• Rekhyt@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    5 months ago

    So, wait, just to be clear: the writer is claiming that the writer’s gender is not a gender but instead that the writer has some divine status?

    M/F/NB/genderqueer/etc aside, human vs divine is not a gender question and this is no longer a discussion about pronouns showing respect and affirmation of gender identity, this is literally a demand for worship.

    • Grail (capitalised)@aussie.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      No, I don’t want worship from you or anyone else here. My gender is goddess. I’m not a man, I’m not a woman, I’m a goddess.

      Recognising someone’s identity is not the same as worshipping them. Not even for gods. Monotheists have spread the myth that you can only believe in a god you worship, but historically this isn’t true. Before the Roman Empire, most people believed in the gods of other cultures. I have an article on the subject: https://medium.com/@viridiangrail/how-rome-killed-polytheism-fa7ade0b9050

      • Rekhyt@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        5 months ago

        But the form in which the writer affirms the writer’s divine identity (again, not gender) is using reverential capitalization, a form of worship. If the writer said “I am a kami and use ke/ker pronouns” there wouldn’t be a worship aspect (though again, identity as a divinity or other non-human is not a gender).

          • Rekhyt@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            26
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            The writer has stated in other comments that the writer is non-binary, which is the closest I can get to an answer to the question, but the actual answer to this question doesn’t matter. We can apply gender identity to humans and non-humans (e.g. animals, fictional aliens, heck even ships) but divinity is not a gender, it’s a supernatural or spiritual status.

            People are free to identify as whatever gender (or non-gender) they so choose but by telling me “you must accept that I am divine,” we’re having an entirely different discussion. By requesting capitalized pronouns, the writer is also requesting their spiritual beliefs to be affirmed, which is implicitly (and apparently intentionally) forcing the other party to change their spiritual beliefs.

            • Grail (capitalised)@aussie.zoneOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Nonbinary isn’t a gender. It’s an umbrella term for about a billion genders. I have a gender identity, and it’s goddess. I’d like you to stop saying My gender identity is invalid, please.

    • Norah - She/They
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      the writer is claiming that the writer’s gender

      Are you purposefully talking to It using the third person? Because that just seems like a roundabout way of misgendering them on purpose, with an extra dash of disrespect.

      • Rekhyt@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        As the writer has stated, the writer views any pronouns that are not capitalized as misgendering them, and stated the pronouns were chosen specifically to reflect the writer’s self-identified divine status as “goddess gender” (a term that, as far as I can tell, only exists on one wiki and the writer’s blog).

        The choice of capitalized pronouns was specifically chosen to imitate reverential capitalization, indicating divine status. As part of the writer’s argument, this is intended to put the writer on the same level as the Abrahamic God. The writer also states in the article that “by affirming trans capitalised pronoun users, generally you are dismantling monotheistic oppression,” which is a wild claim that I cannot agree with. The use of capitalized pronouns is therefore intended to strip the other party of their beliefs, either as a monotheist or atheist (as using reverential pronouns would also affirm a polytheist worldview that they disagree with).

        I cannot use any pronouns that do not acknowledge the writer’s claimed divine status without the writer claiming I am misgendering them. This is the most respectful way I can refer to the writer without acknowledging divine status or actively misgendering the writer.

        I am more than happy to use whichever (lowercase and grammatically correct) pronouns are requested, as I am more than happy to refer to you as they/them, (which is also the default I try to use, though I understand some people are frustrated with they/them as it can strip a chosen gender identity).

        Divine status is not a gender identity. Words mean things, and language can evolve, but this is specifically appropriating a style of writing while disparaging the source of that style.