TromboneChat

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:01 am

Well I'll bring up the Spanish argument. Are people in Spain upset that nouns for inanimate objects are assigned a linguistic gender?

Language is a hill with dying on, and having someone decide that other people are being offensive (when they are just saying "his hair might get caught in the trombone") is an attack on language, and communication. It's Newspeak.

I take very seriously any time someone starts telling people what they can or can't say. Especially if it truly is a reasonable, normal statement.

You're not being forced to do this. Hopefully you're not getting this sentiment from the lobster king Jordan Peterson, it sounds very much in that vein.

It's just a nice thing to do.

You change your speech in uniform, I presume, or when you're in front of a mic, or with your parents... why is this any different?

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:01 am

Burgerbob wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:57 pm

Why does the time matter? Plenty of words have been created and dropped in the last century, and plenty have changed meanings entirely. Why choose this hill to fight on?

Well I'll bring up the Spanish argument. Are people in Spain upset that nouns for inanimate objects are assigned a linguistic gender?

Language is a hill with dying on, and having someone decide that other people are being offensive (when they are just saying "his hair might get caught in the trombone") is an attack on language, and communication. It's Newspeak.

I take very seriously any time someone starts telling people what they can or can't say. Especially if it truly is a reasonable, normal statement.

In fact, it appears they are:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... ttle-spain

You can also see it with the rise of the term Latinx to be a gender-neutral reaction to Latina/Latino.

Whether or you not you agree with it, the answer is yes, Spanish-speakers are dealing with it too. Of course, their language has both syntactic gender and semantic gender to deal with, whereas English only has semantic gender, so it likely gets more complex for them in a way that's difficult for us non-Spanish speakers to understand.

You're in Japan. Haven't you noticed in recent years people saying 彼女ら to refer to a group of women whereas previously the plural for any combination of sexes in a group, including all female, was 彼ら？ We noticed this for the first time on Japanese TV the other day. My wife said she'd never heard it growing up in Japan, and I'd never heard it when I lived there back in the day.

A lot of languages are going through this change, and they all have to deal with it in their way.

Burgerbob wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:05 am You're not being forced to do this. Hopefully you're not getting this sentiment from the lobster king Jordan Peterson, it sounds very much in that vein.

It's just a nice thing to do.

You change your speech in uniform, I presume, or when you're in front of a mic, or with your parents... why is this any different?

I don't think I do, honestly. I use gendered and neutered pronouns as required by English. I say "yes Ma'am" to a female officer. I say "yes sir" to a male officer. If I'm talking about the order that just came from the female general, I say "her orders are". If I'm talking about a group of soldiers moving in the open I say "they are out in the open". If I want you to only arrest the female in a group I say "detain her". Precise, clear language.

This discussion stemmed from someone creating a story, and choosing to gender the person in that story. Someone took offense to that in an unreasonable way. It wasn't her (girltrombonist's) story to rewrite, though.

What change are you even talking about here? I'm not going to start changing all my hypotheticals to gender neutral, when I know exactly the gender of the hypothetical character in my own example as I say it. Why should I accommodate and blur out my message with imprecise pronouns when I might actually mean "I'm picturing a fat, bearded man with a ponytail getting his hair caught in this device as he uses it". It's a precise image. And I might be of the persuasion that no female trombonist would be dumb enough to get her hair caught in the trombone, so I want to make the image extra clear.

"I'm picturing a differently weighted humanoid with facial hair and a ponytail getting their hair caught in this device as they use it" is less precise, for no reason. It's not the story I wanted to tell.

In the same way I wouldn't take offense to a female author defaulting to "she" in hypotheticals. As a female, her experiences will be through a different perspective and she will project her own ego on the world. That's her voice. Taking offense to that would be taking away a very important linguistic feature that allows her to let you know she is picturing herself or someone like her in a hypothetical.

Oof.

I'd just examine why you think this is such a big deal to you.

I think you'd find most of the posters here have gone through the same thing- "why should I have to change??" and come to their own conclusions.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:20 am

Burgerbob wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:05 am You're not being forced to do this. Hopefully you're not getting this sentiment from the lobster king Jordan Peterson, it sounds very much in that vein.

It's just a nice thing to do.

You change your speech in uniform, I presume, or when you're in front of a mic, or with your parents... why is this any different?

I don't think I do, honestly. I use gendered and neutered pronouns as required by English. I say "yes Ma'am" to a female officer. I say "yes sir" to a male officer. If I'm talking about the order that just came from the female general, I say "her orders are". If I'm talking about a group of soldiers moving in the open I say "they are out in the open". If I want you to only arrest the female in a group I say "detain her". Precise, clear language.

This discussion stemmed from someone creating a story, and choosing to gender the person in that story. Someone took offense to that in an unreasonable way. It wasn't her (girltrombonist's) story to rewrite, though.

What change are you even talking about here? I'm not going to start changing all my hypotheticals to gender neutral, when I know exactly the gender of the hypothetical character in my own example as I say it. Why should I accommodate and blur out my message with imprecise pronouns when I might actually mean "I'm picturing a fat, bearded man with a ponytail getting his hair caught in this device as he uses it". It's a precise image. And I might be of the persuasion that no female trombonist would be dumb enough to get her hair caught in the trombone, so I want to make the image extra clear.

"I'm picturing a differently weighted humanoid with facial hair and a ponytail getting their hair caught in this device as they use it" is less precise, for no reason. It's not the story I wanted to tell.

In the same way I wouldn't take offense to a female author defaulting to "she" in hypotheticals. As a female, her experiences will be through a different perspective and she will project her own ego on the world. That's her voice.

Keep editing your post. I enjoy seeing the evolution of this oddly-shaped creature as you modify it.

I'm only adding to it, not taking away. Please let me know what's offensive though. I haven't heard of this new concept

It's been acceptable for a speaker to gender their hypothetical story/examples for the entire history of the English language

Burgerbob wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:30 am Oof.

I'd just examine why you think this is such a big deal to you.

I think you'd find most of the posters here have gone through the same thing- "why should I have to change??" and come to their own conclusions.

I think he's examined pretty well why he thinks it's such a big deal and explained it well. If you don't agree with it, that's one thing, but he appears to have given it some thought.

quiethorn wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:34 am

I think he's examined pretty well why he thinks it's such a big deal and explained it well. If you don't agree with it, that's one thing, but he appears to have given it some thought.

I guess you're right.

Yeah sorry about the edits, I promise I was only fixing spelling or adding extra lines to the end as I thought of them. Very active topic right now

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:34 am I'm only adding to it, not taking away. Please let me know what's offensive though. I haven't heard of this new concept

I didn't say it's offensive. It went from being a fat guy to a "differently weighted humanoid," which is funnier. I said keep going 'cause I wanted to see more of the funny.

I'd be genuinely interested to know what the "oof" was in that post I wrote. I remember the "oof" when the guy was defending racism last year. If something I wrote is the same thing, I gotta know what it is.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:40 am I'd be genuinely interested to know what the "oof" was in that post I wrote. I remember the "oof" when the guy was defending racism last year. If something I wrote is the same thing, I gotta know what it is.

To me, it seems like you're having a real emotional, personal response to this topic. You're coming at it from a place of reason (even if I don't agree with those reasons). But I think you need to examine why you feel the need to do that. Like I said, I've done the same thing.

This happens pretty often. Progressive movement seem like they are attacking something (white culture, men, language, what have you) and it's easy to take that personally. That's been me several times, as a white boy from Wyoming.

My purpose here is always to try and let the other person discover those changes themselves.

I could be reading too much into this and you are just super duper into defending the lexicon, but that's my read.

I love language though. It's powerful. I studied linguistics and Japanese in college. I'm imagining a gender neutral Romeo and Juliet. I don't like it.

To take away the precise image that an author wants to protray, and chip away at something that is not offensive (sorry, "I'm imagining a (guy) with a ponytail getting his hair caught in it" is not offensive) to try and change a language -- that is horrifying to me.

Also the premise - "how dare you not imagine it was a female trombonist" is scary. It really is. If only because there is nothing funny about a girl getting her hair caught in a valve, but something intrinsically hilarious about a hipster dude getting his hair caught in it.

Burgerbob wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:47 am

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:40 am I'd be genuinely interested to know what the "oof" was in that post I wrote. I remember the "oof" when the guy was defending racism last year. If something I wrote is the same thing, I gotta know what it is.

To me, it seems like you're having a real emotional, personal response to this topic. You're coming at it from a place of reason (even if I don't agree with those reasons). But I think you need to examine why you feel the need to do that. Like I said, I've done the same thing.

This happens pretty often. Progressive movement seem like they are attacking something (white culture, men, language, what have you) and it's easy to take that personally. That's been me several times, as a white boy from Wyoming.

My purpose here is always to try and let the other person discover those changes themselves.

I could be reading too much into this and you are just super duper into defending the lexicon, but that's my read.

Yeesh.... don't let the progressives hear you calling yourself a "boy." You're a white man from Wyoming.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:53 am I love language though. It's powerful. I studied linguistics and Japanese in college. I'm imagining a gender neutral Romeo and Juliet. I don't like it.

Well, that's just it... that's not what's happening. This is a typical slippery slope argument. Romeo or Juliet aren't real people that are asking to be called their preferred pronouns.

You're right, language is powerful, and when you use it the way you think is right even though it makes someone else's life worse, that's using that power in perhaps the wrong way.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:43 pm [

If I had a whole month celebrating me and how awesome and different I am, I'd give it up to stop mass shootings, racism, and domestic violence. Because at the end of the day that is way more important than my own ego.

there's a lot in this thread that I'm not going to deal with but this is one I wanna address. has pride been co-oped into a giant party by white gay men and corporations? absolutely. but that's not what pride is about. it's about Stonewall. Queer people, and especially queer Black people were being horribly abusedvin ways that both humiliated and opened them up to extreme violence by outing them by the police in new York and the Stonewall Riot is when they fought back. The first brick was throw by a Black drag queen and it was a huge touch point that started the push for LGBTQ rights. The Blackness and Queerness of those who fought for those rights has been consciously erased by white gay men to create a more "acceptable" gay person to the main stream, there's a ton there to unpack that's kinda out of the scope of this, but suffice to say Pride month came out of celebraating that initial event and, unfortunately, commemorating them as most died young. The average life expectancy for a Black trans person in America is less than 30. You think they wouldn't happily give up Pride to solve the issues that you brought up? They're much much much more likely to be the victims in these cases than the white men debating all this. It's not about the ego of queer people, it's literally about survival and equal rights. And that's been co-oped, which sucks, but don't then throw all these other issues on people who are already getting shit on.

There are bathroom bills and all sorts of other awful and discriminatory laws being passed right now against queer people. My old roommate is trans, people used to follow her home from work most every week, our neighbor would stand outside our door and make violent, vieled threats about her all the time, she was fired from her job for being trans (which is perfectly legal). Pride month doesn't celebrate those struggles or the very very real dangers that exist, so please don't use it as a way to degrade a bunch of people and their "egos" cause most of them would happily trade it to solve those issues. Also like....we don't have to trade solving one issue for another...it's not a zero sum game.

Like all this verbage stuff sounds academic sometimes and it's easy for a bunch of men to debate whether or not it's ok and how far back pronouns go in our language, but that's missing the fundamental point. People get actively discriminated against, attacked, r*ped, and murdered everyday for being queer and these things are generally ignored and sometimes even legal. The least, and I mean the very very least, we can do is speak and write in ways that makes space that's a bit more inclusive in an exhausting fucking world rather than adding one more stress and grating experience to the day. It seems small but trust me from personal experience when I saw it makes a huge difference to my feelings of safety (and I exist in the world with a crazy amount of privilege). But like words have a lot of power, so try and consider why they might matter to people who are less safe than oneself and the massive privledge allowed in debating them.


anyway.... that was a lot... I'm going to go back to playing animal crossing with my partner.


also... as a person. who is probably a hipster.... the trombone and hipster connection is hilarious. I don't know why it exists, but that nytimes thing was funny as shit.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:53 am I love language though. It's powerful. I studied linguistics and Japanese in college. I'm imagining a gender neutral Romeo and Juliet. I don't like it.

To take away the precise image that an author wants to protray, and chip away at something that is not offensive (sorry, "I'm imagining a (guy) with a ponytail getting his hair caught in it" is not offensive) to try and change a language -- that is horrifying to me.

Also the premise - "how dare you not imagine it was a female trombonist" is scary. It really is. If only because there is nothing funny about a girl getting her hair caught in a valve, but something intrinsically hilarious about a hipster dude getting his hair caught in it.

Man... with all the mass shootings and racially charged violence, you're worrying about Romex and Juliex?

mbarbier wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:03 am

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:43 pm [

If I had a whole month celebrating me and how awesome and different I am, I'd give it up to stop mass shootings, racism, and domestic violence. Because at the end of the day that is way more important than my own ego.

there's a lot in this thread that I'm not going to deal with but this is one I wanna address. has pride been co-oped into a giant party by white gay men and corporations? absolutely. but that's not what pride is about. it's about Stonewall. Queer people, and especially queer Black people were being horribly abusedvin ways that both humiliated and opened them up to extreme violence by outing them by the police in new York and the Stonewall Riot is when they fought back. The first brick was throw by a Black drag queen and it was a huge touch point that started the push for LGBTQ rights. The Blackness and Queerness of those who fought for those rights has been consciously erased by white gay men to create a more "acceptable" gay person to the main stream, there's a ton there to unpack that's kinda out of the scope of this, but suffice to say Pride month came out of celebraating that initial event and, unfortunately, commemorating them as most died young. The average life expectancy for a Black trans person in America is less than 30. You think they wouldn't happily give up Pride to solve the issues that you brought up? They're much much much more likely to be the victims in these cases than the white men debating all this. It's not about the ego of queer people, it's literally about survival and equal rights. And that's been co-oped, which sucks, but don't then throw all these other issues on people who are already getting shit on.

There are bathroom bills and all sorts of other awful and discriminatory laws being passed right now against queer people. My old roommate is trans, people used to follow her home from work most every week, our neighbor would stand outside our door and make violent, vieled threats about her all the time, she was fired from her job for being trans (which is perfectly legal). Pride month doesn't celebrate those struggles or the very very real dangers that exist, so please don't use it as a way to degrade a bunch of people and their "egos" cause most of them would happily trade it to solve those issues. Also like....we don't have to trade solving one issue for another...it's not a zero sum game.

Like all this verbage stuff sounds academic sometimes and it's easy for a bunch of men to debate whether or not it's ok and how far back pronouns go in our language, but that's missing the fundamental point. People get actively discriminated against, attacked, r*ped, and murdered everyday for being queer and these things are generally ignored and sometimes even legal. The least, and I mean the very very least, we can do is speak and write in ways that makes space that's a bit more inclusive in an exhausting fucking world rather than adding one more stress and grating experience to the day. It seems small but trust me from personal experience when I saw it makes a huge difference to my feelings of safety (and I exist in the world with a crazy amount of privilege). But like words have a lot of power, so try and consider why they might matter to people who are less safe than oneself and the massive privledge allowed in debating them.


anyway.... that was a lot... I'm going to go back to playing animal crossing with my partner.


also... as a person. who is probably a hipster.... the trombone and hipster connection is hilarious. I don't know why it exists, but that nytimes thing was funny as shit.

They did Stonewall on Drunk History.

quiethorn wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:07 am [

They did Stonewall on Drunk History.

it's a really really good place to start learning about Stonewall- thank you so much for including it!

Also the YouTube channel Contrapoints has a lot of great videos about a lot of things being discussed here that are super informative, incredibly well made, and also super fucking funny.

https://youtube.com/c/ContraPoints

mbarbier wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:26 am

quiethorn wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:07 am [

They did Stonewall on Drunk History.

it's a really really good place to start learning about Stonewall- thank you so much for including it!

Also the YouTube channel Contrapoints has a lot of great videos about a lot of things being discussed here that are super informative, incredibly well made, and also super fucking funny.

https://youtube.com/c/ContraPoints

Started watching ContraPoints and they're good so far but sweet Jesus these are long. I don't have time for this in my life.
I gotta go. I'm watching all the Harry Potters tonight. Man that J.K. Rowling is something. Is she on social media? I bet she has some fascinating tidbits about the films that her fans just eat up on Twitter and stuff.

quiethorn wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:40 am
Started watching ContraPoints and they're good so far but sweet Jesus these are long. I don't have time for this in my life.
I gotta go. I'm watching all the Harry Potters tonight. Man that J.K. Rowling is something. Is she on social media? I bet she has some fascinating tidbits about the films that her fans just eat up on Twitter and stuff.

hahah yes, the news especially are getting longer and longer. some of the older ones, like the ones on pronouns and men aren't quite so heavy timewise.

the JK one is... intense. I won't go into the twitter stuff, but she's sadly got some... complicated views on gender (that the contra video is about)

I’m beginning to think I’ll refer to everything as “it” and be done with it. That’s probably offensive, too.

mbarbier wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:03 am

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Fri Jun 04, 2021 11:43 pm [

If I had a whole month celebrating me and how awesome and different I am, I'd give it up to stop mass shootings, racism, and domestic violence. Because at the end of the day that is way more important than my own ego.

You think they wouldn't happily give up Pride to solve the issues that you brought up? They're much much much more likely to be the victims in these cases than the white men debating all this. It's not about the ego of queer people, it's literally about survival and equal rights. And that's been co-oped, which sucks, but don't then throw all these other issues on people who are already getting shit on.

Well we can add those real issues to the pot! None of what you posted in your excellent post that I'm quoting was even remotely similar to the issue brought up in this thread, which is a forum member attacking robcat for not using a gender neutral example in his story, but imagining a male trombonist getting his hair caught in the rotorless valve.

How can you compare the two, is right! Real issues, and non-issues. People getting treated as subhuman and discarded by society and potentially dying early because of it is a real issue. Let's solve that as humanity.

I feel, unequivocally, that it is extremely hostile to take your own ego issues (how dare someone assign a gender to a person in their own made up story when I'm not that gender) and project them on completely harmless statements. It's terrifying if that is acceptable to go unchecked. Imagine if the reverse happened.

Taking offense to something that is truly not offensive is a personal, ego-based, problem. I would never take the same stance on someone else's words or writing, where they choose some other gender in a hypothetical story to express their own thoughts about a subject. That is their voice. If someone took offense to a female writer choosing to use the pronoun "she" in their textbook, that would be sexist. The same must be true for offense taken against a male choosing so to the same. It's how we view our world, and it's interesting, not offensive.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:53 am I love language though. It's powerful.

It is powerful, and that’s why we should choose our words to empower a group (LGBTQ+) that has been the victim of horrendous violence throughout much of history. Yes, some cultures have been more accepting, but for the most part throughout history being LGBTQ+ was something you had to hide or you would be ostracized, beaten, or murdered. It’s still happening today all over the world.

No one is asking you to stop using he/she when that’s the correct pronoun. Just use they when it’s ambiguous. It’s not hard. It’s kind.

Assuming the language is pure and doesn’t contain inherent bias in favor of men is naive and shows privilege. Using they is a small way to start to unravel that.

“We’ve done it this way for hundreds of years” is the same. We did slavery for a long time too. Using that argument is privilege. If you are a straight white male the past was good to you, therefore it seems good to continue it and grant authority to it. If you aren’t a straight white male you had a very different experience.

What’s more important to you: defending linguistic habits steeped in sexism, homophobia, and transphobia, or being inclusive and trying to deal with your own inherent bias?

The language changes constantly. So can you. It IS powerful.

quiethorn wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:08 am

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:01 am

Well I'll bring up the Spanish argument. Are people in Spain upset that nouns for inanimate objects are assigned a linguistic gender?

Language is a hill with dying on, and having someone decide that other people are being offensive (when they are just saying "his hair might get caught in the trombone") is an attack on language, and communication. It's Newspeak.

I take very seriously any time someone starts telling people what they can or can't say. Especially if it truly is a reasonable, normal statement.

You're in Japan. Haven't you noticed in recent years people saying 彼女ら to refer to a group of women whereas previously the plural for any combination of sexes in a group, including all female, was 彼ら？ We noticed this for the first time on Japanese TV the other day. My wife said she'd never heard it growing up in Japan, and I'd never heard it when I lived there back in the day.

I haven't heard 彼女ら but I have heard あの子達　
(あの娘達) used to refer to a group of women, which is borderline as it is. That term not only genders the group but assigns a childlike characteristic to them as well. Sort of like saying "those babies". I must admit as an English speaker, and someone who knows that Japanese prefers to use ungendered pronouns in polite speech (あの方 or あの人 being completely acceptable), あの娘達 is jarring.

彼 is weird because it doesn't really have gender assigned to it, grammatically. It really does mean "that person". Otherwise 彼女 which DOES have a gender would translate as He-She, which it doesn't.

So the shift your describe is Japan actually moving AWAY from a gender neutral term (which defaults to male) to gender specific terms. The opposite of the change you describe.

Kdanielsen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:16 am

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 12:53 am I love language though. It's powerful.

It is powerful, and that’s why we should choose our words to empower a group (LGBTQ+) that has been the victim of horrendous violence throughout much of history. Yes, some cultures have been more accepting, but for the most part throughout history being LGBTQ+ was something you had to hide or you would be ostracized, beaten, or murdered. It’s still happening today all over the world.

No one is asking you to stop using he/she when that’s the correct pronoun. Just use they when it’s ambiguous. It’s not hard. It’s kind.

But they were asking robcat to change his pronoun when it wasn't ambiguous. He had a very vivid image he wanted to express. You can't twist my words away from this really simple point I'm trying to make.

People are taking offense to something that is really not offensive, unless you're not allowed to imagine a scene and describe it using accurate gendered pronouns anymore.

SimmonsTrombone wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:19 am I’m beginning to think I’ll refer to everything as “it” and be done with it. That’s probably offensive, too.

Yes it is. It is for inanimate objects, not people.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:20 am

Kdanielsen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:16 am

It is powerful, and that’s why we should choose our words to empower a group (LGBTQ+) that has been the victim of horrendous violence throughout much of history. Yes, some cultures have been more accepting, but for the most part throughout history being LGBTQ+ was something you had to hide or you would be ostracized, beaten, or murdered. It’s still happening today all over the world.

No one is asking you to stop using he/she when that’s the correct pronoun. Just use they when it’s ambiguous. It’s not hard. It’s kind.

But they were asking robcat to change his pronoun when it wasn't ambiguous. He had a very vivid image he wanted to express. You can't twist my words away from this really simple point I'm trying to make.

People are taking offense to something that is really not offensive, unless you're not allowed to imagine a scene and describe it using accurate gendered pronouns anymore.

Of course he can create that specific imagery. Did he use he on purpose or as a habit? I don’t know. That’s lawyer ball.

It’s a bigger point than that. The real problem is people attacking the use of they as an ambiguous pronoun that can be singular vs. continuing to use the masculine all the time. That’s the problem. That’s the destructive habit. I’m getting sick of this phrase, but why die on this hill? It’s a shitty, oppressive, biased, privileged hill.

Kdanielsen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:38 am

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:20 am

But they were asking robcat to change his pronoun when it wasn't ambiguous. He had a very vivid image he wanted to express. You can't twist my words away from this really simple point I'm trying to make.

People are taking offense to something that is really not offensive, unless you're not allowed to imagine a scene and describe it using accurate gendered pronouns anymore.

Of course he can create that specific imagery. Did he use he on purpose or as a habit? I don’t know. That’s lawyer ball.

Okay, so it is wrong to attack him for it then; the source of this woeful thread. Thanks.

why die on this hill? It’s a shitty, oppressive, biased, privileged hill.

See above. A 100% contradiction. Doctor, my head.

I am for social justice. My own language needs social justice and saving, it seems.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:43 am

Kdanielsen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:38 am

Of course he can create that specific imagery. Did he use he on purpose or as a habit? I don’t know. That’s lawyer ball.

Okay, so it is wrong to attack him for it then; the source of this woeful thread. Thanks.

why die on this hill? It’s a shitty, oppressive, biased, privileged hill.

See above. A 100% contradiction. Doctor, my head.

I am for social justice. My own language needs social justice and saving, it seems.

You’re going to keep hearing this, and hopefully someday it clicks. It’s not newspeak. Good luck.

“Your” language doesn’t need social justice, oppressed people do.

I’m out.

Kdanielsen wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:48 am
You’re going to keep hearing this, and hopefully someday it clicks. It’s not newspeak. Good luck.

“Your” language doesn’t need social justice, oppressed people do.

I’m out.

Literally no one was oppressed by what Robcat wrote, though. Somehow what he wrote was twisted into an attack on people he didn't even mention. At least it should be an attack on hipsters. It's cool to look out into the big picture but I'm trying to keep it very simple and focus on what the original offending post was, and the response.

It's unfair, a poor assessment, egotistical, and shocking. So far I haven't seen a real argument against that, just stories about real social injustice that are completely unrelated to a hypothetical story about a hipster getting his ponytail caught in a trombone.

To pretend this discussion is ONLY about that one original post is preposterous.

Lawyer ball.

I’m done, and i mean it this time.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:03 am [

Well we can add those real issues to the pot! None of what you posted in your excellent post that I'm quoting was even remotely similar to the issue brought up in this thread, which is a forum member attacking robcat for not using a gender neutral example in his story, but imagining a male trombonist getting his hair caught in the rotorless valve.

How can you compare the two, is right! Real issues, and non-issues. People getting treated as subhuman and discarded by society and potentially dying early because of it is a real issue. Let's solve that as humanity.

I feel, unequivocally, that it is extremely hostile to take your own ego issues (how dare someone assign a gender to a person in their own made up story when I'm not that gender) and project them on completely harmless statements. It's terrifying if that is acceptable to go unchecked. Imagine if the reverse happened.

Taking offense to something that is truly not offensive is a personal, ego-based, problem. I would never take the same stance on someone else's words or writing, where they choose some other gender in a hypothetical story to express their own thoughts about a subject. That is their voice. If someone took offense to a female writer choosing to use the pronoun "she" in their textbook, that would be sexist. The same must be true for offense taken against a male choosing so to the same. It's how we view our world, and it's interesting, not offensive.

I think you're kinda of missing small but kind of important part of this though. It's not about that initial post (tbh I didn't read the original thread and don't care about it cause it's not about that thread), it's not about one single use of he vs she or they. It's about the constant, presumptive assumption of a default to he vs the anything else and the way those issues exist on a spectrum. What I mean by that is that that always assumption of he, let's take with trombone for example, does two things. For everyone just subtly reinforces that men play trombone and non men don't, it's really really really far on one end of the spectrum and does, for all intense and purposes, seem harmless. However that small subtle thing exists on the same spectrum as some much much bigger issues with sexism in the brass community. A spectrum that eventually leads to people using their gendered power in a situation like Massimo La Rosa did. I know that that sounds insane and I'm not saying that just using he makes you a racist or anything like that, but when the predominant cultural assumption is that the gender of what you do is different that your own, the constant drip of it overtime becomes two things. 1. it's just exhausting to hear an assumption that this isn't for you in a way that's so small that a thread this big will go just because someone pointed out that is doesn't ALWAYS have to be he, with the only people not being the point being "he's" who have no reason to notice it or ever feel unwelcome. 2. Small things like that and the reactions to them being brought up, overtime, become a tell as to who is safe in the community and who is not inways that white men, who are basically always safe in the community don't notice.

I know it seems like this subtle and nitpicky thing, but that's because it's a subtle and nitpicking thing that doesn't effect you so you have no reason to ever notice or be bothered by it. BUT making that small, yet supportive shift in language when you don't have to makes a huge difference when it comes to, you've deemed it "real" issues. "Real" issues don't exist in a vacuum. They grow ever so slowly out of small issues. Tiny small issues of making people feel unnoticeably unwelcome, overtime, really affect big issues and when big issues happen you start to notice the little ones afterwards cause they tell you who pays attention and who gives a shit. Cause of course you view this as "taking offense to something that is truly not offensive" because if you're a cis male you've literally never been truly unwelcome in a trombone related space and most likely in any other, so you're not in a position to deem something like this offensive. Not cause you don't have the right, but because you have no experience in the matter. It's like telling a Black person what's racist as a white person. I have zero experience being Black, whereas the the Black person. has experienced that racism their entire life, so when they say something it's time to listen, not gatekeep what is or isn't offensive.


If you take the time to make subtle changes when there's no reason for you to, that has a huge effect on how welcome people feel in spaces, but it also says to the people that this effects that you're an engaged human and, if the chips are ever down, you're a safe person to turn to. I've learned from personal issues that I'm not going to get into related to sexual harassment, that you start to notice after.



In a lot of ways the pronoun thing is like the trope of misgendering someone and they "yell" at you for it. It's not cause of the once, it's because of the constant drip of it happening everyday and then getting misgendered by another person who just isn't paying attention because none of it effects them. I know this thread seems out of proportion, but just sit with how it would feel if you weren't a man and literally everything in your job/community is male and just trying to draw attention to it brings up this thread (and the one from the other day) where people are coming out of the woodwork to bring associate you with it's and geldings and sexual predators. It reinforces that subtle message very very clearly because the debate seems comically academic to men because it's like trying to explain water to fish, whereas it's not academic to the people who is very subtly erodes their feeling of being a part of the community (if they were lucky enough to ever feel that way given how much they were told it's a boy instrument when they go started). These things genuinely aren't academic and exist on the same spectrum of a serious forms of discrimination and violence, or "real issues."

If you want a specific, first hand example, I teach a lot of younger kids. Im a privy who keeps their gender to themselves. When parents find out I'm non binary either they're cool about it or the lessons suddenly stop for some "reason". I regularly lose students not cause of behavior but because of words in my email signature/zoom profile. Not defaulting to he all the time normalizing having different pronouns, it makes them less unfamiliar, and it makes that kind of backdoor firing over "words" happen at a lot less.


re the sexism of taking issue with someone using "she" instead of he and all that, that's the same basic category as reverse racism, like he and she and they aren't on equal footing so, while saying it would be sexist would be true in an ideal world, it's not in ours. Only using he in a writing is a presumptive norm of a patriarchal system and so using it reinforces that. Frustratingly, using she or they instead is a radical departure that is taken as a statement rather than just a use of language. They aren't equivalent because there's different weights behind them- language isn't a vacuum. Also, once again, it's not academic. When I wrote my book I just freely switched between he and she and they. No big deal, just a small preference that I was considerate about how I used it to make sure it always read smoothly and didn't effect the readability. I've had dudes write me and be super fucking angry that I brought that "snowflake shit" into a technical book. I know other people who've had that same issue. none of the complaints have come from anyone other than white cis men. it's all an academic language debate until you depart from it and people take e a big issue with you doing you, cause you doing you applies to men and their comfort and stops when it runs into that.

Speaking of existing in a world that jsut assumed you're comfortable and you being welcome at all [email protected]? REALLY? after everything in this thread you bust in with that? Lemme guess....you didn't read the thread, you saw someone was "offended", and decided you to bust right in with a term that's very regularly used as a precursor to dehumanizing violence. Way to go. you sound like the student I had this semester who never once brought his book or did the assignment but felt the need to dominate every disçussion. Like maybe read the thread before just busting in with a term that not only people take offense to, but is intentionally used as a dehumanizing term towards a group that suffers a ton of violence. Way to go.

What I see is several folks are explaining how making a small change with help other folks feel more part of the team. In some cases this is much more severe and the consequences are more about dignity, feeling humanized, and being safer. All these little things like not defaulting to male are drops in the sea of change.

In light of knowing that history has defaulted to male in English, yet around half the worlds population in the history of time does not identify as male, i feel like it would be clear to most folks why that might have gotten grating…especially in light of the length of time it’s been happening. I just am not sure why the response to “this is an issue with impacts for a lot people” is “I’ve never seen it in my whole life so it’s not an issue - y’all must not be reasonable people.” That’s like someone saying “I love Asparagus” and my responding “that’s not possible, I don’t like asparagus and I’ve never met anyone who does.”

So, yes, we are at a point that enough awareness has been made that we know calling a group of folks with different genders or unknown genders “guys” isn’t the best thing to do. If you are taking to a group of friend who you all know are make, there is nothing wrong with calling them guys. They are guys.

If you’re on the fence about “hey guys” not having meaning, next time you are in a group, just say “hey gals” instead and note the reaction.

As said above so much of this is not a zero sum game. You don’t have a maximum number slots in our minds for new words or number of new ideas or things to change to be a better neighbor.

(MattK as a dyslexic who also is terrible with names myself [to the point it’s kind of a reputation that precedes me], I didn’t want to just gloss over what you said. I recognize this can in fact be very difficult )

100% never ok to call people it.

Totally fine to call Romeo “he”

Also fine to call Romeo they, even knowing Romeo’s gender. And if you meet someone in person named Romeo it’s still a good idea to not assume they are male.

To answer the question I address my classes as “everyone” “everybody” “class” and “y’all” most of the time.
I know that above there was an attempt to be absurd to prove a point about calling a class “hey gang” could be offensive because you’d be calling them criminals. Well, probably not the case. However, if I said “hey gang” and I learned that bothered one of my students it’s so easy for me to just use any of the other billion words available to us instead of saying I should be able to say what I want. Of course, we can all say whatever we want! It just depends on whether you’re cool with knowingly saying something that bothers someone else.

Real-world example is that at work (teaching is my side gig, I work at a tech firm by day) - I have worked hard to create a culture on my team that is respectful and collaborative and feels like family. I’ve been doing and saying that for going on 20 years. But one of my employees let me know they really don’t like the word family in a work setting. I didn’t understand it - honestly still don’t fully get it. But I listened. I talked it through with her with open ears and together we figured out some slightly modified ways of phrasing it that resonate with her. It took a lot of mental effort to change this oft-repeated slogan of mine. But its now part of my routine to use other phrases. Again, did I have to do that? No. But I have at least an average sized vocabulary and I cannot imagine for myself not wanting to find a solution. She feels heard and valued and we came out the other side a bit more bonded.

This is a discussion. It’s ok that we have wound up discussing things beyond the ponytail comment. Clearly some other meaningful topics have come to light.

Plus - and this is important - this may have come up in June. These conditions exist in all 12 months. People are people in all 12 months. This feedback is not something to be thought about in only June in the US. We can totally work on improving multiple things at once. Great news is we arent limited to just one thing per month and/or only given the narrow window of one month a year to solve (as as been pointed out) things that date back 100s/1000s/infinity years.

Cheers

mbarbier wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:27 am I think you're kinda of missing small but kind of important part of this though. It's not about that initial post (tbh I didn't read the original thread and don't care about it cause it's not about that thread), it's not about one single use of he vs she or they. It's about the constant, presumptive assumption of a default to he vs the anything else and the way those issues exist on a spectrum.

Not quoting everything you wrote, because it was long, but it's a great post. I think I personally already do use gender neutral terms most of the time in this forum, when talking about non-descript examples of people. I might go back and look to confirm that. I agree that doing so might make the place more welcoming.

Anyone who has been around the forum knows I love to play devil's advocate. I will never side with a viewpoint that I believe it's morally wrong, but if you read the first post and the response again, I don't think my devil's advocate here is unreasonable. I swear the only point I argued was in regards to the initial first post, someone stating a fact about what they imagined.

Your post, at least, was the first that directly answered my playing devil's advocate, and I'll take a look at changing up my pronouns in what I write here. It will be interesting to see what I actually use here, so I'll look back through now.

Realized I was still looking at page 1 lol. We’ve moved past my comment

Thanks all

I'll add that I can actually resonate with the constant drip of implied language that doesn't apply to me. Not on the same level as an assumed gender, but dealing with interests that I'm automatically assumed to have because I'm male. It can be draining at times.

Gears are turning here, in my head. Lots to think about.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:48 am

Not quoting everything you wrote, because it was long, but it's a great post. I think I personally already do use gender neutral terms most of the time in this forum, when talking about non-descript examples of people. I might go back and look to confirm that. I agree that doing so might make the place more welcoming.

Anyone who has been around the forum knows I love to play devil's advocate. I will never side with a viewpoint that I believe it's morally wrong, but if you read the first post and the response again, I don't think my devil's advocate here is unreasonable. I swear the only point I argued was in regards to the initial first post, someone stating a fact about what they imagined.

Your post, at least, was the first that directly answered my playing devil's advocate, and I'll take a look at changing up my pronouns in what I write here. It will be interesting to see what I actually use here, so I'll look back through now.

I kinda write a freaking novel- thank you for reading it! I genuinely appreciate the good faith engagement and honesty you bring to the conversations in on the forum. I think a big part of the difficulty with these kind of conversations on a forum is that it gets so easy to just get caught up in the linguistics (which I really love to do in a lot of areas) when issues are being discussed that feel based in linguistics because there real world parts of them don't relate/effect the everyday life of most of the people having it. and so its so easy to get removed from the real life part of it.


And I think a big thing is that the thing isn't about having totally equal language or such,but just small ways that show people they're being considered. So like 80/20 or even 90/10 male/female pronouns can mean a lot cause it shows an effort and that's what most people want cause it gives everything a place to start to grow, ya know?

Also totally about that slow drip and maleness. Like maleness can be really limiting and it's exhausting when you just wanna live your life and there's resistance to just like doing your thing.I feel like that's a thing that gets left out much too much in discussions about feminism and the patriarchy- it benefits men, but it also really limits them too.

I can imagine it has a lot of overlap with how it's gotta feel as an American in Japan. I went and stayed with one of my sisters for a while when she was stationed there. It was super eye opening about who a lot of spaces and practices are for (and how they're not for you). Not that anyone was anything less than really kind, welcoming, and totally lovely and I really look forward to returning, but it was one of this first times I really experienced being in a place that I realized didn't exist for my cultural perspective, if that makes sense? It was only like a month, but I can imagine being there for a few years really tunes ones umbrella towards those things. That might be a huge assumption on my end, but it was a pretty eye opening experience when I went.

You're right. Non Japanese people trying to infiltrate into Japanese culture is a futile effort. I respect why that is the case. If you become a part of it, you're no longer outside of it, appreciating it for what it is, and it is no longer what it is

This thread is yet another example of someone coming out of nowhere, throwing in a comment and disappearing. The OP surely had no intention of seeing things head in this direction.

boneberg wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 9:20 am This thread is yet another example of someone coming out of nowhere, throwing in a comment and disappearing. The OP surely had no intention of seeing things head in this direction.

And that’s the beauty of having a message board Conversations aren’t limited to one direction. So glad the OP knowingly or unknowingly sparked such an enlightening conversation.

Cheers

It seems like there are a predictable few who always have the same axe to grind. Why not concentrate on trombone issues and topics on a TromboneChat?

And FWIW, Harrison - I also definitely appreciate as well your thoughtfulness in your responses. There was a lot of room here for this to collectively go off the rails and it didn’t. So thank you for having a major part in the bulk of the convo staying productive and civil.

And, so glad we we’re able to meet virtually Mattie.

Have a wonderful weekend everyone.

Cheers

boneberg wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 9:34 am It seems like there are a predictable few who always have the same axe to grind. Why not concentrate on trombone issues and topics on a TromboneChat?

This is trombone related (because human interaction relates to EVERY topic. That’s kind of the entire point

Cheers

I’ve read this thread, and tried to follow the back-and-forth and sub-threads. Lots of interesting and respectful exchanges.

My view, which is open to question, is that calling people what or how they want to be called is a matter of respect and care. Why not do so? It will take some adjustment, and you will make mistakes. Some people will be offended when you make a mistake, but that’s on them. (See what I did there?) Just do your best, be sincere, and most people will understand. It doesn’t cost you anything, and it helps the other person.

Example: My full name is Kenneth, but almost everyone knows me as Ken. When I was a child I was called Kenny, but no one (other than my mother, my aunt, and a few select friends) calls me that. When people call me Kenneth, I simply say, “Ken, please.”

Another example: I work as a drug and alcohol counselor. The. LGBTQ+ community is over-represented in the population I serve. I’d heard about the trend for a little while, and when “they/them” was first introduced in my agency a few years ago, my initial reaction was, “Is this really necessary?” After a brief discussion with other counselors, and a few interactions with some of my clients during group therapy, I decided to change. I adjusted. It cost me nothing other than attention and time. I made the change out of respect and care. Yes, I made mistakes, but I learned.

Another way to think of it: How important is it to you to call people by what you believe they should be called, rather than what they preferred to be called? Is it really the hill you want to die on?

Language changes over time. People change over time. Fashions come and go. It’s called history. Roll with it.

***

An aside: I’m reminded of the line in the absurd Monty Python sketch: “It’s Raymond Luxury-Yacht, but it’s pronounced, ‘Throat Warbler Mangrove.’” Just another way to say it’s no skin off my nose—and you’ll have to watch the skit to understand that reference.

I wished I could find a clip of the scene in "The Jerk" where he tries to explain that you can call "a gang a she" to get out of the fact that he was referring to some other relationship.

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/b7f221cc-6 ... play=false

Peters goes "....or a girl...?"

"Yes, a girl is just one of the many things you can call a she..."

A crass movie, but somehow that scene seemed to fit somewhere in here.

My 5 cents...

This thread turned out better than I initially thought it would. Some things to think about.

<Deleted comments on incorrect post. Sorry!>

greenbean wrote: ↑Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:28 pm My 5 cents...

This thread turned out better than I initially thought it would. Some things to think about.

I do, though, wonder about the motives of "girltrombonist" who joined TC a few days ago and started this thread 20 minutes later. And has not logged in since. Are they strictly a troll? Maybe. And "girl" is part of their username?... Are we supposed to assume something? Is this to reveal their biological sex? Or gender?...

Easy there, she didn’t start a thread, a mod split it off from the source material.

Related, some other things from the above pages… I don’t think that her post has to be read as an attack on Robcat or taking great offense, either. It was pretty soft and even, just noting that they exist. If their simple existence is an attack, that’s a different interpretation that I’m not seeing.

That said, if I had been quick enough on the draw before it spun out, I would have replied something to the effect of “we do know that they exist, we just assume that they would be smart enough NOT to get their hair caught in it.” But, alas, sometimes you don’t show up quick enough to get in a poor joke.

Cheers,
Andy

Andy, I think I was suffering from COVID brain fog when I typed my post above. I was confused about the start of this thread. I take back all my suspicians about 'girltrombonist".

I do that quite a bit - maybe I am getting old...