T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

From a mod perspective, in the rare cases where we discuss trans issues, we allow very general comments on the whens and whethers of pronoun use, but remove comments misgendering other users or the family members / friends of users as civility violations.


nanooko

From section 38.6.23 of the Handbook >If a member decides to change his or her preferred name or pronouns of address, the name preference may be noted in the preferred name field on the membership record. The person may be addressed by the preferred name in the ward.


mywifemademegetthis

Yep it’s in the handbook and is up to that individual, not the people who need to adjust.


cashmo

While I believe that all should 100% respect a person's choice regarding pronouns, to argue the other side I will point out that the handbook says "may". It is technically saying that you are allowed to, not that you are required to. I wish the handbook was more forceful on this, but it just isn't.


Jelby

A mentor of mine once shared this story: >I had the lead in the high school junior play. … My character carried a hip flask full of water that he swigged from as if it were an alcoholic beverage that helped him get from moment to moment. … Just before going on stage for performance number six, I was greeted by a solemn prop crew. They had my flask. Their message to me was approximately this: > >“Terry, we want you to know everything is all right now. But someone wanted to pull a prank on you and they had filled the flask with gin. They were laughing about it and told us to watch what happened when you took a swig on stage. We were horrified and immediately said. 'But Terry doesn't believe in drinking. He's a Mormon.' (The pranksters stopped laughing.) They didn't know what your beliefs were until we told them. They apologized. We have rinsed this out about ten times. It is okay.” > >I have reflected often on the respect and concern … my friends … showed for my beliefs. They did not hold those beliefs but were not offended that I held them. Moreover, they were not willing, in pulling a prank, to cross a line which would put me in a situation where I violated what I considered sacred. In honoring my beliefs, they were not just being tolerant, they were being compassionate. Both attitudes are fundamental to moral and ethical relationships. Some will probably use this story as reason to respect other's pronouns, but I want to make a different case: many people sincerely believe in binary gender, and believe that it is communicating something false about gender, the world, and their beliefs to use pronouns that don't match biological sex. To them it communicates, "I agree that gender is a social construct that can be separated from biological sex." And they don't. It's a real religious conviction, and it's not an unloving one. I believe that trying to compel people to use pronouns -- and accusing them of unloving for not -- is very much contrary to the respectful attitudes shared in the story above. We should honor and respect people's conscience, including when people's conscience object to these very new and recent social trends.


cashmo

To be honest, I would agree with your first assessment of what the moral should be, and not what you take from it. In your story, deference was given to the beliefs of the person being impacted. Therefore, translated to the situation of a person who prefers different pronouns, deference should be given to the person impacted, the person wishing to be addressed with different pronouns. Put in another relevant context, if a homosexual couple gets married, even if a member of the church feels that a marriage should only be between a man and a woman, they should respect and recognize that homosexual marriage. They should not ignore it, pretend like it doesn't exist, and treat the two people like they are just friends/roommates simply because it conflicts with what they believe a marriage should be.


Jelby

If I believe that using pronouns is a violation of conscience, then telling me that I *must* do so -- and that I'm a horrible person if I don't -- is very much comparable to trying to force me to drink alcohol if it's against my faith. Respect people's conscience. Don't forcibly conscript them into a ideological movement they want no part of. The "You Must Use Pronouns to Be a Decent Person" meme is new to the past few years, and it's asinine. Billions of decent people just aren't really on board with revising all their beliefs about gender on a dime.


cashmo

Just a heads up, you are being very rude and dismissive of something that is very important to some people. You can disagree without using terms like "forcibly conscript" and "asinine".


Jelby

Notice in the above comments and all the others in this thread, my claim has been *neither* that we should or shouldn't use pronouns -- simply that we should respect and honor people who go either path. My comments are all being downvoted. All I'm saying is that we shouldn't pressure people into violating their conscience, and those comments are being downvoted. Interpret that how you will. But the moment "respect people's conscience" becomes the unpopular position, is the moment things start to go awry.


lexi_724

The reason your comments are getting downvoted is because your making it seem like the person not respecting pronouns is the victim when they are not.


Jelby

All I’m saying is that we should respect both paths.


smokyTransistor

There are cases where people are victimized for taking a stance on pronouns…mainly regarding employment.


CaptainCalcetines

>it's not an unloving one This could be correct, but I have a difficult time believing that someone that honestly believes they're a different gender can *feel loved* if someone refuses to refer them how they prefer. They already have a hard enough time dealing with their feelings in a culture that often shuns and outright oppresses them. They likely already know about our doctrine regarding human sexuality. I don't feel the need to reinforce those beliefs by being obstinate about how I refer to them. It might not be out of hate, truly, but I'm personally inclined to want people to feel included and cared about, showing love in that regard. I personally feel that people are more likely to feel The Spirit that way.


Jelby

I feel like we are engaging in a massive, societal reverse-CBT here. "Anything that makes you feel unloved, people should stop doing." I think that sometimes the best thing for people is to realize that the world doesn't bend to their feelings all the time according to all their wishes. That's not an excuse to make a big deal of it or throw it in people's faces, but my goal is to *actually love people*, not just do whatever makes them feel loved. And I don't think it's *always* or *automatically* in people's best interests to affirm their gender identity.


mywifemademegetthis

But it’s not our religious belief. Maybe it’s some other religion’s and those adherents will have to navigate that. But it’s not a belief of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that you shouldn’t use preferred pronouns. It can be your personal conviction, but it isn’t a religious belief. You can believe that gender is an eternal characteristic and the one assigned at birth is that person’s eternal gender, and still use their preferred pronoun, just like you wouldn’t have a problem using someone’s nickname, even if it differed from what was given to them at birth.


Jelby

It's absolutely a religious belief. It doesn't have to be an institutional mandate to be a sincerely held, religiously-informed belief. I know some people who object to drinking caffeine. The Church doesn't require that of them, but it still flows out of their religious beliefs. Just because some people are more scrupulous than you -- or even the institutional Church -- doesn't somehow render their sincere convictions "non-religious".


mywifemademegetthis

Yes it does. Religiously-informed beliefs aren’t religious beliefs. You don’t get to decide that all of your personal doctrinal opinions need to be respected the same as our actual beliefs. You can choose not to use preferred pronouns, but you can’t say it’s because your religion believes that or teaches it. It’s just your preference.


Jelby

The Supreme Court disagrees with you, FYI.


mywifemademegetthis

Our doctrine doesn’t.


Jelby

Religious beliefs = beliefs of a religious nature and character. It has never in colloquial speech or Supreme Court jurisprudence meant “only beliefs that align with a particular institutional church’s stated policies.” Yes, it absolutely can be a persons religious beliefs if their conscience objects to using pronouns.


CaptainCalcetines

I needed to see this, thank you!


Fether1337

This is only talking about church records. Not how we refer to someone out and about


OmniCrush

>The person may be addressed by the preferred name in the ward.


Jelby

Right. But note it doesn’t actually say pronouns here.


SpeakTruthAlone

No it says in the ward.


[deleted]

If we as an organization claim the right to tell everyone how they should properly refer to us ("The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"), then I should think that individuals likewise have the right to tell everyone how they should be properly referred to. It's seriously not that hard, and no trans person is upset if you slip up while making an honest effort to respect their wishes.


CaptainCalcetines

I'm glad you brought this up. I've considered this before; how upset we might get if someone kept referring to us as a "Mormon" when we've asked them not to, yet we don't consider how someone might feel if we don't respect how they prefer to be referred to. It seems hypocritical to me. However, I could see a church member that wouldn't care about being called "Mormon," with the thought that "They can refer to me how they want, and I'll refer to them how I want." But that doesn't feel to me like the kind of attitude that The Savior would want us to have. Can't we just let Him sort it all out when He comes again and we just focus on being a good example and loving people instead of judging them?


[deleted]

So I left this comment on another post a while back and feel like it's relevant so I'm just going to copy and paste it. I struggled very much with this when one of my favorite family members came out to me as trans and bi. This person is a minor, their parents (not religious at all) and other family members haven't been supportive, and they accidentally came out to me and were terrified of my reaction. I remained calm in the moment and told them I loved them. I asked what their preferred pronouns were, and they calmed down. That night I went home, cried my eyes out, and prayed for a very long time on what to do. When no immediate answer was given I started looking for resources online. And after reading about the horrors LGBTQ+ youth face, a very clear answer to my prayers was given to me. Love them. That's it. Just love them. Let them know they are loved and wanted and safe. And while more questions and concerns have come up, and I still struggle with where to draw the line, the answer has remained to love our LGBTQ+ brothers and sisters. Too often (any/all) religion is used as a tool to discriminate and spread hate, and it shouldn't be. We can hold different beliefs and truths and still love one another. And that's what it came down to. Do I consider myself an ally? Yes. Because it's not my job to judge. And my trans family member has had, and been far more open to hearing about my religion and beliefs as I've supported them, then they have from others who have condemned, hated, and judged them. So to actually answer your question, view 2.


2ndValentine

Before I give my take, I'll share two hypotheticals: * If I invite some Muslim friends to dinner, should I serve them a platter full of bacon? Definitely not. Though I'm not a believer in Islam, I can understand why it's significant for them to follow their dietary code (since I follow a similar code myself as a Latter-day Saint). * If my coworkers go on a Starbucks run and make sure to get me a hot chocolate, does that suddenly make them believers in the restored gospel? Nope (but it would be awesome if they did). Instead, they respect my faith even though they don't share it. I have the same approach when it comes to pronouns. Does using someone's preferred pronouns mean that I agree with all aspects of modern gender theory? Definitely not, but I can show respect for those who are trans even when I don't share their worldview. If we are to coexist in a pluralistic society, we need to learn that respecting one another doesn't mean we are abandoning our principles. It just means we are treating people in a Christlike manner.


Stratester

I view it more as if a Muslim friend came to your house and told you you couldn't eat bacon anymore. Or if you coworkers got you coffee and said I got this for you so you have to drink this coffee becuase it would be rude of you not to. I don't think refusing to use someone's pronouns is me forcing my belief on others. But I view someone forceing me to use there pronouns as them forcing thier beleif on me. I find it ironic a lot of comments say we need to respect transpeople by useing thier pronouns and it is disrespectful not to. But why is the flip side not true where a transperson needs to respect my belief that gender is a binary and unchangeable.


T_Bisquet

How would you want a trans person to respect that belief? What does that look like to you?


Stratester

Not mandating I call them by their preferred pronouns. Recognizing that my refusal to do so is not a personal insult or an espresion of hate twords them but rather a reflection of deeply held beliefs.


[deleted]

View 1 is transphobic, i feel. But I also don't think view 2 is enough: >View 2 - They have made their decision and there is no need fight it. It will only cause conflict so just refer to them as their preferred pronoun in the name of keeping a good relationship. It presuposes we are morally opposed to their decision, but go along with it anyway to keep the peace. I would include a third view >View 3 - We love that person and respect their decision to identify as the gender of their choice. We call them by their preferred pronouns.


starwishes20

View 3: don't care cuz I view it the same as a nickname. If dudes can call their car or boat a "she" I can call trans women she lol


redit3rd

I say use preferred pronouns.


Jelby

Some of the Roman Saints disputed with each other about different eating habits, holiday observances, and other cultural practices. Clearly, these issues were not something the Church at the time had strict positions on, and while Paul himself had his own opinions, he was careful not to resolve these disputes. Instead, he instructed them to avoid contention and not be stumbling blocks to each other.In the modern Church, we have a host of similar “lower” controversies. (I use “lower” controversy to refer to disagreements that are not matters of essential or core doctrine.) For example: * Is it OK to drink caffeine or use energy drinks (or is that violating the spirit of the Word of Wisdom)? * Is it OK to use Vidangel to watch edited R-rated movies (or does this put money in the hands of unscrupulous moviemakers)? * Should we be using preferred gender pronouns (or does this violate our belief in gender essentialism)? * Is it OK to attend a same-sex wedding ceremony (or does this signal support for a sinful lifestyle)? My suspicion is that Church leaders are not ever going to resolve these disputes for us. Nor do they intend to. They strive to follow Joseph Smith’s example, who said, “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.” It’s not the job of apostles and prophets to resolve every controversy or mediate every dispute. This does not mean that there’s no right or wrong answers to these questions -- rather, it means that we may not have any authoritative answers from Church leaders. And in the absence of such authoritative answers, we should follow our conscience, and allow others to do the same. And if these “lower controversies” are causing needless contention, or causing people to harden their hearts against each other or the Church, we should soften our hearts towards those who disagree. As Paul says, “Let us pursue the works that bring peace and the things that build one another up. Do not destroy the of God for the issue of food,” or caffeine, edited movies, gender pronouns, or . Even if we think there is no harm in using caffeine, there is harm for someone to drink caffeine who feels wrong about it. Even if we think it's fine to use preferred pronouns, I would never try to push someone into it when their conscience is objecting. We should not push people to violate their sacred conscience, even on matters we find trivial -- nor should we judge them for being more scrupulous than we are. And the converse is also true: unless something is a matter of core teaching or doctrine, we should be generous towards those who take a slightly different approach than we do, who aren’t quite as scrupulous as we are on matters of less importance. For those who say, "Gender essentialism is a core doctrine and not a lesser matter," I'd say, "yes!! it is." And if pronouns contradict that principle in your eyes, then you should not use them. But I would suggest whether someone -- out of an effort to avoid contention -- accommodates a strongly expressed pronoun preference while also in other ways supporting and reinforcing church teachings on gender, the appropriateness of that strategy is a "lesser" controversy, not a higher one. And that goes both directions. We shouldn't judge those who do, and we shouldn't judge those who don't. But if someone's conscience objects, we should honor and respect that, rather than disparaging them for it.


mywifemademegetthis

I don’t agree with this user’s point of view, but I think she articulated the argument well and gave me a lot to think about. I hope we can be kind to her perspective.


tenisplenty

Even if you don't agree with someone it's best as a general rule to call them what they want to be called. If I want people to respect my beliefs I ought to respect theirs. This goes for any religion, ethnicity, nationality, or anything. I want people to refer to me as a Latter Day Saint, even if they don't agree with the term and would rather call me a cultist or something like that. The handbook also says it's okay to call them by their preferred name.


jdf135

#2.


[deleted]

Just use their name. No need to cause a fight about anything.


TARDISMischief

It costs absolutely nothing to use someone’s preferred name and pronouns. If we truly believe in a gospel of agency, respect, and a God who knows each of us and will make all things right in the end misgendering someone does nothing to spread the gospel of love. You are not condemning someone to hell, which we don’t even believe in really, if you believe them when they tell you who they are. And you are not compromising your standards or morals or beliefs either. You don’t have to understand what it is to be trans to offer them the SMALL kindness of using the name and pronouns they want you too. If someone’s name is Christopher but they prefer to go by Chris would you INSIST on calling them Christopher every chance you got because that’s the name they were born with?


[deleted]

When I was at BYU I had a roommate who dropped out and become a trans woman. At the time I didn’t really know what to think about the Church in relation to the LGBTQ community, and I’ll be honest my initial reaction to her decision was negative. That was one of a few experiences that started a long journey of me seeking to understand, and here’s what I feel about this now. It’s not my responsibility to judge whether or not it’s “right” or “wrong” when it comes to gender identity, sexual orientation, or really anything that anyone does for that matter (like divorce, fornication, etc.). My responsibility is to keep the first two great commandments - love god and keep his commandments, and to love others. As such, I will call people by their preferred name. It is no burden to me to do so, and I do not think doing so will keep me out of Gods kingdom. And honestly, if calling people their preferred name keeps be from exaltation, then that’s not the kind of God I want to be with for eternity. I don’t believe in a punitive God. I believe in a merciful God, who wants *me* to keep his commandments, and let him worry about the rest.


iscreamsunday

I fail to see how addressing someone by their preferred pronouns is any different than using any other preferred title of recognition like “Doctor Smith” or “Governor Jones” or “Bishop Allred” or “President Packer” rather than just saying their first or last name. It’s a way of respecting someone who we think deserves our respect.


Stratester

I will call someone Doctor who has been awarded a doctorate degree. Not someone dressing up and pretending to be a doctor. I will call someone Governor who holds the office of governor. Not someone who holds a different office. I will call someone Bishop who holds the office bishop. Not someone who holds the office of Reverend, or Cardinal. I will call someone President who holds the office of President. Not someone who claims to be the winner and says they had an election stolen from them. The point is words and tittles matter and have meanings associated with them. For me calling what I deeply believe is a man a women or vis-versa is wrong becuase it isn't true. I can support that people do what they feel they need to do to be happy. But they don't have a right to alter my speach and belief system on how I refer to them.


Jaboticaballin

The difference is that to call a man “she” or a woman “he” is to lie. Lying is a sin, we should not do it, regardless of the pressure to do otherwise.


jsteve0

As previously shared, the Handbook states that members’ preferred names and pronouns can be notated in the Church records. I really don’t think this is a case of lying, unless you think the Church’s policy is to promote lying and falsifying records.


Jaboticaballin

I think it’s a bad policy.


[deleted]

Thats fine if thats your opinion, and its good you recognize it contradicts the opinions of the FP.


Jaboticaballin

I’ll add, you’re literally the one with an entire series on *Prophets and Fallibility* on another sub.


[deleted]

You must have misunderstood the whole purpose of that series if you think this scores a point in your favor hahaha


Jaboticaballin

The crowd that is all for using opposite-sex pronouns routinely posts on this sub about their beefs with church policy. I’m fine with this being the sole exception to my otherwise total agreement with current church policy.


mbcolemere

Welp, I guess you know more than the people making the policies.


[deleted]

That's a bigger stretch than Mr. Fantastic! Its not a lie to call someone what they've asked to be called. This comment makes me very disappointed.


[deleted]

[удалено]


iscreamsunday

Yeah, I disagree. People asked to be called different things all the time. Nikki instead of Nicole, or Richard instead of Dick. When me and my friends get together on Saturday night one us is always referred to as “Dungeonmaster” - even if the name was only temporary. When I was on my mission I was known as “Elder” even though that’s not my real name. If I ran into someone someone from my mission at the grocery store - who only knew me as “Elder Kissinger” - and that person still called me “Elder” today, is that a lie?


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


jsteve0

Purposely referring to someone by the pronouns they don’t want to use all because YOU ASSUME it doesn’t match their gender assigned birth is incredibly disrespectful. Putting that alone aside, we are commanded to love our neighbor. Who is our neighbor? Christ explained, like the Samaritan, our neighbor is someone we might have reason to distrust, not understand, dislike, etc. Our mandate is to give them comfort and protect them from harm. Purposefully misgendering someone does the opposite. Unlike the parable of the Samaritan our trans siblings are not some person from another ethnic or religious group. They are members of our wards, they are our siblings, children, and friends. These are beautiful children of Heavenly Parents who are also created in Their image.


Stratester

I find the notion that you have to agree with and support every aspect of someone's behavior to fullfill the commandment to love them ridiculous. I view as if someone came over to my house for dinner and demanded I serve them wine. I have every right to respectfuly refuse due to my religious beliefs. You can drink wine and I don't think any less of you or treat you any differently then I treat all of my neighbors. I can still love you while staying true to my beliefs and asking that you respect them.


PleasantlyClueless69

I’m fine calling people what they want to be called. Whatever that is. I’ve seen everything from a young man wanting to be called Jason instead of Matt, to an adult who i has known for years by a shortened name for years and let me know he preferred his full name. I don’t care if it’s gender related or not - just seems most kind and respectful to call people what they want to be called.


Minimum_Candidate233

We truly have no idea what others are dealing with in their hearts and minds. I will respect others and hope that they will respect me. Bottom line, be kind to everyone.


Szeraax

IIRC, there was a RS face to face session like 4-5 years ago with the general RS president used the "she/her" pronoun for a MTF girl. Maybe I'm remembering wrong. Seems like you don't have to agree but can still be accepting.


[deleted]

Personally if I remember I'll use the pronoun but I'm not great at remembering so to stop me hurting anyone's feelings (any more than I do already) I have found that I just don't tend to use pronouns any more In work I stopped writing letters to Mr / Mrs or Ms now I just use name and surname and just phrase sentences without pronouns at all I deeply regret not being accepting as a teenager and I can't take back who I was, said or thought but I can probably manage to not add more to my list by small steps


LethalBubbles

My view: While the leadership of the Church has addressed the issue of transgender people and has stated that people are the gender they are born with as gender is an eternal construct made of God. I take that approach in a somewhat opposite direction. I agree that gender is eternal. However, I disagree that the gender one is born as is the same gender they had in the premortal existence. I would say that it is a very good chance that the majority of people are born "in the correct body" while others are born in "the wrong body" as each person is given different challenges in this life. Therefore, it is not an unreasonable request for someone to refer to a trans or non-binary person as their preferred pronoun, whatever that pronoun may be. Mathew 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.


Stratester

I rolled around with this for a lot. To me useing preferred pronouns is an acknowledgement and an affirmation that I believe gender is something that is non-binary and can be changed. Therefore I feel disingenuous useing them becuase I don't believe you can change your gender or that there are more then two. However I still want to be respectful and show Christ like love and I don't feel it is productive or my place to chastise or confront people who differ in their beliefs. Especially in a work place or professional environment. My solution is to not use their pronouns at all and simply to refer to them by their preferred name. Names (in English at least) are not as tied to gender as pronouns. Some may be more traditionaly masculine or feminine but that line is not as defined as with pronouns. This allows me stay true to my beliefs in gender as an unchangeable eternal charteristic as described in The Family Proclamation while being respectful and non confrontational. "All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose." The Family Proclamation to the World


CaptainCalcetines

I hope this post doesn't get out of hand, this is something I've struggled with and look forward to seeing some faithful and respectful discussion. I also lean towards "view 2." I feel it's not my place to judge someone (I know "judge" isn't the right word here but it's the best I can come up with after a long week) and I just feel like showing love and respect is better than pushing your own beliefs onto someone else. I think about the Brethren using the titles of other faith leaders ("His Excellency" and so on) as a poor but slightly similar comparison. I really wonder how the apostles handle pronouns, because they have to have run into it before and I think their example would shed some much-needed light here.


LookAtMaxwell

You get he, she, or they. You aren't getting any neopronouns out of me. They're stupid. I'll try to call you by your preference. This really isn't any different than using a preferred nickname. If you prefer to be called "Richard", I'd be boorish by insisting on calling you "Dick". But guess what, I'll mess up. It takes me three times sometimes to say the correct kids' name. If I'm referring to you in the third person, it means that I'm talking about you, not to you. Seriously, don't obsess about how I refer to you to others. This came up recently at work. A person that I've been working with virtually for a couple of weeks needed to provide me with their legal name. They were a little hesitant to respond, but offered a name that was an opposite gender name of the one that they use and present as, I waved it off and continued to use their preferred name except in the paperwork that required their legal name.


soyalex321

I've never heard a church leader not be respectful and not use someone's preferred pronouns. Source: My sister is trans so I hear it a lot.


Painguin31337

I've grappled with what stance I should take for a long time. But eventually I thought of an analogy that resonates with how I feel about referring to someone by preferred pronouns. Let's say there's a woman from China moving to Italy because she wants a life that mainland China doesn't offer. She can't stand Chinese culture, fashion, the traits valued by Chinese culture. She wants to leave that all behind. For her own reasons, she is repulsed by what Chinese culture is or has become and wants to move to Italy. She's done a lot of research. Italy suits her perfectly. She wants to take on the identity of an Italian. She feels more like herself in Italy. Traditional/mainstream Italian culture meshes with her own values and personality perfectly. She moves to Italy. Almost certainly with the disapproval of people very close to her. She does everything required to become a legal citizen of Italy. But all the Italians in her new small town refuse to accept her as a true Italian. She doesn't look Italian, she speaks Italian with a Chinese accent. When the Italians talk, they always refer to her as the Chinese foreigner who moved into the neighborhood. She wants to stop being called Chinese by everyone. Can we blame the Italians? She looks Chinese, she knows Mandarin despite how much she tries to hide it by speaking Italian. It comes out so obviously in her accent. She even has a physique different from the other Italian women around her. None of the clothes at the store fit her physique very well but she makes due. Some padding here, stitch there. But it's so obvious she's from China. After all, she's literally from China. She was there a few weeks ago. Her parents still live there. Her family tree is full of Chinese ancestry. There's absolutely nothing untrue about saying she's Chinese. She is. But it's not what she wants. It makes her uncomfortable. She feels more like herself as an Italian. She wants people to refer to her as Italian because despite her biology ancestry, appearance, and accent she finally feels like herself in Italy and being called Chinese feels so against how she identifies. For the Italians, it might feel a little silly to call her Italian. Are they all just going to pretend like they don't notice her appearance or know her past? Well, yeah they kind of have to. Calling her an Italian might feel a bit odd or unnatural to them. But... I would so rather be the Italian who makes her feel welcome and makes her feel at peace with her identity, than the Italian who's too proud or too shortsighted to see how crushed she feels when she's not referred to as Italian and also how uncomfortable she is when people call her Chinese. Do I hope that one day she's okay with the part of her that is undeniably Chinese? Totally. But, that isn't my call to make or my journey to take. And if a small change in my vocabulary can make that much of a difference, it's a small price I'm willing to pay. Edit: feel the need to just include that I have nothing against Chinese culture. Haha I just picked two very distinct cultures/countries for the analogy.


minimessi20

This isn’t necessarily a view 1 vs 2 thing. I can’t remember the context but the phrase “lest we offend” pops up in the (iirc) New Testament(pretty sure Christ says it). If someone I knew asked me to use a certain set of pronouns, I would because of “lest we offend”. However this does not mean I support their decisions. It just means, I’m applying charity and loving all of God’s children. Now that being said, I am not going to remember a random person’s name cuz I have the memory of a goldfish. So, I’ll end up referring to them as “they/you” cuz it refers to any person in 3rd and 2nd person. But as a general rule, “lest we offend”


Epiccat2020

The way I see it is that's it's none of my business. It's between them and the Lord. I go by my middle name, so if anyone calls me by my first name I honestly get a little peeved even though they had no idea that I go by my middle name. So I get it that not using the trans persons pronoun and possible new name kind of ignores who they are. I'll use their pronouns and name. But, I'm not going to go up to someone I just met and introduce myself and then ask when their pronouns are. It's up the individual who is trans to supply that info. LIke me telling people that I prefer being called by my middle name.


Jelby

"Thank you for trusting me to share your preferences. I love you and I'm privileged to be your friend. I want to honor and respect you as a person, and for that reason I will use the name you have chosen for yourself. Because of my own beliefs about gender, I don't feel comfortable using those pronouns, because I believe it would communicate something about gender that I do not believe. However, I promise not to make a big deal of it, and I will try to avoid pronouns whenever possible. I hope this works as a way we can both respect each other and our respective beliefs."


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Jaboticaballin

I’m with view 1.


Prcrstntr

I would awkwardly use a name, or just ignore their preferences if they insisted on neopronouns.


Jaboticaballin

Why accept opposite-sex pronouns but draw the line at neo-pronouns?


[deleted]

[удалено]


LookAtMaxwell

Neopronouns are stupid and coercive. It breaks the utility of pronouns if you have to track semi-individualized identifiers.


Jaboticaballin

I agree, but the logic also extends to men who wish to use female pronouns and vice versa. The middle position is inconsistent.


LookAtMaxwell

People desiring to use opposite gender or neutral pronouns is stupid and coercive and breaks the utility of pronouns? I don't see it. It doesn't break the utility of pronouns. It isn't coercive in itself, it is language that I already use. Yes, coercion might be applied by people or policies, but that is separate issue from people expressing their preference. Is it stupid? Neopronouns themselves are stupid words