@Goyo, I respect that you may not want to come back and discuss this painful subject. It's not your duty to educate me; nor is it my place to enquire about your identity, and I will not do so. Do not feel that I'm expecting a response, of any sort.

However, I wanted to let you know that, reflecting overnight, I have belatedly better understood (I believe) the source of pain for some groups of people in what has happened, and why it is not (for some) a matter of modifying their use of language or choosing to disengage.

I also want to apologise unreservedly for not realising this sooner -- when you've never experienced something, it's hard to recognise how it impacts somebody else but that's no excuse for not apologising when you recognise you've been wrong.

I spent a lot of time awake overnight worrying about what I wasn't seeing, and finally came up with an analogy that let me see how, in some circumstances, for me, modifying my use of language would contravene my core values. And it follows that, in different circumstances, that could be true for others without making them "bad people".

As an analogy, you may not feel it has the same strength as your own deeply-held beliefs, but accept my assurance that it is fundamental to how I perceive myself and how I act and communicate

I spent my University years and my years in employment fighting the usage, and am pleased that it is no longer -- in some quarters at least -- the default generic pronoun; and that correcting the usage of 'he' to 'they' in some venues is no longer challenged. There are places it isn't recognised, or is actively ridiculed, and those are places I do my best to avoid, because I can't participate and still stay true to what I believe on the subject.

Let us suppose that the CoC had been modified to mandate the use of 'he' as that generic third-person pronoun. Let us also suppose that the reasoning has been explained and it explains the 'benefits' (however 'benefits' are defined) to a group of people not including me who feel disadvantaged without the change.

As a one-time professional writer, and a sometimes teacher of writing, I'm confident that I could adjust my writing style to avoid using it at all; or I could modify my behaviour not to get into situations where it might be necessary; or both.

But -- and this was my visceral reaction when I thought about it for a few moments -- I could but would I? Doing so requires me (1) to give up 6+ decades of believing otherwise, and (2) give the appearance of condoning the change -- disregarding completely something I believe fundamentally.

Decline to participate any more? I would miss SE enormously as a resource, although I've never bought into the idea of it as a 'community'.

Perhaps at best it's a set of distinct communities, with a few points of overlap, but there are places within it where -- even if I lurk, or spend hours researching similar questions and/or crafting questions that won't get closed immediately, I feel that at best I am tolerated, and will never 'belong'; and other places I would never venture because they're toxic, or not relevant to my interests). I suppose I could still lurk, and look for 'community' elsewhere.

I'm fortunate -- the tides of change are not moving in a direction contrary to my beliefs, but I don't envy anyone who finds themself swimming against the tide.

I do believe that the change to the CoC addresses a real issue for a group of people who participate here; and I now understand that it causes a real issue for some other groups.

I regret to say, I don't think there's a solution that doesn't involve pain for some people. If we return to the previous state of affairs, we will hurt those whose presence has been (to be blunt) tolerated on the condition that they keep quiet about who they are and don't make others uncomfortable, otherwise they're expected/driven to go elsewhere -- is that an equitable solution?

If we adopt the new CoC, different groups of people may have to keep quiet about who they are or leave -- is that equitable?

Is it possible to weigh the competing needs of two groups with very differing beliefs and come up with a solution that suits everyone? No, it isn't -- this isn't Physics (my degree subject) or IT (my career) where you can do the work and demonstrate what fits the theory/meets the spec and what is clearly wrong. It's people and beliefs and messy as all-get-out and I don't have a solution.

It will come as no surprise that on balance I favour the CoC change (if I were in position to do so, I would reword the FAQ, and I would definitely handle the whole sorry roll-out differently) but I will no longer dismiss the impact on others as trivial. Which is, I acknowledge, no consolation to those faced with painful decisions.

It's my intention now to reflect on how I can incorporate my apology and new understanding in my answer without detracting from the point I intended to make.

I found this whole conversation incredibly confusing!

@Goyo, here are some practices that I find helpful in achieving clear communication in StackExchange.

1 - use short sentences.

2 - when several clauses are needed, to express a complex idea, use commas where it would help with readability.

3 - avoid sarcasm and self-deprecating comments.

4 - keep in mind that strong statements such as "I find such-and-so deeply offensive" raise the stakes and make it harder to have a productive conversation.

@ColeValleyGirl - I have no idea what this debate was about! That is, what the disagreement was and what the two positions were....

Hey. When did you stop being a moderator?

Forgot to tag you @ColeValleyGirl

@aparente001 I suspect your comments are addressed at me? i haven't had a problem with Goyo's style.

Re the disagreement, we were discussing (in essence) whether the change in the CoC caused pain to people who were already present and not knowingly/deliberately giving offence. My conclusion: yes, it but it was unavoidable without expecting others to efface themselves. There is pain on all sides and no good solution.

@Goyo must answer for themself.

@Cyn To be honest, I can't remember. I stepped early in the history of G@FH (late 2012 -- one of the first pro-tem moderators for that site) and stepped down sometime after November 2016l, for health reasons -- nothing to do with the site -- I deleted my original account for the same reasons in late 2017) sacrificing a lot of reputation (Which has never mattered to me, although I won't diss those who care).

I'd step up again if the opportunity arose and the site agreed -- it's amazing what a pacemaker can achieve!

@ColeValleyGirl Then I must be remembering wrong because I was sure you were a mod on Genealogy when I was active there, starting about a year ago (I stopped bothering a few months ago).

Congrats on the pacemaker (not the need for it, because that stinks of course) but getting the tool you need to stay functional. A friend of mine's wife "died" twice and came back and the pacemaker stopped that from happening.

@Cyn One or both is us may be remembering wrong, and I'm not sure it's material. I have noticed and regretted your absence.

Thanks for the congrats -- yes, the reason stinks and it hasn't fixed everything but most things are better.

It's hard on a less active site. Even the OP's often didn't come back to thank me (or others) for answers or upvote, etc. And I'd get some downvotes with no explanation for basic factual answers, it was weird.

I know I suddenly stopped working on our genetic genealogy wiki answer but I just couldn't deal with it anymore, not because of you.

@aparente001 (1)(2) I am well aware, but I struggle to get my point across through the keyboard in a language I don't feel totally comfortable with. Yes, I need to pay more attention.

(3) Sorry about the sarcasm, I am at a lost regarding self-deprecating comments.

@Cyn No problem -- I really need to get on and publish them. However, that isn't the subject for this chatroom so we should let it rest here.

(4) Since there seems to be such a big issue about how such-and-such is very offensive for some people, I thought that might be a good way to make my point. You are right, though, there must be a better way. I am not a fan of this myself.

@ColeValleyGirl Wow, I feel a bit overwhelmed (not your fault). I will come back to you later.

@ColeValleyGirl - Yes, I did get the feeling the two of you were understanding each other, but to me it seemed miraculous because in almost every sentence there was something I didn't understand.

@Goyo - I am bilingual with Spanish and am active at Spanish.SE, although Spanish is not my first language. So, you can give me two versions if you ever want to -- it might help me follow along better.

@ColeValleyGirl - I don't understand what the CM perception of Monica's statements and/or behavior was, that started the whole hoo-ha. Do you?

@aparente001 Without facts (or a transcript) I don't think anyone who wasn't 'there' can know -- it may be that people whose experience (like my sibling's partner) was of having their chosen pronoun deliberately avoided found a discussion about how to deliberately avoid using an 'unacceptable' chosen pronoun painful.

That's a position I could have sympathy for, especially if people had previously expressed their unhappiness and had it disregarded. But I will stress I don't know any facts and am not willing to judge anyone on hearsay or speculation.

I will add that I don't believe it 'started the whole hoo-ha' -- there's at least one earlier resignation from an excellent moderator who found the climate and comments in the TL lounge was the last straw.

@ColeValleyGirl Discussion does not case me pain. Lack of discussion, sometimes.

@ColeValleyGirl Unsolicited advice: please sleep. Do not overthink, do not worry so much. This is not your fault at all.

@ColeValleyGirl I do not think you have to apologize. You reacted promptly to what I said. You explicitly acknowledged that besides bad faith and unawareness there is also pain and conflict of values. This is the first time I see supporter of the CoC update and I appreciate it a lot.

@aparente001 What I said above is why I am here. That alone makes me enjoy the conversation, whatever it is about. I couldn't tell you right now what it is but I am enjoying it and learning.

@ColeValleyGirl - I can certainly understand that the TL Lounge wasn't a healthy climate. I've never been there (not being a moderator), but I've tried several sites' general chat rooms and found them overwhelming and sometimes hurtful.

What I don't understand is how an unhealthy environment had the end result that Monica ended up kicked out of moderating.

But I understand now that you may not be able to help me understand that....

@ColeValleyGirl I don't know what else yo expect from me, if any.. I f you want to know about me, feel free to ask. I am deliberately avoiding to talk about me (well, most of the time) because I don't want to make it about me. If you want to see the pain and the conflict of values expressed you can find that in many moderators' resignation and other questions, answers and comments in MSE. If you want to know more about my specific objections to the CoC and the FAQ you can ask too.

Typo above: "This is the first time I see a supporter of the CoC update doing that"

@ColeValleyGirl I just noticed the update in your question. I love how you kept firm while giving consideration to the issues it can cause for other people.