[Message from blahaj.zone] Neopronouns are not trolling (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by qaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

67 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/20091173

I've been waiting until after Christmas day to make this post, but some of our communities recently have had a lot of noise and upset over someone that uses neopronouns that most people are unfamiliar with.

So I want to make this clear. A persons pronouns are to be respected. This is true when the user is using neopronouns that you're unfamiliar with. It's true even if you think someone is trolling. Pronouns are not rewards for good behaviour. They aren't only to be respected when you like the person you're interacting with, or if their pronouns "make sense" to you. Trolls, spammers, twitter users, it doesn't matter who they are, your options are to respect their pronouns, or to not engage with them.

I really want to re-iterate the importance of this. Gender diverse folk are undermined, invalidated and questioned at every step of our lives. As a community, we need to be working to undo that, not creating more of it, and that means there is no space for treating pronouns (including neopronouns) as a reward for good behaviour.

This isn't a free reign for trolls and spammers. The rules still apply. Trolling, spamming, etc will continue to be dealt with, but it's not an excuse to act as if respecting someones pronouns is optional.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Deestan@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I am assuming it as "not adding gender to the sentence". Neutral. Leaving it out. Not misgendering. It is how people have always talked about someone when the gender is either unknown, irrelevant, or hard to assume.

I am respecting a site or community's rule that this is not the case on their space, but it's such a deviation from the norm that I want it to be clear.

The qualifier "non-tolerable" was clumsy. I was trying to ask if it fell more on "honest mistake, but not allowed" or "assumed to be an intentional transphobic trangression".

[+] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -7 points 2 days ago

Understandable, but

Not misgendering. It is how people have always talked about someone when the gender is either unknown, irrelevant, or hard to assume

Your later comment suggests you have a particular user in mind, in which case that user's pronouns are known, relevant, and require no assumption.

I am respecting a site or community's rule that this is not the case on their space, but it's such a deviation from the norm that I want it to be clear.

It should be about respecting the individual(/system/thing), not just respecting a rule?

I was trying to ask if it fell more on "honest mistake, but not allowed" or "assumed to be an intentional transphobic trangression".

It doesn't sound like an honest mistake. Maybe it was from the user you mentioned who got banned, but it sounds like you're trying to see if it's okay for you to do it on purpose.

But maybe I'm misunderstanding! I would like to be

[-] Deestan@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

Thanks for responding! I hope you have the patience to help me understand a bit more. :)

I guess we differ on whether you can respectfully refer to someone without gendered language?

Meaning, the mistake was assuming you could be neutral, not on not knowing the requested gender.

E.g. in academia (at least in my country) we tend to talk about authors of a particular paper as "they" whether they are one, several, male, female etc, even if you know their gender. It is consided respectful, unassuming and inclusive.

Do you think it is disrespectful to e.g. say "I love my partner, they bought me legos for christmas" when talking about my spouse to a colleague even I know she's female? Where my motivation is to not have gender in the conversation?

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 day ago

Thanks for responding! I hope you have the patience to help me understand a bit more. :)

Of course! Thanks for asking and being open ☺

E.g. in academia (at least in my country) we tend to talk about authors of a particular paper as "they" whether they are one, several, male, female etc, even if you know their gender. It is consided respectful, unassuming and inclusive.

Yeah I think this is totally normal and okay, but if the particular paper in question, e.g., is about gender, and the author writes about their unique gender, I think it would be inappropriate/disrespectful to not use their preferred pronouns°

Do you think it is disrespectful to e.g. say "I love my partner, they bought me legos for christmas" when talking about my spouse to a colleague even I know she's female? Where my motivation is to not have gender in the conversation?

It definitely depends on the person and the culture. Some people, cis or not, feel a strong internal sense of their gender, and may feel misrepresented when referred to with neutral pronouns. (Further reading °if I were writing a paper and referenced this author, I would be sure to use Their preferred pronouns, because Their pronouns are known and relevant (They/Them, Capitalized))

I'm quite queer and have facial hair, so when I refer to my partner with neutral pronouns, people assume she's a man, and then she has an uncomfortable first interaction with those people when they meet her, and wonders if I'm embarrassed to be in a relationship with a woman.

Personally, if I hear someone specific being referred to with they/them pronouns when their preferred pronouns ought to be known, I assume they're non-binary, trans, or at least some sort of queer

Ultimately, 'they/them' pronouns aren't entirely neutral. Those pronouns imply personhood, can strip away identity from some, and are an identity for others