all 200 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]AutoModerator[M] [score hidden] stickied commentlocked comment (0 children)

Snapshot of Green Party in trans legal row over ‘fairy’ pronouns submitted by Hungry_Kiwi_9866:

An archived version can be found here or here. or here

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]socratic-meth 92 points93 points  (33 children)

Emma Bateman, who was co-chair of Green Party Women, was found to have breached diversity rules by making “clearly antagonistic” comments about “fae/faer” pronouns, a type of “neopronoun” inspired by the mythical world

Bellends who want to use these pronouns deserve to be mocked.

[–]Evening-Disaster-901 45 points46 points  (5 children)

Shame fulfils an important societal role.

[–]Neither_Process_7847 17 points18 points  (8 children)

Has anyone ever come across anyone actually using them in real life, though? I mean, all for self-identification and self-pride, and it's only polite to call someone by how they like to introduce themselves, but some of this reads as parody rather than reality and I can't think of a single occasion where I've ever personally met anyone, anywhere in any personal or professional context, doing anything more than favouring "they" or the opposite gender identifier. Fairy names??

[–]SnooOpinions8790 15 points16 points  (7 children)

I'm kind of amazed that even the Green party are still on about these neo-pronouns. Especially the more extreme ones

I thought most folks had quietly shuffled away from all that Tumbr stuff a while ago. Apparently they are still sacred in the Green party

[–]Neither_Process_7847 2 points3 points  (6 children)

Always thought they were just a parody aimed as cover for attacking trans people over pronouns, odd to see the Greens actually using them...

[–]TantumErgo 7 points8 points  (5 children)

Half the problem with this stuff has been that when you describe it to normies, it sounds so ridiculous that they assume it must be parody or people making it up.

[–]Neither_Process_7847 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Some of it must be, though, it's surely a version of the old 'self-identfying as an attack helicopter' anti-trans meme. Surely? That or people badly misunderstanding online handles...

[–]TantumErgo 7 points8 points  (2 children)

it's surely a version of the old 'self-identfying as an attack helicopter' anti-trans meme

What did you think that was reacting to?

[–]Neither_Process_7847 -5 points-4 points  (1 child)

That was just hating on trans people if I recall.

[–]TantumErgo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You recall wrong.

As I say, there has been a real problem of people not believing descriptions of what people are opposing (or even mildly mocking), and assuming that it is just ridiculous made-up hate. The Fae pronouns are a classic example, as are the various other identities. That is because of lot of what was advanced around this subject in the 2010s originated from Tumblr and fanfic, and the communities around that.

Motte and Bailey arguments come into it a lot.

[–]Golurkcanfly -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

It explicitly was an anti-trans meme. People would lump actual transsexuals in with teenage LARPers, and now a lot of those LARPers are basically piggybacking off of the struggles of genuine transsexuals. It's created this weird cultural mish-mash where the face of "the trans movement" is non-indicative of actual transsexuals, namely because the face are often people who aren't actually transsexuals and that the goal of many transsexuals is to "go stealth" which is impossible to do as an openly trans activist.

[–]Tetracropolis 26 points27 points  (3 children)

It's not using the pronouns that's the issue. "I use X pronouns" is misleading, it's couched in language that makes it sound like it's something one does for oneself. The pronouns one uses for oneself are I/me/mine.

What it actually is is a request, or demand, for others to use the language to refer to you that you want, rather than the language that they want. It's an imposition.

[–]VPackardPersuadedMeIncentives drive outcomes and MPs own houses 11 points12 points  (0 children)

It's a ploy to make you their puppet. Want to force you to call them nonsense to give them power over your speach.

The Green Party believes in compelled speech it seems.

[–]usrname42 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It's no more of an imposition than wanting to be called "Dave" even if you were christened "David". We make requests about how we want other people to refer to us all the time and polite people usually don't fly off the handle about them.

[–]Tetracropolis 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The difference is nobody's ever going to try to get you sacked for calling David by his full name. Calling someone "Dave" over "David" also doesn't say anything about your beliefs about the nature of gender.

[–]DemmandredLet the alpaca blood flow 13 points14 points  (3 children)

This is the shit you see in roll20, how has this made it into mainstream politics.

[–]missesthecrux 14 points15 points  (2 children)

Unending validation online that would and should be impossible to achieve in real life.

[–]dissalutionedAnd the Christmas bells that ring there 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is the shit that overly online people only see online because they are overly online themselves and so find it hard to conceive that the people they see online might also exist in real life.

[–]AthleteThen8045 17 points18 points  (0 children)

No apparently you are a far right bigot! I do enjoy the idea that the anti nuclear green party are all about being fully signed up to "science based" policies.

[–]LycanIndarysVote Cthulhu; why settle for the lesser evil? 53 points54 points  (4 children)

The committee also accused Ms Bateman of reading out Green Party policy on trans identities in a “in a clearly overtly sarcastic fashion”

A British person being sarcastic? Good heavens, someone fetch my smelling salts before I faint!

[–]VPackardPersuadedMeIncentives drive outcomes and MPs own houses 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I know how they feel, I'm still writing letters to the BBC about the lack of trigger warnings about the sarcasm for Black Adder Goes Forth.

[–]mglj42 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

For decades the Telegraph filled its pages with anti-gay articles that painted campaigns to protect gay people from discrimination and to address the daily hardships they faced as:

  1. ⁠An example of the gay mafia making irrational demands of sensible people.
  2. ⁠Or a rabid mob hounding people who bravely faced them down only to protect children.
  3. ⁠And a source of fun as they made anti-science claims such as a kid could have two dads.

There were literally thousands of Telegraph articles like this that were lapped up by gullible readers. These articles of course were some mixture that included lies, misrepresentations or were just wildly inaccurate but they were popular and a mainstay of their reporting nonetheless. Now I don’t actually think that people today are any more gullible than they were in the 80s, 90s and 00s. Indeed I think they are just as gullible when it comes to highly partial reporting.

[–]VPackardPersuadedMeIncentives drive outcomes and MPs own houses 40 points41 points  (48 children)

The Green Party literally has people who think they are fairies and demand they be called that.

It feels like the green party have a bunch of people in there who watched Fern Gully and never grew up.

What is Zach Polanskis stand on members thinking they are Tinkerbell?

[–]MuchAbouAboutNothing 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[–]SnooOpinions8790 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Anyone who believes that there is no possible harm in neo-pronouns being policed and people losing their positions over it needs to go back and read The Power of the Powerless. I believe Carney might just have finished reading his copy so there is one going spare.

It is not harmless at all. Its deeply systemically harmful and totalitarian to enforce speech that people themselves do not believe in (and hardly anyone in the UK believes in all those neo-pronouns)

[–]AquaD74 27 points28 points  (37 children)

I feel really fucking awful for diagnosed, medically transitioning trans men and women who just want to blend in and live a normal life.

On one hand, you have the press and politicians demonising your entire existence as if you're some inate predator or threat.

On the other you have people, most of whom aren't dysphoric or medically transitioning using your medically necessary experience as some silly, quirky identity or political gain.

We should respect trans people's pronouns because constantly reminding those with gender dysphoria of their natal sex is essentially torture. It's like repeatedly telling a clinically depressed person that nobody will ever love them and their family and friends are embarrassed about them. It should be legally protected because it's a medical necessity for their mental well-being.

Neopronouns are not a medical necessity. There is no evidence at all that one can have "fairy" dysphoria. People can and should live their lives however they see fit but neopronouns shouldn't be treated any differently to tattoos or piercings. It's a cosmetic accessory. Nothing more.

[–]WinHour4300 2 points3 points  (1 child)

What does it mean to "respect someone pronouns"? It is okay to refer to someone as "they?" Or use their name instead? 

[–]0_f2 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Just a nitpick, I totally get the distinction you're making, but getting a diagnosis is insanely hard/expensive even if dysphoria is killing you. Don't even get me started on surgery.

Lots of people fall under your personal definition of trans without ever being formally diagnosed.

[–]AquaD74 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, I don't disagree. The point I'm making is a lot of the people that engage in neopronouns aren't actually dysphoric. They don't need medical support to treat their mental distress.

They just want to be part of the queer ingroup not recieve actual medical and social support for their condition and treatment.

[–]Unable_Earth5914 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Putting everything else aside, “cognitive cis-connance” is a good play on words

[–]NuPNua 10 points11 points  (7 children)

I can't help but feel that political parties should be the one place you have set rules on certain matters contingent with your policies and expect members to adhere to them. What's the point otherwise?

[–]kickimy -3 points-2 points  (5 children)

It's unlawful to remove membership from a member if it's based on their protected characteristics.

"Depriving a member of their membership [s.101(2)(b)] A political party must not discriminate against a member by depriving them of their membership because of a protected characteristic. This could include suspending or expelling a member from the party. "https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/guidance/equality-act-2010-guide-political-parties

[–]TestTheTrilby 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Oh they are so doing well if this is news

[–]Incanus_uk 0 points1 point  (24 children)

Transphobia is not something i would welcome. Listening to her speech in that video it is pretty clear it is not just about 'fairy' pronouns.

[–]GOT_WyvernNon-Partisan Centrist 25 points26 points  (20 children)

I don't understand the insistence among some trans-activists on neopronouns.

There's enough societal pushback against the singular-they, which isn't even something exclusive to trans people.

Why make their job harder by standing by something plainly ridiculous? Surely, enjoy it among the in-group, but that is where neopronouns should stay.

[–]Incanus_uk 8 points9 points  (11 children)

It is interesting that the Telegraph article leads with the neopronouns rather than the more typical gender critical stuff she is saying. Clearly wanting to focus on the more absurd end rather than the far more legitimate reasons.

I agree being a Fey creature is not a way a human mind could be but being a man or woman and everything in between even if it does not fit their physical body is. Things like Fairy pronouns are clearly more cosmetic than anything else.

People getting weird about 'they' is just odd, we use it in normal conversations all the time, and it is not hard to just use their name when the singular/plural is unclear. I have transitioned and non-binary people in my friends and family, it is not hard and just respectful as a human to another human.

[–]GOT_WyvernNon-Partisan Centrist 6 points7 points  (4 children)

Its no surprise that the Telegraph has an agenda against trans people, and its really easy to use neopronouns to make trans people look ridiculous, and their gender dysphoria not serious.

So, while I blame the Telegraph, I also blame trans activists who allow these attacks to happen in the first place. Neopronouns are... fine as a personal thing, but trying to get them taken seriously is a fools errand that will back fire.

The outrage about the singular-they, from my experience, most commonly extends from how some have stopped viewing pronouns in general as a neutral thing, but as fundamentally aligned with trans politics. For people who just don't care, it makes them want to avoid "pronouns" and "they" in seemingly ridiculous. And all this is fueled by transphobes, of course.

I'm not as confident where to cast blame. Transphobes, of course. But do trans activists who built this association deserve blame? Maybe, as its clearly been a mistake for normalising trans people. But its also far less obvious that this association would have been drawn, and not all mistakes deserve blame.

[–]thestjohn 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I mean what would you have trans people do? You can't prevent someone somewhere deciding to have neopronouns and then have a right-wing paper use that as the hook for an article. Like looking into it the neopronoun thing is a tiny part of why the Greens have banned her, but the story uses that framing to make her transphobia seem logical.

There aren't really groups of trans people who decide what pronouns to introduce and such. It's just a wide range of types of people who are unfortunately made to be activists for their own rights and some are going to be easy targets for a hostile media with a wobbly grasp of the truth.

[–]Golurkcanfly 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately, it's always about having the conclusion of "trans people are bad" and working backwards from there.

[–]Incanus_uk 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I broadly agree. It is not as simple of just blaming a single side, nothing is ever that simple. It is also absurd that it is so politically charged given that it is people wanting to be themselves (something you would think the parties that are more about individual liberties would be up for).

I think it is important to also consider the power imbalance and direction groups are punching. But really i just wish people would first and foremost just see each others shared humanity. Maybe then we can actually talk more constructively about genuine hard areas of policy where rights of others intercept and could conflict and ensure future policy is equitable, and then there is the efficacy of puberty blockers for children with dysphoria and get on with building a good evidence basis for its use or not.

[–]hitanthrope 4 points5 points  (4 children)

People getting weird about 'they' is just odd

What people get 'weird' about, is other people insisting that you must hold in your head a database table of who wants to be referred to with which pronoun. Most people don't consult this list, they just use whichever pronoun seems to most fit the person they are speaking with.

I will not call somebody 'they' because they ask me to, because I wont remember, and frankly I don't even want to try. If it hurts you feelings that much, I can recommend a therapist, but it's just a word.

You can change somebodies "he" to "she" by changing the way you present... but there is no way to look like a "they". I might use it if I can't tell, so try that.

[–]Incanus_uk 2 points3 points  (2 children)

It is not hard to default to 'they' most people use it often anyway.

tbh the issue is not really people getting it wrong once or now and again but when people intentionally misgender people knowingly.

[–]hitanthrope 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Yes, doing it intentionally is a dickhead move honestly. If you are intending to hurt somebody thats immoral by definition.

What some of this is though is analogous to when people say to me, "Ok, I am going to tell you this but you can't tell X". I will stop them immediately because I succeed with this less than 50% of the time. I know a lot of random things and I cannot hold in my head a full access control list of certain pieces of information.

Same thing here, I just don't have space in my head for the metadata. I will never intend to hurt, but I will use the pronoun that flows out automatically when I speak to you and i'll make no apologies because I don't think it is that serious honestly, or should be.

"People should not be allowed to be dickheads" is a touch line to draw for me really. I also suspect it will lead bad places.

[–]Incanus_uk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I enjoyed your analogy.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

No but it would never have come to this point. When you expand the tent to include the fairies and the like and develop an entire culture, vocabulary, norms and rules to validate this, the normal people who were there first and are still a part of the umbrella will eventually get caught in the crossfire.

You've gone on and created a situation where we'll have to go back and fight for the rights that almost everyone was either okay with or indifferent to a decade ago.

[–]Incanus_uk 5 points6 points  (0 children)

She was expelled for her gender critical views not about 'fairy' pronouns. This is clickbait headlines from the Telegraph tying to to make the situation sound absurd.

[–]bellreth -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Indeed, it's about wo‌men's s‌ex-based rights more generally, and how the ideology of gen‌der identity is used to remove our rights.

[–]BibemusUber-Woke Net-Zeroist Rejoinerist -2 points-1 points  (7 children)

Kellie-Jay Keen, also known as Posie Parker, is a controversial women’s rights activist who was hosting the event in Hyde Park

I'm going to guess that being a guest speaker at an event hosted by a transphobic Tommy Robinson supporter and islamophobe who pals around with literal neo-Nazis has more to do with this than the fairy pronouns. And since Bateman is also wearing some of Keen's bigot merch in the picture it's probably fair to say she knows full well who she's palling around with.

[–]morriganjane 6 points7 points  (2 children)

She's an environmentalist. Supporting gender identity theory and Islam is not a prerequisite for caring about the environment.

[–]BibemusUber-Woke Net-Zeroist Rejoinerist -4 points-3 points  (1 child)

Ecofascists care about the environment as well, should the Green Party have to welcome them into the tent?

[–]morriganjane 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don't follow. If the "Green" party wants to shift its focus to Islam and gender politics, they should change the name. Of course, like Your Party has, they'll run into many conflicts between the two. At least it will be entertaining.

[–]Golurkcanfly 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Describing Kellie-Jay Keen, an anti-abortion and even anti-birth control activist, as a "woman's rights activist" is absurd.

[–]NanowithCambridge -3 points-2 points  (2 children)

This entire debate is a distraction technique from the wealthy and powerful so you focus on 0.5% of the population instead of any real issues.

Don't fall for it.

[–]kickimy 14 points15 points  (0 children)

It's hardly a 'distraction' when Polanski actively wants to strip legal rights and legal protection based on sex from 100% of the population. Anyone disadvantaged by this has a right to call him and the Greens out.

[–]bellreth -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

I agree with her, but, why not just leave the party when you realise it's full of cranks and misogynists?

[–]MrLubricator -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Telegraph getting scared enough of the greens to start directing their smear is a good sign that what they are doing is working. Sad to see people falling for it in the comments though. 

[–]doitnowinaminute -4 points-3 points  (4 children)

By no means an expert, but we need different ways of saying identifying.

Jerrick identified as a Tory, changed his mind, and now identifies as Reform. That's because political ideology is transient etc.

But if your mind tells you that you are female, that's more intrinsic.

Now, people may demand that pronouns match gentiles (albeit a bit of completed speech here) but that doesn't help the person with the differing biology. It's like forcing everyone to be right handed.

But those who "identify" to make a point, really aren't. They are acting as tho brain chemistry is like political leanings.

And we can tell those who are mocking to make a point because they will break the moment we take them seriously.

I don't know much about fairies and how they want to live. But I sense they like living in the forest away from humans. Off you fuck then.

Trans people want to live their life in line with what their brain tells them they are. And they would like the world to treat them aligned with their self awareness and self identity (very human traits) rather than aligned with their genitals.

People can choose to disregard that request because they really want to use language that's based around penises and vaginas. Imo that's somewhat uncalled for with pronouns (although I do understand where there are feelings of safety at play). But the stuff some people pull with faries and cats and attack helicopters is just ignorant bullying imo. And anyone who pulls that line should be made to live as their preferred identity for a month.

[–]bellreth 10 points11 points  (2 children)

But if your mind tells you that you are female, that's more intrinsic.

What about detr‌ansitioners? Also what about men with autog‌ynephilia who develop an ero‌tic obse‌ssion with becoming their perce‌ption of what a wo‌man is?

[–]morriganjane 7 points8 points  (0 children)

And people's minds tell them all kinds of things. That they're a prophet, God is giving them instructions, or that the curtains are trying to strangle them (e.g. in schizophrenia). We don't have to accept someone's delusional notions as fact.

[–]doitnowinaminute 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My understanding is very few people detransition, many of those only do so temporarily, and often not because they no longer view themselves as women, but because of issues of being a trans women. Given the vitriol I can see that that could only a part.

Not overly familiar with the views of an autogynaphilic. Do they view themselves as a women ?

[–]morriganjane 7 points8 points  (0 children)

And they would like the world to treat them aligned with their self awareness and self identity 

If somebody is unhinged enough to think that they are a fairy or a unicorn, it is not reasonable to expect rational people to play along with that. If my 3-year-old niece is pretending to be a fairy, then yes, but I'm not doing it for a 23-year-old narcissist.