New York City is fining people for ignoring pronoun orders.

[Forty Two]

[pErvinalia]

Convincing argument.

[laklak]

We only need one gender neutral pronoun, right? I suggest "asshole".

[Scot Dutchy]

In Dutch it is easy; het.

[pErvinalia]

In Australia it's "cunt".

[laklak]

That's gendered, man! That's why I picked asshole. Though that would likely trigger people with colostomy bags.

[pErvinalia]

In Straya, "cunt" is gender neutral. A bit like "bitch" is in the US.

[Hermit]

As usual, Forty Two has made a PC mountain from a pretty minor molehill...

I'd call it a massively massaged message, aka a beatup of legendary proportions.

Interesting allegation. How so? What's massaged about it?

To begin with, compare the title you gave this thread with the title of Washpo's article. Axel Springer's Bild would employ you on the strength of what you've done there if you were competent with the German language. Come to think of it, Bild most likely has an English language subsidiary. This could be lucrative even for me if you gave me 5% of your salary Springer will pay you.

[Forty Two]

Convincing argument.

[Brian Peacock]

I wonder what happens if a Spanish speaking gender fluid non-binary dipshit demands that Spanish only be spoken to "Zer" in gender neutral terms....

What if they weren't a dipshit?

Oh, so it's o.k. to misgender in Spanish? Just not in English.

Did I say that? Please show your working out.

[JimC]

I wonder what happens if a Spanish speaking gender fluid non-binary dipshit demands that Spanish only be spoken to "Zer" in gender neutral terms....

What if they weren't a dipshit?

Oh, so it's o.k. to misgender in Spanish? Just not in English.

Did I say that? Please show your working out.

Perhaps, like the constipated mathematician, he worked it out with a pencil...

[L'Emmerdeur]

Of course somebody could say that the thread title is "arguably true," and that's good enough for them.

It's a new ordinance/regulation, of course. The fact that they haven't enforced the ordinance doesn't make the ordinance appropriate.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "new ordinance." The Gothamist page that I linked to points out that this was put in place in December of last year. As far as we know, not a single fine has yet to be levied, contrary to your "arguably true" thread title. We can discuss whether the ordinance is appropriate, but the gist of my post was to highlight the discrepancy re: reality vs. the thread title and your "OMG teh trans-people are oppressing us with the jackboots and the iron fist of lefty government!" OP.

What if they made an ordinance that gay people couldn't show public displays of affection, but didn't yet enforce it. Would we have to withhold judgment until they enforced it?

You're right. We should imagine things that could happen, then proceed to write about our fantasies as if they were true.

This is a law that says that person X can control the speech of person Y and compel them to use certain words. A complaint gets filed, and then the commission holds a legal proceeding to determine whether "misuse" was accidental or whether it was on purpose?

This is a city ordinance that recognizes the fact that transgender people suffer harassment. That harassment can include intentionally, maliciously and repeatedly referring to them in a way that denies their identity. If an employer is doing this to their employee, or a landlord to their tenant, then the trans person they've been targeting can get help to fight back. The story I cited specifies that the severity of the violation of the ordinance as well as a history of previous violations, among other things, will determine the fine, should a hearing find for a complainant.

So, if I walk into work tomorrow and say that from now on I want to be called "zouzou" instead of he or him, everyone has to remember that and use it. If I switch back a week or two later, they better switch back, right? Or, they'll have to file a response to my charge of "misuse of gender pronoun."

You go, girl! Find yourself a crummy job in NYC and stand up for whatever it is you're standing up for!

The guidance says to ask transgendered people what they prefer. Why just transgendered people? Why not everyone? Why assume that CIS people don't want different pronouns? Trans people are about 1/2 of 1% of the population. I bet at least that percentage of CIS people would like to change pronouns too.

I bet you'll get right on to substantiating your assertion that there are cisgender women that don't want to be known as a "she" and cisgender men that don't want to be known as "he."

My preferred pronoun is "your majesty."

Mr. Volokh would be so proud of how well you parrot his talking point.

[pErvinalia]

Convincing argument.

Convincing argument.

[Sean Hayden]

[Svartalf]

Yes, precisely my opinion