Nonbinary Teacher in Florida Fired for Using Mx. Title
Nonbinary Teacher in Florida Fired for Using Mx. Title
The virtual school says its hands are tied due to Florida's "don't say gay" law. However, the teacher has lodged a complaint against it.
The virtual school says its hands are tied due to Florida's "don't say gay" law. However, the teacher has lodged a complaint against it.
You're viewing a single thread.
Made up titles are fucking stupid.
As opposed to naturally occurring titles?
Ms/Mrs/Mr all reflect objective truths. Mx reflects how the person feels.
We literally made up Ms., Mrs., and Mr.
That's how language works, we get to make it up as we go along.
How do you think we got here??
As I said, they all reflect objective truths. They're descriptive. Mx is not.
Oh I get it, you're just in denial about modern gender theory. Good luck with your rocks. The trick is to bang them together.
As opposed to commonly accepted titles. Not made up, flavor of the day nonsense. Your generation can put up with this shit after mine is gone. Good luck, you are most definitely going to need it.
Hypothetical question:
I have a friend named Richard. He prefers to be called Rich but his boss calls him Rick.
Should his boss adjust to call him Rich because that is what he prefers, or should he just accept being called Rick because it is a commonly accepted nickname for Richard?
That's a name, not a title. You don't get to choose titles, they reflect objective truths.
Exactly, those titles have meaning that reflect "objective truths". E.g. I don't conform to society's male or female gender roles or expectations.
It's almost as if language exists to convey information and has been evolving with the constantly changing society that uses it.
... or was your comment an appeal to made-up semantics because you don't actually have a compelling argument?
Follow well established societal mores, do not change them for .001%.
Answer the question. Why reply just to dodge it? Could have simply not engaged. It's so weird to me.
I did give a valid and correct answer to the question. You either didn't understand or know I'm right so dropped back to the default... ItS sO WeIrD tO mE
So, answer it? Rich or Rick? Both are well established.
So what would you call him?
All titles are "made up," and Mx. as an honorific has been around for almost fifty years. A better question would be why our two main honorifics for people are so pointlessly gendered.
It has barely any history prior to 10 years ago. Just because some nobody said it once in the 1970's doesn't mean its been colloquially around for 50 years. The source of it "being around from the 1970's" is a dubious article written in 2015. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/the-filter/11597192/Whats-it-like-to-be-a-Mx.html
Your claim as to its history is simply not true, and its use has, obviously, been mostly limited to the community that generated it. Did you expect Ronald Reagan to use it in his inauguration speech?
Other than that, I don't see what point you're actually trying to make here.
There's words that develop organically and then there's words that people make up to validate the feelings of women who would have been emos like 10 years ago. Neopronouns and titles like this are stupid and no person outside the progressive bubble will ever use them.
Organically developed, like, a community making a new word that fills a lexical need to describe a concept? Sounds a lot like "Mx." to me. What's stupid about it?
Organically developed
making a new word
Qed
Try reading a book that's a few decades old. Language evolves. Though wonder if you read books.
"Read a book sweaty 💅💅" 🤓
Here's an idea- let's not care if it's fucking stupid and call people what they want to be called?
Call me big master pimpin'. I will request you be fired if you do not
I want to be addressed as "your highness", can you do that for me? Would be pretty bigoted if you don't, just saying
Sure, your highness. I have no problem with that. What difference does it make?
Here's a better idea why don't the few conform with the masses rather than the other way around. That's some bullshit I'll never do.
You want people to conform more? Do you live in the 1950s? This is 2023 when people have the freedom to express themselves and identify as who they want to identify as. Get out of the 20th century.
I am also one of those people and I will never recognize any of that other than ridiculous ultra left bullshit. People have freedom to play make believe, I have the freedom to not participate in their foolishness.
A precious summer child who thinks that this is ultra left wing.
"I just want to live in a centralised commune, where the concept of currency doesn't exist... but Mx? Well I'm not that ultra left."
Yes, you can also never recognize that "f*g" and "n****r" are not acceptable in society anymore and still use them. You have the freedom to do that too. You have the freedom to be as big an asshole as you want to be.
But you shouldn't have that freedom to fire people over how they express themselves.
Enjoy your bigotry. You seem very proud of it.
Could someone change this kids diaper.? Never stops crying.
oldbaldgrumpy
Not exactly a controversial opinion from your demographic
I agree. I would go further in saying that most people would agree it's just plain ridiculous.
I would go further than that and assert that when you say most people, because of your specific demographic, you really just mean the people you know, who are outside of the range of groups actually accepting the kind of change you're against.
In a way, you're right. Most people that you find to be rational would agree that it's just plain ridiculous. It's just that the groups that you don't find rational are growing and the groups that agree with your mindset are shrinking.
The evidence of that can be found by just observing how often this kind of thing happens at all. It used to not happen. Now it does enough to make news kind of often.