• SheeEttin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I don’t see anything stupid about this, but if you have better ideas, let’s hear them.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      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.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          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.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            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.