First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next  Last
Target had transgender buttons, but these hashtags are funny lol
6895 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Temple of Yaoiism
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/16/17

dulun18 wrote:


redokami wrote:


dulun18 wrote:

my pronoun will be "your honor" similar to this guy i guess



well shit
can I change mine to mistress or master then?


just go down the list of pronouns


i went to the fair recently.. which reminded me


the stores should use these toilets instead-- this is the best example of gender neutral toilet around

each person will have their own little box.. so you don't have to worry about some guy in the women bathroom and vice versa




Oh god those things are disgusting, I've only used those a few times in my life and I tend to avoid them as much as possible.

runec 
39578 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/16/17

karatecowboy wrote:
And if wanting to have nothing to do with aberrosexual marriage makes you happy then, well, too bad. We're going to force you to bake perverted cakes and hold unholy mockeries of matrimony. Cuz muh equality.


Psst, marriage being "holy" and "sacred" are relatively new concepts. Hell, even "love" is a relatively new concept to marriage. Christianity likewise does not have a monopoly on marriage. The idea exists in basically every culture. So don't give us this appeal to tradition bullshit.

Because "traditional" Christian marriage means your wife is a sex slave and she has to sleep outside when she's menstruating. Prior to that, traditional traditional Christian marriage was pretty much a private affair and wasn't any of the clergy, church's or anyone except the couple in question's business.

If you want to appeal to tradition, you have to take all of it, you don't get to pick and choose based on what makes you feel personally squicky.





20760 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / Auburn, Washington
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/16/17

Ejanss wrote:

Because saying all those nouns over and over can really wear you down:


That's a valid answer: stop using pronouns at all. Call everyone by name, all the time, and insistently refer to yourself in the third person. Then pretend you don't know what people mean whenever they use pronouns.

"Cheryl, Alex would like you to tell Bob that Bob's manager Shirley is waiting in Shirley's office to talk to Bob."

"Is he at his desk?"

"Alex or Bob?"
26475 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / In Jail, On Death...
Online
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/16/17
Pronouns are a bit of a mystery to me. For example, if a person named Cheryl wants to be called Cheryl, and I call her by her last name, I think it is rude. Another example is if I call someone midget or negro, much to their chagrin. To a point, I think what we call people does not fall entirely on the person making it, morally anyway.

If someone wants another to refer to them as "Master" or "Big Brother", then I can see why forcing others to refer to said title as making them feel uncomfortable.

I think ideally, we should compromise. I mean, there has to be one name, pronoun, or other both parties should be okay with. Just as one is not entitled to being called one thing at the behest of another, nor is one possess the moral right to call a person any name they want to.

20760 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / Auburn, Washington
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Pronouns are a bit of a mystery to me.



Well, the purpose of pronouns is to serve as a convenient shorthand.

Which means, first, they should be something you can easily recall so when you want to refer to Cheryl you can produce an appropriate pronoun without much mental difficulty.

Second, they should be something that can be easily recognised by whomever might hear it, so when you call Cheryl "her" the person you're talking to understands that you mean Cheryl. This isn't just about the propriety of the pronoun, but the context of the conversation: "Hey Bob, go tell her I'm ready to go" implies that Bob should be able to figure out who you mean from previous parts of the conversation. If Bob doesn't already know that Cheryl is waiting for you to be ready, he might be confused.

But finally, they should be something that isn't offensive to the person you're talking about. (Or to, ideally.) "Go tell it I'm ready to go" is pretty much never appropriate, even if literally everyone knows you must mean Cheryl.

Balancing these things is not usually all that hard, but sometimes you get some cockhole who comes along and wants you to do what they tell you even if it's a pain in the arse, so they can feel special and powerful and important. The appropriate pronoun for these people is "arsehole."

"I'm special and identify as a brand new gender that has never been seen before! The appropriate pronoun is..."

"Arsehole. It's arsehole. Hey, Bob, arsehole is lecturing us about tolerance again."

Look! Bob knows exactly who you mean! And it's easy to remember, too! Sorry, arsehole, you've been outvoted two to one.
26475 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / In Jail, On Death...
Online
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17

cdarklock wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Pronouns are a bit of a mystery to me.



Well, the purpose of pronouns is to serve as a convenient shorthand.

Which means, first, they should be something you can easily recall so when you want to refer to Cheryl you can produce an appropriate pronoun without much mental difficulty.

Second, they should be something that can be easily recognised by whomever might hear it, so when you call Cheryl "her" the person you're talking to understands that you mean Cheryl. This isn't just about the propriety of the pronoun, but the context of the conversation: "Hey Bob, go tell her I'm ready to go" implies that Bob should be able to figure out who you mean from previous parts of the conversation. If Bob doesn't already know that Cheryl is waiting for you to be ready, he might be confused.

But finally, they should be something that isn't offensive to the person you're talking about. (Or to, ideally.) "Go tell it I'm ready to go" is pretty much never appropriate, even if literally everyone knows you must mean Cheryl.

Balancing these things is not usually all that hard, but sometimes you get some cockhole who comes along and wants you to do what they tell you even if it's a pain in the arse, so they can feel special and powerful and important. The appropriate pronoun for these people is "arsehole."

"I'm special and identify as a brand new gender that has never been seen before! The appropriate pronoun is..."

"Arsehole. It's arsehole. Hey, Bob, arsehole is lecturing us about tolerance again."

Look! Bob knows exactly who you mean! And it's easy to remember, too! Sorry, arsehole, you've been outvoted two to one.


I think asking is a manner of being polite, but demanding is a move of aggression, so I agree. I know the nature of pronoun usage, but was reminiscing over the moral debate arising out of the rights of the caller and the one being called, which transcends common pronouns to titles of references. I came to the conclusion that a short discussion is correct for disputing of claims when it comes to it. If you feel uncomfortable, I think one in turn should ask if there is another name. Or for short meetings, never bring it up or make a big deal out of it.

I think making people feel unnecessarily uncomfortable in such a way is perhaps wrong in this scenario, as itis to force your world view into another vocabulary and lifestyle, despite my disagreement with said worldview. (I think refusing to use simple terms like "he" or "she", depending on the person, is a bit prickish, as I do not think one should be uncomfortable or even bigoted, but this action requires their consent as well.)

22667 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17

karatecowboy wrote:


Midnightspell wrote:

We have one life so do what makes you happy, if transitioning into another sex makes you happy, do it, if someone of the same sex makes you happy than be with them. Why people are so quick to shove their opinions down each other's throats and are so quick to tear each other down is beyond me. Why people want to be responsible for causing someone's unhappiness is devasting and so cruel


And if wanting to have nothing to do with aberrosexual marriage makes you happy then, well, too bad. We're going to force you to bake perverted cakes and hold unholy mockeries of matrimony. Cuz muh equality.



a business should have a right to turn away a customer but no one has to be rude about it or offended, and also you don't have to get married by a priest, a celebrant will do just fine, who would want to get married by someone that does not want to participate in their special day.
20760 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / Auburn, Washington
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:
I think asking is a manner of being polite, but demanding is a move of aggression, so I agree. I know the nature of pronoun usage, but was reminiscing over the moral debate arising out of the rights of the caller and the one being called


Your rights stop at the other person's.

You have a right to say "I would like to be called this." Nobody can demand that you like being called something else.

But you also have a right to say "I am going to say this." Nobody can demand that you say something else.

So when you look at that other person, they can like what they want and they can say what they want, but they can't tell you what to like or what to say.

When you get to the question of calling people things they don't like, you have every right to do this and they don't have to like it. But that means things. If you call someone names at work, and your boss doesn't like it, you can be fired. Even if your boss doesn't care, the people you're calling names might complain, and firing you might be the best way to stop them complaining. Their friends might complain, and firing you might be the best response. Customers might complain. You have to work close enough to the social boundaries that you can get away with it, and if you fuck up, there will be consequences.

I'm not actually trying to educate you, because you probably already know this stuff. It's to establish consensus. If one of us is out in left field somewhere with something, we kind of have to raise a hand and say "wait, here's a big point of divergence." And if we don't say these things out loud, those points are easy to miss.
11631 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17

Midnightspell wrote:


karatecowboy wrote:


Midnightspell wrote:

We have one life so do what makes you happy, if transitioning into another sex makes you happy, do it, if someone of the same sex makes you happy than be with them. Why people are so quick to shove their opinions down each other's throats and are so quick to tear each other down is beyond me. Why people want to be responsible for causing someone's unhappiness is devasting and so cruel


And if wanting to have nothing to do with aberrosexual marriage makes you happy then, well, too bad. We're going to force you to bake perverted cakes and hold unholy mockeries of matrimony. Cuz muh equality.



a business should have a right to turn away a customer but no one has to be rude about it or offended, and also you don't have to get married by a priest, a celebrant will do just fine, who would want to get married by someone that does not want to participate in their special day.


Hey sorry about that I didn't mean that you agree with what I wrote just that some people seem to see it that way
26475 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / In Jail, On Death...
Online
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17

Midnightspell wrote:


karatecowboy wrote:


Midnightspell wrote:

We have one life so do what makes you happy, if transitioning into another sex makes you happy, do it, if someone of the same sex makes you happy than be with them. Why people are so quick to shove their opinions down each other's throats and are so quick to tear each other down is beyond me. Why people want to be responsible for causing someone's unhappiness is devasting and so cruel


And if wanting to have nothing to do with aberrosexual marriage makes you happy then, well, too bad. We're going to force you to bake perverted cakes and hold unholy mockeries of matrimony. Cuz muh equality.



a business should have a right to turn away a customer but no one has to be rude about it or offended, and also you don't have to get married by a priest, a celebrant will do just fine, who would want to get married by someone that does not want to participate in their special day.


Not the entire legal right, at least in the US, the general debate being business in public being ran as private property or realms of public accommodation. In any case, if I was turned away for a nonsensical reasons, I think I am well within my right to express displeasure, especially if it is a part of a larger franchise that goes beyond the persons running said store. I think a great deal of the actual debate about churches stems from a case about a church refusing for property to be used by a gay wedding, with the caveat being that the building was legally marketed as available to the general public for rent, thus the business tagline, which applies to public bakeries refusing to make cakes for gays.

37852 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17
As a straight male, I kind of want to where a "ask me about my pronoun" pin. Then when people ask, just say "he".
84874 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17
Who calls people by their pronoun to their face anyway? Typically the pronoun is used when they are not in your presence.
20760 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / Auburn, Washington
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:
Not the entire legal right, at least in the US, the general debate being business in public being ran as private property or realms of public accommodation.


Given that I have spent my entire life being told that I am not allowed to skateboard in store parking lots because they are private property, I do not understand how there is a debate.

More importantly, I do not understand how my cis white male privilege never translated into a discussion over whether that was fair. Every time I got taken to the police station and my skateboard mysteriously disappeared, that was close to a hundred bucks out of my pocket. But a gay couple isn't allowed to order their wedding cake from a fundamentalist christian bakery, and it's national fucking news.

What the fuck, guys. I mean you cannot fucking tell me it was too hard to find a gay baker.
26475 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / In Jail, On Death...
Online
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17

cdarklock wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:
Not the entire legal right, at least in the US, the general debate being business in public being ran as private property or realms of public accommodation.


Given that I have spent my entire life being told that I am not allowed to skateboard in store parking lots because they are private property, I do not understand how there is a debate.

More importantly, I do not understand how my cis white male privilege never translated into a discussion over whether that was fair. Every time I got taken to the police station and my skateboard mysteriously disappeared, that was close to a hundred bucks out of my pocket. But a gay couple isn't allowed to order their wedding cake from a fundamentalist christian bakery, and it's national fucking news.

What the fuck, guys. I mean you cannot fucking tell me it was too hard to find a gay baker.


Well, you also cannot bar blacks , and I find the legal and moral inconsistency to be perplexing as well, with the Federal Government using the commerce clause to force desegregation in businesses of public accommodations during the 60s from what I know. Just to be clear, my view on private organizations fall under that of "freedom of association", but I am not sure if that is sensible, as several Country Clubs double as businesses apparently, but then, so do private schools.

My opinion on the subject is not so well thought out, I admit. My reference to the franchise actually took place at the CookOut on Midlothian, where a cashier refused service to Trump Supporters Wear Trump Hats, and I felt one should appeal to the business oriented management, if but for a free burger.



22667 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F
Offline
Posted 5/16/17 , edited 5/17/17


i get what your saying and i would be upset if i got refused service but in the end i wouldn't want to force a company or religion to participate in my partners and my wedding that they clearly don't want to be apart of, this would ruin our day due to their unhappiness, there are plenty of bakeries that will willingly make a cake filled with love and thoughtfulness for our wedding day and plenty of places and celebrants that will be very happy to contribute to our day, in the end i think it's best to leave the bitter to be bitter whilst i have the time of my life at my partners and mine wedding. Same goes for every other shop and business, they can be as bitter and petty as they want, there will be a better place and they lose paying customers
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.