Police in Vietnam have detained prominent environmentalist Hoang Thi Minh Hong, known as Hong Hoang, on tax evasion charges frequently used against critics of the government’s environmental policies. Hong, who was taken into custody on May 31, is an Obama Foundation Scholar and founded the Center of Hands-on Action and Networking for Growth and Environment […]
Nah, “it” is a correct pronoun for me. Dehumanizing ghouls isn’t a problem. Billionaire philanthropist doing leg work for imperialist capital? Wall. I don’t care.
Removed by mod
oh well as long as the person you misgendered was a ghoul then who cares? 🥴
Removed by mod
Lmfao “debate bro nonsense” is when misgendering political enemies is bad? It’s not about giving a shit about the enemies, it’s about comrades who take note of your willingness to ditch people’s pronouns the second you disagree
Apparently correcting someone for misgendering ghouls is about protecting the ghouls. But also he agrees we shouldn’t misgender fascists. So is he saying we ought to protect fascists? Hmmmmmmmmm
Or maybe the cognitive dissonance is just too strong
Removed by mod
Now who’s the debate bro?
Right, you save the casual bigotry for the real baddies, not just the lowly disagreers
Removed by mod
If you view the norm of correcting people’s pronouns as liberal civility politics, I have some bad news about who agrees with you
Removed by mod
It’s not about protecting or giving a shit about ghouls. It’s about you thinking that there are people who are bad enough that you can misgender them. You can assure me that you only do it to the “right” people, but guess what? Everyone thinks that. Your view isn’t some righteous rebellion against liberalism. It’s the default position. Everyone thinks they can misgender the people who “deserve” it. That’s the point of correcting pronouns for everyone. It’s not supposed to be a morally loaded thing.
Removed by mod
:PIGPOOPBALLS:
Removed by mod
I'm losing my mind reading this. Admittedly, the people you were talking to are dogmatists who have no way to defend their views, but they are still clearly correct:
If you're operating the fucking guillotine and want to whisper into this person's ear that they don't have a gender before chopping their head off, who cares? However, making misgendering them a point of your public ridicule of them is bad for essentially the same reason as being racist to Clarence Thomas is bad: promoting racism (as one does with racist public statements) hurts many people other than Clarence Thomas, and it hurts those other people more because they are more vulnerable. It has nothing to do with the man himself. If you are personally assigned to his firing squad and want to write something racist on the bullet you shoot him with, I don't give a shit beyond that you probably need mental counseling, but don't go hurting comrades because you are too lazy to grasp at a better weapon with which to hurt your actual enemies.
Thanks for explaining the arguments I was making in a more civil manner. I’m sure that will make a difference and get through to the person you’re talking to, thus disproving the validity of my dogmatism.
I know he probably won't listen anyway, I just feel compelled to try anyway.
good? no one cares about their feelings, as was pointed out to you already. they care about you misgendering people (or in this case, slime mold). similarly no one is going to take offense to you insulting nazis, but they would take offense if you used slurs to do so.
idk what your hangup about this is tbh, it's pretty simple stuff.
You really couldn’t have missed the point more