Censorship and Gaslighting: Meet Jonathan Yaniv

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
Just so people know. This is not new.

"Singular they" had been the standard gender-neutral pronoun in English for hundreds of years. However, in 1745, prescriptive grammarians began to say that it was no longer acceptable. They instead began to recommend using "he" as a gender-neutral pronoun.This started the dispute over the problem of acceptable gender-neutral pronouns in English, which still goes on today.

nonbinary.miraheze.org...

Yes but that’s not the same as they/them or the full spectrum of an iron clad non binary identity that’s always in the plural.

Try it out with various sentences.

They is easy for a third person reference, and we routinely use it, to this day.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

It's been around a long time.

Transgenders (LGBT) didn't just pop-up today.

SPIVAK: en.m.wikipedia.org...

blogs.illinois.edu...

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

It's been around a long time.

Transgenders (LGBT) didn't just pop-up today.

SPIVAK: en.m.wikipedia.org...

blogs.illinois.edu...

No doubt, but I think you are still speaking cross wise here, and ‘splaining a bit. What you haven’t done yet is explain how the expanding variety of pronouns won’t represent a challenging transition linguistically, especially given people using them are still in a small minority. One has to make a case for the ways to address pragmatic issues.

Until recently it was not widespread in linguistic norms, nor enforced in various locations. The widespread nature of it is recent. Here in nyc in government now you can get an EEOC violation if you error on pronouns .

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

There are also other new pronouns that while I umderstand the idea, such as xir, are again not in our language or training linguistically. I think people aren’t recognizing what such a shift means, how difficult it is, and how long it would take. 

You're right. Its a set-up for failure -- when folks instinctively use long established and ingrained pronouns -- and faux outrage by those "misgendered"... Even when folks try to respect their preferred pronouns but make an honest reflexive mistake..

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

It's been around a long time.

Transgenders (LGBT) didn't just pop-up today.

SPIVAK: en.m.wikipedia.org...

blogs.illinois.edu...

No doubt, but I think you are still speaking cross wise here, and ‘splaining a bit. What you haven’t done yet is explain how the expanding variety of pronouns won’t represent a challenging transition linguistically, especially given people using them are still in a small minority. One has to make a case for the ways to address pragmatic issues.

Until recently it was not widespread in linguistic norms, nor enforced in various locations. The widespread nature of it is recent. Here in nyc in government now you can get an EEOC violation if you error on pronouns .

I am not missing your point. But, many want to blame it on today's transgenders -- like it's a new thing. It's not.

What is new is society acceptance of something that's always been.

I suppose willingness would be a factor.

I expect it will evolve primarily with younger people and college society.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

There are also other new pronouns that while I umderstand the idea, such as xir, are again not in our language or training linguistically. I think people aren’t recognizing what such a shift means, how difficult it is, and how long it would take. 

You're right. Its a set-up for failure -- when folks instinctively use long established and ingrained pronouns -- and faux outrage by those "misgendered"... Even when folks try to respect their preferred pronouns but make an honest reflexive mistake..

I think this is a main issue. People due to psychology and linguistics, even with all intent to respect the pronouns, will find themselves reflexively slipping.

I found myself doing that with the they/them person at work, despite all intentions. People were gracious thankfully, acknowledging it’s hard. But that doesn’t mean all people will be in our current environment.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

There are also other new pronouns that while I umderstand the idea, such as xir, are again not in our language or training linguistically. I think people aren’t recognizing what such a shift means, how difficult it is, and how long it would take. 

You're right. Its a set-up for failure -- when folks instinctively use long established and ingrained pronouns -- and faux outrage by those "misgendered"... Even when folks try to respect their preferred pronouns but make an honest reflexive mistake..

I think this is a main issue. People due to psychology and linguistics, even with all intent to respect the pronouns, will find themselves reflexively slipping.

I found myself doing that with the they/them person at work, despite all intentions. People were gracious thankfully, acknowledging it’s hard. But that doesn’t mean all people will be in our current environment.

The key is willingness to learn.

If you work with a transgender that wants to use certain pronouns -- I doubt you'd have any issue if you sincerely show respect and try to work with that person.

The issue is those who are rude and refuse to accommodate something new. Especially, if they don't accept it.

Kind of like when women entered fields that were once dominated by men.

Which still continues to be an issue.

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Boadicea
I suppose you'll have to define "harm" more narrowly.

Sure. There are 16 women in Canada suffering financial harm and persecution by their government for not providing a service they do not offer, and most likely do not have the skills or supplies to provide, under color of "equal" rights.

I wasn't aware that the Canadian government is suing them.

a reply to: Phage

I wasn't aware that the Canadian government is suing them.

So clever! But no.

Because I'm pretty sure you are aware that it's the Canadian government that wrote and passed the law, and executes and enforces the law, and investigates and prosecutes violations of the law.

Jonathan Yaniv didn't/doesn't do all that.

a reply to: Boadicea

Because I'm pretty sure you are aware that it's the Canadian government that wrote and passed the law, and executes and enforces the law, and investigates and prosecutes violations of the law.

I did not know they have been charged with a crime. As far as I can tell, they are being subjected to lawsuits from a single individual.

Right, and I do. I have zero issues with lgbt and trans inherently. I think by and large we should allow people to be and do as they wish, and do our best to be respectful.

I’m just interested in this whole pronoun issue as a psycho linguistic challenge in any individual or let’s say workplace setting. I think this is a real behavioral and linguistic thing to be accounted for. Even just from a memory position it can be difficult to remember a wide range of newer pronouns and gender identities.

a reply to: Annee

a reply to: Annee

The issue is those who are rude and refuse to accommodate something new. Especially, if they don't accept it.

The bigger issue is those AGPs that want us to use certain pronouns for their sexual fantasies... And those who would punish and harm those of us who refuse to accommodate them and their cheap thrills.

a reply to: Phage

You might be thinking of a previous civil suit by another man identifying as trans:

Back in May, I wrote about the biological man claiming to be a woman who has sued a spa in Windsor after a female employee declined to service him following his request for a Brazilian wax. The “transgender woman” was furious, claiming that his genitals are irrelevant to his gender, and that this Muslim woman should have absolutely no problem handling his penis, seeing that in his point of view, it was a female penis. 

But not this Jonathan Yaniv:

Then in August, another fellow got in on the game. A transgender “woman” began calling spas in British Columbia, asking that they give him a “Manzillian” wax, and then taking careful note of those who refused. He then filed 16 human rights complaints against sixteen women who refused to handle his penis, claiming that he had been discriminated against. 

Canadian man claiming to be ‘female’ sues 16 women for refusing to wax his genitals

As I understand it, the complaints were filed with the Human Rights Tribunal, who would also be the ones handling the investigation and... maybe prosecution isn't the right word... What would be the right word? Litigation? Adjudication?

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Annee

The issue is those who are rude and refuse to accommodate something new. Especially, if they don't accept it.

The bigger issue is those AGPs that want us to use certain pronouns for their sexual fantasies... And those who would punish and harm those of us who refuse to accommodate them and their cheap thrills.

. . . and once seizures were being processed by the Devil.

Chosen ignorance.

a reply to: Boadicea

What would be the right word? Litigation? Adjudication?

Lawsuits. He is suing them, as your link title says.

Canadian man claiming to be ‘female’ sues 16 women for refusing to wax his genitals

People sue for all kinds of things.

a reply to: Annee

. . and once seizures were being processed by the Devil. 

Chosen ignorance.

Gaslighting. Period. It's called autogynephilia and there are too many self-identified autogynephiles to believe otherwise. All you have is gaslighting and bullying.

Barbara Kay: Absolutist dogma is chilling transgender research

There is a name for Perry’s erotic fetish: autogynephilia, an ugly word in English, rendered far more beguilingly in French as amour de soi en femme. It was coined by Toronto sexologist Ray Blanchard of the Toronto-based Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and describes men who get sexual pleasure from seeing themselves as women. These men don’t want to actually be women — that is, they have no wish to transition surgically as male-to-female trans people do — because they understand, exactly as Perry says, that they are not females trapped in a male body; they are biological males indulging an erotic fantasy.

Autogynephilia poses a serious problem for transgender advocacy. For two reasons. First, Perry and his ilk muddy the pure waters of the typical narrative: namely that males who yearn to appear as female are females who were “assigned” the wrong body at birth, and require rescue by the medical community in order to be made whole. Second, the introduction of eroticism (“potent sex dream”) into the near-spiritual and de-sexualized tropes cultivated in transgender advocacy lends credence to the idea that at least one form of cross-gender identification is paraphilia — kinkiness, in lay terms — rather than a noble, existential struggle for self-emancipation.

a reply to: Phage

Maybe it's semantics, but we're not talking about a civil court suit with a jury... The Human Rights Tribunal handles it all:

The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal is an independent, quasi-judicial body created by the B.C. Human Rights Code. The Tribunal is responsible for accepting, screening, mediating, and adjudicating human rights complaints. The Tribunal offers the parties to a complaint the opportunity to try to resolve the complaint through mediation. Respondents have an opportunity to respond to a complaint and to apply to dismiss a complaint without a hearing. If the parties do not resolve a complaint and the complaint is not dismissed, the Tribunal holds a hearing.

ETA: BC Human Rights Tribunal

Bottom line is that the Human Rights Tribunal is running the show start to finish.

a reply to: Boadicea

Barbara Kay -- what a nut job.

Her degree is in literature and apparently humanities studies.

She writes conservative opinion pieces.

She has no education in science.

a reply to: Annee

Nut job, huh? Okay.

Just like all those men who know and admit they are in fact autogynephiles, right? Just nut jobs... Right?

Hahah what a good laugh.

Isnt this what we wanted?

Have fun up there.