[2pEXgD0fZ5cF]

Then what about the following part from the guidelines:

> 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.

[orra]

The guideline argues "they" is gender neutral, so it does not conflict with anybody's gender identity. This misses the point.

"they" is indeed gender neutral. But when we talk about specific individuals, we almost always use gendered pronouns.

Hence, as I said, persistently using "they" for a binary trans person is a veiled insult. Again, it's like saying 'You're not a real man, but I am not allowed to call you she, so I will call you they'.

[jhugo]

Knowing very little about this issue, this seems like a minefield. I have met many people whose native language doesn't have gendered pronouns, who make mistakes constantly when trying to use them in English and eventually learn to use "they" consistently to avoid getting it wrong. According to this standard, they would be being disrespectful whenever they meet someone with a strong preference about their pronoun, even if they had no knowledge of the preference.

[orra]

> According to this standard, they would be being disrespectful whenever they meet someone with a strong preference about their pronoun, even if they had no knowledge of the preference.

No, the point is to use somebody's preferred pronouns once you know them.

My complaint is the GNU guidelines explicitly allow you to not correctly pronoun/gender somebody, once you know their gender identity.

Re non-native speakers, etc, all I am criticising is transphobic intent. People are, of course, allowed to slip up. Hence my use of the word "persistent" in some of my posts: I mean persistent and deliberate.

[jhugo]

I think we agree - but I do notice that there often seems to be a lot of "assumption of intent". (The below is general in nature and not related to the article from which this thread grew.)

I've had >30 years of conditioning to select the pronoun according to the physical appearance of the person I'm referring to. Until last year, the concept of a person stating a preference of pronoun and expecting me to follow that preference had never crossed my mind. I simply had never been exposed to the concept. I make no judgement about whether that is the "right" way; I merely assert that this is the way I have learned. Since I was exposed to the concept, I have tried to understand it better and do my best to use the pronouns a person wants me to use, though I am by no means perfect at this.

A person whose native language does not have gendered pronouns has potentially spent their entire life using neutral pronouns without consideration to the apparent gender of the person they are referring to, and the concept of that person having a preference of pronoun is likely completely foreign to them, too.

Given that, it seems reasonable that a sudden shift in societal expectations of people, namely that they should learn the pronouns of others and correctly and consistently use them, should be coupled with a recognition that people are likely to make many mistakes whilst adjusting to this shift, and therefore good faith should be assumed unless there are indications to suggest otherwise.

[pseudalopex]

A person who struggles with gendered pronouns because their native language doesn't have them would struggle with them when talking about cis people too.

[jhugo]

Yes, they do!

[buisi]

Using "she" and "he" would be hurtful in reference to a non-binary individual. Non-binary are more common than you think.

"they" is useful when you don't know someone's pronouns, and it's better to form a habit of using "they" for everyone (not just non-trans imo), than to accidentally use the wrong gendered pronoun, which may trigger their dysphoria more strongly.

I'm not getting the notion from this policy that it is intended to get individuals to deliberately use the wrong pronoun, because they're uncomfortable with using the correct pronoun for them. But, if you think it is ambiguous, then it could certainly be reworded.