Reply to Ellen Page announced new identity as Elliott Page

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Ellen Page announced new identity as Elliott Page"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Also, it’s really problematic when anyone who questions or pushes back on these new terms, etc is called a bigot. I  am respectful of everyone. I will call people whatever they ask to be called. I don’t hate trans people or wish them ill will at all. That doesn’t mean I can’t have questions or point out things that don’t make sense.

Calling everyone who doesn’t blindly agree with you a bigot is just a way to shut people down and divide people. It’s controlling and counterproductive. [/quote]

Can you point to anyone on this thread being called a "bigot?" Or any use of the term "bigot" before your post? [/quote]

Not the PP, but this was slightly upthread:

[quote]You're being deliberately disingenuous. You say they don't assign a "gender" but rather "observe a newborn's biological sex and record it." Why didn't you use the word gender in the second sentence as well? You know that gender and sex are not the same thing as demonstrated in your own language choices.

And for your commentary on the deadname article, again, you're being dismissive just to be smug. No one is getting upset "about the mere mention of their former name." It's not simply about "mentioning what someone used to be called for informational purposes." It's about continuing to use a former name as a way to not recognize and diminish the significance of the person's transition and new name.

[b]You understand all the "new language" as you call it but because you have problems with the people using it you cloak your bigotry in a sanctimonious criticism of the nuances of the language.[/b][/quote][/quote]

I'm the one who used the bigot term quoted and I will emphatically push back on the PP's assertion that I called someone "who doesn't blindly agree with me" a bigot.  I did not call the poster a bigot [b]just[/b] for pushing back on the terms at all. I actually explained and delineated why I think they were being bigoted:

1. being deliberately obtuse, pretending they don't understand semantics when really they don't want to accept them and
2. being dismissive, comparing apples and oranges to tell people directly affected by a situation that their feelings on the issue should really be a "non-issue."

I used the word bigot in the context of a wider discussion and that's the OPPOSITE of calling someone a bigot for just not agreeing with me.

Yes, calling people bigots can be divisive.  Doesn't mean we should stop calling it out when we see it.  If people don't agree that what I'm saying is bigoted is in fact bigoted, than come back and argue your counter points.

I didn't use the word to shut anyone down.  If I wanted to shut people down my replies would be one sentence long instead of discussions. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics