LGBTAI+ Questions, Information and Discussion thread!

[Jormengand]

Can I ask an honest question? No attack is intended here, I am genuinely interested in your answer. If you had a friend who asked you to refer to them as "c**t", what would your response be?

As a pronoun or a name? As names, there are already people who have offensive-sounding names (my father's girlfriend is a teacher, and relates the tale of a boy whose parents insist they call him by his assigned first name, which is "Bimbo". My aunt is also a teacher, and someone in one of her classes is called Hoor, which is pronounced about the same way as "Whore." The book "Don't Tell Mum" contains an adventure in which someone - also a teacher: they get everywhere - has a student called "Labia") and I would use those names.

If someone asked me, for no reason, to call them an offensive slur, I would suspect they were having me on, but if they could provide several posts'-worth of justification for it (as I have), then sure, why not?

(Plus, some people enjoy being referred to as a slut or bitch anyway, if only in private, and I am happy to comply. )

[Serpentine]

Female asexuality is at least somewhat acknowledged and not so widely considered to be abnormal (though criticized and usually called "frigidity").

Or the idealised "purity", depending on whether we're criticising women for having sex with others or for not having sex with us.

[Serpentine]

As a pronoun or a name? As names, there are already people who have offensive-sounding names (my father's girlfriend is a teacher, and relates the tale of a boy whose parents insist they call him by his assigned first name, which is "Bimbo". My aunt is also a teacher, and someone in one of her classes is called Hoor, which is pronounced about the same way as "Whore." The book "Don't Tell Mum" contains an adventure in which someone - also a teacher: they get everywhere - has a student called "Labia") and I would use those names.

If someone asked me, for no reason, to call them an offensive slur, I would suspect they were having me on, but if they could provide several posts'-worth of justification for it (as I have), then sure, why not?

(Plus, some people enjoy being referred to as a slut or bitch anyway, if only in private, and I am happy to comply. )

So you'd be perfectly okay, when talking to a complete stranger, saying "Oh, I came to this party with c**t over there." or "I've got this friend, and c**t's totally into...", and you don't foresee any issue with that, nor understand why some people would be uncomfortable with it?

[Jormengand]

So you'd be perfectly okay, when talking to a complete stranger, saying "Oh, I came to this party with c**t over there." or "I've got this friend, and c**t's totally into...", and you don't foresee any issue with that, nor understand why some people would be uncomfortable with it?

I'd probably use a few more of my none-too-precious words to explain why they're called that, adding a parenthesized "Yes, that's [I'm guessing her? His? Its? ] name, because [reason]" to the first sentence about such a person, but then explaining that someone wants to be called "It" takes no more effort than explaining that someone wants to be called "They" (and anyway, any given one of us has taken more effort to make this argument than all of us combined will ever use to explain someone's choce of pronouns) so it doesn't really matter.

[Serpentine]

I'd probably use a few more of my none-too-precious words to explain why they're called that, adding a parenthesized "Yes, that's [I'm guessing her? His? Its? ] name, because [reason]" to the first sentence about such a person, but then explaining that someone wants to be called "It" takes no more effort than explaining that someone wants to be called "They" (and anyway, any given one of us has taken more effort to make this argument than all of us combined will ever use to explain someone's choce of pronouns) so it doesn't really matter.

"Yes, that's c**t's name."
I've never had to explain why I called someone "they", in large part because it blends seamlessly with ordinary conversation about an absent third person, partly because it's already well-established as an acceptable thing to refer to someone as.

[Athedia]

I'd probably use a few more of my none-too-precious words to explain why they're called that, adding a parenthesized "Yes, that's [I'm guessing her? His? Its? ] name, because [reason]" to the first sentence about such a person, but then explaining that someone wants to be called "It" takes no more effort than explaining that someone wants to be called "They" (and anyway, any given one of us has taken more effort to make this argument than all of us combined will ever use to explain someone's choce of pronouns) so it doesn't really matter.

Most people don't want to have to give a lesson before conversations and to be honest if I was the person on the other side listening to that my response would be to say "I don't feel comfortable with the language here, either change the topic or stop talking to me."

[Mono Vertigo]

Or the idealised "purity", depending on whether we're criticising women for having sex with others or for not having sex with us.

Also that, yes. I know very few things more schizophrenic than general Western attitude on sexuality. Point is, women can easily be imagined as not wanting sex for a variety of reasons, whereas the very concept of asexual men (who are not elderly or suffering from some big disorder) seems to be impossible to even conceive.

[Marnath]

Also that, yes. I know very few things more schizophrenic than general Western attitude on sexuality. Point is, women can easily be imagined as not wanting sex for a variety of reasons, whereas the very concept of asexual men (who are not elderly or suffering from some big disorder) seems to be impossible to even conceive.

Well I don't know, a number of guys around here have said they don't want kids or relationships until a non-specified "later", and are praised for being responsible. I'm not sure that a clarification of "no, I mean never kids" would be understood as anything other than you being really sincere about your celibacy or whatever. Not that I'd know since I've never actually tried to explain to someone the difference between just not wanting to settle down(yet?) and actually not having the urge at all.

[Jormengand]

Most people don't want to have to give a lesson before conversations and to be honest if I was the person on the other side listening to that my response would be to say "I don't feel comfortable with the language here, either change the topic or stop talking to me."

The thing is, "It" (the actual word in question here) isn't a swear word, and if you would be so offended that someone would call someone else that, even if it had asked for it, that you would insist that such a person was not even talked about at all, then you really need to be more accepting.

[Marnath]

The thing is, "It" (the actual word in question here) isn't a swear word, and if you would be so offended that someone would call someone else that, even if it had asked for it, that you would insist that such a person was not even talked about at all, then you really need to be more accepting.

I thought the suggestion was to always use their name instead of the pronoun, rather than not talk about them.

[Eldest]

Q: So stupid question but my brother asked me to explain the difference between bi and pan yesterday and I did my best but I was wondering if people could clarify?

Oh dear, this has been a problem question before.

Spoiler: contains opinion, also peanuts

Show

There isn't much. They're pronounced and spelled differently. One inherently says "there are more than male and female out there. And the other is more widely known. I guess bi has the potential to say "I don't like that gender specifically" where as pan doesn't have that option, or at least can't say so well.

[Jormengand]

I thought the suggestion was to always use their name instead of the pronoun, rather than not talk about them.

Again, I still find the fact that someone would deliberately attempt not to use my chosen pronouns offensive.

[Athedia]

The thing is, "It" (the actual word in question here) isn't a swear word, and if you would be so offended that someone would call someone else that, even if it had asked for it, that you would insist that such a person was not even talked about at all, then you really need to be more accepting.

We were saying complete stranger here. Talking about their friend. Two persons I have no social obligation to engage. If I am uncomfortable with a strangers conversation I am always allowed to end it, friends are different.

[Teron]

Again, I still find the fact that someone would deliberately attempt not to use my chosen pronouns offensive.

Plus, you don't have some inalienable right not to be offended. Using someone's chosen pronouns should be common courtesy.

[Mono Vertigo]

Well I don't know, a number of guys around here have said they don't want kids or relationships until a non-specified "later", and are praised for being responsible. I'm not sure that a clarification of "no, I mean never kids" would be understood as anything other than you being really sincere about your celibacy or whatever. Not that I'd know since I've never actually tried to explain to someone the difference between just not wanting to settle down(yet?) and actually not having the urge at all.

Thing is, I'm under the impression there's a big difference between having kids, or an established relationship, and just having or desiring/needing sex (which could involve one-night stands and nothing else). So, when a guy says that, the most likely interpretation is that if they could get all the casual sex they wanted without any "risk" or need for an actual relationship or kids, they wouldn't be celibate but have as much sex as wanted.

[Jormengand]

"Using someone's chosen pronouns should be common courtesy."
"Using someone's chosen pronouns should be common courtesy."
"Should be common courtesy"
Common courtesy.

Plus, there's a difference between being offended by how someone interacts with themselves or others, and being offended by how someone interacts with you.

[Heliomance]

The thing is, "It" (the actual word in question here) isn't a swear word, and if you would be so offended that someone would call someone else that, even if it had asked for it, that you would insist that such a person was not even talked about at all, then you really need to be more accepting.

From a certain point of view, though, "it" is actually even more offensive than "c**t". "C**t" at least gets used to refer to people, if vulgarly and insultingly. By calling someone "it", the implication is that you are calling them not a person. That you literally consider them subhuman.

No swear word, however crude, can compare to the insult and degradation of robbing someone of their personhood.

Now, I know that you don't read these implications into the word. But everyone around you does. Everyone that hears someone refer to you as "it", that's what they think is happening. Everyone that calls you "it", that's the stigma that they have to overcome in order to force themselves to do it. Do you think it any wonder that people find it hard to call you a word that every instinct is telling them is unbelievably degrading? I for one think it can only be a good thing that people have a hard time calling you subhuman. Bad things happen when that becomes easy.

[Serpentine]

Plus, there's a difference between being offended by how someone interacts with themselves or others, and being offended by how someone interacts with you.

I expect this is merely an issue of wording, but this is about how someone interact with others, while referencing you, not how they interact with you. It's not all that often that one uses someone's pronouns to their faces. This is about how people talk to other people about you, not how people talk to (interact with) you.

[Athedia]

"Using someone's chosen pronouns should be common courtesy."
"Using someone's chosen pronouns should be common courtesy."
"Should be common courtesy"
Common courtesy.

Plus, there's a difference between being offended by how someone interacts with themselves or others, and being offended by how someone interacts with you.

Yes, you can feel offended about how they interact with you. You can not tell them how to interact with others. You are trying to enforce how they talk to others which is not acceptable.

[Serpentine]

Yes, you can feel offended about how they interact with you. You can not tell them how to interact with others. You are trying to enforce how they talk to others which is not acceptable.

My issue is more that Jorm is trying to enforce how they think, really, trying to tell me that I'm not allowed to be uncomfortable when "should" doesn't come into the reality of the situation.

[Jormengand]

I expect this is merely an issue of wording, but this is about how someone interact with others, while referencing you, not how they interact with you. It's not all that often that one uses someone's pronouns to their faces. This is about how people talk to other people about you, not how people talk to (interact with) you.

Referring to someone is still interacting with them; it still has (as Heliomance has kindly pointed out for me) an impact on you, it still affects you. Someone else's choice of pronoun... uhm... doesn't.

Do you think it any wonder that people find it hard to call you a word that every instinct is telling them is unbelievably degrading?

No. I find it more of a wonder that people, in full knowledge that I would find their refusal to call me by my chosen pronouns, still refuse to preserve their own self-perceived purity.

My issue is more that Jorm is trying to enforce how they think, really, trying to tell me that I'm not allowed to be uncomfortable when "should" doesn't come into the reality of the situation.

You ARE allowed to be uncomfortable, and I couldn't make that clearer if I wrote it on the walls of the senate a hundred times in big red letters. What I don't like is the fact that, due to that discomfort, you deny me a common courtesy that you extend to near-enough everyone else.

[Irish Musician]

So, if someone doesn't use "it" in reference to you as much as they can but uses [Proper name] instead b/c "it" makes them uncomfortable, is this a bad thing?

[Serpentine]

No. I find it more of a wonder that people, in full knowledge that I would find their refusal to call me by my chosen pronouns, still refuse to preserve their own self-perceived purity.

It's not about "purity". It's about overcoming decades (and more) of social, cultural and linguistic development. Your reasoning may be sound, but you're telling us to drop our pants in the middle of the room and take a dump, right in front of a whole lot of people who aren't party to that reasoning. It takes time to overcome 20+ years of toilet training, effort to expect to have to explain it over and over in every conversation even though it's easily enough and (in my opinion) inoffensively avoided, and some people need to at least start with a nappy first.
But we've been saying this over and over again and going nowhere. The question has been answered, and then some.
Anything more on the bi/poly question? Or maybe on whether there's an asexual closet?

So, if someone doesn't use "it" in reference to you as much as they can but uses [Proper name] instead b/c "it" makes them uncomfortable, is this a bad thing?

Jorm has stated pretty clearly that this is the case. If that's not so, then some serious clarification needs to happen, because I'm pretty sure that's exactly what's been said.

[Jormengand]

But we've been saying this over and over again and going nowhere. The question has been answered, and then some.

AKA: "Here's my opinion, but yeah let's shut up about this now."

[Serpentine]

AKA: "Here's my opinion, but yeah let's shut up about this now."

"Here's my opinion. Geeze I've been saying that a lot, probably time to let this thread go back to its actual useful function."
You can quote me on that.

[Jormengand]

"Here's my opinion. Geeze I've been saying that a lot, probably time to let this thread go back to its actual useful function."

See, in a debate, you can either give your opinion or end the debate, it's pretty bad form to do both, because you're basically saying "Here's my opinion, and you're not allowed to say anything against it, nyah nyah." It's aggravating, and you know the other person will respond anyway to call you out on your BS, so why bother?

[Irish Musician]

Jorm has stated pretty clearly that this is the case. If that's not so, then some serious clarification needs to happen, because I'm pretty sure that's exactly what's been said.

Apologies but I am all confused as to what is going on now.

Jor, is this the case? Is it offense for someone to use "it" minimally because it makes them uncomfortable and instead use your proper name in reference to you? I agree the subject was gone on a long while, so a simple answer is fine. I just got confused back there and just want to clarify

[Serpentine]

Uh huh.
So anyway, bi/pan? Asexual closets? Apparently the consensus is that it really is a thing. How does the "coming out" go?
Something else? Ummm... Anyone got an opinion on the "unicorn" concept, in polyamory?

[Athedia]

AKA: "Here's my opinion, but yeah let's shut up about this now."

A good few pages have been dominated with this question. We went beyond the original answer already, it is time for some new questions.


As for my question, thanks guys. It basically sums up to "it depends" I guess.

[Kindablue]

What's the unicorn concept in polyamory?