Report: The Pronoun Wars: Professor Goes to Court After Being Punished for Refusing to Refer to Transgender Student By Preferred Pronoun

[ThinkingSapien]

Though English doesn’t really have good singular gender neutral options.

There is a a bit of a history of the word “they” being used that way. Not that everyone will accept the gender neutral option.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

And I would say that you should treat people with the minimum of respect as per their wishes.

Should maybe, but nothing can be compelled, just even logically there is no obligation to call anyone a certain way. Those may be your ideals, but they only apply to you.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

Or we could leave it as is since it is consistent with biological reality and not compel all of human society to cave to the whims of a few mentally ill persons.

We don’t go through this when the guy at work uses the name “Jeffrey” despite having a completely different legal name. No one makes a huge deal about that not matching reality.

I really don’t see the issue. It’s just a pronoun. Much the same way I don’t refer to the Eucharist and blood by the properties they clearly appear to have to me as a non Catholic. It’s courtesy.

 

[Freddy]

It seems odd to me that you and I are having this argument. I know we argue about abortion pretty regularly, but I would think that your interest in choice and individual rights would have us a bit more aligned on this topic.
I wish you a good evening and friendly greetings to your wife.
Take care,
jt

It’s a religious position that doesn’t have any merit as far as I’m concerned (a man is a man etc). There’s simply no secular argument to support it. But I do feel a tad frustrated at times with what I see as somewhat frivolous cases of ‘genderism’ (I’m not even sure what to call it these days). 'Please call me “them” ’ for example.

There are genuine cases and then there are demonstrably ridiculous cases. And incremental steps leading from one to the other. Deciding which deserves your support and which one can dismiss is not any easy choice these days.

You take care too.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

There is a a bit of a history of the word “they” being used that way. Not that everyone will accept the gender neutral option.

English has gone through a lot over centuries. Heck, U.S. English even managed to drop the extra letters in some words. Using “they” makes it yet another word that becomes context sensitive for meaning, something that makes it hard for non naive speakers and computers.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

It’s a religious position that doesn’t have any merit as far as I’m concerned (a man is a man etc). There’s simply no secular argument to support it.

The position is religious, but the professor’s actions (or rather lack of actions) has arguments in defense of it that have merit in the secular worldview.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

It’s a religious position that doesn’t have any merit as far as I’m concerned (a man is a man etc). There’s simply no secular argument to support it.

The position is religious, but the professor’s actions (or rather lack of actions) is defended by secular principles.

Maybe I’m shooting from the hip here, but it seems that one can’t make a secular defence for a specifically religious belief. The basis for the belief, by secular standards, doesn’t stand.

But then, to argue against my own point, he wouldn’t be defending that a man is a man etc (that wouldn’t stand). But he would be arguing that it’s his belief that counts. Which I would generally accept (as @HerCrazierHalf implied earlier).

But then you get into all kinds of knots about blasphemy and cartoons of Allah…

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

but it seems that one can’t make a secular defence for a specifically religious belief. The basis for the belief, by secular standards, doesn’t stand.

Not the belief, but the practice of the belief, particularly when the belief does not involve any harm.

But then you get into all kinds of knots about blasphemy and cartoons of Allah…

I don’t really know what that is supposed to mean and what the relationship with this scenario is.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

But then you get into all kinds of knots about blasphemy and cartoons of Allah…

I don’t really know what that is supposed to mean and what the relationship with this scenario is.

At what point can you reject people’s beliefs as being irrelevant to the actions you take. Like taking the Lord’s name in vain or ridiculing Allah.

I’m generally pretty respecful of beliefs. I’ll uncover my head if I enter a church and remove my shoes if I enter a mosque. But sometimes…

You probably have heard about Uluru (formally known by it’s Anglised name of Ayer’s Rock). Blood big monolith in the middle of Australia. Haven’t been there yet but I’ve seen if from 30,000 feet flying over it on an International flight. Impressive - as the surrounding land is completely flat. It’s the Australilian equivalent of Devils Tower in Wyoming (which I have visited and is equally impressive).

You used to be able to walk to the top. Quite a climb but lots of people did it. Then the local Aborigines wanted to stop that. They said it was a sacred place for them and we should respect it on that basis.

The better angels of my nature said - sure. Why not. You should respect people’s beliefs. No problem. I support their right to ask for it to be off limits. But the other Freddy…his immediate reaction was - c’mon mate. It’s just a bloody big rock. Get real.

And the two of them are still arguing about it.

 

[Servant31]

Does the professor have a right to mental health though?

 

[Freddy]

Does the professor have a right to mental health though?

If you mean that the situation is likely a tribulation and a source of concern for both for student and professor, then I wouldn’t argue the point.

 

[Servant31]

Why not. The point above was made that the student should be called whatever pronoun he/she deems appropriate. If that goes against the professors beliefs, why should the students wishes be respected, while the professors not be? Why does the student supersede the professor?

 

[Freddy]

Why not. The point above was made that the student should be called whatever pronoun he/she deems appropriate. If that goes against the professors beliefs, why should the students wishes be respected, while the professors not be? Why does the student supersede the professor?

I’m not sure that you are reading what I’m writing. I was agreeing with you.

 

[ReaderT]

Notwithstanding that transexualism is not classified as a mental disorder.

In America, it is: “Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5),”

If you don’t know the details of the case and are not qualified to make a psychological determination then that argument is not worth the paper it isn’t written on

Individuals with ambiguous anatomy only make up 0.02% to 0.05% of births. Even then, a simple blood test will confirm XX or XY, so there’s really no ambiguity. To truly have an uncertain situation you’d have to find a person with something like Swyer Syndrome, which is 1 in 80,000 births. The vast majority of transgender cases (over 99%) involve someone with perfectly normal anatomy.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

Diabetes is a disorder of carbohydrate metabolism caused by insufficient activity of the pancreas.

 

[sealabeag]

Intersex and “transgenderism” are two different things. I’m sure in some persons both are present, though. Whether hormonal, mental, sexual or otherwise, both are illnesses.

 

[goout]

goout:

If I called you “Dog Dan” that would be a deception, correct?

Only if you’re doing so to deceive someone. If you’re doing so to respect me, then no.

But, um, you’re not a dog, right?
How could I possibly respect you if I participate in a deception?

 

[Hodos]

It’s courtesy.

It isn’t courteous or loving to perpetuate a lie which one embraces due to mental illness.

I actually care about my neighbor enough to uphold God’s design for humanity, to include the fact that he created us in the image of God, as man and woman. I care enough for people suffering with gender dysphoria to not succumb to their wants but rather uphold the unique gifts and responsibilities given to the person in the article as biological male by God. I care enough about them that I would not pretend that they can be female and enjoy the gifts and responsibilities God has uniquely given to those who were created as females. They will never be able to procreate as a woman or raise children as a woman, and will likely chemically castrate and eventually surgically castrate himself so that he would not be able to enjoy the fullness of either masculinity or femininity. I care enough about transgender people to recognize statistics that demonstrate that the average lifespan of transgender people is half of what it is for normal adults and that rates of suicide and depression are much higher than the average population and are not significantly altered even after gender reassignment.

 

[Hodos]

Notwithstanding that transexualism is not classified as a mental disorder.

It was until about five minutes ago, and the change was due to political reasons not medical reasons. And again, what is out of order is someone compelling other people by force to ignore objective reality because they require you to engage in their fantasy. But by all means, feel free to show me the genetic evidence that the person in the article is a female and I will be happy to change my use of pronouns.

 

[Petra202]

Reminds me of Greek gods and goddesses!