I believe we should all have "equal" rights. I believe your reasons for introducing the new pronouns rule in the CoC is because you too feel people have rights and their rights should be supported, and clearly comes from good intentions. But "enforcing" this in CoC is a different kettle of fish and I just wanted to know your take on the question. There's no rule in the Coc for eg someone calling me Bob instead of James. Nor a choice for me to not use a specific pronoun, which I may have a valid reason for. This is not equality.

'Equality' is not what you are describing. I'm a member of a minority (which is irrelevant). I do not want to be referred to by a slur for that minority. Some people want to use slurs. They believe they have 'valid reasons'. The idea that my desire to not be referred to by a term that is offensive is somehow 'equal' to other people's desire to use slurs, and therefore enforcing rules preventing use of slurs is 'not equality'... is way off base.

@Beofett you've entirely twisted my words. Where do I mention "slur"? Just not using specific pronouns.The site is filled with slurs, people calling eachother noob and stupid for not googling etc. But sure, let's address special cases and not others as those are more important.

Also, this is not a statement, it's a question. I mean downvoting is free and all but bit silly really.

You're confusing my providing an example to illustrate one of the problems with your claim, with "twisting your words". Also, I believe we should *all* have "equal" rights.... This is not equality. is not a question. It's a statement.

@Beofett You say you're a member of a minority but it's irrelevant. So why mention it? And that is my point and question about equality, you can mention what you want, but (question) do I not have the "equal right" to ignore it? I'm not saying we should, I'm asking the question. No-one has ever kicked up a specific rule or problem when people don't refer to a doctor as Dr, even if they ask. Surely in a world with freedom of speech and equality, once you enforce one thing you take away some freedom? You just have to want people to be civil, but this covers a lot of ground and can't be enforced.

And just to avoid poisoning my character... I do care, and I have a trans gender friend who I refer to with their preferred pronoun. But I choose to do that. Sure it would be unkind and uncivil to not do so, then we wouldn't be friends, or less close. But is it not a choice? Is it going to become a legal matter for not using a gender pronoun (there are cases springing up BTW)? There are many things in life people would "prefer" others to do, but with "equality" you just have to ask and want, not expect or enforce.

@James if you are a cis-gendered male, and I insist on referring to you as "she", "they", or "it" even after you correct me, that will be considered harassment and I will be dealt with accordingly. It doesn't matter what my excuse is. No one's getting special treatment.

@James So why mention it? As I just explained: as an example to illustrate the problem with your perspective on "equality". Telling people they can't call someone a slur (again, this is an example) might be "taking away some freedom", but "freedom of speech", outside of the context of the US Constitution (which only applies to government enforcement, and excludes all private institutions), is not the same as "freedom of consequences for your choices". Letting "people [be] free to chose not to be kind" is not "equal" to people's right to be treated with respect.

To put it simpler: you say with "equality" you have to ask and want, not expect or enforce, but in essence you are saying "your desire not to be singled out and harassed is less valuable than the desire of others who wish to be able to be rude or unkind, should they so choose, because expecting or enforcing that behavior 'costs' more than we are willing to commit".

To add further clarification on what in retrospect is ambiguous phrasing on my part: the fact that I am a member of a minority is relevant to my example, but which specific minority is not relevant, since it is for illustration purposes only.

@Beofett "in essence you are saying "your desire not to be singled out and harassed is less valuable than the desire of others who wish to be able to be rude or unkind, should they so choose" Not sure I said that when all I've referred to is "equality", this means" equal" not biased. It doesn't matter what the choice is or desire, any kind of rule like this removes equality. It's this simple: Forcing anyone to do anything at all strips them of the freedom to not do it and to have freewill/choice. This is not subjective, it's entirely fact based on definition. I am expected to obey CoC.

Then I'm not sure what you think "equal" means. You're comparing apples (wanting to be treated with respect) to oranges (not being told you can't be rude). The word "equal" is entirely unrelated to that comparison, just as it is entirely unrelated to freedom to say what you like without consequences. The part about freewill/choice is a red herring, by the way, as is the idea of "compelled speech". You always have the option of not engaging. The CoC doesn't force you to use someone's preferred pronouns. You can exercise free will and not participate in discussions.

@Beofett "not being told you can't be rude" I don't understand why you read my comments like this at all. I've made my stance clear but you insist on twisting it. I don't want to be rude to anyone, I made this entirely clear. If you cannot see that enforcing the use of gender pronoun is removing freedoms then I do not wish to engage in debate with you any further. Have a nice day (EDIT I'm not talking about letting people be unkind or intentionally use the wrong ones, just in case you thought that of me too)

It's ironic you're here debating about the enforcement of people using gender pronouns is fair and justified, yet you twist my words to make me look bad and think bad of me. We don't need enforced gender pronouns to be able to be civil to each other, nor avoid defaming other people's character)

@James Treating people differently, and going out of the way to avoid referring to them by their preferred pronouns, is rude, no matter how "genuinely" one may be opposed to non-binary pronouns. This has been explained in multiple places throughout this and other discussions. This is not "twisting" your comments. It is a simple statement of the situation. Not wanting to be rude, and also refusing to recognize non-binary pronouns (and therefore treating non-binary individuals differently) are mutually exclusive.

@James I do want to clarify that I do not "think bad of you". I am clearly not communicating my point in a way that is reaching you, and you are misinterpreting it as twisting your words. I just am confused about your repeated use of the term "equality", since that word does not have any obvious relation to how you seem to be using it. I understand that prohibiting behavior is removing "freedoms"; I disagree that protecting "freedoms" on a privately owned forum is more important than enforcing manners. I don't know how to explain this any clearer, so I agree its best to end the discussion.

Yeah you just don't understand. you argue it's rude, I agree. I have agreed, I said it myself. If you can't see that I don't want to discuss anymore. You have upset me by twisting my words and making me look and feel bad. Tho, don't worry about that because it's not outlined in the CoC so my feelings don't matter.

I agree with James. Respect can be requested, but not demanded. It is not a Human Right (un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights) and it should never become one. I tend to respect people I don't know, but once you demand me to respect you, I'm tuning out.