Whatever pronoun they wish
Pestilence, war, famine, and…pronouns.
The University of Toronto has slapped down a professor who openly criticized the use of gender-neutral pronouns and political correctness at the post-secondary institution.
Jordan Peterson, a psychology prof, was sent a letter Tuesday that told him that he must refer to students by whatever pronoun they wish — not just ‘he’ or ‘she’ — and that he must also refrain from making public statements on the topic.
Whatever pronoun they wish? What if every student comes up with a different “pronoun”; how is Peterson supposed to refer to them [or whatever “pronoun” “they” are using instead of “them”…] in that case? Is he expected to memorize every single new pronoun? Will he be punished if he forgets one, or accidentally switches them?
Also…what the hell has happened to the left that pronouns have become the hill it wants to die on? It’s so ludicrous. How often do teachers “refer to” students anyway? Mostly they talk to students, and “you” isn’t gendered; is the occasional use of “her” or “him” really such a throbbingly urgent matter?
Well, in my view, no, it’s not, and the enraged obsession with it looks decidedly infantile, or perhaps just narcissistic. I get that people want to be “validated” but I think that’s mostly just too much to expect of other people in general. We can’t expect other people in general to give enough of a shit about us to “validate” us – they have other things to do. We all have other things to do. It’s not our job to “validate” people. Treat them decently, yes, refrain from harassing or bullying them, yes, but validate them, no. And I think it’s ludicrous that a university is telling a professor what third person pronouns he can use.
The professor published two YouTube videos on the topic of political correctness in response to the university’s plan to conduct anti-racism and anti-bias programs.
His comments sparked tense rallies both for and against his position, which argued against gender-neutral pronouns and in favour of free speech.
The university said the refusal to use gender-neutral pronouns when asked would be discrimination.
Universities should not be telling professors what words they have to say. That’s for the professors to decide. They can tell them some words not to say; nobody wants professors calling students names, and especially not politically fraught names – cunt, nigger, faggot, kike; you know the ones. But what words to say? What pronouns to say? No.
The U of T letter, signed jointly by arts and science dean David Cameron and faculty and academic life vice-provost Sioban Nelson, said the university is committed to free speech but that right has limits.
“Your statements that you will refuse to refer to transgendered persons using gender neutral pronouns if they ask you to do so are contrary to the rights of those persons to equal treatment without discrimination based on their ‘gender identity’ and gender expression,’” the letter says.
Notice the scare quotes on “gender identity.” They’re not sure gender identity is a real thing, but they’re bullying Peterson over it anyway.
I look forward to the time when we’ve moved beyond The Great Pronoun Wars.
so irritating in so many ways. . .
Part of this has to do with the business model of education, the idea of students as customers. Schools are very afraid of offending students these days because of the possibility that students will find another institution more “student friendly”. They are also terrified that a student will sue. I don’t know how often students actually sue; from what I’ve seen, it seems like a small percentage, and the school very frequently wins, but I know my school is always acting paranoid about civil rights complaints, though the only ones I have heard them discuss were easy wins for the school.
Instructor speech is being closely monitored, and we have had instructors receive reprimands for “bad” language – in a college setting.
I was at an event, in a coffee-house, where name tags were being used.
The organizers actually made space on the tags for the wearer’s THIRD PERSON pronoun of choice. How could anyone know how they were being referred to in their absence? Was everyone expected to rush over and check the approved term for person X before they mentioned them to person Y?
I’m a gender abolitionist at heart, but I’m really very conflicted about this story. I know that many of the groups, organizations, and people who have jumped up to defend Prof Peterson’s rights are those with whom I disagree on just about everything.
The thing that bothers me about people declaring “preferred pronouns”, especially for 3rd persons, is that it is based on the assumption that it makes a difference for how people are supposed to interact with one another. That is a problem, unless the situation is about medical treatment or romantic/sexual encounters.
The principled position I would love to see a prof take is to say something like: “Gender is irrelevant to interactions between students and teachers, and among students in this class, therefore, when third-person pronouns are required, I will refer to myself, the TAs, and all the students using the pronouns they/them.” I wonder how that would go over.
Yes. I don’t know what groups, organizations, and people have jumped up to defend Prof Peterson’s rights, but I can easily imagine. I too probably disagree with them on nearly everything. But I find the whole pronoun obsession an embarrassment for the left.
I don’t know. I’ve long had a problem with how standard English usage in the good old days erased women. And still does to an all-too-noticeable extent. It’d be nice if that stopped overnight. If, for instance, I never again had to hear about “man” inventing agriculture when the likeliest early practitioners were women. These things do affect how you view the world.
That said, I’m still a bit boggled that men could insist for decades, centuries, that it was A-OK to subsume half the human race into invisibility. But once trans people become part of the picture the issue becomes important and a matter of respect.
So what was going on before? Confusing.
Oh, well, yes, so have I, and still do. I hate the default male.
But this isn’t the same thing. It’s not “please remember that women are half of all humans,” it’s “please memorize my pronouns no matter how slight is our acquaintance, how seldom we interact, how small a part I play in your life.” It’s “if you fail to memorize the pronouns of me, a stranger, I will punish you in every way I can find for months afterwards.”
The first is general, the second is egomaniacally particular. The first is about women, the second is me me me me ME ME ME ME.
“The first is about women, the second is me me me”
True. There is that.
If I was in his class, I’d probably announce my new pronoun is “Stormaggedon, Lord of All”. Better yet, if I were the professor, who delicious would it be to tell the university that that is my new pronouns, and I must be referred to that way in all university documents.
@7 Unfortunately I have a friend (I guess probably at this point now former friend) who’s started doing that. I really don’t know what to make of it.
The part that still troubles me it that in this situation there seems to be a fair bit of ME ME ME coming from the prof as well. (And this complicates matters because it now becomes an asymmetrical situation.) Educational institutions do have a history of at worst denigrating and at best ignoring diversity. For example, until fairly recently it was not uncommon for teachers (ranging from primary to tertiary) to make fun of a student’s name if it was unusual or difficult to pronounce, sometimes even picking a new name for the teacher to use to refer to the student. And criticism (including deliberate mis-gendering) for overly effeminate boys and excessively masculine girls was common and acceptable. Certainly it is unreasonable to expect a prof (or anyone else for that matter) to keep track of the gender-de-jour for someone who considers themselves “gender-fluid”. But I think there ought to be a middle ground that addresses the issue in terms of fostering an environment of mutual respect.
I agree with that. But, as I mentioned, I’m not convinced it even comes up that much. Normally the professor would use names rather than pronouns. One of the many many ways Trump sounded inappropriate and pugnacious in the debates was his constant “she” and “her” instead of HRC’s name.
Here is a weird thing:
http://thevarsity.ca/2016/10/12/trans-non-binary-individuals-share-experiences-at-rally/
Quote: “Southern, pretending to be transgender, took to the microphone to defend Peterson and was quickly shut down”
Does the notion of “pretending to be transgender” even exist? How? Wouldn’t that require some kind of objective measure beyond the words of the individual?
Lauren Southern is a journalist for the Canadian right-wing libertarian AGW-denying “Rebel Media”, sometimes known as “Fox News North” – therebelmedia.com.
In this case “pretending to be transgender” means that Southern does not in any way personally consider herself to be a transgender person, but was claiming to be trans as a journalistic exercise.
More on this here: http://torontoist.com/2016/10/when-rebel-reporters-fake-being-trans-theyre-not-doing-journalism/
And further to Ophelia’s comment (#12) about Trump’s rude use of “she” in reference to HRC, I recall being taught some rules about how one should not refer to people (generally older female people) in the 3rd person, by means of the reprimand “she is the cat’s mother” – see http://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2011/04/cats-mother.html. The rules did seem silly and arbitrary at the time (for example, I don’t recall any similar treatment of the use of “he”). But in retrospect I can see this as a way for women to stand up in the face of the pervasive sense of being erased as persons, especially after hearing some husbands complain about their wives by saying things like “SHE doesn’t approve of…” (And now being emphasized by someone who apparently takes being rude and crude as a mark of achievement.)
Oh, interesting. I encountered that phrase, though I think it was in reading rather than real life, and I think the reading was fiction for children from an earlier date – 19th century or Edwardian or that sort of time frame – it never occurred to me that it was female-specific. I think it puzzled me a little but I decided it must mean saying “she” (or “he”) over and over without ever saying the name – or, sometimes, saying it out of nowhere without a name.
I can assure you that phrase is alive and well, at least in my part of the world.
No mention whether you should use different pronouns when using this “medication”.
The Cure for Being a Woman
When inclusivity gets out of hand.
Gender is a Construct
It was still very common in my childhood in the UK and I assume it it is still widespread today, I use it anyhow. It means don’t use ‘she’ the way Trump uses it, that’s all. I’ve only ever heard it in the context of a child being disrespectful to its mother. You will always hear it in the form of a question: ‘Who’s she? The cat’s mother?’.