Gender Attribution

[crayzz]

I'm not about to simply say, 'yeah, okay' to someone else's imperative. I'm going to use pronouns as I see fit, and I'm going to use 'he' as gender-neutral because I disagree with any other gender-neutral pronoun (with regards to a singular person) because I have the higher cognitive function to disassociate the word from its normal gender association.

The funny thing is that you don't, by your own admission: "Yeah, I probably do see a guy when you say mail man, or mail carrier."

You yourself admit that you fall into the trap of associating male specific terms with men.

You argued about how English is a language the refers to gender, and in retort I'd argue that it's gender binary, and 'xe' isn't an English word (and it isn't a word I'm going to use) and 'it' is considered by many to be at least as offensive as using a 'wrong-gendered' pronouns. There are plenty of people who aren't man or woman mentally, and plenty of trans people who don't quite know what to think of themselves.

I have the higher capacity to know what "xe" means even though the oxford dictionary won't tell me. Incidentally, "xe" is preferable among many groups because the term assigns no gender, thus being applicable to those without a set identity as well as to those whose identity you don't know. That term is used to recognize that some people don't have a set identity; something that "he" can't do.

(Further incidently; I've seen many terms that aren't part of the english language. "Webcomic" wasn't for a long time. To my knowledge, it still isn't. Language changes. Grow up and recognize that.)

So, in the end, I'm going to use the language that works for me, always. When I give a damn, I'll discuss my use of whatever words I use with to people with whom I am using them. If the person I am interacting with cares more about my use of the word 'he' or 'she' than whether or not I've given time and respect to their gender issues, then I honestly couldn't care less if I am constantly offending that person.

You don't respect their gender issues. You openly admit that here:"No, what I'm saying is the gender and sex are complicated issues, and I decide how to handle them in my own life. However, I'm emphasizing the part where I call other people whatever the fuck I want because that's how it works.

Your decision to not use the preferred pronoun is based in disagreement with it (or, in you words, that it's complicated and subjective). Which is the issue. Open refusal to use the preferred pronoun is based entirely on disrespect.

Your whole spiel is nothing but a petulant whine of "you can't tell me what to do". And you're right; I can't. I can't make you anything. But I can recognize your behaviour as shitty behaviour, and I can criticize you for it.

[Alex Starkiller]

Another admission: I use "he" when I don't know but don't think I should use "they". I'm not going to use "xe" unless specifically asked for it. "He" however, is used under the assumption that the person I'm talking to is male, and given my experiences that's usually the case, OR it gets the other person to let me know it's incorrect. I suppose that's a little underhanded for people who don't want to admit it for some reason, but I don't see the need to assume gender-neutral over assuming male.

[Packbat]

Assuming that everyone is male unless proven unwise just seems unfair, to be honest, even if you ignore the research suggesting that perpetuating that assumption leads to statistically worse outcomes for non-male participants in society. When I need to refer to someone with a pronoun and realize I am unaware of their gender, I reword or use singular-they; when I need to refer to someone for hypothetical purposes, I usually flip a coin (or some equivalent).

[RyukaTana]

I'm not about to simply say, 'yeah, okay' to someone else's imperative. I'm going to use pronouns as I see fit, and I'm going to use 'he' as gender-neutral because I disagree with any other gender-neutral pronoun (with regards to a singular person) because I have the higher cognitive function to disassociate the word from its normal gender association.

The funny thing is that you don't, by your own admission: "Yeah, I probably do see a guy when you say mail man, or mail carrier."

You yourself admit that you fall into the trap of associating male specific terms with men.

Again, I'm not going to discuss with you. I will, again, touch on the part of what you said relevant to the rest of my discussion.

You see, when I said I have the higher cognitive function to disassociate, I mean beyond that I think of a guy when I say 'mail man'. If given any reason at all, my brain will remind me that 'not all mail people are men'. Also, you, as you have consistently, made an assumption about why I see a man. An assumption I wholly left open, due to the nature of the conversation and how my reply sounded, but I didn't bother to delve into it because I absolutely don't think it matters.

I don't picture some faceless individual with his dick hanging out throwing mail in my box. I don't know what the person who delivers MY mail even looks like. I picture the UPS guy I've seen once and a while (and that's only when trying to think of a real-life example). I'm actually more likely to picture a woman, because of this character being the first example to pop into my head. If I pictured a fire fighter, it'd be a guy, probably a muscular one with his shirt off, because fire-fighter calendars. If I see a cop, not only do I picture a guy, but I see one with a porn-stache, because I've seen that character in a lot of stuff. Clearly, now, I must believe all cops are assholes in aviators with a porn-stache who chew gum, just all of them. I can't differentiate, my brain isn't capable of it.

I also see a white dude with a beard and long hair when you say Jesus, despite my brain distinctly telling me Jesus was probably not a white dude. I know the difference, but I will immediately pick my nearest mental reference point. However, should it be important that I don't, I would use my mental capability to remind myself that what I picture isn't every single version of that type of person. Just like not every transsexual looks like RuPaul (I don't actually know if RuPaul is trans, but I was just reaching for a stereotypical drag queen look) and not every black person is Lil Wayne or Steve Urkel.

As for not using 'xe/ze', it's neither natural nor fluid to the English language. There's lots of words that people recognize that I won't use for exactly the same reason. They're harsh on the ears with regards to the surrounding language. Of course, that probably makes me an asshole, but you know what, I'm cool with that. Not once has a trans person ever felt the need to say that to me. You can assume whatever you want there, I know my relationships with said people.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Assuming that everyone is male unless proven unwise just seems unfair, to be honest, even if you ignore the research suggesting that perpetuating that assumption leads to statistically worse outcomes for non-male participants in society. When I need to refer to someone with a pronoun and realize I am unaware of their gender, I reword or use singular-they; when I need to refer to someone for hypothetical purposes, I usually flip a coin (or some equivalent).

See, everyone here keeps using the word 'whiny' about my diatribe, but honestly, the use of the word 'unfair' and all that shit sounds whiny to me. I'd hate myself if my feelings were so fragile that someone could make me feel awful just by saying the wrong pronoun at me. It's a fuckin' non-issue, I'll never not see it that way, because anyone worth a damn will treat such people with respect, ACTUAL fucking respect. Not some shitty, worthless appeasement. I all the respect someone has to give me is a word, that's far more offensive than if they just disrespected me outright. At least I'd have a tiny iota of respect for their honesty.

[crayzz]

I use "xe" and "hir" because they're useful. It takes no thought, takes no coin flipping, and makes no assumptions.

Honestly, it'd be less of a problem if people stopped complaining "but that's not real english". English wasn't real English for decades. Shakespeare couldn't even spell his own name consistently. I'd rather enact changes in the way I speak and write to address current inadequacies in the language than to perpetuate them.

For all that, I have little problem with singular "they"; I just find myself in positions where I need to distinguish between groups and individuals, and I find "they" can cause some confusion in that area.

EDIT: "It's a fuckin' non-issue, I'll never not see it that way, because anyone worth a damn will treat such people with respect, ACTUAL fucking respect."

Actual respect recognizes identities. Your's is respect in name only.

Before you complain some more, recognize that one's respect for another can differ with regards to specific properties; "I respect them generally" isn't mutually exclusive from "I do not respect their identity".

FURTHER EDIT: "As for not using 'xe/ze', it's neither natural nor fluid to the English language."

What makes your subjective impressions objective?

[RyukaTana]

What makes your subjective impressions objective?

Have I once argued the point that everyone is to do things my way? Or has my argument all along been exactly that I (the subject, as in subjectivity) can use what I (the subject again) feel comfortable and natural using? That my (still the subject) language is my (yet still the subject) own?

[crayzz]

Have I once argued the point that everyone is to do things my way?

"As for not using 'xe/ze', it's neither natural nor fluid to the English language.

Not unnatural an in-fluid to you, unnatural and in-fluid to the language. No, you didn't say everyone had to do things your way; then again, I never said you did. It would behoove you to actually read what's written.

EDITED

[RyukaTana]

Arguing against the argument again. Hence why my statements continue not to be for you and just to add to the discussion about my point with other people.

[crayzz]

Heh. This was actually an argument against the premise.

[Alex Starkiller]

Assuming that everyone is male unless proven unwise just seems unfair, to be honest, even if you ignore the research suggesting that perpetuating that assumption leads to statistically worse outcomes for non-male participants in society. When I need to refer to someone with a pronoun and realize I am unaware of their gender, I reword or use singular-they; when I need to refer to someone for hypothetical purposes, I usually flip a coin (or some equivalent).

Assuming non-gender until proven otherwise is just as unfair, unless you want to tell me that the non-gendered get less right to fairness than females or hermaphrodites. Either way there's unfairness, and I think that not presuming they'd prefer non-gendered pronouns is a better alternative.