Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bitwize 1906 days ago
It's the bit about singular "they". RMS for some reason doesn't like singular "they", despite the fact that it predates singular "you" in common English usage. Singular "they" also happens to be, by far, the preferred pronoun of nonbinary people. By telling people not to use singular "they", RMS is harming, offending, and driving away nonbinary people from participation in GNU projects.
4 comments

> By telling people not to use singular "they", RMS is harming, offending, and driving away nonbinary people

Are we really at a point where a pronoun is persecuting people...?

This sort of attitude is seriously disrespectful to people who are actually being harmed, offended, and physically chased away from real spaces.

> Are we really at a point where a pronoun is persecuting people...?

If you're intentionally going out of your way to use a pronoun that someone doesn't feel represents them, then yes - that is persecuting them.

If someone asks you to stop, and you keep doing it - that's persecuting them.

> Are we really at a point where a pronoun is persecuting people

Chosing to reject someone's identity is persecuting them, yes. Luckily in England the courts agree and transphobes who refuse to use people's correct pronouns often lose their employment tribunal cases.

“Often” - I’d be curious to see stats. Not that I don’t believe you, I do; I’m just thinking this is such an edge case of an edge case, that the trade-offs involved in accommodating it might not be worth for society at large. After all, the Holy Inquisition made ultracatholics very happy too.
It's actually a hate crime in Canada. You deliberately misgender someone, you can expect to be arrested and maybe spend time in prison.
In the linked guidelines it says the following:

> Honoring people's preferences about gender identity includes not referring to them in ways that conflict with that identity. For instance, not to use pronouns for them that conflict with it.

> There are several ways to avoid that; one way is to use gender-neutral pronouns, since they don't conflict with any possible gender identity.

> One choice is singular use of “they,” “them” and “their.”

> Another choice uses the gender-neutral singular pronouns, “person,” “per” and “pers,” which are used in Information for Maintainers of GNU Software.

> Other gender-neutral pronouns have also been used in English.

I'm genuinely trying to understand this. That does not spell a strong opposition to the supposedly preferred use of "they". But even then, does that really warrant the label "transphobe"?

Is that all it takes to qualify as a transphobe person, despite all the other points?

I feel like you're stuck on the reference to the guidelines. People are combing the guidelines with other things RMS has said about the word "they".

RMS has spent several years railing against "them"/"they", based on his flawed understanding of English.

> Is that all it takes to qualify as a transphobe person, despite all the other points?

If you know my pronouns are he/him but you decide that you can't use those and insist on using they/them instead then yes, you have an irrational dislike of trans people and you're a transphobe, unless you can show that you only use gender neutral pronouns for everyone.

> There are several ways to avoid that; one way is to use gender-neutral pronouns, since they don't conflict with any possible gender identity.

I have explained elsewhere in this thread why it's problematic to call a he/him trans man "they" and never "him"

> That does not spell a strong opposition to the supposedly preferred use of "they".

A previous version of the guidelines banned singular they. It has single been updated, even though Stallman on his personal site continues his disapproval.

> Is that all it takes to qualify as a transphobe person, despite all the other points

Rejecting gender identities is core to being a transphobe.

TBH even as a nonbinary person who goes by singular “they”, even I think that singular-they is ambiguous and I wish that some other non-ambiguous singular-gender-neutral pronoun had taken off instead…

(I’m still going by “they” because a bad standard beats an incompatible hodgepodge of non-standards)

That policy has since been updated to allow singular they, despite Stallman's objection to singular they.

But now the footnote of the policy would allow you to call a trans woman "they" and never "her". That's not something transphobes (or anybody else) would ever do to a cis woman.

FWIW, I tried to get in the habit of using singular-“they” for everyone, even where I know their gender and they are cis, to reduce any subconscious gender bias. This has had two effects: learning that some trans people really don’t like that, and everyone assuming my partner is a dude. (He is, but I’m bi and therefore this is mere coincidence).
Interesting.

I've taken to calling my partner "partner", to be gender neutral. But in the short term, people probably incorrectly infer I use the term because I am gay. Or, if they're presumptive but less presumptive, gay or bi.

Has he objected? If he is voicing his opinion on his blog, but the policy for GNU (which he runs) is otherwise progressive, then it feels like he is separating his personal opinions from how he operates a professional venue.