"Another approach is to follow that word, heresy. In every period of history, there seem to have been labels that got applied to statements to shoot them down before anyone had a chance to ask if they were true or not. "Blasphemy", "sacrilege", and "heresy" were such labels for a good part of western history, as in more recent times "indecent", "improper", and "unamerican" have been. By now these labels have lost their sting. They always do. By now they're mostly used ironically. But in their time, they had real force.
The word "defeatist", for example, has no particular political connotations now. But in Germany in 1917 it was a weapon, used by Ludendorff in a purge of those who favored a negotiated peace. At the start of World War II it was used extensively by Churchill and his supporters to silence their opponents. In 1940, any argument against Churchill's aggressive policy was "defeatist". Was it right or wrong? Ideally, no one got far enough to ask that.
We have such labels today, of course, quite a lot of them, from the all-purpose "inappropriate" to the dreaded "divisive." In any period, it should be easy to figure out what such labels are, simply by looking at what people call ideas they disagree with besides untrue. When a politician says his opponent is mistaken, that's a straightforward criticism, but when he attacks a statement as "divisive" or "racially insensitive" instead of arguing that it's false, we should start paying attention.
So another way to figure out which of our taboos future generations will laugh at is to start with the labels. Take a label — "sexist", for example — and try to think of some ideas that would be called that. Then for each ask, might this be true?
Just start listing ideas at random? Yes, because they won't really be random. The ideas that come to mind first will be the most plausible ones. They'll be things you've already noticed but didn't let yourself think."
Anyway - if you cannot steelman the "many people obsessed with pronouns are narcissists" phrase you are probably not the best person to ask other people to steelman anything.
Not if your definition of "to steelman" is to "make is sound not transphobic". I really don't consider something being "transphobic" having anything to do with whether it's true or not. I can imagine a statement that is both "transphobic" and factually correct.
It sounds like you really want to say, "people who care about pronouns[trans people] do so because they are narcissistic," but you really don't want to because you understand the implications of such a statement. Personally I think the idea is abhorrent, but correct me if I'm wrong about you.
You're the only one who's brought up trans people so far.
Apparently in your mind "obsessed with pronouns and wanting to be celebrated" automatically means trans people. You realize that other people use pronouns right? And you don't have to be trans to narcissistically obsess over them and insist on being celebrated.
I hope you're able to overcome your clear transphobia some day.
Please correct me. I cannot follow your line of reasoning on how addressing transphobia is transphobic. You realize the movement you're referring to is inherently connected to the trans community, right?
What I'm pointing out is that characterization is transphobic. Usually when people point out that a characterization is incorrect, they aren't accused of making that characterization themselves. Typically folks understand the difference and I expect you to as well.
You're the only one making a characterization involving trans people. Trans people use pronouns, so what? You're being transphobic because you're automatically associating trans people with the negative thing I said even though that association doesn't need to be made and you're the only one suggesting it.
This really isn't that hard. As I explained elsewhere, if you buy an iPhone that doesn't automatically make you an Apple fanboy. Likewise, if you're trans and you make it a point to use certain pronouns that doesn't make you a narcissist. I'm specifically calling out SOME people, not even trans people.
Some people absolutely do latch onto pronouns because it brings them attention. These are the people that want to be celebrated, because they're narcissists. I really can't make this any more clear that these are not just trans people. Do trans people tend to care more about pronouns? Sure. But that doesn't automatically mean they want to be celebrated for doing so.
What does transgender have to do with it? Are you implying that transgender people are obsessed with pronouns?
In my experience trans people just want to be called by their preferred pronouns. They’re not obsessed with it. Most don’t care about being “celebrated” they just don’t want to be excluded or harassed.
Maybe you can clarify. I said that the statement that "pronoun obsessed people are narcissistic" is not possible to justify without being transphobic. ie: it assumes transphobia. I'm not sure how that translates into me being transphobic, but I'm willing to listen.
Having preferred pronouns doesn’t automatically mean that person is obsessed with pronouns and wants to be celebrated.
If I buy an iPhone it doesn’t automatically mean I’m obsessed with Apple and want to feel special because I bought an Apple product. That’s an additional step.
