I am glad someone is calling the Florida school system on their bullshit. Being non-binary hard and being treated like the coping mechanisms you use for avoiding hating the experience of dealing with people and existing in your body are somehow a delusion, some sort of sexual kink or deliberately confusing is like trying to go about your day with weights strapped to you. It makes dealing with every social interaction so tiring. It really feels like everybody else in the room is obsessed with your sex organs and characteristics like complete perverts that they don’t see the question is about how happy you are and how you feel about all the people in your life and whether you feel anxious and isolated being around them or just comfortable and able to express your full range of personhood.
This teacher is standing up because they know there’s others much worse off who aren’t secure enough to do it. Pretty admirable I think.
Thank you for sharing how thus affects you. It’s important for people to see that this is affecting actual people and not some strawman concept they don’t understand.
It’s something even a lot of my friends don’t even really get. I ended up going to a Birthday party where across the street from the restaurant there was a 250 plus rally of anti-trans protesters with zero counter protesters. We didn’t realize the thing would be there. I ended up not being able to eat because the stress from proximity made me throw up everything.
I know we get called sensitive snowflakes but having that level of outright hate shoved in your face can easily make anyone feel very small and very vulnerable and at some level it’s visceral.
deleted by creator
It’s harder to feel like a capable badass when you’ve borrowed a friend’s hat to cover your rainbow colored hair and are ralphing korean food into a strip mall garbage can.
At some level we as a demographic are sensitive, I can’t really control the way I feel about my body and my place in society. Being out does mean exposing that vulnerability where other people can see. Sensitivity isn’t cowardice but it does mean having to realize where your limits are and how you work. A lot of us learn to put on a tough as nails affect over time so we can get through a regular ass day. Realistically I know I am not a coward any more than I am Superman. I am just doing my best
Not only that, but then have the hate be called “reasonable debate”
As if we aren’t actual real people that just want to exist in the world. It’s like you have to fight against the fucking river in making anyone even believe you that what they are seeing is hate, transphobia.
We’re simply not treated like real people in these debates, and it’s frustrating and exhausting. If they faced the same treatment you would bet they would protest severely.
But I guess that is also the case for cis women in the abortion debate. I guess the debate being about half of the population still isn’t enough for empathy.
Pretty real stuff. A feels like lot of people just want to punch through us to hit somebody on the other side. I can’t say I like the way they frame things about parents rights either. It’s like they want to own their children like property not just be a major influence in their lives. The lack of empathy doesn’t even really extend to their own flesh and blood much less us.
My hometown’s council is like a microcosm of the whole thing. A vocal group storms the trustee meetings to rail on and on about how we need to Protect children from gender ideology, they run over their alloted time so nobody can get any regular business done and the board turns their mic off so they can just function as a government. The “spurned Conservatives” then go to the local paper and tell everyone that their freedom of speech was unjustly curtailed because a hypocritical progressive turned their mic off. The paper prints the story uncritically and all of a sudden we’re a threat to freedom of speech and democracy… They then turn around and say “I’m not transphobic” as though they didn’t just paint us as bogeyman who are dangerous to be around women, kids, polling stations, government, pens and paper etc. etc. etc.
Some days it’s just a lot.
Yeah…
This isn’t calling out Florida schools, this only calls out Florida employers. A teacher can be directed not to talk about gay in matters of education, and can be fired for not following such direction, but they cannot be discriminated against for their own sexual identity as a matter of their employment.
US law is shite.
A lot of people do not draw the distinction between talking about things in an educational context versus it being a way they express themselves for their own needs. Laws like this make people afraid to do so until it is contested because the act of contesting it is itself punitive. The cooling effect is implicit in the design of the law because it recognizes law removes people’s ability to support themselves in a society before it has a chance to be tested meaning only the secure of a minority under extreme fire can contest it and that means becoming very visible in circumstances where one’s safety often relies on being invisible.
This teacher is likely under extreme fire right now by a mob of people telling them they are a pedophile, delusional, harmful and trying to exploit every shred of exposed weaknesses to gendered nonsense one naturally lets be known when one comes out as non-binary.
Where legal protections are shaky schools will fire teachers under concerns for that teacher’s physical and mental safety if enough parents are valued at being a threat by feeling empowered by their interpretation of the law or the idea that a school is operating outside the law. Ultimately running a school is government money that needs to be paid so an employee going up against a school board for wrongful dismissal will not impact the individual school as much when the main currency for the school board employees is time and complexity of a bunch of individual parents suing because their little darling asked them what someone calling themselves Mx. means when they came home.
That’s a good point. Gorsuch’s surprising cross over to rule with the liberal justices in a recent supreme court ruling (Bostock vs Clayton County) allowed gender and sexual identifies to be protected by current federal employment law. The very logical conclusion that comes from, any discrimination on the basis of sexual or gender identity revolves around a person’ s assigned sex at birth, which is definitely prohibited, and you can’t discriminate on those things without it being an illegal discrimination test based on sex. Basically if you fire someone assigned male at birth for wearing a dress but not someone assigned female at birth for wearing a dress, this is sex discrimination, already protected by current federal law. Similarly if you’re firing a male for marrying a male but not firing a female for marrying a male, than that’s sex discrimination already prohibited by current law.
Unfortunately I don’t know if the current Supreme Court reasoning would extend the existing federal law to protect non binary honorifics, since the school could argue it would fire anyone using a non binary honorific regardless of that person’s assigned sex at birth. Though maybe if you could get the school to admit they’d allow a non binary honorific for an intersex individual that would open up the door for non binary protections too via current law? But this is why we need a real updated federal law explicity protecting against discrimination on the basis of sexual and gender identifies, including non binary identities. In the meantime the states that do have explicit protections in their state laws are going to be much better places for non cis and hetero people to work in.
Very interesting and informative, thanks.
We absolutely do need updated Federal law, discrimination in general should be simplified and more comprehensive. It’s somewhat strange that Title II doesn’t cover sex - I can understand why (eg women’s hostels only allowing women) but I feel this should be an exception to a rule, not an absence of any rule whatsoever. Title II already has an exemption for “private clubs” so it wouldn’t be that unusual.
-
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act explicitly prohibits discrimination because of sex in matters of employment. Florida is free to prevent teachers from teaching things, but they cannot fire people for their own sexual identity, per federal law.
-
Meanwhile, Title II of CRA covers interstate commerce and prohibits discrimination because of race, color, religion, or national origin - but not sex. Under Federal Law, if your business has a lot of out of state customers (primarily hospitality) or includes supply chains that cross state lines, you can’t discriminate on race, etc but you can discriminate on sex.
-
The 14th Amendment states that the law must apply to everyone equally. However, this only applies to governments (and their contractors) - a black person cannot be refused to be heard in court and a gay person cannot be refused a marriage.
The way US law is supposed to work is that states can set their own laws where Federal Law doesn’t cover it. However, they must do this within the bounds of Federal Law. This is why we have 1st Amendment challenges against state laws that fill in the gaps of federal law - a business can discriminate based on sex, or any other reason (so long as they don’t fall under Title II), even if state law says otherwise.
US law is so shit. It’s unnecessarily hard to read, distributed across multiple yet interwoven jurisdictions, and full of holes. But hey, at least it isn’t financial regulations - reading those will cause a sane person to lose the will to live.
TL;DR This should be a slam dunk for the teacher, per Federal Law: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which overrules anything the states write. However, who knows how the current Supreme Court might try to spin it - if they even opt to hear it (they absolutely should).
The teacher will make millions from the settlement, paid squarely out of the pocket of working Floridians. And despite that, half the state will continue voting for politicians and supporting police whose actions have no real consequences for them - the tax payers will foot the bill for their actions. Until we start hitting these people in their own pocket books and pensions, their behavior won’t change.
This may not be the slam dunk you think it is. To the best of my understanding, the current coverage under title vii for gender and sexuality has only been extended so far as “would this behaviour be unacceptable for the opposite sex?”
Florida could argue (within the scope of existing supreme Court decisions) that the use of certain “new” titles are never acceptable, regardless of the person’s sex.
As written, the rule is illegal, but it could possibly be upheld in the context of this specific case.
They would have to argue that sex and gender are not the same thing in court, under oath. It’s been a longstanding argument for the GOP that they are the same. And if they argue biological sex and gender are not 1:1, then they’re acknowledging that a different gender identity than one’s birth sex is possible, and setting that precedent immediately takes the wind out of a lot of their arguments on transgender folk.
They’ll be happy to say one thing in public and argue another in court. For example, when Fox News argued that a reasonable person is not expected to believe anything Tucker Carlson is saying.
This may not be the slam dunk you think it is.
Yeah, that’s why I said “should”.
-
However, regular guys from Florida succeeded in being waaaay worse than the memed Florida Man, good job guys
“Florida Man” is a representation of all the US. The only difference is that Florida allows the publication of personal information about people for merely being arrested, let alone accused or even actually convicted of a crime. This gives a disproportionate view of how bad Florida is - it isn’t that much worse than most other US states.
But it is worse. The whole state is literally a swamp, and Ron DeSantis is a war criminal, alongside his criminal actions as Governor (eg using ringfenced state money to benefit other states and his friend who owns a chartered airline business).
Florida Mx if you want to lose your job.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.Just wait until Mike Johnson allows a convention of the states (state governments are predominantly Republican, in contrast to the majority of state and national population) where they rewrite state adherance to the Constitution and every federal civil rights law they don’t want states to have to adhere to - but not the ones you hold dear.
We call people what they want to be called. (Credit for this to Charlie Worroll from Crimelines and other podcasts)
I agree.
That being said, how do you pronounce this? Is it Mix? Mixter? Mizz(that sounds too close to ms)
Just like “mix”
Mix of what?
Do you think it’s possible for two words to sound alike but have different meanings?
Repression has historically always won… right? !
Online Public School, what’s that?
My brother did Florida Virtual School and graduated in 2011 or so. It was actually pretty great, and what they should have switched all the students to during COVID. It’s exactly what it sounds like, online coursework, just like if you’ve ever taken a college class online, but its a public high school option meaning its free. Some stuff doesn’t work quite as well, the lab kit they sent my brother to use wasn’t quite as good as my in person lab classes. Florida actually invested the time and money to make it good because a lot of child actors and some of the kids training at sports schools use it.
Edit: to clarify, “public” in the US means state government funded, I’m aware that some places mean the opposite when they talk about public/private schools.
It’s a public school that’s attended primarily online.
When I was enrolled in one, they had us do 99% of our work at home, and we could do the work at our own pace, but we had to come in to the building to take the more important tests to move to the next semester-equivalent. That was to make sure that we weren’t cheating like we were fully able to do for the regular tests, because this was before spyware was the norm.
It was great for anyone who could stay motivated to do school work and would go out of their way to interact with other students, and it was the worst possible method of schooling for my lazy, unsociable ass. I’d likely not have graduated if my high school hadn’t started giving what basically amounted to a GED test for seniors who couldn’t pass their classes in time. I knew the stuff, I just refused to actually do the stuff. Highly recommend for extraverts. Cannot recommend for introverts.
deleted by creator
How about we come up with a better term rather than use a stupid one that someone has to tell you how to pronounce.
To be fair Mrs. (And to a lesser extent Mr.) Don’t have an obvious pronunciation from the spelling either. You’ve just been hearing them said out loud for most of your life.
Fair, but they are also shorthand for words: Mister, Miss, Missus. All of which are pronounced as you’d expect.
Is Mx short for something? I’ve not heard so but that doesn’t mean it isn’t.
Apparently it’s short for “Mix”. I only learned that in this post, which suggests it’s far from established - I assumed it was along the lines of “latino/latina -> latinx”.
Obligatory “Latine” is the preferred gender neutral term for spanish speakers because it actually follows the gendering rules of the language, rather than english speakers making shit up.
Yesss that sounds far better.
Even if it sounds close to a word for “toilet” - but then, half the argument revolves around toilets.
Let people piss and shit in peace.
It takes 10 seconds to learn its pronounced mix. Its not difficult in the slightest
Anyone with an S lettered last name is gunna sound like Mc S
I just tried it with my last name lol.
Mc Steele, makes me feel like a McDonald’s meal item.
I’m not saying it’s difficult to teach or learn, but if you first encounter it in a book are you going to know it’s pronounced “mix?” And if you hear is are you going to know it’s spelled “Mx?” You can argue difficulty all you want but if you have something that is spelled how it sounds and pronounced how it looks it’s still easier and there will be less confusion.
Removed by mod
Where was @Alexstarfire@lemmy.world supposed to have learned that definition before this thread? Where were the students of this teacher’s class supposed to have learned it?
Given that English adopts definitions based on a critical mass of people using it, why should Mx. be adopted when it is only used by an exceedingly small minority?
Where were the students of this teacher’s class supposed to have learned it?
“Hello class, I’m mix Jones. I’ll be your teacher this year”
Or you know, you could just ask. Not a burden in the slightest. Why should I learn how to say your name? The answer is it’s a matter of respect.
Where were the students of this teacher’s class supposed to have learned it?“Hello class, I’m mix Jones. I’ll be your teacher this year”
That is the real nuance in this case. A teacher is not allowed to “say gay” to their students under Florida state law. However, an employee cannot be discriminated against for their sex under Federal law.
By a plain reading of the law, a gay teacher cannot be fired for being gay. A reasonable extension of that is that they cannot be fired for explaining to students that they are gay. This should hold true for any sexual characteristics that the teacher holds. Federal law overrules state law, thus, even though the state finds it illegal, they should still be protected under Federal law. It might be different if the teacher talked about other people being gay when they are not, but Federal law protects them against discrimination for their sex.
The question is whether “sex” includes being gay, or non-standard gender definitions. I think and hope it does. I worry that the current Supreme Court might rule otherwise.
Or you know, you could just ask… Why should I learn how to say your name?
These two statements kind of contradict each other. Asking implies you need to learn something new. There’s nothing wrong with asking or learning something new, but the person presenting a new idea should be prepared that it is a new idea for people to learn, which people might not immediately accept. That doesn’t excuse discrimination, but neither is acceptance demandable.
Once some critical mass of a population has accepted the new terminology, then and only then should acceptance be expected - and even then, that only applies to that specific population.
I mean if you see “Mx” and you don’t assume it’s pronounced “mix”, you might have some elementary language difficulties. I understand not being sure, but it is pronounced how it’s spelled.
I don’t see anything stupid about this, but if you have better ideas, let’s hear them.
The better idea is not to make up terminology that only suits you and an exceptionally small minority and then expect everyone else to adopt it.
By all means, define yourself as you like - but don’t expect others to immediately recognise that definition without reasonable explanation.
This case has nuance. On the one hand, a teacher in Florida is not allowed to talk about gay people or anything about alternate genders, per state law. On the other, Federal Law states that no one can be fired over matters regarding sex. Federal law overrules any laws states make, hence the ruling in 303 Creative vs Elenis, however the question is what “sex” covers in the Federal domain.
What honorific should nonbinary people use?
Whatever they like, and other people should be reasonably accommodating to that. Meanwhile, people using rarer honorifics should be accepting that others might find it unusual and sometimes hard to remember.
I think most of them do accept that. Just like most trans people accept that their friends might mess up on gender on occasion after they transition.
fake school upset by fake honorific
All words are “fake”
Mx. isn’t fake. People get to be called what they desire.
To a certain extent. How about profanities or protected titles (such as dr.) or another people’s identities?
What an excellent strawman. Shoo, troll. No one is suggesting that.
Same to you, strawman… Im on your side with this, but you did say people can be called whatever they desire… here I am, I want to be doctor. 🤷🏻♂️
What makes a word a fake word?
How do you even say that? “Mexico Smith, can I get a hall pass?”
deleted by creator
Spanish is my first language. Spanish defaults to masculine of words, but so do all Latin based languages. Here in the states we see Latinx. In Mexico and South America, “latine” is becoming prevalent.
Linguistically speaking, it’s absurd. Polls in the USA, where Latinx was invented by uncomfortable, uninformed white people to try and be inclusive, show that 93% of the latino / hispanic population either disapprove of or don’t care about it.
Edit: putting this up higher for visibility.
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/08/11/901398248/hispanic-latino-or-latinx-survey-says
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/05/us/latinx-gallup-poll-preference-trnd/index.html
Use latine, it already exists in the language
I will refrain. Thanks.
As someone with no skin in the game, I don’t understand why people don’t just say “Latin” when they’re speaking English. We already don’t use genders, and routinely ignore plenty of other foreign language rules like plurals (“a cannoli”, for example). I don’t think anyone is going to be confused and think you’re talking about the Italic people annexed by Rome in 338 BC.
Because we’re not Latin - that’s just the language spoken by the Roman empire. In fact, latino is a bit wrong. Something my mom rankled at when I was growing up. Oddly enough, my grandma who got her PhD in Spanish from the University of Habana, didn’t give two shits.
Hispanic refers to “Hispaniola,” the kingdom primarily situated on the Iberian peninsula which had Portugal, Spain, and parts of France in it (to simplify the explanation).
Latino is accepted and fine. Hispanic seems to be fine as well. Latin works, but again, it’s sort of wrongish.
Edit: putting this up higher for visibility.
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/08/11/901398248/hispanic-latino-or-latinx-survey-says
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/05/us/latinx-gallup-poll-preference-trnd/index.html
My perspective has always been “if it’s good enough for John Leguizamo to use on HBO, it’s good enough for me.” And he very frequently referred to his ethnicity as Latin in his comedy.
And then a few weeks ago he was on CNN saying Latinx.
Point being, the thing that matters is that the intent is to be respectful. Using the wrong word to offend makes you an asshole, and it doesn’t matter if you’re misgendering someone or denigrating an entire ethnicity. Using the wrong word because it’s ambiguous, or it’s traditional, or you’re not sure is a different matter. Most words were wrong at some point, because language changes. The point is that you treat other humans as people, and not as political targets.
Sure. 93+% of the others who have weighed in against it don’t matter. Only Leguizamo.
Let me state it clearly: most of us do not like it.
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/08/11/901398248/hispanic-latino-or-latinx-survey-says
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/05/us/latinx-gallup-poll-preference-trnd/index.html
Way to miss the point. None of this is news to me, and prescriptivism is a losing argument. I personally despise the term Latinx–just like I despiss Mx. I wouldn’t default to either. But I’ll call anyone whatever they prefer. If you want to doggedly refuse to accommodate someone just because their preference puts them in a minority, who are you actually helping?
Latine is so obviously the better choice, but no, 'Muricans have to anglicize it to make it theirs. 🙄
Use latine instead
deleted by creator
Hot take: gendered language doesn’t serve any meaningful purpose and we should just get rid of it. There is no need for inanimate non-gendered objects to have a linguistic gender.
Or, you know, you could just get over it and realize that gender in language is not the same thing as gender in people. There’s one African language, for example, that has 16 different genders.
Also, you are mistaken that linguistic gender doesn’t serve a purpose. It does and there’s a pretty extensive body of linguistic literature on the subject.
Fun fact; as with most of the other Germanic languages, English originally had three genders; masculine, feminine and neuter. They got stripped out of the language for reasons having to do with English history that are too technical to go into right now.
And German still has those genders, and as you rightly said, they have nothing to do with gender identity.
The only issue here is gendered pronouns and other forms of address that rely on the gender of the person being discussed. Nobody cares whether a table is masculine or feminine, but they do care whether your parent’s sibling is a male or female because in many languages, there’s no word to eliminate that information. That’s the issue here, and the solution isn’t to rewrite the entire concept of gender in languages, but instead to introduce and popularize genderless pronouns and titles. I know I hate saying “how many uncles and aunts do you have,” especially since I know that doesn’t necessarily cover all of the person’s parents’ siblings. Give me words like “cousin” so I don’t need to separate people by gender in casual conversation unless it’s actually relevant.
Can you link a layman’s explanation of the value of grammatical gender regarding inanimate objects? After years of learning and being frustrated by French, I had come to the conclusion that grammatical gender was stupid and served no purpose, but I’d love to have a better understanding of its value.
Again, this isn’t coming from a position of “prove me wrong, buttfart”. This is coming from “I’d like to learn more and have a better understanding of something I’m probably just not getting.”
Hot take: person who only speaks English thinks everyone should just speak English.
It’s still entirely non-standard, and not explicitly protected under law.
By all means, push the bounds; and I would hope you establish legal precedent. However, there is little that offers prior circumstance; you are still arguing how things should be, rather than how things are right now. Because of that, courts are not a sufficient venue, it must be argued at the political level.
I agree that Mx is made up bullshit, much like “Latinx” is nonsense in Spanish, but the law does not make any such distinction. You cannot be discriminated against in your job based on your sexual identity, even if you identified as an Apache helicopter (“oh yes daddy, let me fuck you in your missile tubes” - “hah, as if you’d even touch the sides”).
Boo, get new material.
Seriously, sexually identifying as an Apache helicopter? Go back to edgy 2012.
I’m merely pointing to that as a ridiculous exception that is still technically valid in this instance. Sexual identity is a protected class, if only in matters of employment.
Frankly, I think it should be a universally protected class, in almost all cases and for all classifications, but it bears mentioning the limitations of the law.
I agree that Mc is made up bullshit
Boy do I have bad news for you about every other word that exists in every single language. There is no word tree we harvest fresh ripe new words from, everything is made up. We are just meat squirting air through our various holes because we like the sounds they make and wish to communicate thought.
Something being made up doesn’t make it bullshit, but something made up by a tiny minority within a minority expecting everyone else to adopt it certainly does.
Is it really so hard to respect a person enough to address them with the courtesy title they ask you to use? Are you in any way inconvenienced by saying “Hello Mx. TWeaK, how are you today”?
No, but unless someone tells me that they want to be referred to as “Mx” I shouldn’t be expected to assume that. Furthermore, when they tell me and my natural response is “Huh?” I shouldn’t be vilified for not knowing what they mean - neither should they be vilified for coming up with a personal definition that suits them better.
It’s a two way street. You’re free to be yourself and to stand out from the crowd, but doing so naturally invites inquesition. Such inquesition is not inherently malicious, even if malicious people are more likely to ask questions.
The reasonable ground is somewhere in between. Noisy people on either side demand that they be seen as right, but the fact is they’re both an insignificant minority with an unobjective opinion. One minority is smaller and more vulnerable, and that should be taken into consideration, but that doesn’t mean everything they say is right.
Question: “I shouldn’t be expected to assume that. Furthermore, when they tell me and my natural response is “Huh?” I shouldn’t be vilified for not knowing what they mean”
Who has ever done this to you. Ever. Who have you met that asked you to address them in a specific way then got pissy at you over it? I’m not saying it didn’t happen, but neither me nor anyone I know nor anyone who knows a person I know has ever had this happen to them.
Also: “and that should be taken into consideration, but that doesn’t mean everything they say is right.”
How can someone be wrong about the courtesy title that they choose to use? Like the entire concept and name ‘courtesy title’ make it pretty clear what they are about.
Who has ever done this to you. Ever. Who have you met that asked you to address them in a specific way then got pissy at you over it? I’m not saying it didn’t happen, but neither me nor anyone I know nor anyone who knows a person I know has ever had this happen to them.
No one. At the same time, people here seem to be getting a little pissy over the thought of asking the question or not immediately accepting any answer - hence my statement in clarification. My statement is confined to the hypotheticals in our conversation, dismissing them out of hand would be hypocritical.
Also: “and that should be taken into consideration, but that doesn’t mean everything they say is right.”
How can someone be wrong about the courtesy title that they choose to use? Like the entire concept and name ‘courtesy title’ make it pretty clear what they are about.
First, my statement that it “doesn’t mean everything they say is right” is meant to cover extreme limits, it doesn’t explicitly refer to things we’ve said but things that could potentially be extrapolated from that. I’m trying to form a concise statement that covers as much as possible.
Second, using a “courtesty title” and even people accepting that does not mean the courtesy title is not “made up bullshit”. People accept bullshit all the time - just look at Trump supporters. It’s only when the made up idea is accepted by a critical mass that it ceases to be bullshit; and even then, it could still be reasonably labelled as bullshit, particularly if it doesn’t have a logical origin.
Maybe “Mx.” as an abbreviation for “Mix” has some logical origin, but at the same time it doesn’t really fit in line with “Mister, Miss, Missus”, and it certainly isn’t established like those terms are nor is it immediately apparent what the abbreviation is short for.
Some measure of rejection should be expected when you’re asking people to adapt their native language to suit yourself. Your personal expression should not dictate how others express themselves in communication; communicating is a mutual process between people, without an agreement on terminology things are neither right nor wrong, it’s all just made up bullshit until we agree - and even then…
Like “mix”. It’s fairly simple to most people who have common sense and aren’t actively trying to be offended over nothing.
deleted by creator
I pronounce it phonetically precisely because this is not an abbreviation of any word. But honestly I have no idea, this asking.
”Good morning, I am Mx. Vary, your science teacher." That’s it, that’s all you need for the entire year.
Do your classes take place entirely over text? They’re asking how you pronounce that in speech.
Mr. Is short for “Mister” Mrs is short for mistress, but is usually pronounced “Misses”
So how does one pronounce Mx.? Mix or Mixter? Mixes? And sometimes Xs are pronounced like Z, so is it just Mmmz?
Asking how to pronounce someone’s preferred pronouns is entirely reasonable when their preferred pronoun is not a regular part of the English language. I’d rather know how to say something and not offend someone than say it wrong for who knows how long and definitely offend them.
Removed by mod
If they’re saying it, they just told you how to pronounce it. That’s my point.
Yeah, but I’m trying to learn for myself, and have never had anyone say it to me.
So you’re not really helping by assuming I should know how to pronounce a new word
I’m not assuming you would know. Nobody is. If they’re introducing themselves, that’s how you would know. If you are a third party and want to learn for yourself, there is a very easy way to do that.
Okay, but like, if you were in their class you would hear them say it to you and then you’d know.
If you actually cared you’d just look it up tbh.
maybe the x is silent? is it pronounced mi, like in the solfege song?
deleted by creator
Your version of “common sense” in this situation only applies to a small minority that naturally extrapolates beyond the meaning of the statement alone.
“Mx.” as a prefix is not in any way established in common vernacular, nor does it easily make sense unless you assume they’re doing something specific that most people don’t do.
However, the law says that anyone is free to do so as they please; you can sexually identify in any way and must not be discriminated against for that in terms of your employment.
And I thought it is m-ex, like reading the letter “x”.
It’s pronounced emacs
I thought that they were declaring themselves as a mail exchange
I’m more of a ‘vi’ guy.
:q
It’s not immediately intuitive in my opinion, but it does make sense once you remember that other M- honorifics start “Mi”. Mister, missus, miss. Then it makes sense to follow, mix.
I think some people use it one way and others the other. I don’t think there’s one universal correct way.
I’ve heard it both ways. I’m sure no one would be offended either way you say it.
You’re the divisive one here, suggesting people are hateful for having legitimate questions.
It’s so simple, just like Mr. Is pronounced merr.
You’re very much part of the problem.
I don’t remember writing that anyone was hateful. Actively trying to be offended, yes. Legitimate questions ask questions like this “So how is Mx pronounced?”. The comment was I replied to intended to mock it, not ask in good faith. But see, you’d have to come to that conclusion by using common sense, so here we are again.
It’s not “fairly simple if you have common sense”. The known abbreviations have been in use for a hundred or more years and are widely known. Everyone knows how to pronounce them, the only curveball is Mrs being misses since it was originallymistress but that word later became associated with cheating and “ladies of the night”.
Mx was made up recently, it stands for nothing AFAIK. They just took the standard M beginning and slapped X on it because X tends to mean “unknown”.
It’s akin to asking you to address me as “Zf. Cat” because that’s what makes me feel comfortable.
Removed by mod
They weren’t introduced in anything like an analogous way. Mr and Mrs evolved slowly over decades and even centuries from older forms referring to master and mistress.
I don’t have a strong opinion about Mx either way, but as an amateur linguistics nerd I can assure you that the way it’s been introduced to our lexicon is very different from these much older terms.
Yep, language flows and changes over long periods of time, not through a court order or “marginalized” people screaming “we want our own pronoun that we just came up with to be culturally except! If you don’t comply, you are an insensitive asshole!”
Removed by mod
Most floppy disks aren’t floppy either, so maybe not the best example.
Removed by mod
Actually the floppy part of the disk is inside the plastic case. It’s a floppy piece of magnetic tape.
But that’s a great example of how language evolves - people don’t even know what the name means, and yet they know what it is.
Ok, Zf. Cat :) If that makes you feel comfortable it costs me nothing to be considerate of your preference. See?
Now you have to remember that for every interaction with me. If you happen to call me sometime else, I’ll grit my teeth and have to correct you or if I’m an asshole, I’ll berate you about it, constantly. You will also have to refer to me as Zf. Cat to everyone you know, regardless of whether or not they know me, or are in my presence.
You should be asking yourself why you assume the person would react angrily instead of just politely correcting the pronunciation. If someone accidentally mispronounces my name I gently correct them, while smiling, and I have never once been offended or take it personally. You also assume it is a heavy burden on others to simply call people what they’d like to be called. When it is not. Being angry over this is not a healthy attitude. It’s simple manners to be considerate of others and that is precisely what the person is asking for, nothing more.
If you have to correct someone about your name/title every single time it gets pretty damn annoying. I met a girl years ago whose name was spelled Remy but pronounced Ray-me she said “I hate my parents for it” (I doubt she actually hated her parents, but hated the fact that they gave her a “bad” name).
Except it’s not like that at all, because you just made that honorific up!
Mx. has an actual cultural context outside of their classroom. Sure, it’s new, but it’s not like this teacher just made it up themselves.
“Mx” was also just made up by someone.
Removed by mod
What is that context? You failed to include it.
The context is Mx. already being used and recognized around the country and around the world. It’s new, but it’s not just something the teacher made up.
So common sense is dictated now by a few members of niche social media circles?
Removed by mod
One, it’s virtue signaling at its best.
Secondly, randomly adding in the letter x to things is not ‘common sense’.
Common sense is the ability to make practical judgments and behave in a sensible way. It’s the knowledge and experience that most people have, or should have.
So my original point still stands. ‘Mx’ is not common sense. Knowing not to play a game of chicken with traffic, is common sense. Maybe this is why common sense isn’t so common anymore, people just appropriate words/phrases to mean whatever they want, instead of what they mean.
This is how we’ve ended up in a world where the word literally no longer means the word literally.
Removed by mod
Bitcoin and NFTs… That’s the counter argument you go with. Fucking Christ…
You’d think someone using the name CaptPretentious would be all in favor of things being made up by niche social circles.
Sorry was I supposed to put my first name, last name, social Security number, and mother’s maiden name as my username?
Well see, common sense would have me ask “hm, how do I say that?” then google it, then when I see that it’s simply pronounced “mix” I’d say “oh, okay”. And then go on about my day… instead of ranting about how hard it is to figure out and how angry it should make everyone. But that’s just me.
If it were me, I would probably figure out what the person I’m trying to argue arguing with was actually arguing about. Instead of getting up on a soapbox and pretending like I know what I’m arguing about. But that would take effort.
But you keep using those canned responses you got ready to go.
Wow, those two letters really shook you. Deep breaths.
My position has fuck all to do with the letters.
But you really need it to be don’t you. Because your canned responses only work if that’s what I’m arguing about.
You don’t need to have kids call you weird names, it’s really not necessary. Just be normal.
Just be normal.
People are normal no matter what honorific or pronouns they prefer. Bigots on the other hand can suck it.
My mistake, it’s definitely lamron to ask little kids to call you “Mx”.
Well I guess you confirmed you’re a Hoover.
“Just be normal” is the first step toward “just be straight” then “just be white” then “just be Christian” then “just be our version of Christian”. Why can’t people just be who they are? Like, literally no one is hurting anyone in this scenario, yet your absolute paper thin fragile porcelain toilet of an ego is hurt because the teacher isn’t exactly how you picture the ideal person your children think the world is filled with.
What if who they are is a literal Nazi? Do the get to just be who they are too?
Read my comment again. No one is being hurt here. That’s the one part that matters.
