Why You Should Not Need to Declare Your Gender Pronouns
Non-trans people declaring preferred pronouns is a growing trend. Although I know it is usually done voluntarily, I argue this trend is not one we should adopt. This is not about the rights of trans-people to use their own pronouns.
I do not want to be part of a process that normalizes changes to societal conventions without first thinking them through.
Rather than adopt a position because of the prevailing popular culture, I prefer to adopt a position by considering the consistency with which it can be applied. That is, is it a good proposal/principle to apply regardless of the social pressures at play?
So, let’s identify the central principle here, stated in the form of a question.
Should the majority preface their identity with a declaration of common attributes — simply because it acknowledges the existence of a minority?
No.
The problem with this kind of principle is that it is an impossible standard to apply consistently. And, in fact, it is not applied seriously in any other context. As a result, it is not a noble rule to live by, but instead, a trend that gets applied to select ideas that happen to be in vogue.
When do able-bodied people need to preface their identity with this fact?
When do heterosexual people need to preface their identity with this fact?
They do not need to.
There is nothing incorrect with the default assumption that a person likely falls into the statistical majority — unless given good reason to think otherwise. In contrast, the onus lies on the minority to acknowledge their deviation from the majority. For example, it is expected that a blind student would bring attention to this with his teachers. But it is not a sustainable principle to expect non-blind students to declare their “normal visual acuity” at the beginning of every semester.
A quick survey of these examples and you will clearly see the inconsistency with which certain activists have chosen to apply their principle on gender pronouns.
But there’s a bigger problem here.
This is just one example of the tendency among activists to prioritize their desired outcome on a single issue — rather than prioritize the broader implications of the principles used to achieve the outcome.
On this issue, the “desired outcome” is something akin to the acceptance of transgenderism. Although I think the outcome is often a bit more expansive like: the normalization of gender neutrality and the non-binary construct.
I do not make any judgement here about those outcomes being good or bad, reasonable or unreasonable. But I do think we should be critical of poorly thought-through principles that get employed in pursuit of those outcomes.
So, should the vast majority of “cis” people bring attention to their gender pronouns?
No.
