The pronoun war. Him, her, them, they, birthing parent, mother

So let’s discuss this complete absurd BS of pronouns. The LGBTQ community doesn’t only want you to reference them as the pronoun they prefer now they want to force mothers to be referenced as “birthing parent”. The teachers Union in an attempt to make trans parents more comfortable are wanting to refer to moms as birthing parent.

so this whole thing is dumb to me. But let’s say you don’t call a transgender by their preferred pronoun. You are liable to be sued in some states. What happens if you don’t call an actual mother by her preferred noun? Can they sue? Are we only going to make laws to protect a gender confused person? We have to change our nouns to make them comfortable?

I also disagree with forcing us to use their pronouns. We should be able to freely express and verbally express our opinions on gender. I even feel “they” (the opposing thought, not pronoun) should be able to call a mother a birthing parent without being criminally charged. However the same should be afforded to us.

 

The left will call you a nazi, racist, homophobe, islamophobe, transphobe, bigot, hater and misogynist, but if you call a woman mom they lose it. The left needs to follow its own rules.

 

You forgot white supremacist!.

 

I suspect most LGBT people don't consider this a major issue in their lives for obvious reasons. A relevantly small number of people are actively pushing for this kind of change and it typically only applies in formal contexts, not day-to-day use.

Incidentally, with Teachers Union? There are more than one.

Not for just one incident of misnaming or misgendering them, especially if it is unintentional. Those laws are about intentional and repeated discrimination and abuse. There would be the same kind of issue if someone in a position of authority (typically where they apply) was constantly referring to a Christian as "god botherer" or a woman as "bitch". The gender identity aspect was often an addition to existing laws relating to gender, racial or religious discrimination after all.

Unlikely, since the whole "birthing parent" thing is typically about professional rules and regulations rather than law. And again, I don't see it being problematic in practice unless it's the basis of some kind of targeted discrimination or abuse.

Ok Little Miss Josephina. (How much of that would it take break the "personal insults" rule here?)

 

Can I asked why this bothers you so much and have you ever run into a situation where someone asked to address them by their preferred pronoun?

 

I'm use the pronouns Miss Flynn taught us in First Grade many years ago.

 

I would hope in the "many years" since the first grade you have discovered that your knowledge, your opinions, your beliefs did not end in the first grade.

 

If it doesn't hurt you and its not illegal or immoral the only reasons someone would make a big deal of it is to control the other person or to put them down.

 

Insisting on the use of bogus pronouns is an attempt to control and humiliate a person by having them acquiesce to a lie.

 

Because this is how shitstorms start. It took just two whiners to complain about not being able to use a bathroom because they weren’t customers and the company changed their policy nationwide. Now those bathrooms are being used by drug addicts.

 

I will offer you an easy point, here. Being sued, for using the wrong pronoun-- to refer to anyone-- is, indeed, absurd. So much so, that I really am having a difficult time believing that you know of that, which you speak. Therefore, all it requires is a link to the laws, to which you allude or, better yet, to news accounts of actual suits, in which monetary damages were awarded, because of a faux pas, in pronoun, in order to win my agreement.

A link to a Right Wing article, claiming that this is a possibility, is not an acceptable alternative source, to the actual statutes, or to real life cases-- just to be clear, about that.

 

The former mayor of NYC infamously passed a well-publicized law that subjected to anyone using the wrong pronoun to a fine of up to $25,000. I don't know if it is still on the books.

 

This whole issue seems made up to me. I've never heard of anyone being sued over this. Do some people get upset? Sure. I guess for them it would be the same as if as a guy somebody called me a girl. That would be annoying and insulting. But I wouldn't, nor would I expect to be able to sue over the issue. I think these laws don't exist outside of a few extremists imaginations, and if they do exist, they should be removed immediately.

 

This question wasn't directed at me but I would like to take a crack at it. My answer is, I don't hang around boneheaded people, I don't converse with boneheaded people, and when I see someone I perceive as a bonehead I ignore them.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_Expression_Non-Discrimination_Act

 

From you answer this pronoun issue should not be a concern at all for you. You never have to address them, speak to them or interact with them. So why would it bother you?

 

I did a little investigation, for you, of your tip. Your post suggested inaccuracy, at least, in saying that the mayor "passed a law," when, as I know you are aware, mayors don't have that power. Here is a link to an article, from the Right wing Washington Times, no less, so one that you should have no objections to reading, or believing.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.wa...blasio-fine-businesses-wrong-gender-pronouns/

I only, admittedly, skimmed the article but it was clear that, as I had expected, this is nothing that could be applied to citizens, generally. Instead, it was the result of the work of a Human Rights Commission, which led to this rule, for businesses, only, which would result in fines for the business owners/management if they continued to refer to their workers by a pronoun, after the employee had made clear, that was not the one they wished to be called. This is world away, from the idea that any person need refer to any other person, by their chosen pronoun.

The mayor's office had clearly been promoting this, as a workplace harassment issue. While I know nothing of the mechanism, which legally permits the City to do this, it is not surprising that there are rules affecting businesses, which any municipality can enforce. Not to fully endorse the action-- in fact another error in your reply, was that the maximum fine, for repeat offenders, was not 25 but $250,000-- I can see no legitimate reason, other than as a form of harassment, why an employer would insist on calling someone "Mr.," when they have made clear that they go by, "Ms.," or referring to that employee as "her," when the person is outwardly manifesting the intent to be considered as a "him."

 

So the bother for you is the POTENTIAL problems it may cause in the future? Fight the social warrior battles before the war even starts.

To me this is such an inconsequential thing and it is just a matter of showing people some respect. I am a gen Xer so this pronoun stuff is definitely new to me, however throughout my life I try to address people respectfully. If someone asked me to call them William or Robert instead of Bill or Bob I try my best. If someone asked me to address them as Ms. rather than Miss or Mrs it is not an issue. I addressed my professors as Dr. or Professor. I address my physician or dentist as Doctor. In the military people address others with their rank. In a court I address the judge as your Honor. We do this as a sign of respect.

It cost me nothing to try to remember to call someone by the preferred pronoun, name, title or whatever.

 

It seems you spotted a couple of ant hills in the mountain range.

 

That is funny to hear you say, for it was I who had been thinking that those who are making so much of this issue, are the ones blowing up molehills, to mountainous proportions.

 

Is there a better way?

What if Bill wanted you to call him King Henry the 8th? What if some Ms., Miss, or Mrs. Smith wanted to be called Birthing Person Smith? What if your professor of history, Dr. Jones, wanted to be addressed as Astronaut-On-The-Moon Jones? What if Sgt. Binghamton wanted to be called General Binghamton? What if Mr. Riley wants to be called Birthing Person Riley? What if you priest wants to be called Plumber and your Doctor wants to be called Father? What if Jane wants to use your bathroom and shower with you, and be called Joe? Actually, I couldn't care less if you or anyone willingly did all of that to be nice or show respect. I just think anyone who doesn't does not deserve to be ridiculed, ostracized, fined, or imprisoned, and people who insist on doing that should be ridiculed, ostracized, fined, or imprisoned.

 

You might have a point there.

 

What about our feelings?
I find it offensive to call someone who's obviously a man, a "woman".

Even Elton John knew that Lola was just a man in a dress and Elton John was as gay as they come

 

The overview article, you cited, does not say what you allege, in your OP. It merely mentions that the use of pronouns was made part of New York's hate crime laws. This does not mean, in case you are confused, that any instance of using the undesired pronoun is, in itself, a hate crime.

For some odd reason (or just because wikipedia's headings did not make clear where it would appear, and I did not feel like reading through the entire article, to find it) the article didn't seem to include the bill's final wording; it's "external links," section, however, allowed me to see both legislative chambers' versions, from which I will ask you to point out the specific lines, you feel warrant your OP's interpretation.

I had intended to reproduce the entire bills, but find them to be rather long, for "snipping." Since it is you, who is sounding the alarm at this arriving tempest, I will therefore leave it to you, to use your own link, and Snip just what you view as the most significantly problematic wording, in these bills.
First , from the State Assembly (the summary):

https://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A08319&term=2003
[Snip]
Prohibits discrimination based on gender identity or expression; defines "gender identity or expression" as having or being perceived as having as gender identity, self image, appearance behavior or expression whether or not that gender identity, self image, appearance, behavior or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the sex assigned to that person at birth; further includes offenses regarding gender identity or expression within the list of offenses subject to treatment as hate crimes.
[End]

And, the Senate version:

https://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S04457&term=2003

[Snip]
S04457 Summary:
BILL NO S04457...


Amd Exec L, generally; amd S40-c, Civ Rts L; amd S313, Ed L

Prohibits discrimination based on gender identity or expression; defines "gender identity or expression" as having or being perceived as having gender identity, self image, appearance, behavior or expression whether or not that gender identity, self image, appearance, behavior or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the sex assigned to that person at birth.

 

And I'll allow, that there are also no doubt, some who take overly seriously, when someone doesn't "catch on," to what might be expected, among the most widely, "woken." But these are just personal interactions, which are bound to be fraught with the misunderstandings, disagreements, and unreasonable, exaggerated responses, endemic to our species. The legal aspects of it-- which would be noteworthy, and even concerning, were they broadly applied-- seem to be not defining any new offense, but only identifying a way that some are practicing their prejudices, in the workplace, that is only newly becoming a more common tactic, for expressing intolerance and hostility, through harassment. It would be nice if we all could agree that this is wrong but, as I'd said: humans-- what ya gonna do?