When treating people with respect is just too difficult for some.

[canpakes]

The OP text (especially given other texts I have read) was not disrespectful treatment. It was actually fairly warm/kind.

Warm and kind to whom?

In my opinion, (UR4 re: motive; removed. -c-) is an example of it being too difficult for some to treat people with respect - That being the author of the text.

Is this where someone else now posts a link to the definition of irony? : D

[drumdude]

It's extremely easy to treat people with respect if they agree with your personal opinions/ideology - treating people with respect if they don't share your personal opinions/ideology/view/belief is the real measuring stick for respect.

The OP text (especially given other texts I have read) was not disrespectful treatment. It was actually fairly warm/kind.

In my opinion, (UR4 re: motive; removed. -c-) is an example of it being too difficult for some to treat people with respect - That being the author of the text.

Imagine a similar letter telling a black person that they only feel comfortable calling them the N word.

Would you still believe the author of the letter was being warm and kind? The black person should just respect someone else’s different point of view? We just need to be more respectful of someone using the N word?

[ceeboo]

It's extremely easy to treat people with respect if they agree with your personal opinions/ideology - treating people with respect if they don't share your personal opinions/ideology/view/belief is the real measuring stick for respect.

The OP text (especially given other texts I have read) was not disrespectful treatment. It was actually fairly warm/kind.

In my opinion, (UR4 re: motive; removed. -c-) is an example of it being too difficult for some to treat people with respect - That being the author of the text.

Imagine a similar letter telling a black person that they only feel comfortable calling them the N word.

Would you still believe the author of the letter was being warm and kind? The black person should just respect someone else’s different point of view? We just need to be more respectful of someone using the N word?

It would be beyond silly to respond to such a ridiculous post.

[drumdude]

Imagine a similar letter telling a black person that they only feel comfortable calling them the N word.

Would you still believe the author of the letter was being warm and kind? The black person should just respect someone else’s different point of view? We just need to be more respectful of someone using the N word?

It would be beyond silly to respond to such a ridiculous post.

I think that's because it effectively highlights the glaring flaw in your logic. I'm glad you can see that using the N word is wrong, but you need to understand that intentionally misgendering someone is a very similar display of disrespect and likely coming from a similar place of ignorance and hate.

[ceeboo]

It would be beyond silly to respond to such a ridiculous post.

I think that's because it effectively highlights the glaring flaw in your logic.

I am confident that one of us has indeed highlighted a glaring flaw in the logic department. However, I have no confidence that you and I would agree on who that someone is.

[Res Ipsa]

It's extremely easy to treat people with respect if they agree with your personal opinions/ideology - treating people with respect if they don't share your personal opinions/ideology/view/belief is the real measuring stick for respect.

The OP text (especially given other texts I have read) was not disrespectful treatment. It was actually fairly warm/kind.

In my opinion, (UR4 re: motive; removed. -c-) is an example of it being too difficult for some to treat people with respect - That being the author of the text.

Hi Ceebs,

I think you’re way off here. This was a note to the authors niece or nephew. What loving and respectful aunt would insist on calling a niece or nephew by a name that was a complete rejection of who that person is? Calling a person by their preferred name, regardless of their legal name, is a simple matter of courtesy that we extend to each other all the time. Who actually demands to see a friend or family member’s driver’s license and refuses to address them as they have asked to be addressed?

For a transfolk, calling them by their deadname is not only rude, it’s a denial of their identity. In the current environment in which political and religious leaders are denying that trans folk even exist, it’s a slap in the face.

If extending the common courtesy that we commonly extend to strangers is so traumatic, then it’s best that she not interact with her niece/nephew. But to just announce that she refuses to call them by their preferred name and pronouns, blaming emotional stress without even acknowledging the emotional stress on her niece/nephew is both passive aggressive and toxic as hell.

[drumdude]

I think that's because it effectively highlights the glaring flaw in your logic.

I am confident that one of us has indeed highlighted a glaring flaw in the logic department. However, I have no confidence that you and I would agree on who that someone is.

It saddens me to think that 60 years ago if you had applied this same flawed reasoning, you'd be arguing that people who use the N word need to be treated with respect.

The difference is literally just your inability to adapt to changing social niceties.

[Res Ipsa]

I think that's because it effectively highlights the glaring flaw in your logic.

I am confident that one of us has indeed highlighted a glaring flaw in the logic department. However, I have no confidence that you and I would agree on who that someone is.

Are trans folks somehow less deserving of respect than black folks?

[canpakes]

Res - or Ceeboo, since you believe that the opening post’s text author has a point about this - please explain something to me, given that my IQ on any given day is no greater than the day of the month …

I've been struggling with using non-biological pronouns for over a decade. It creates a massive amount of stress and discord within myself and is just not healthy for me. I have come to the conclusion that I will no longer be using non- biological pronouns with anybody.

How does using non-biological pronouns cause any conflict or stress?

There is, as example, no way to speak English without using non-biological pronouns to address two or more people, regardless of sex or gender. The most religiously devoted Americans do this without concern, let alone ‘stress’. What, then, is the religious reason why NBPs could not be extended to single individuals regardless of sex or gender?

[Res Ipsa]

Res - or Ceeboo, since you believe that the opening post’s text author has a point about this - please explain something to me, given that my IQ on any given day is no greater than the day of the month ...

I've been struggling with using non-biological pronouns for over a decade. It creates a massive amount of stress and discord within myself and is just not healthy for me. I have come to the conclusion that I will no longer be using non- biological pronouns with anybody.

How does using non-biological pronouns cause any conflict or stress?

There is, as example, no way to speak English without using non-biological pronouns to address two or more people, regardless of sex or gender. The most religiously devoted Americans do this without concern, let alone ‘stress’. What, then, is the religious reason why NBPs could not be extended to single individuals regardless of sex or gender?

I read it as a clumsy way to say “pronouns that don’t correspond to biological sex.”