hmmm so I didn’t downvote, but I think there’s a conflation in your comment between making an etiquette mistake (that Throwaway151 gave every signal that they were trying not to do, trying to fix) and some sort of active or positive cis-supremacism. That kind of conflation is probably seen as sloppy reasoning by many, and makes people hesitate before engaging with you because they don’t want to walk on eggshells, or risk being called transphobic or whatever.
I understand that people not trying hard enough at etiquette feels extremely similar to malice (especially in early stages of transition) because a dozen trans people and/or enbies have reported that to me! But generalizing from Throwaway151′s mistakes to the overall tone of the forum still seems like a mistake.
First of all, this perspective is so far off base. Its not an “etiquette” issue, its a literal human rights issue. Its an issue that is, as we speak, actively harming people to the point of self harm, resulting in suicide and to the point of physical violence resulting in death. And the political climate around this issue, around the globe, is so heated and exacerbated by bigots and bigotry that anyone claiming to be an altruist should be extremely cautious around these things. It would be “sloppy reasoning” to think otherwise. The OP has literally ignored my updates about deadnaming, which rationally says the OP doesn’t actually think these things matter.
It’s worth quantifying and doing ITN estimates of bullying, self harm, suicide in the queer community; then thinking about interventions. I forecast that a good treatment of this would be well received on the forum (which isn’t to say it would go uncriticized). I feel vaguely like I’d support someone doing this in some trivial ways; I’d like to upvote a proper treatment of this, for instance.
But I think it’s basically irrelevant to this post or it’s comments.
I’m sorry you feel like a few EAs might not support or respect you because they disagree with you here, but I don’t think there’s evidence that you’re broadly right about correlations between referring to a he/they who changed their name in the middle of a public writing career and tolerance for bigotry.
Yeah, you don’t get to decide for other people what is or is not harmful to them or who they are. Its just not how it works. When you start letting everyone do that for you, let me know and we can have that conversation. Every bigot (and I am not calling you one) rationalizes their bigotry and the harm they cause to others and devalues it all. That process, which you just summarized, btw, is not altruistic in any way shape or form. Again, words cost you nothing and if someone says they are harmful to them, as a supposed altruist, then you update—because it costs you nothing and you’ve reduced harm.
hmmm so I didn’t downvote, but I think there’s a conflation in your comment between making an etiquette mistake (that Throwaway151 gave every signal that they were trying not to do, trying to fix) and some sort of active or positive cis-supremacism. That kind of conflation is probably seen as sloppy reasoning by many, and makes people hesitate before engaging with you because they don’t want to walk on eggshells, or risk being called transphobic or whatever.
I understand that people not trying hard enough at etiquette feels extremely similar to malice (especially in early stages of transition) because a dozen trans people and/or enbies have reported that to me! But generalizing from Throwaway151′s mistakes to the overall tone of the forum still seems like a mistake.
First of all, this perspective is so far off base. Its not an “etiquette” issue, its a literal human rights issue. Its an issue that is, as we speak, actively harming people to the point of self harm, resulting in suicide and to the point of physical violence resulting in death. And the political climate around this issue, around the globe, is so heated and exacerbated by bigots and bigotry that anyone claiming to be an altruist should be extremely cautious around these things. It would be “sloppy reasoning” to think otherwise. The OP has literally ignored my updates about deadnaming, which rationally says the OP doesn’t actually think these things matter.
It’s worth quantifying and doing ITN estimates of bullying, self harm, suicide in the queer community; then thinking about interventions. I forecast that a good treatment of this would be well received on the forum (which isn’t to say it would go uncriticized). I feel vaguely like I’d support someone doing this in some trivial ways; I’d like to upvote a proper treatment of this, for instance.
But I think it’s basically irrelevant to this post or it’s comments.
I’m sorry you feel like a few EAs might not support or respect you because they disagree with you here, but I don’t think there’s evidence that you’re broadly right about correlations between referring to a he/they who changed their name in the middle of a public writing career and tolerance for bigotry.
Yeah, you don’t get to decide for other people what is or is not harmful to them or who they are. Its just not how it works. When you start letting everyone do that for you, let me know and we can have that conversation. Every bigot (and I am not calling you one) rationalizes their bigotry and the harm they cause to others and devalues it all. That process, which you just summarized, btw, is not altruistic in any way shape or form. Again, words cost you nothing and if someone says they are harmful to them, as a supposed altruist, then you update—because it costs you nothing and you’ve reduced harm.