It depends on context. Would you insist on calling a transwoman you met socially or were chatting/emailing/threading with, He/Him? If yes, I think you’re a jerk. Do you want to be able to distinguish between a trans man/woman and cis in a conversation like this thread we’re in? Fine, we’ve been doing so in this thread and it seems fine. Well, fine-ish, since we’re debating board rules.
I think the point is being careful about telling someone their claimed gender is bullshit. “You’re not really a woman.” Do not do this. But trying to discuss that trans people exist should be okay.
Disclaimer: I don’t entirely understand any of this, but it seems like basic politeness to avoid being a dick and not judge people.
I’m actually not sure I agree. I mean, there are definitely people who hold that trans women aren’t women. But then I consider things like how quickly Elliot Page’s (Juno, Kitty Pride, Vanya Hardgrieves) online bio was changed to use his new name. Not misgendering trans people seems the rule for most publications, online or off, not the exception.
The two large groups that seem to be holdouts are (1) the ones who are also holdouts on other forms of bigotry and (2) the gender critical feminists, who are generally called “trans exclusionary radical feminists” by other feminists.
And even the latter seem to believe they are fighting some sort of existing consensus. Their big fear seems to be that people are too accepting that trans women are women. They’re even willing to ally with anti-feminists because they see the trans threat as so large.
Sure, fewer people accept that trans women are women (and the rest) than accept that being gay is okay. But the consensus still seems pretty wide. It’s not this huge open question, even socially.
Even Reddit seems to have started cracking down on this stuff. The reason may have more to do with profit, but even that’s telling you something: being transphobic is starting to be advertiser unfriendly.
(None of this should be construed to mean that transphobia doesn’t exist, or isn’t commonly faced by trans folk. Or even that there aren’t LGB people who want to exclude the T [though their numbers are decreasing rapidly, it seems to me].)
See, look, if you have a thread like “Who is hotter, MaryAnn or Ginger?” that is just a fun thread, since it is about celebrities, part of their job is trying to be attractive or sexy. So, it is just admiring how well they play their part. Of course, you cant get too gross.
But if someone posts elsewhere “Yeah, that …(fill in name of attractive person in the news ) makes me all hot and bothered”- then that is being a sexist pig.
It is perfectly OK to say a celebrity is sexy- since that is part of their resume in many cases.
So what could be sexism and misogyny in GD can be OK in CS, since the venues are different.
Everything in it’s place and a place for everything.
All of these are great threads to still have, yes. But this one :
would need to be heavily modded to direct it away from the “pervert in the women’s toilet” wildly exaggerated boogeyman-type clusterfuck that the Rowling thread became.
I don’t agree that “Who is hotter” threads should be acceptable any more, but I realise I’m in a minority there and don’t fight the tide.
But then, if in that case it’s commonly considered that they aren’t sexism, then sexism isn’t given a pass in the Cafe. But I do understand what you were saying better now.
I want to reiterate that I’m in favour of banning misgendering of posters and having at least a strong presumption against misgendering anyone else.
I’m opposed to a ban on linking to resources that ‘misgender’, because that would prevent some evidence being seen, and some people’s stories can’t be told. Would that be covered in the ban? I realise this could be abused, but it’s possible to moderate linking things not germane to the topic and just intended to insult, while not banning important information because of the way it’s presented.
If you think this should be against the rules then what kind of discussion do you intend to allow?
Those are small groups. The big group is people who don’t know or care very much about the topic, want to be polite but are still operating based on old fashioned common sense.
I think it’s not a question of “could be abused”, as you put it, but “will be abused”. Why leave that doorway open?
What “important information” would only be contained in a source that misgenders, that isn’t also available elsewhere? Certainly neither any scientific nor any newsworthy information.
@What_Exit, can I/should I link to examples? I don’t want to derail the thread. Or can we assume the mods would use their judgement on whether a link is relevant or not?
Trying to find out why things are changing so fast?
This isn’t my argument though. I think we should allow respectful debate because it’s the right thing to do. There is no reason to allow harassment or intentional rudeness, but debate is how we discover the truth and better inform ourselves and others. The ‘were things better in the past’ thread showed that there are misconceptions even among well educated Dopers.
I know the JKR thread was not respectful, but I think the moderators should be trying to encourage better debate, not ending it entirely.
Are ignorance and full agreement the only choices available to people of good conscience, i.e. those who do not intentionally mis-gender or discriminate but have “educated themselves” and found genuine concerns around some elements of public or health policy related to trans issues?