How you can better
Last July Stonewall posted some advice on “how you can better support non-binary people.”
Is this a reciprocal type thing? Is there advice to non-binary people on how they can better support binary people?
And what is it to “support” people anyway? When it’s parents of minors, for instance, it means paying their expenses. When it’s non-binary people…?
So let’s see what Stonewall tells us.
There are many ways to be inclusive of everyone, regardless of their gender identity. Our language and the way we speak is often embedded with hidden gendered cues.
So to support non-binary people we should get rid of all those embedded hidden gendered cues, yes? Only, then, won’t trans people wonder what happened to our support of them? If we can’t say “she” any more how can we Validate the Idenniny of our trans laydee friends?
Once we start to notice them, we can move towards using language that’s inclusive for all. Here are 10 tips you can start using right away!
1. Introduce yourself with your name and pronoun. Stating your pronouns reminds people that it might not always be immediately obvious what pronoun someone uses
My pronoun is “I” – and so is everyone else’s. I don’t see where that gets anyone.
3. Instead of addressing groups of people with binary language such as ‘ladies and gentlemen’, try more inclusive alternatives such as ‘folks’, ‘pals’ or ‘everyone’
But see this is what’s worrying: won’t trans women resent this disappearance of “ladies”?
4. Use words that define the relationship instead of the relationship and gender. For example, use ‘parents’, ‘partner’, ‘children’ or ‘siblings’
But what if we’re talking about our brother or sister? We have to call them “my sibling” instead? Also see the part about trans women not wanting to see the lady words disappear.
5. Not everyone is comfortable with gendered titles such as ‘Ms’ or ‘Mr’. Titles are not always necessary, but if they must be used it’s good to provide alternative ones such as ‘Mx’ (pronounced mix or mux)
Not everyone is comfortable being called Mux, either.
6. Use the singular ‘their’ instead of ‘his/her’ in letters and other forms of writing, i.e. ‘when a colleague finishes their work’ as opposed to ‘when a colleague finishes his/her work’
Why would we say his/her? We would say her or else we would say his, because we would know who the colleague is. Are we supposed to say “their” even though we know it’s her or his? Can we refuse?
9. Make sure that your workplace, school and college policies and documents use inclusive language, i.e. using ‘they’ instead of ‘he/she’ and avoiding sentences that imply two genders. Where specifically talking about gender identity, make sure it is inclusive of non-binary gender identities and not just trans men and trans women
In other words make everyone at your workplace, school, and college hate you. I don’t think so. I’m refusing whether you say I can or not.
No guidance for biology teachers? I still teach “male has XY, female has XX”. Then I teach about variations, which are rare but real. I have had trans students in class (and maybe NBs, for all I know), and none of them complained about it. I called them whatever name they told me was their name, and they learned the material I said they needed to learn. Whatever they might believe about two sexes, they kept it to themselves, which is as it should be, because I am teaching science, not religion.
Some people really do speak in the third person, “Elmo-style”. I think I read somewhere that this is symptomatic of certain dissociative disorders.
Often enough this ends up just being a way to erase women.
True story from a few weeks ago. A (woke male) friend was driving me in his car, and he kept referring to the driver of a nearby car (whom we couldn’t see) as “he”. After a few times of this, I said: “Or she.” He self-righteously corrected me: “They.” So there are two genders now: male and nonbinary. Lovely.
@GW #2
Bob Dole: Bob Dole does not have a dissociative disorder!
Right!
Uh oh. Somebody forgot to run this one through the Translator! Or maybe Stonewall is morphing from an “all trans, all the time,” to an NB organization. Now shit’s gonna get real!
I prefer “they” to “he/she” in cases where the sex is unknown or irrelevant, or when making generic statements (though in the latter case I’ll often recast the sentence in the plural). That’s how English has worked for centuries, and it’s gotten along nicely (despite some growling from the self-appointed grammar police). But that’s far different from using “they” for individuals of known sex, and especially using “they” with singular forms of verbs.
Most human languages lack sex-based gender distinctions in their pronouns, and perhaps English will eventually go that way, with no great loss. But for now third person singular pronouns in English force us to distinguish between human*/non-human on one hand, and male/female within the human category. Those distinctions can sometimes be awkward, but for the most part speakers aren’t making them maliciously, and shouldn’t be made to feel awful for doing what the conventions of the language dictate.
*Along with some select animals, for many speakers.
I used to prefer that, but recently I’ve started making a point of saying “he or she”, just because so often “they” is an easy way of avoiding the existence of “she”. I should probably start alternative “he or she” with “she or he”.
Or like a character in one of my books said “he she or it”
‘Is this a reciprocal type thing? Is there advice to non-binary people on how they can better support binary people?’
That reminds me of one of my low-level pet peeves–the woke use of the word ‘ally’. Allies are supposed to be cooperating to further a common cause, or for mutual protection–an attack on one is an attack on all. A can’t be B’s ally unless B is also A’s ally; ‘ally’ as a one-way relationship makes zero sense.
But it sounds nicer than…er…toady.
So far my support has been largely to ignore them. I have ignored people who can claim to be in so many groups, but that’s not why. If I don’t have a reason to engage with them, then why should I try to do more to support them? Do they have special needs? Is there some way I can actually help them as a group? No and no.
“We be nice to them, if they be nice to us”. — Gollum
I don’t do special treatment. People who want special treatment suck ass. I’ll be fair, but I will decide for myself what is fair to who, case by case. I have upped my criteria, so up yours. :P
“Folks” and “pals” are more informal greetings. I wouldn’t use them in a business setting. And aren’t “pals” friends or people you hang out with?
Re #8
I’ve started doing pretty much the same thing for the same reason. I have also been using “default female” wording don’t if the time instead of “default male”, partly to avoid “he or she is driving his or her car to his or her house”, and to avoid “singular they”.
Ophelia: Maybe the term we should be using is “Familiar” (Sorry, I find the series What We Do in the Dark, which is an odd combination of modern (non sexy) vampire fiction and The Office) very funny!
On a related note, the current Jesus and Mo should inspire some screeching, no? That last panel is hilarious!
As Author said – Mind. Blown.
Karen the chemist, #13: when I was at school, we would refer to those who toadied up to teachers as ‘teachers’ pals’. Pals was our acronym for ‘personal arse-lickers’.
Of course, I wouldn’t for one second dream of suggesting the same might apply to the allies of the transenbiequeerplusetc.
iknklast
Nope, not even on request. I’ve asked several times and received crickets in reply every time. And they have the nerve to talk about being “erased” by people refusing to play along with their delusions…
I like to believe they know that would be a fight they simply can’t win, and selfish me holds out hope that scientists and the ivory tower of scientific academia at least will be spared their nonsense. But I also didn’t believe their nonsense would permeate upper-level sports and women’s safe spaces as far as they have, so I’m steeling myself for the possibility of ending up in the line of fire …likely literally, given their propensity for literal physical violence.
Strange times.
I prefer the alternative form from my childhood:
ibbica, it’s already penetrated into science academia – see Pharyngula. That a trained scientist could come up with the nonsense PZ has spewed over the past few years is…astonishing. Horrifying.
Banichi, there is also the old “Ladies and Germs”.
Acolyte of Sagan:
When I was in school, we called them “teachers’ pets”. ;-)
guest:
Indeed. Perhaps only-a-little related, but a few years ago when I used to give lectures about privacy and stuff, I sometimes put up only one slide, which read something like:
Are you coordinating with the police?
Are you cooperating with the police?
Are you collaborating with the police?
Are you colluding with the police?
The point was to talk about how the nature of relationships, particularly when there’s a huge differential in authority or power, changes what is (or ought to be) disclosed, how that information is likely to be framed, considered and used, the implications of all of this and so on. The “police” part was there to sound scary and I would show how it generalises. The punchline was that we should always keep asking ourselves what the (often changing) nature of a relationship is because the business model of social media platforms (for example) is explicitly to fool us about exactly that.
You raise a similar issue with allyship. As good trans allies(TM) are we coordinating? Cooperating? Collaborating? Colluding? Something that doesn’t even begin with C?
Please let us know when you finish your book because I really want to read it.