Comment by echelon
5 years ago
You're lashing out in anger. Calm yourself.
It seems like you dislike trans folk. I'm not sure what they did to hurt you, but I suspect your fears and hate are the result of conditioning.
What harm is it to use singular "they"?
It avoids assumptions. It also avoids sexism. Do you want a world where all contributions are assumed to come from men?
You've got a lot of fear and anger. Reflect on it. Let it go.
I don't know if you're a Christian, but even if you aren't, remember that Jesus said to love one another first. It's one of the most important messages for the world. Love, not hate and fear.
Please don't go into personal attack, and please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamewar comments to HN. You've unfortunately been doing a lot of that lately, and it's not what this site is for.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Your rhetorical style is very harmful to the people you claim to support. You received criticism for your interactions and you immediately redirected that towards hatred for "trans folk" in an effort to smear the person who said it.
> What harm is it to use singular "they"?
That's not what the OP is saying. Because of course there's no harm in any pronoun. But there is societal harm in acting high and mighty about how saying "they" is somehow making a better world and then acting like a prat when called on it.
> regressive labels. ... people will be all sorts of genders. They won't be bound by yesterday's norms.
No, modern twitter activism is just making a bunch of crap up, and this over-concern on properly labelling everyone's gender expression just harms actual transexual people with actual body dysmorphia.
What people who harp on pronouns miss is that pronouns are not used to refer to someone's gender but their sex. I can see your sexual characteristics from across the room, and referring to them is a good way to narrow down who I'm talking about. "That's her there, the tall one in the red dress". Nobody is going to say "That's zir, the one who is only sexually interested when they're romantically attracted to someone, and whose gender expression varies with the weather." Not only is it a bunch of totally irrelevant and inappropriate discussion for most settings, but it's invisible and thus worthless in a referential sense.
The pronoun warriors are invariably not sexually dysmorphic, they're just deconstructing their parent's mores. They're today's goths, not some miraculous new human evolution. If they manage to do something new and valuable - if for instance Harry Styles actually looked good in a dress - all they'd end up doing is expanding the normal dress code for men, they wouldn't actually be creating a new identity. And this isn't helpful because society explores these things (copying elements of one sex's traditional styles in the other sex's new style, etc) via fashion designers and manages to do it without attacking each other's moral character and making queer/intersex people into political pawns.
> It seems like you dislike trans folk. I'm not sure what they did to hurt you, but I suspect your fears and hate are the result of conditioning.
If they had displayed any hate, and they did not, it would have been caused by conditioning from vocal jerks, not from trans people living their lives.
> Would you be a stuffy gender policeperson, or will you just let people be who they are?
Okay, in what way are people not already 100% allowed to express their gender? (In the USA, Canada, etc...)
To someone in the Q-adjacent community who has been through Tumbler and Twitter, you're incredibly transparent. Everything you say is divisive, rude, harmful because it distracts from actual problems, and because it makes this nonsense seem important. You're clearly a justice warrior, not someone who works for justice.
> You've got a lot of fear and anger. Reflect on it. Let it go.
And you're doing this in the name of a community who was doing just fine on their own. Trust people to speak for themselves. Don't pick fights in their name.
Since the LGBTQ institutions have been taken over by the woke they've pushed gendered nonsense and the public isn't blind. Mental breakdowns over pronouns, putting men in women's prisons, etc. Your behavior here is part of a pattern that has reduced LGB acceptance over the last few years, and while Trans acceptance is superficially up, it's at the cost of hateful wars against transexuals, for instance.
I know an ~60yo MTF who was savagely attacked online, under their actual name, for saying that they were tranSEXual because they knew they were biologically male and wanted to be a woman. They were told their language was hateful and they were "killing us!" even though they nearly lost their job, and were being bullied in a way that actually causes people to kill themselves. This is an actual person who spent the last four decades living as the other sex, fighting actual discrimination back in the day, and the mob wanted to cut them down for not toeing the woke line.
The effect of this allyship is similar to Portland, where white Antifa activists are using BLM as an excuse to riot. There's a 'funny' video of a black officer saying he's been racially insulted more during the BLM riots than in their entire career before that. He continues to say that every time a black person tried to speak to him - to ask about his actual views and rational for being an officer - that white BLMers come and physically block their interaction. The rioters don't want anyone to find a middle ground and solve anything because they're using black people to justify their anarchist cosplay. "Oregon Public Broadcasting reports Wednesday that black members of Portland’s Black Lives Matter movement are tired of their anti-racism demonstrations being hijacked by the mostly white “Antifa” anarchists and are working to separate the two movements as protests continue."
Similarly, I've never seen the pronoun police display actual concern for anything other than their ability to control people.
Reflect. Stop. Thanks.
> What people who harp on pronouns... Mental breakdowns over pronouns... pronoun police
To my eyes, in this thread, the person who is harping on pronouns the most, seems to be closest to having a mental breakdown over them, who can most accurately be described as "pronoun police", and who shows the greatest explicit tendency to control others' use of pronouns, is also the person who in the first place corrected an in-the-wild usage of singular "them" to "him".
Like, can we step back and look at the thread and say that yeah, sometimes maybe it's the people who are pushing back against singular "they" that are blowing the thing out of proportion?
> I've never seen the pronoun police display actual concern for anything other than their ability to control people.
If you're open to a real example, the "pronoun police" at my workplace suggest that when writing about hiring candidates, we use singular "they" instead of "he" or "she", in order not to call too much attention to the gender of that person when those evaluations are read by decision makers. The intent is to reduce any possible gender bias in hiring.
This to me reads like an actual concern for something other than one's ability to control people, namely a concern for being more objective and unbiased in hiring decisions. (Or at least, if you want to be cynical about it, for seeming more objective and unbiased in hiring decisions.)
I wanted to step back to the beginning and ask why you felt that you needed to jump into a conversation with someone who was obviously much more deeply involved that you. In no way did I criticize trans people, or otherwise attack anyone other than SJWs who fight for people who don't want them.
Don't you see the issue of people claiming to fight for others, but really just stirring up trouble?
I'm honestly interested because I see many communities attacked and turned into a hollow shell, leaving the original members as the primary enemies. Transexuals are literally hated on Twitter despite being the group who fought for the freedom that the current justice warriors are using against them. And people like yourself, who seem to sincerely be trying to help, are helping the attackers. What about the transgender message to you justifies death threats and insane hatred of transexuals? Because that's what you're supporting if you back these pronoun bullies. All anyone different needs is just for everyone to let them be. Fighting in their name is directly counterproductive.
Real LGBTQ+(everything) people don't want to force the public to do anything, they simply want to be equals! Everyone who fights for this "must use pronouns" or "must say 'cis'", etc, fight must hate actual LGBTQ people or they wouldn't try to pick a fight for them. Do you and everyone else not understand how hard it is without people making it harder?
I mean, it is a way for you (the generic you, but also the personal you) to virtue signal. But do you really think this justifies the damage?
How, and why? This stuff is crazy!
Oh, also, regarding
> What people who harp on pronouns miss is that pronouns are not used to refer to someone's gender but their sex. I can see your sexual characteristics from across the room, and referring to them is a good way to narrow down who I'm talking about.
The thing you see about someone when you look at them from across the room isn't their biological sex, if anything it's their gender presentation. This chunk of youtube video (https://youtu.be/9bbINLWtMKI?t=548) talks more or less about that.
9 replies →
> If you're open to a real example, the "pronoun police" at my workplace suggest that when writing about hiring candidates, we use singular "they" instead of "he" or "she", in order not to call too much attention to the gender of that person when those evaluations are read by decision makers. The intent is to reduce any possible gender bias in hiring.
I am, and I like that. Like the example of hiring musicians after a blind listening. Kind of the whole schtick of that music show where the hosts spin around only after listening to the artist. fwiw, that's actually not considered progressive anymore because it amplifies the homogeneity of choice. Because of this or that factor, many cellists are one sex, or the QA department skews heavily towards one demographic. Without active HR grooming you don't get those SV pleasing diversity numbers where you have a numerical microcosm of the country. But yes, the idea of a meritocracy and blind hiring is always refreshing.
> To my eyes, in this thread, the person who is harping on pronouns the most, seems to be closest to having a mental breakdown over them, who can most accurately be described as "pronoun police", and who shows the greatest explicit tendency to control others' use of pronouns, is also the person who in the first place corrected an in-the-wild usage of singular "them" to "him".
Have you cared for groups of children? Like all bullies, SJWs try to make the victim appear the aggressor. As a current example, Letitia Wright got taken in by pseudo-science, but people attacked her (viciously!) for retweeting it even though she had been victimized by the "hoax". "You're pushing a message that KILLS PEOPLE! F you, cword", and so forth. Presumably if they found anyone taken in by Letitia's post they'd attack them too. Simply put, none of this is what you'd do to actually fix a problem, or if you actually cared about people.
In our case, look at how the person who used "them" responded to the criticism. They went straight to trying to ideological slander.
>> It seems like you dislike trans folk. I'm not sure what they did to hurt you, but I suspect your fears and hate are the result of conditioning.
Accusations of transphobia. That's not the kind of allyship that anyone needs. In fact, that's almost exactly how a troll who wanted to make people hate each other would act.
Yes, this is obviously a non-problem, but by their own rules, the OP assumed someone's pronouns. And when called on this they didn't respond reasonably but lashed out with essentially accusations of hate. If they intend to be helpful they should check themselves before they wreck their allies.
1 reply →
Never in my comments have I displayed anger, irrationality, or a desire to dictate that others have to use certain language. It must be easy just to think I'm some fringe element going nutso like some Trump supporter living in Florida. I'm far from that. Go ahead, treat all arguments with anyone you disagree with that way. You may feel right, but it's not right, and the more you dismiss someone based on that the worse you will get surprised.
All I said was that we don't have to speak like we don't know that someone is a man or woman with a high degree of certainty, based on a name. Bending over backwards to neuter someone's pronoun on a 1% chance is silly.
I guess that makes me a grammatical nitpicker if you can only oversimplify it. And sure, attribute it however you like, but I don't speak in vagaries when something is specific and known. And it counters an accurate use of the English language, for some political purpose.
I'm against the dumbing down of discourse at the hands of people who are riding the latest bandwagon, and on other people's behalf no less.
Finally, about your example of obscuring during someone's hiring candidacy by calling him/her "they". That is ridiculous to the extreme. I guess that's what happens when you buy into the idea that your world is dominated by evil bias, and everyone around you is repeating that mantra.
4 replies →
May I say a sincere thank you for taking the time to write an articulate, reasonable, credible counterpoint to the above discussion.
I love how you go right ahead assuming, at the same time you preach against it. It's really respect worthy.
I'm not Christian. I'm not religious. I'm not Republican. I'm not disliking trans people. I'm not afraid of any such issues. All wrong. Yet you were happy to assume all that?
What I don't like is people who take on for themselves the cloak of righteous moral positioning on behalf of others, and force others to conform to their thinking because they believe they're right. Or worse, believe they're better.
"They" is not singular. You know the person is a man. You want to neuter everyone's speech to fit your worldview for the benefit of a 1%.
Strong opinions do not equal anger. And not everything in the world should be solved by just "can't we all get along and let people do what they feel is good". Opinions and attitudes such as you're showing are deserving of objection and being opinionated in the opposite direction.