I see you

[Joe Guy]

You assume a lot.

[datsunaholic]

You assume a lot.

Splitting hairs. Take out the word assume and form it as a question. It's not about what I believe, it's what you believe. I'm asking if you believe that.

Prove me wrong, then. And explain why it's different, if you think so.

If all you can do is criticize my phrasing rather than the content of my posts, I'll ASSUME you don't have a valid argument to make. Or an invalid argument. Or any argument at all, that it's just something you believe with no justification.

[Joe Guy]

You wrote that you assumed something, which means in this case that you believe something about someone and that person is required to prove you wrong. If you want to ask a question of someone, just ask it.

To quote you, "it's just something you believe with no justification".

[dales]

One thing I leaned about assume.

It makes an ass out of u and me.

[ex-khobar Andy]

My wife kept her 'maiden' name when we married. I never asked or expected her to change.

So I'm a Smith and she's a Jones. If she has made an appointment with the plumber, when they call they assume that I am Mr Jones. It does not bother me in the least, nor do I attempt to correct them.

[datsunaholic]

You wrote that you assumed something, which means in this case that you believe something about someone and that person is required to prove you wrong. If you want to ask a question of someone, just ask it.

To quote you, "it's just something you believe with no justification".

You're still splitting hairs on my choice of words. Fine, I'll take that using "I assume" isn't the right choice of words, since it's just getting hammered for my use of "I assume" rather than anyone explaining why choosing to use a personal pronoun of "she" or "he" when someone has asked to be referred to as "they" is anything other than being disrespectful to the person making that request.

True, no one is required to prove me wrong. I hold an opinion based on evidence I've seen, since I read above that they refuse to use someone's chosen personal pronoun. If they are OK with me believing that they are bigoted against non-binary people, they need not make any explanation. If they care to explain why it's not, they're free to do so. I will admit that would be a difficult task as I for one believe that people wanting to be called "they/them" deserve to have that wish respected. To actively choose not to is at best disrespectful, and at worst a form of active bigotry used to marginalize those who choose to not be referred to as "him" or "her".

[MajGenl.Meade]

I assume, Meade (and Gob), that you're one of those that refuses to address a woman as Ms then when she prefers such? . . . Or maybe you even resort to calling married women by their husband's name? Your wife would have to be addressed as "Mrs George Meade"? Or, if someone changes their name, you still insist on using their birth name (unless they are a married woman, then you insist on using their husband's name)?

I see no reason not to call someone by the pronoun they wish to be used once I'm made aware of it.

In order:

1. No. I use Ms or Mrs (if I know which term is appropriate. If I don't know, it's Ms). It is of course easier here where the black women are "mme" (after a certain age, before which they are "ausi" or sister) and the white women are mostly "mevrou" (madam). Younger ones would be "young lady" unless the name is known. Same for "young man".

2. I call married women by whatever name they use. Most often, it's either their Christian name because I know them or, if not, "tannie" (auntie) will do at a pinch, even for English speakers.

3. My wife goes by Mrs. Meade, which is her choice. She uses her maiden name as a (non-hyphenated) middle name and that appears on legal documents. Sometimes I call her "Mrs. R....." (or Ms.).

4. I have never called any man or woman by the pronoun "he" or "she". "Hello, he. How are you doing?" "Good to see you, she". Doesn't work. So I doubt I will be called upon to say "Good morning, they". If I am speaking to someone else about a person, I would of course say "She (or he) is my friend". If the friend happened to be standing within earshot and is binary, I'd say "Karen is my friend" or "Donald's coming with us" as appropriate. I always suppose that if I know people, I know his or her name. If the person is a stranger and I happen to speak in reference to him or her - perhaps "Please serve her first" - I don't really expect the person to engage me in a discussion explaining why I should have said, "Please serve they first". In that case, I'd just carry on ahead of they and let they wait after all - teach 'em to be rude to me.

Someone might object. "Suppose you are speaking to 'their' parents. Then wouldn't you refer to the child as 'they' rather than 'he' or 'she'?". No. I'd use the child's name. Unless it was something like x2BF008 in which case I probably wouldn't bother speaking to such silly people at all.

As stated before, if someone ever asks me to call them by a pronoun (whether he, she or they), I'll let you know how that goes.

Clearly from the answers above, I am a most evil person and deserve sixty lashes with a wet noodle

[Gob]

It's not possible "misgender" someone by refusing to use a self-chosen "they", is it?

Yes it is, if you are calling them "he" or "she" when you know they don't identify with the gender implied by either of those.

Nope, you do not "misgender" them. You merely chose to not use the self-chosen "they", but you may chose to refer them in another way, such as "you" or "that person", or their name. What you do not do is refer to them as a plural....

If someone wishes to avoid unnecessary offence,then they can start by not demanding others conform to calling them a plural, it's pure idiocy.

Except "they" has been used for hundreds of years to refer to a single person of unknown or indefinite gender. Perhaps it has not yet achieved the standard status of "you" as a singular pronoun (or do you still insist on "thou"), but almost everyone does it, and if you say that you never have, you are lying. Insisting in this context that it is an erroneous plural is just you deciding to be precious.

Hardly relevant in this case, the person referred to is known, and has decided themselves to be of indeterminate gender, not "unknown" gender. The only time "they" would have been used in that way in the past is for a person unknown to the author. What we are talking about here is a person who has requested to be called "they" so there is no chance they are "unknown."

[Gob]

Interesting how being half-rice half-chips entitles you to chose your plural status, but being any other way, entitles you only to conform to their wishes.

Who, that is "half rice half chips" has insisted that someone else is not entitled to choose their own pronouns? A real example, or I'm calling bullshit.

I didn't say that anyone of that ilk had demanded that though, did I? People here, yourself included, are saying that we should not have be allowed determine how we refer to this half-rice half-chips person, that we should conform to your politically correct views, and use what you determine is correct to use.If we do otherwise, we are ;

"an asshole to laugh off the feelings of people in the minority struggling in a toxic social construct"

Or we...

"are one of those that refuses to address a woman as Ms then when she prefers such"

"even resort to calling married women by their husband's name"

for example.

Truth of the matter is, I will call anyone by whatever they choose to call themselves, but if requested by Squigglypantyfarthobgobblin to call them "they" I will politely decline, and explain why.

[Econoline]

I have never called any man or woman by the pronoun "he" or "she". "Hello, he. How are you doing?" "Good to see you, she". Doesn't work. So I doubt I will be called upon to say "Good morning, they". If I am speaking to someone else about a person, I would of course say "She (or he) is my friend". If the friend happened to be standing within earshot and is binary, I'd say "Karen is my friend" or "Donald's coming with us" as appropriate. I always suppose that if I know people, I know his or her name. If the person is a stranger and I happen to speak in reference to him or her - perhaps "Please serve her first" - I don't really expect the person to engage me in a discussion explaining why I should have said, "Please serve they first". In that case, I'd just carry on ahead of they and let they wait after all - teach 'em to be rude to me.

Someone might object. "Suppose you are speaking to 'their' parents. Then wouldn't you refer to the child as 'they' rather than 'he' or 'she'?". No. I'd use the child's name. Unless it was something like x2BF008 in which case I probably wouldn't bother speaking to such silly people at all.

As stated before, if someone ever asks me to call them by a pronoun (whether he, she or they), I'll let you know how that goes.

[Guinevere]

Truth of the matter is, I will call anyone by whatever they choose to call themselves, but if requested by Squigglypantyfarthobgobblin to call them "they" I will politely decline, and explain why.

So you’re going to give them a lecture about how you are right and they are wrong?

I honestly don’t get the unwillingness to refer to someone as they wish to be referred to. Language evolves. And, has been pointed out several times previously, using “they” as a singular form isn’t unheard of or grammatically incorrect.

What’s the justification?

[MajGenl.Meade]

Make an ominously good book title: "They" by H. Rider Haggard

Seriously, in all practicality, when on earth does anyone EVER refer unavoidably to a binary person standing in front of them as "he", "she" or "they"?????? It just doesn't happen.

Between us, Gob and I have addressed every conceivable circumstance in which we would AVOID offending a person by using their name, rather than any pronoun, at all, of any kind. Alternative strategies of respect.

If I'm talking to a person about a third (binary) person and utter the phrase, "You know Don? Well, they just bought a car" - then I have butchered English UNLESS I go on to explain, "Don does not like to be called 'he' so we all call them they".

Now, why should I be explaining such a thing to someone who (a) doesn't know and (b) doesn't care? Better to simplify and say "Don bought a car". There are polite and respectful ways to get around using "them/they" without offending one's own sense of idiocy.

If no one is giving respect to these explanations . . . well, discussion ended.

[Gob]

Truth of the matter is, I will call anyone by whatever they choose to call themselves, but if requested by Squigglypantyfarthobgobblin to call them "they" I will politely decline, and explain why.

So you’re going to give them a lecture about how you are right and they are wrong?

Where did I say that?

I honestly don’t get the unwillingness to refer to someone as they wish to be referred to. Language evolves. And, has been pointed out several times previously, using “they” as a singular form isn’t unheard of or grammatically incorrect.

What’s the justification?

Not wanting to conform to something silly.

[ex-khobar Andy]

If I'm talking to a person about a third (binary) person and utter the phrase, "You know Don? Well, they just bought a car" - then I have butchered English UNLESS I go on to explain, "Don does not like to be called 'he' so we all call them they".

My daughter has a friend who prefers to be 'they.' So she and her friends use that terminology when they are discussing what 'Stacy' has been up to. The first few times you hear it, it kind of grates. After a while you understand what she is doing and roll with it. After a bit more of a while, I expect I won't even notice. I'm not there yet but I will be at some point.

Note that there are good and bad reasons for a language to evolve. I don't suppose I will ever get used to, and accept, (say) 'between you and I,' because there is a perfectly good construction - 'between you and me' - which works and offends no-one. But if there is a need, unknown to me and most other users of the language for the past however many centuries, for a construction which is inclusive of some who had, until now, been excluded, then the language should change to meet that need. We all accept the word 'bug' to mean some sort of problem with an electronic device (and yes, I know the Grace Hopper story) and it's unremarkable. We not longer expect 'bug' always to mean some annoying flying critter. You'll get used to it. Hopefully.

[Econoline]

We all accept the word 'bug' to mean some sort of problem with an electronic device (and yes, I know the Grace Hopper story) and it's unremarkable. We not longer expect 'bug' always to mean some annoying flying critter. You'll get used to it. Hopefully.

The difference is, nobody gets mad at you for NOT using the word "bug" to mean "some sort of problem with an electronic device".

[Guinevere]

Truth of the matter is, I will call anyone by whatever they choose to call themselves, but if requested by Squigglypantyfarthobgobblin to call them "they" I will politely decline, and explain why.

So you’re going to give them a lecture about how you are right and they are wrong?

Where did I say that?

I honestly don’t get the unwillingness to refer to someone as they wish to be referred to. Language evolves. And, has been pointed out several times previously, using “they” as a singular form isn’t unheard of or grammatically incorrect.

What’s the justification?

Not wanting to conform to something silly.

“Telling” them is essentially a lecture on why you think you are right and they are wrong.

Again - its not about conforming, it’s about being respectful to the person.

[Joe Guy]

How about using Gender Blender instead of they.

"Yeah, I saw Pat the other day and gender blender said to say hi to you."

Works for me...

[datsunaholic]

The point is to use a gender neutral word instead of creating an entirely new word for bigots/transphobes/homophobes to single out.

"Robin said that they talked to the client about getting the kitchen items delivered". What gender is Robin? And that's the point. Truthfully, I didn't even know Robin's gender (Robin is a former coworker) for several months and didn't think it was polite to ask.

[Joe Guy]

......."Robin said that they talked to the client about getting the kitchen items delivered". What gender is Robin? And that's the point. Truthfully, I didn't even know Robin's gender (Robin is a former coworker) for several months and didn't think it was polite to ask.

If someone said or wrote that to me, I would ask who the other people were (besides Robin) that talked to the client. If one must be neutral, why not say, "Robin told me that Robin talked to the client about getting the kitchen items delivered"? It's still clumsy but it wouldn't require people to guess which definition of "they" is intended.

[Bicycle Bill]

The point is to use a gender neutral word instead of creating an entirely new word for bigots/transphobes/homophobes to single out.

"Robin said that they talked to the client about getting the kitchen items delivered". What gender is Robin? And that's the point. Truthfully, I didn't even know Robin's gender (Robin is a former coworker) for several months and didn't think it was polite to ask.

And unless I was thinking of doing gender-type stuff with Robin, I don't think it would even be a topic of conversation... and THAT'S the way it should be.
But when some of the really outspoken examples of the "Alphabet Brigade" (the LBGTQIAXYandZ crowd) want to make a big fucking thing about it.... maybe THEY'RE the ones that should just shut the hell up.

-"BB"-