Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[The Bear]

7 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

Me too !! ..  last time I went they drilled away for about an hour and pushed and pulled my gob all over the place ..  my jaw ached for the rest of the day ! ..  fantastic experience ! ..  can’t wait to go again.  .. 

Is this you when you realise its dentist appointment day? 

 

 

[Nalis]

Alan Partridge quotes arent as funny as people think. Same goes for accidential Partridge references.

[TJQuik]

4 hours ago, Nalis said:

Alan Partridge quotes arent as funny as people think. Same goes for accidential Partridge references.

Couldn't disagree more. He's one of the best characters ever made.

[Jon the Hat]

11 hours ago, Nalis said:

Alan Partridge quotes arent as funny as people think. Same goes for accidential Partridge references.

 

WHY AM I SO BIG??

 

[Nalis]

9 hours ago, TJQuik said:

Couldn't disagree more. He's one of the best characters ever made.

I get that some people like him but that is borderline delusional.

 

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

 

WHY AM I SO BIG??

 

Thought this might start

[Jimothy]

13 hours ago, Nalis said:

Alan Partridge quotes arent as funny as people think. Same goes for accidential Partridge references.

I agree on quoting Partridge. I think it's a character done to death too. The most recent series, the One Show type parody was shite and just really force. But I disagree on accidental Partridge, people say stupid things live on TV is always funny.

[Sly]

Pronouns.

 

It is a minefield and i’m not sure my 40+ year old brain is capable of changing to “gender neutral” ones naturally. 

 

[Jon the Hat]

2 minutes ago, Sly said:

Pronouns.

 

It is a minefield and i’m not sure my 40+ year old brain is capable of changing to “gender neutral” ones naturally. 

 

I wouldn't worry about it. When you speak to people directly in English you don't use pronouns, you say you (how are you?  How have you been?), so actually pronouns only affect how you refer to someone in the 3rd person, which is up to you not to them, so it is quite easy to avoid, assuming you know their name.  This is Sarah.  Sarah works in HR etc.  So if in doubt I tend to do that.  Find out their name and then use it.

[deep blue]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I wouldn't worry about it. When you speak to people directly in English you don't use pronouns, you say you (how are you?  How have you been?), so actually pronouns only affect how you refer to someone in the 3rd person, which is up to you not to them, so it is quite easy to avoid, assuming you know their name.  This is Sarah.  Sarah works in HR etc.  So if in doubt I tend to do that.  Find out their name and then use it.

A great idea, but not for my 70+ brain which forgets a name 5 minutes after it's been uttered 

[filthyfox]

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I wouldn't worry about it. When you speak to people directly in English you don't use pronouns, you say you (how are you?  How have you been?), so actually pronouns only affect how you refer to someone in the 3rd person, which is up to you not to them, so it is quite easy to avoid, assuming you know their name.  This is Sarah.  Sarah works in HR etc.  So if in doubt I tend to do that.  Find out their name and then use it.

I think I'm going to have to get offended at peoples offence.

 

Why is nobody ever offended for me when I am offended?

[FoyleFox]

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I wouldn't worry about it. When you speak to people directly in English you don't use pronouns, you say you (how are you?  How have you been?), so actually pronouns only affect how you refer to someone in the 3rd person, which is up to you not to them, so it is quite easy to avoid, assuming you know their name.  This is Sarah.  Sarah works in HR etc.  So if in doubt I tend to do that.  Find out their name and then use it.

 

55 minutes ago, deep blue said:

A great idea, but not for my 70+ brain which forgets a name 5 minutes after it's been uttered 

This is where the Leicesterism of "Aye up me duck" is perfect. No pronoun, no remembering names, everyone's a duck. Quacking

[Finnegan]

6 hours ago, Sly said:

Pronouns.

 

It is a minefield and i’m not sure my 40+ year old brain is capable of changing to “gender neutral” ones naturally. 

 

 

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I wouldn't worry about it. When you speak to people directly in English you don't use pronouns, you say you (how are you?  How have you been?), so actually pronouns only affect how you refer to someone in the 3rd person, which is up to you not to them, so it is quite easy to avoid, assuming you know their name.  This is Sarah.  Sarah works in HR etc.  So if in doubt I tend to do that.  Find out their name and then use it.

 

Plus, more often than not, people who have chosen "atypical" pronouns are going to be used to people getting wrong accidentally or carelessly.

 

Doing it maliciously, repeatedly or refusing to respect their choices is obviously a dick move but clumsily using the wrong one occasionally isn't likely to result in serious offence or a trip to HR.

[Daggers]

On 23/03/2023 at 01:03, Nalis said:

Alan Partridge quotes arent as funny as people think. Same goes for accidential Partridge references.

Ok Domingo, we get it, you’re still annoyed. 
 

 

[ClaphamFox]

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I wouldn't worry about it. When you speak to people directly in English you don't use pronouns, you say you (how are you?  How have you been?), so actually pronouns only affect how you refer to someone in the 3rd person, which is up to you not to them, so it is quite easy to avoid, assuming you know their name.  This is Sarah.  Sarah works in HR etc.  So if in doubt I tend to do that.  Find out their name and then use it.

Demanding that other people use certain language to describe you when you are not present is a bit odd. You're effectively trying to dictate to people how they must perceive you. Why the need for such external affirmation, especially if it is not sincerely given?

 

But yes, in order to avoid upsetting somebody, the use of their actual names is probably the safest route to take if you're in any doubt over their 'preferred pronouns'.

 

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

 

Plus, more often than not, people who have chosen "atypical" pronouns are going to be used to people getting wrong accidentally or carelessly.

 

Doing it maliciously, repeatedly or refusing to respect their choices is obviously a dick move but clumsily using the wrong one occasionally isn't likely to result in serious offence or a trip to HR.

And that, sadly, is what a fair few people are insisting on the right to do.

[Finnegan]

15 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

Demanding that other people use certain language to describe you when you are not present is a bit odd. You're effectively trying to dictate to people how they must perceive you. Why the need for such external affirmation, especially if it is not sincerely given?

 

This sounds like some fairly boomer mental gymnastics to try and avoid just simply being a decent human being.

 

I mean if Tracy in accounting is asking everyone to refer to her at all times as Her Royal Highness Queen Tracy of the Golden Stapler, First of Her Name, Best at Her Job, Hoarder of Paper Clips, Keeper of the Tea Fund and Purveyor of Rich Tea Biscuits then I can understand some hesitation to comply.

 

But your agender colleague wishing to be known as 'they/them' isn't really "DicTaTiNg HoW tHeY'rE pErCeIvEd", they've just chosen pronouns they're more comfortable with and are asking you to show a smidgen of basic kindness in trying to remember them. Blows my mind that people would kick off about this shit when it has literally zero bearing on their own lives and costs them absolutely nothing to comply to.

[Tommy G]

24 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

Demanding that other people use certain language to describe you when you are not present is a bit odd. You're effectively trying to dictate to people how they must perceive you. Why the need for such external affirmation, especially if it is not sincerely given?

 

But yes, in order to avoid upsetting somebody, the use of their actual names is probably the safest route to take if you're in any doubt over their 'preferred pronouns'.

 

100% agree with this......it's all getting a bit too much.

[Tommy G]

2 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

This sounds like some fairly boomer mental gymnastics to try and avoid just simply being a decent human being.

 

I mean if Tracy in accounting is asking everyone to refer to her at all times as Her Royal Highness Queen Tracy of the Golden Stapler, First of Her Name, Best at Her Job, Hoarder of Paper Clips, Keeper of the Tea Fund and Purveyor of Rich Tea Biscuits then I can understand some hesitation to comply.

 

But your agender colleague wishing to be known as 'they/them' isn't really "DicTaTiNg HoW tHeY'rE pErCeIvEd", they've just chosen pronouns they're more comfortable with and are asking you to show a smidgen of basic kindness in trying to remember them. Blows my mind that people would kick off about this shit when it has literally zero bearing on their own lives and costs them absolutely nothing to comply to.

I don't think it's kicking off, but you could hold the company of 100 people in your work life (on a weekly basis, I know I probably do) of which 20 might want to be referred to as something other than he or she. That is quite a lot to remember, and it might not be ''they'' either! So you could be juggling 15 or 20 different ways to address someone. I think the safest route is someone's name. Your opinion is clearly different to this, doesn't mean it's right.

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

This sounds like some fairly boomer mental gymnastics to try and avoid just simply being a decent human being.

 

I mean if Tracy in accounting is asking everyone to refer to her at all times as Her Royal Highness Queen Tracy of the Golden Stapler, First of Her Name, Best at Her Job, Hoarder of Paper Clips, Keeper of the Tea Fund and Purveyor of Rich Tea Biscuits then I can understand some hesitation to comply.

 

But your agender colleague wishing to be known as 'they/them' isn't really "DicTaTiNg HoW tHeY'rE pErCeIvEd", they've just chosen pronouns they're more comfortable with and are asking you to show a smidgen of basic kindness in trying to remember them. Blows my mind that people would kick off about this shit when it has literally zero bearing on their own lives and costs them absolutely nothing to comply to.

Sadly it doesn't really surprise me, especially about the basic kindness part.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

I don't think it's kicking off, but you could hold the company of 100 people in your work life (on a weekly basis, I know I probably do) of which 20 might want to be referred to as something other than he or she. That is quite a lot to remember, and it might not be ''they'' either! So you could be juggling 15 or 20 different ways to address someone. I think the safest route is someone's name. Your opinion is clearly different to this, doesn't mean it's right.

 

38 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

 

Plus, more often than not, people who have chosen "atypical" pronouns are going to be used to people getting wrong accidentally or carelessly.

 

Doing it maliciously, repeatedly or refusing to respect their choices is obviously a dick move but clumsily using the wrong one occasionally isn't likely to result in serious offence or a trip to HR.

I think this covers that.

[Tommy G]

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Sadly it doesn't really surprise me, especially about the basic kindness part.

You can still be kind but at the same time agree pronouns are tricky at best in society, especially when a person who more than likely is misgendering someone by accident rather than doing it maliciously most of the time. On the unpopular opinions topic, our nursery now refers to all the kids as ''young people'' rather than children, ''xxx parents'' rather than Mum or Dad is here to see you. It's just bonkers, and you can tell the staff are tip toeing around worried about messing up with the language they use. 

 

My son has additional needs, or is it special needs? I'm not sure which one you are supposed to use in 2023. Quite frankly I'm not bothered, as long as he isn't discriminated maliciously. 

 

Edited 29 March 2023 by Tommy G

[ClaphamFox]

23 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

This sounds like some fairly boomer mental gymnastics to try and avoid just simply being a decent human being.

 

I mean if Tracy in accounting is asking everyone to refer to her at all times as Her Royal Highness Queen Tracy of the Golden Stapler, First of Her Name, Best at Her Job, Hoarder of Paper Clips, Keeper of the Tea Fund and Purveyor of Rich Tea Biscuits then I can understand some hesitation to comply.

 

But your agender colleague wishing to be known as 'they/them' isn't really "DicTaTiNg HoW tHeY'rE pErCeIvEd", they've just chosen pronouns they're more comfortable with and are asking you to show a smidgen of basic kindness in trying to remember them. Blows my mind that people would kick off about this shit when it has literally zero bearing on their own lives and costs them absolutely nothing to comply to.

I didn't say I wouldn't comply. I said I find it odd. I'm not advocating causing somebody else personal distress and I'd never deliberately use pronouns that would upset a colleague or anybody else. Obviously there are times when kindness should come before expressing one's beliefs, and that's the side I'll always favour in personal interactions.

 

I do object to the use of female pronouns to describe the actions of violent male criminals in media reports, and in particular in the recording of crimes by the police. There are also times when facts should come before feelings.

Edited 29 March 2023 by ClaphamFox

[Finnegan]

6 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

I do object to the use of female pronouns to describe the actions of violent male criminals in media reports, and in particular in the recording of crimes by the police. There are also times when facts should come before feelings.

 

Haha oh gosh, "facts before feelings!" It just suddenly got a bit Ben Shapiro in here. Its odd how often the "Facts Don't Care About Your Feelings" crowd get overly emotional about facts.

 

Using someone's correct pronouns is the facts though, isn't it? Why is the fact of biological sex more relevant to crime statistics than the fact of gender, a completely subjective social construct? Crimes aren't committed by emotionless robots, they're committed by complex and often damaged people and their self-identity can be a huge part of understanding what they did and why. If a violent criminal is transgender then that fact is worth recording, as has been pointed out repeatedly by Christian Conservative Republicans in the last 48 hours. Although I'd argue there's a massive irony in that, given that stigmatisation and de-humanisation pushed by those fanatics is likely what would push a trans-person to a mental break and is thus why it's statistically interesting.

 

But just to be clear on your last sentence, you are aware that Audrey Hale was biologically female and so I'm reading it correctly that you want his chosen pronouns to be respected and him to be recognised as a violent male criminal as per his own distinction?

[ClaphamFox]

21 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Haha oh gosh, "facts before feelings!" It just suddenly got a bit Ben Shapiro in here. Its odd how often the "Facts Don't Care About Your Feelings" crowd get overly emotional about facts.

 

Using someone's correct pronouns is the facts though, isn't it? Why is the fact of biological sex more relevant to crime statistics than the fact of gender, a completely subjective social construct? Crimes aren't committed by emotionless robots, they're committed by complex and often damaged people and their self-identity can be a huge part of understanding what they did and why. If a violent criminal is transgender then that fact is worth recording, as has been pointed out repeatedly by Christian Conservative Republicans in the last 48 hours. Although I'd argue there's a massive irony in that, given that stigmatisation and de-humanisation pushed by those fanatics is likely what would push a trans-person to a mental break and is thus why it's statistically interesting.

 

But just to be clear on your last sentence, you are aware that Audrey Hale was biologically female and so I'm reading it correctly that you want his chosen pronouns to be respected and him to be recognised as a violent male criminal as per his own distinction?

They matter because men and women have sharply different patterns of criminal behaviour and sexual predation, which is why virtually every country in the world separates men and women in contexts where the latter are vulnerable. There is no evidence whatsoever that this changes when men identify as women. A man who identifies as a women does not in that moment undergo a genetic transformation that renders him less of a potential risk than men who do not identify as women. Recording a crime committed by a biological male as committed by a female is not only unfair to women, it is willfully misleading. How can we begin to understand patterns of behaviour, and create laws in response to them, if we won't even describe them accurately?

 

Audrey Hale was a woman and the correct pronouns to use for her are the female ones. Her crime was highly unusual in that mass shooters are almost always male, but this one was committed by a woman and should be recorded as such.

 

 

Edited 29 March 2023 by ClaphamFox

[Jattdogg]

Jut saying it could be a great conversation starter for those who forget or are unsure of how someone identifies.

 

"Aye up me duck, would you mind telling me your preferred pronoun?"

 

The looks i would get saying that over here would be hilarious.  Did you just call me a duck mofo? Lol

 

All I will say on this is to be kind and try your best to respect others. You might get things wrong but don't fret. Most people wont get bent out of shape.