scotroutes – Member
Screw that! I can barely remember folks names…

So true scotroofs

The Glasgow University union had it’s lower level area refurbished last year and had a gender neutral toilet put in. I’t a single use toilet and I don’t really see the point in it other than it saves you walking further down the corridor to the male/female bogs. The male toilet down there isn’t particularly nice to use though. There is no UK law that stops a woman using a male toilet or vice versa.

5 gender symbols? Can someone please explain to me which each represents and where the other 45 or so are?

Wouldn’t it have been simpler just to have a sign with the single word Toilet?

No idea Scotroutes and I thought I was clued up on this sort of thing

I think those symbols are a bit disrespectful actually, two of them appear to be ‘slag’ and ‘prancing fairy’

I was eating in a hotel last week, when there were several office Xmas parties going on. Glad to report that this gender neutral toilet stuff is really catching on. Several couples even went into the Ladies together rather than the stereotype of only ladies going for a wee together. They did seem to take rather a long time over it though?

sweepy – Member

I think those symbols are a bit disrespectful actually, two of them appear to be ‘slag’ and ‘prancing fairy’

its why I used it lol

Good to see the GUU has a toilet especially provided for men, women, Theresa May, RuPaul and Fred Astaire.

@northwind

Your “Am I allowed not to care” line was a response to me saying that we should use the term the individual would like us to use. So no, not clear at all, it looked and still looks like you were saying you don’t care what people prefer to be called.

For clarity, it’s true, I don’t care and you can’t make me 🙂

I have the right not to care what someones gender is (i.e. I treat everyone equally regardless of their gender, colour, racial origin or the relative length of their fingers and toes etc.).

On the same basis I should also have the right to not care what they want to be called (with the exception of their name), if that designation is specifically designed to draw attention to attributes I am otherwise free to ignore.

A single pronoun (which is what I’m arguing for) gives everyone their undisputed right to their gender (of whatever degree, type, permanence/impermanence, biological, material or imaginary), and me the right to verbally treat them in the same way as any other human being.

I don’t see that as a problem?

Do you?

For clarity, I obviously know that that situation (single pronoun) doesn’t exist at the moment, but its the best solution, and going from 2 to 1 is not going to be helped by a detours to 70 or 100.

No, you’re right, we can’t make you. We will judge you, though.

🙄

Rachel

Carry on.
So whats wrong with equality exactly?

allthegear – Member

No, you’re right, we can’t make you. We will judge you, though

How do you judge someone that is unbiased towards people? I don’t care what sex or colour you are either. I do think the use of a single pronoun is pretty stupid and taking the whole PC thing too far. If you find he or she offensive you have mental problems.

All this talk of single use toilets is wasteful. Can they not be cleaned between uses?

poah,
I’m arguing _for_ the use a single pronoun to avoid confusion and offense, not for using current ones to offend people.
So thanks but no thanks.

allthegear – Member

No, you’re right, we can’t make you. We will judge you, though.
🙄
Rachel

Evidently.

College Professor on Social Justice Left: ‘I am a Gay Mixed-Race Woman. I Am Intimidated By These Students’

**** this cis white bitch.” That’s the message, you will recall, that Reed College students placed at the podium where Boys Don’t Cry director Kimberly Peirce was speaking. Peirce is a queer, genderfluid woman—her movie, which debuted in 1999, is about the murder of Brandon Teena, a young transgender man.

eat_the_pudding
poah,
I’m arguing _for_ the use a single pronoun to avoid confusion and offense, not for using current ones to offend people.
So thanks but no thanks.

Until human beings stop being sexually dimorphic a single pronoun will only add confusion and offense.

@jimjam

Until human beings stop being sexually dimorphic a single pronoun will only add confusion and offense.

I didn’t say that thin skinned semi-professional offense takers wouldn’t be offended (In the same way that they probably are by “other people generally being different from me”), just that it was the best simplest solution.

Certainly better than identity politics bingo.

Did you get offended by the use of the word “you” at the beginning of this sentence?
It is /\ there if you missed it.

It was gender neutral ‘you’ know.

Did it feel bad?

EDIT: Sorry if ‘you’ were offended. I’ll try to find a little willy drawing to put in the middle of the ‘o’ to make it more gender specific for ‘you’ if that helps.

eat_the_pudding – Member

poah,
I’m arguing _for_ the use a single pronoun to avoid confusion and offense, not for using current ones to offend people.
So thanks but no thanks.

I’ve never been confused or offended by the use of words he or she.

Looking in at the world of LGBTQZ and student politics is fascinating and a bit scary, because of how angry and certain of their own correctness many of the participants seem to be – and how dismissive and disrespectful they can be to others.

I don’t know if internet discourse has played a role in fermenting this kind of antagonism – but we’ve seen the disrespect people use on this forum when discussing suspension set-ups or tyre widths, so I have my suspicions.

Personally I’m open-minded on the subject of the OP to the extent that I don’t really have a settled opinion, but I’ll call people whatever they want to be called – within reason.

how angry and certain of their own correctness many of the participants seem to be – and how dismissive and disrespectful they can be to others.

It’s the same with any demographic though; be they LGBTetc, Christian, Vegetarian, Feminist, French, Furry, there’s always an extreme vocal minority that give the rest a bad name.

eat_the_pudding

@jimjam

Stop wasting yourself. I am fully in favour of equal rights for gay, bi-sexual or transgender people. The operative word there is equal. I don’t have the right to demand people refer to me by a new pronoun of my choosing, nor should I.

I live next door to a lesbian couple and one of them is very butch. My children (despite my best efforts) always refer to her as “the man”. She just laughs, which is pretty much how things should be.

There will be malicious people in the real world who might deliberately discriminate or belittle by misgendering someone. That’s unfortunate but the way to prevent this and effect cultural change isn’t by throwing up iron clad legal defenses.

Most of the stuff on here is banter 😀 You forget though, that mass movements are all essentially religious but although they may not believe in god – all of them believe in the devil. It has been like this since the dawn of time, these people would have been the angry mob during the Salem witch trials, ardent Nazis or southern American communist insurgents. In todays developed world though, they have to find evet more ridiculous causes to support violently.

I should also have the right to not care what they want to be called (with the exception of their name), if that designation is specifically designed to draw attention to attributes I am otherwise free to ignore.

eat_the_pudding: I was referring to your comment above where it seems you are saying you don’t care how somebody ask to be referred to as.

Seriously, if someone goes out of their way to ask to be referred to by particular pronouns, it is probably because it is important to them. The reason why really shouldn’t matter to you – it’s their business. And it is common courtesy, if nothing else, to at least try to comply.

Oh – and for the record – deliberately misgendering someone, especially if they have already requested otherwise, is already covered under the Law and could well see you having a visit from the Police.

Rachel

@jimjam, I was just pointing out that not every word you can use to refer to people in the english language contains gender information. So whats weird about suggesting that a few extra should be neutral?

I disagree that:

Until human beings stop being sexually dimorphic a single pronoun will only add confusion and offense.

The point would be to remove confusion and offense.

Then the only people who get offended would be the ones who think that pronouns are magic and make them special (on both sides).

iously, if someone goes out of their way to ask to be referred to by particular pronouns, it is probably because it is important to them. The reason why really shouldn’t matter to you – it’s their business. And it is common courtesy, if nothing else, to at least try to comply.

Can you refer to me as god then? It’s really important to me as a mentally unstable narcissist.

Tom, if that’s what makes you feel better, why not?

eat_the_pudding

The point would be to remove confusion and offense.

So when I go online to shop for a pair of trousers cut for a male body type should I click the ze link or the ze link?

Then the only people who get offended would be the ones who think that pronouns are magic and make them special (on both sides).

I agree with your sentiment but it swings both ways as you point out. Pronouns are basic and perfunctory but they are necessary because males and females are different and this is true for the absolute vast majority.

@Rachel
If you read what I said, I’m against multiplying pronouns (ad infinitum) and in favour of making them neutral to get around the whole thing.

As I said to poah

I’m arguing _for_ the use a single pronoun to avoid confusion and offense, not for using current ones to offend people.

What pudding said, because our societal obsession with individuality and difference actually becoming more homogenised would amuse me.

I don’t think you have thought that through Tom

eat+the+pudding: I understand that – I don’t have an issue with how you think you would like the English language to develop. I do find it disappointing that you seem to think it okay to simply not accept that other people might want to be called something different and then to go along with something they feel is important to them.

These two are not mutually exclusive – it is possible that you might like something but then also accept others might have a different view. If you are a meat eater, you don’t expect vegetarians to tuck into a meat pie if they come around your house, do you?

Rachel

People are very resistive to change in language. This is a bit like Ms a few years ago. Developed as a way of addressing women that did not indicate marital status ie to replace Miss and Mrs. But no – we now have a choice of Ms Mrs and Miss so Ms becomes shorthand for “feminist”

Samuel’s primary school teacher is called Ms and she is married with kids.

I use Miss usually but I’m a feminist*. Am I doing it wrong???

edit – * not a TERF, obviously

I do find it disappointing that you seem to think it okay to simply not accept that other people might want to be called something different and then to go along with something they feel is important to them.

Depends what they want to be called.

poah – thats the use as intended. I address all women in writing as Ms

Ms was intended to replace both Mrs and Miss but became a 3rd way of addressing women instead

Ms was intended to replace both Mrs and Miss but became a 3rd way of addressing women instead

Do you think anyone really thought it would replace the existing two options though?

🙂 I think thats the lesson from Ms – pointless in trying to create a gender neutral pronoun as all it will do is single folk out not allow them to be addressed without assumptions

I’m not just being argumentative, but I think Ms has been pretty useful – for professional situations as well as giving women the choice of whether they wish to be defined by their marital status or not.

Ms is certainly useful and I’m glad it exists. I presume, though, that if I asked you to use Miss, you wouldn’t insist on continuing to use Ms, though?

Miss Rachel Lawson