table is that too often the people talking are the ones who should be listening. I do get the frustration of it, because sometimes the people shouting, "Keep out, you're not one of us," are getting it wrong, because life is fucking complicated and everyone makes mistakes. But railing against the 'Keep Out' signs does not achieve much at all.

My first question to a trans man wouldn't be what do I call you. It would be:

May I ask you some things about your experience if it's OK?

If he says, "No," then what?

 

[MelissaBaby]

Wikipedia:

"Cisgender (sometimes cissexual or shortened to cis) describes a person whose gender identity is the same as their sex assigned at birth.[1] The word cisgender is the antonym of transgender.[2][3] The prefix cis- is not an acronym or abbreviation of another word; it is derived from Latin meaning on this side of. Coined in 1994, cisgender began to be added to dictionaries in 2015 as a result of changes in the way gender is conceived in popular Western discourse.[4][5]

The term has at times been controversial and subject to critique."

Most of the terms that have been getting tossed around in here didn't exist years ago. They've been invented. Mostly starting in the 90's

Like "google" and "selfie" and..."mansplaining"?

 

[Auden James]

Like "google" and "selfie" and..."mansplaining"?

I think you know what gordo12 meant: terms like "cisgender" have no basis in reality (are not descriptive, but rather normative) and are therefore "invented" or made-up words. You may disagree about that with him, but please: don't misrepresent him!

 

[Winter_Fare]

I don't need a list of pronouns to help me decide how to treat them.

You seem to think that they need to be addressed as something special to show respect.
...
Learning about problems is the solution, not pasting a label on it.

No, comrade.
To clarify, the pot calls the kettle black because it sees only its own reflection. The disrespect is emanating from somewhere on your body and it gets brighter when you bend over.
People are not problems.

 

[SimonDoom]

I may respond to it if the fancy takes me, but I'm not going to go out of my way to make the tone of that reply comfortable to genteel ears.

I don't think of my ears as "genteel," and I would never ask you to tailor the way you talk to them. You state your position extremely well, with an often astonishing ability to marshal evidence on a dime, and I respect that even when I don't always agree with you. Have at it, as far as I'm concerned.

My view is that this forum is the better for us having this conversation than not having it. And I say that to Lady Rush, whose views I respect as well, and everyone else who has contributed to this thread.

 

[gordo12]

If he says, "No," then what?

If he/she doesn't want to talk about it, they don't want to talk about it. I'm not about to push the issue.

But I would regret it as a lost opportunity to learn about something in-depth.

 

[gordo12]

The disrespect is emanating from somewhere on your body and it gets brighter when you bend over.

Oh, I can solve that problem for you. It's called daylight and when you pull your head out of your ass the world brightens. You should try it more often. It's nice out here.

 

[Winter_Fare]

Oh, I can solve that problem for you. It's called daylight and when you pull your head out of your ass the world brightens. You should try it more often. It's nice out here.

Reading comprehension fail once again! No wonder you have such a problem following the argument

 

[gordo12]

Reading comprehension fail once again! No wonder you have such a problem following the argument

If you were actually capable of making one...

 

[MelissaBaby]

I think you know what gordo12 meant: terms like "cisgender" have no basis in reality (are not descriptive, but rather normative) and are therefore "invented" or made-up words. You may disagree about that with him, but please: don't misrepresent him!

Can you give me an example of a non-invented word?

 

[gordo12]

Like "google" and "selfie" and..."mansplaining"?

Google- derived in 1920 as a numerical representation based on the word Googol.
Mansplaining - appeared in an article in 2008.
Selfie - culture became popular in Japan and then other East Asian countries in the 1990s, then spread to NA in the 2000's

You missed one:

Femsplaining: The tendency of some women to mistakenly believe that they automatically know more about any given topic than a man does and who, consequently, proceeds to explain to him, correctly or not, things that he already knows.

Seems like there's a lot of that today.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Wikipedia:

"Cisgender (sometimes cissexual or shortened to cis) describes a person whose gender identity is the same as their sex assigned at birth.[1] The word cisgender is the antonym of transgender.[2][3] The prefix cis- is not an acronym or abbreviation of another word; it is derived from Latin meaning on this side of. Coined in 1994, cisgender began to be added to dictionaries in 2015 as a result of changes in the way gender is conceived in popular Western discourse.[4][5]

The term has at times been controversial and subject to critique."

Most of the terms that have been getting tossed around in here didn't exist years ago. They've been invented. Mostly starting in the 90's

Every single term you and I are using was "invented" at some point or another. Some recently, some thousands of years ago, but all of them were created by humans to fit a particular need. Weird how nobody complains about novelties like "computer" (which until the 1940s was a job description, not a machine).

Far be it from me to argue with somebody who has read a Wikipedia article, but:

"Cis" has been part of the English language, as a standard counterpart to "trans", for centuries. Ask an organic chemist, or go look up terms like "Cisalpine Gaul", "cislunar", "cisatlantic", etc. etc. - in every case, a counterpart to the "trans" version of the same term. Once "transsexual" and "transgender" entered the language, "cissexual"/"cisgender" were the implied counterparts by standard patterns of English word formation.

Even in the specific context of sexuality, the use of "cis" as standard counterpart to "trans" goes back much further than 1994 and was well known to scholars. For instance, here's an encyclopedia definition published in 1914, which presents cisvestitism as a counterpart to transvestitism:

"Cisvestitismus, die Neigung, die Kleidung einer anderen Altersstufe, Volks- oder Berufsklasse des gleichen Geschlechts zum Zwecke sexueller Entspannung anzulegen, dem Transvestitismus verwandt." - Dr. Ernst Burchard "Lexikon des gesamten Sexuallebens".

(A great deal of early 20th-century research into sexuality/gender stuff was done in Germany, before the Nazis came along and burned it, paving the way for present-day folk to claim it's all a recent invention - nope, just stuff that was identified long ago but has been viciously and often murderously suppressed for large chunks of history.)

What has changed recently is a movement away from treating cis-ness as the default expectation, in the same kind of way that it's no longer in vogue to assume people are white men until specified otherwise. That means that "cis" terminology is used more often than it was. To people who aren't familiar with those prefixes it might seem like a novelty, but it really isn't; if you gave any nineteenth-century European scholar a definition of "transgender" and asked them to guess what "cisgender" meant, they'd have no trouble.

FWIW, the Wiki article's assertion that "cisgender began to be added to dictionaries in 2015" is incorrect. Neither of the links it offers as cites for that sentence actually support that claim. They merely mention that one dictionary (the main OED) added it in 2015, without claiming this as the first. I don't know what the actual first was, but even the OED had already included it in their online dictionary of current English two years earlier.

 

[Auden James]

Deplatforming is just people telling bigots to fuck off. Why is that a bad thing? Surely telling bigots to fuck off is a good thing.

Deplatforming is not simply telling bigots to fuck off: it is actively silencing discourse participants that the one's holding the means of discourse deem disadvantageous to the observed course of discourse. It is comparable to organziers of some public debate calling in some muscle to push a debater whom they want to see removed from the debate because the other debaters seem unable to defeat his argument off the stage and out the door—and them then giving a short speech to the public about "fairness" (or something like that) and, at last, being able to continue the debate in a "productive" (or something like that) way.

 

[Winter_Fare]

@gordo12
You're kidding me right?
Easy read version:
Habitually misgendering people is not edgy, there's no painting it as anything other than dogged indifference or ignorance.Trans people, non binary people, all people in fact are entitled to respect and acknowledgment as people, not problems.

You lost my respect when you said you went to so many different care homes over years and never noticed one single episode of abuse to patients. You're blind to it is all. It happens with terrifying regularity even in the best institution. Temporary staff, staff having bad days, prejudices of their own. I've worked in healthcare for 22 years by the way, seven in elderly care, seven in adult nursing, the rest where I am now, so no bullshit. You just don't register it for what it is.

Lastly your example of "master" as an everyday pronoun is ludicrous, and flippant, not funny at all. It's a title, not a pronoun.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I think you know what gordo12 meant: terms like "cisgender" have no basis in reality (are not descriptive, but rather normative) and are therefore "invented" or made-up words.

All of which applies equally to "transgender" - it's simply the antonym of "cisgender", both structurally and in use - and yet nobody in this conversation seems to have an objection to that term. So it's hard to believe that it's "inventedness", however defined, is the real reason for objection to its use.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Google- derived in 1920 as a numerical representation based on the word Googol.

Wrong by about 75 years.

"Googol", meaning the number 10^100, was coined in 1920.

But "Google" was coined as a business name (either as an accidental misspelling on "googol" or an intentional play on the word) around the mid-1990s. I'm not sure when its use as generic "search on the internet" developed, but it would have been a little after that.

Mansplaining - appeared in an article in 2008.
Selfie - culture became popular in Japan and then other East Asian countries in the 1990s, then spread to NA in the 2000's

You missed one:

Femsplaining: The tendency of some women to mistakenly believe that they automatically know more about any given topic than a man does and who, consequently, proceeds to explain to him, correctly or not, things that he already knows.

Seems like there's a lot of that today.

I agree that several people in this discussion believe they know more than you about this topic. I disagree with your assumption that it's because you're a man.

 

[Auden James]

Can you give me an example of a non-invented word?

In gordo12's sense? Best to ask him yourself, I think. But if I had to guess, I'd be rather surprised if I were to find out that gordo12 considers words like car or dog as equally "invented" as cisgender . . .

All of which applies equally to "transgender" - it's simply the antonym of "cisgender", both structurally and in use - and yet nobody in this conversation seems to have an objection to that term. So it's hard to believe that it's "inventedness", however defined, is the real reason for objection to its use.

Just because nobody here objected yet in written form to the supposedly antonymic term doesn't necessarily mean that there's no objection to it by none of the writers here, or does it?