Trans etiquette: how bad is this?

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@ZPG_Zealot

It’s “Orwellian” to ask someone to deny their previous history with someone.

Not revealing does not equal denying.

[ZPG_Zealot]

@puzzlegal

Who said anything about denying the past? We were talking about bringing up awkward bits of the past out of the blue, for no particular reason.

If you see a woman wearing an ugly dress, do you volunteer, “wow, you are wearing an ugly dress”? Or do you keep your mouth shut, or comment on the weather? Is that an Orwellian denial of the truth?

Most of our past interactions are not highly gender-bound. (well, maybe yours are moreso than some of the rest of us.) I have no trouble talking honestly about my interactions with Joe back when he was called Jane, without talking about his gender switch. In fact, I’ve more often had the opposite problem – where I am telling a mutual acquaintance something about Joe, and the MA looks at me puzzled, and asks if they know Joe, and I have to backtrack, and say, “oh, yeah, you know him, but he was called Jane last time you saw him. He’s Joe now.” Note that these are people Joe is friendly with and will likely see in the not-so-distant-future, so I’m not outing anything they aren’t going to learn in due time.

Awkward bits of the past come up out of the blue for no particular reason all the time in casual conversation. It happens ignore it and move on or if necessary explain the awkwardness and move on.

[ZPG_Zealot]

@IvoryTowerDenizen

Not revealing does not equal denying.

It is ridiculous, rude and invasive someone to expect everyone around them to police their speech 24/7 because actual facts about a person’s past make them uncomfortable. If Jane wanted to be in an environment in which no one ever referred to the time when she was known as John, she should have re-located and severed all ties with people who knew her as John. She choose not to do this which means she has to live with the possibility that sometime someone might inadvertently refer to the time when she was John. Hell, I don’t like being related to my mother (or my father to a lesser extent sometimes) or my previous legal relationships with some of my ex-husbands. However, I don’t require my friends and acquaintances pretend those people don’t exist or had no connection to me in the past.

[Spice_Weasel]

@Una_Persson

Sometimes the SDMB feels like a Rick & Morty episode, and I’m Morty. This is one of those times.

@Little_Nemo

I didn’t want to start a great debate on the meaning of violence or ask general questions about the legal status of birth certificates or pit anybody. I was just looking for some humble opinions on a social situation.

Apologies for the hijack.

Poor Morty.

[The_King_of_Soup]

@ZPG_Zealot

It’s “Orwellian” to ask someone to deny their previous history with someone. The nature of casual conversation is one in which plenty of irrelevant, sometimes personal information will spill out as people talk. Hint: that’s why it’s called casual. And how much editing I or any other person would do will depend on many factors.

Once more, that is not what “Orwellian” means. Using that word just makes the demands of decency and civility seem more oppressive than they really are. For that matter, that is not what “casual” means: it’s not a synonym for “careless.” And we all have a duty to take care not to cause undue harm to others – when driving, at work, at play, and in casual conversation. Let one of the factors we use to decide how much discretion we owe another be: let’s not be assholes. If we can manage that, we won’t need any others.

[Drunky_Smurf]

@Broomstick

Speaking as a cisgender heterosexual who upon marriage did not adhere strictly to the traditional name change… that “regular societal expectation” is far from universal and over the past 30 years I’ve been subjected to people correcting my name to what THEY think is proper off and on for the past several decades.

This sounds terrible. I’m sorry you had to go through such ugliness.

[control-z]

I would definitely say that referring to Jane as John was insensitive to Jane, even if it was 100% factually correct.

Just like the families of people with terminal diseases suffer, the friends and family of transgender people have their trials and tribulations too. They had to let go of John and transition to Jane. The friends and family no doubt wonder if it’s just a phase, if this is the best thing for the person, etc. I have a friend with a daughter transitioning to a son and it while she has been as supportive as possible, giving up her daughter has been very hard on her.

[Little_Nemo]

@ZPG_Zealot

It’s “Orwellian” to ask someone to deny their previous history with someone. The nature of casual conversation is one in which plenty of irrelevant, sometimes personal information will spill out as people talk. Hint: that’s why it’s called casual. And how much editing I or any other person would do will depend on many factors.

@ZPG_Zealot

Awkward bits of the past come up out of the blue for no particular reason all the time in casual conversation. It happens ignore it and move on or if necessary explain the awkwardness and move on.

@ZPG_Zealot

It is ridiculous, rude and invasive someone to expect everyone around them to police their speech 24/7 because actual facts about a person’s past make them uncomfortable. If Jane wanted to be in an environment in which no one ever referred to the time when she was known as John, she should have re-located and severed all ties with people who knew her as John. She choose not to do this which means she has to live with the possibility that sometime someone might inadvertently refer to the time when she was John. Hell, I don’t like being related to my mother (or my father to a lesser extent sometimes) or my previous legal relationships with some of my ex-husbands. However, I don’t require my friends and acquaintances pretend those people don’t exist or had no connection to me in the past.

There’s the issue of good manners. Everyone should try to avoid saying or doing things that will upset other people needlessly.

It’s true that sometimes a person needs to hear something upsetting. And sometimes you might want to intentionally upset somebody. But it’s foolish to do it for no reason. And if you do it on a regular basis, you’ll find that people avoid being around you.

[Telemark]

@Little_Nemo

Everyone should try to avoid saying or doing things that will upset other people needlessly.

“A gentleman is one who never hurts anyone’s feelings unintentionally.”

– Oscar Wilde

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@ZPG_Zealot

It is ridiculous, rude and invasive someone to expect everyone around them to police their speech 24/7 because actual facts about a person’s past make them uncomfortable. If Jane wanted to be in an environment in which no one ever referred to the time when she was known as John, she should have re-located and severed all ties with people who knew her as John. She choose not to do this which means she has to live with the possibility that sometime someone might inadvertently refer to the time when she was John. Hell, I don’t like being related to my mother (or my father to a lesser extent sometimes) or my previous legal relationships with some of my ex-husbands. However, I don’t require my friends and acquaintances pretend those people don’t exist or had no connection to me in the past.

That’s quite the strawman you’ve erected.

[Una_Persson]

@ZPG_Zealot

It’s “Orwellian” to ask someone to deny their previous history with someone. The nature of casual conversation is one in which plenty of irrelevant, sometimes personal information will spill out as people talk. Hint: that’s why it’s called casual. And how much editing I or any other person would do will depend on many factors.

Bye.

[ZPG_Zealot]

@Little_Nemo

There’s the issue of good manners. Everyone should try to avoid saying or doing things that will upset other people needlessly.

Accept it doesn’t sound like saying or doing anything to upset was the intention of the person who made the original “I knew Jane, back when she was John” remark. It would be an incredibly common remark in regards to a trans person among my liberal academic friends (where trans is the new cool) and be considered a mark of tolerance and acceptance.

[raventhief]

@ZPG_Zealot

It is ridiculous, rude and invasive someone to expect everyone around them to police their speech 24/7 because actual facts about a person’s past make them uncomfortable. If Jane wanted to be in an environment in which no one ever referred to the time when she was known as John, she should have re-located and severed all ties with people who knew her as John. She choose not to do this which means she has to live with the possibility that sometime someone might inadvertently refer to the time when she was John. Hell, I don’t like being related to my mother (or my father to a lesser extent sometimes) or my previous legal relationships with some of my ex-husbands. However, I don’t require my friends and acquaintances pretend those people don’t exist or had no connection to me in the past.

It’s rude… to expect other people to not be rude?
Ok then.

[Crazy_Canuck]

@ZPG_Zealot

It is ridiculous, rude and invasive someone to expect everyone around them to police their speech 24/7 because actual facts about a person’s past make them uncomfortable.

Make them uncomfortable? Is that what you think the worst case scenario is for a trans person who is outed? If it was, I might agree with you, but it isn’t. Those “actual facts” ** can get them beaten, raped and killed.** The violence against transgendered people is a real issue, and calling it “making them uncomfortable” is an insult to them.

Let me try a different approach. You are Roma, correct? Back during WW2, would it be “ridiculous, rude and invasive” for me not tell the nazis who or where the Roma were? After all, that group being Roma and their locations are “actual facts”. Or is it possible that my words could cause harm to the Roma, and I should keep my mouth shut?

[Little_Nemo]

@ZPG_Zealot

Accept it doesn’t sound like saying or doing anything to upset was the intention of the person who made the original “I knew Jane, back when she was John” remark. It would be an incredibly common remark in regards to a trans person among my liberal academic friends (where trans is the new cool) and be considered a mark of tolerance and acceptance.

If you pick your nose while you’re engaged in a conversation with somebody, it might not be your intention to be gross. But the person you’re talking is still going to find your behavior to be gross.

The fact that you and your friends think that saying things like this is a mark of tolerance and acceptance doesn’t mean that it is a mark of tolerance and acceptance. It could just be that you and your friends don’t realize how clueless you sound when you say it.

[Telemark]

@ZPG_Zealot

It would be an incredibly common remark in regards to a trans person among my liberal academic friends (where trans is the new cool) and be considered a mark of tolerance and acceptance.

Yes, but you also claim that in your social group offering an unwanted handshake is akin to rape, and adoption doesn’t create a family bond, so I don’t think we should follow your guidance on social norms.

[Broomstick]

@ZPG_Zealot

Awkward bits of the past come up out of the blue for no particular reason all the time in casual conversation. It happens ignore it and move on or if necessary explain the awkwardness and move on.

Really? You can’t stop yourself from revealing personal information about others? You just involuntarily burp it up?

Well, thanks for the warning - I know never to confide in you,

[Broomstick]

@Broomstick

Speaking as a cisgender heterosexual who upon marriage did not adhere strictly to the traditional name change… that “regular societal expectation” is far from universal and over the past 30 years I’ve been subjected to people correcting my name to what THEY think is proper off and on for the past several decades.

@Drunky_Smurf

This sounds terrible. I’m sorry you had to go through such ugliness.

Thanks for the sympathies, but don’t get the idea my experience was unusual - it’s downright *common *for anyone who doesn’t conform to extremely old-fashioned ideas about women, marriage, and names,

[Folacin]

@puzzlegal

Of course, people are carelessly rude all the time. And when people are carelessly rude without intending to offend, we usually just ignore it, or quietly take them aside and tell them they were rude so they can to better next time. But in this situation, a big question is whether this was also harmful.

Or rude without knowing. As an oldish, cisgender male, it wouldn’t have occurred to me that transitioning is something that someone would (to use an inappropriate word) ‘hide’, or that the statement “I knew Joan back when she was John” was even potentially rude/dangerous.

Of course, that is because I never really thought about the implications - which is embarrassing for a pretty liberal guy. I guess at some level, as a pretty much live and live sort of fellow, I never really consider the dangerous assholes that exist in the world, and what will set them off.

The Dope has fought some ignorance today.

[puzzlegal]

Yes, by “carelessly rude” I was thinking the person probably didn’t realize it was rude. Honestly, it doesn’t sound like there was any ill intention in that interaction. It was still unfortunate.