https://www.advocate.com/news/nonbinary-florida-teacher-fired
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.
“I was told that professor was not okay, Dr. was not okay for me because I didn’t have a Ph.D., but there are lots of people at FLVS who do use Dr., which, coincidentally, is also in violation of the same law I got disciplined for,” Vary said. They were told the other acceptable courtesy titles were Mrs., Ms., or Miss. Using "teacher" was also out of the question.“
“We’re going to refuse every attempt at compromise, and force you to choose between abandoning your principles or your career. Why? Because we’re bastards. Fuck you.”
Serious question, though: how does one pronounce Mx.?
Or get rid of these titles altogether, they don't serve much of a purpose and I stopped using them a long time ago.
What if some people prefer to use them them? That seems counterproductive if you respect how people want to be referred.
No why would we force or encourage other people to NOT use their preferred titles. If there are no practical downsides, just let people do what they want.
I’ve skimmed the thread and I don’t see any compelling reasons. Could you cite some?
I am 100% supportive of trans rights, but using precious political will, energy and attention to pressure non trans people to stop using gendered titles is a hugely divisive distraction.
That the thread exists shows that there are downsides (to expand upon what I meant). I would say my perspective is that if you remove the barriers we have imposed upon ourselves, there is less to divide. Removal of gendered labelling for bathrooms, and making Mr/Ms/Miss/Mrs (which is inherently biased against women) obsolete would allow for names to take precedence instead of your 'status'.
The existence of the thread is not an argument. Thats just intellectually dishonest. You wouldn’t tolerate such lazy argumentation from someone who says that they want to impose gendered titles, and the existence of a thread discussing it is “proof” enough.
You’ve now provided a different argument: you claim it removes divisions. Except this is very divisive. Just leave people alone: let people use their gendered titles, and let others not use them!
I don't know, feels kinda weird if my kids were calling their teacher by their first name. I don't have a powerful argument to back this up I admit. Guess it really doesn't matter so it is just a preference on my part.
'Teacher' is what I am referred to as, or 'profe', depending on the school/student/background.
The idea to me is to show humility and respect to someone wiser than yourself. However, I think the ultimate show of respect would be to simply listen and to iterate that you have listened rather than giving someone a potential ego trip.
There's also something to be said about knowing their name. In grade school I knew my teachers last names at least because I called them Mr/Ms whatever. In university they were just "Professor" and I forgot most of their names.
For sure. Here we never brought up the teacher's first name unless another kid asked midclass.
I learned one teacher's name in gradeschool that way and tried it - just doing it made me uncomfortable so I didn't do it again lol.
Serious question, though: how does one pronounce Mx.?
the term you're looking for is "schwa" or ə
it's the neutral vowel sound that marks an unstressed syllable.
We’re going to refuse every attempt at compromise, and force you to choose between abandoning your principles or your career.
Remembers me of something we've already heard, at least in EU, a couple of years ago.
I wonder how much pain and misery she put her better half through. Someone just wants to live their life without being shrunk down or going to Venus every weekend.
Nothing says "small government" quite like being fired from your job because of your name.
Small gov’t has always meant a consolidation of power, so things are easy to control.
Seems like a first amendment violation to me, but then again I’m not a Bible thumping fascist
Also 14th and 19th, plus the Civil Rights Act. A non-corrupt SCOTUS would toss the Florida law immediately, but absent a couple minutes under Warren we have never had one of those.
Seems like a first amendment violation to me
Never fear, those "conservatives" who are such responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars will gladly waste them to defend any forthcoming lawsuits.
My blood boils every time they do this. If they just took the money they would have spent and set it on fire it would do less damage.
It’s literally freedom from persecution from the government which is exactly what happened here. Stop parroting shit you’ve heard without understanding what it means
I see you made a new account just to be a bigot. Pretty pathetic, really. Enjoy your imminent ban
They were told the other acceptable courtesy titles were Mrs., Ms., or Miss. Using "teacher" was also out of the question.
After being denied Teacher, Professor, or Dr. as the title (the last because they did not have a PhD even though evidently others in the school go by Dr. without a PhD without discipline). And note that "Mr." was apparently not an option?
The school's hands weren't tied. They appear enthusiastic.
I don’t understand trans people because I have never met one because they are the smallest group of people they could find to harass/hate. Which is insanity to me. I can’t overstate how unafraid I am for my children of a dude in a dress reading them “three billy goats gruff “Why the fuck make up monsters when churches exist!?
Because you create fear of those monsters that don't exist by blowing up the image of those monsters to divert the monsters that exist within your own belief system.
"Trans people are the problem with pedophilia." You do that to those you have indoctrinated, young people with no mind of their own, and people who statistically fall into a category of superstition and believing in figments of their imagination, Big Foot, Aliens, God and you fuel that fire with hate with things like, "the atheists want our voices to go unheard so we should kill your friendly woke white woman that supports your friendly neighborhood poorly mistreated and culturally shit on Blackman/woman. You fuel that with hate until the minority becomes the target in your political and religious agenda to spread, "love in the name of Jesus Christ, or whatever religion is popular." Because if the enemy is justified by your power and money and beliefs then the mass takes to ignoring the issues within your own system of power and money.
So you tell your party or system, "be afraid because if we don't target them first. They will target you, your guns, your wealth, your god, everything you believe. Everything you have to abuse the power you have now." You do it because it keeps you in power.
Fuck cons and fuck republicans and if you are reading this and going, "uh why I never...." Then you are a port of the problem. As yourself when is the last time someone who supported the color of the rainbow truly targeted you or your children. The answer is that person is more likely to be killed by you or your affiliates and so the answer is probably never. Now as yourself the last time someone who supports the confederate flag ran over a group of protestors. Fuck you too if you believe trans people, black people, or anyone that doesn't believe in your saving God and political party is the problem because a woman should have a right to an abortion and you think your voice is going unheard when there is no law that says if you keep your kid you are against the law. Fuck you if you just support in killing as many people as possible but your answer is, "we should support our own first." But you will complain about your taxes that supports a fuck ton of military power in the country but you don't want to use it to protect others but are fine with fueling the weapons we have to protect our own and more.
Fuck you if you if any of this pisses you off because you just can't face the fact that your politics and God don't love. They hate. Fuck you and the white ass elephant you road in on and refuse to acknowledge in the room.
Time and time again the people that go hard against gay rights get caught in homosexual relationships. In this case there's quite a few "masculine" men who are attracted to transsexuals moreso in the case of the religious right who see the "temptation" of a transexual person as an act of the devil. They ignore the whole it's not temptation unless you're actually attracted to them part but they aren't exactly the smartest kids in class either.
I had a conversation with my partner once while working as a medic on an ambulance. He told me being gay was a choice and that they were sinners going to hell. All I could answer with was “so your telling me that every day you have to tell yourself ‘no. I choose not a to suck a dick. Not today.’ Because personally I’ve never had to choose” He became so angry that I had zero doubt he has thought about sucking dick.
Like Latinx (though apparently most Latin American people don't really like this from the last survey I saw). It's a genderless way to refer to someone. You replace the gendered letters with x (like the most common variable name in math is, I assume, where it comes from).
I got you back to zero but good luck. It’s not okay to pick on ANYONE not a white dude. So. Stop it. Also, every cd I burned in the early 00ts had for its 4th track metallicas “unforgiven” as both a homage and a fuck you.
Mx. is a confusing title. How is it pronounced? "X" is an obnoxious letter choice to try to genericize gender.
But the article shows this teacher tried several other reasonable titles, like "professor" and "teacher" that were also denied. That's ridiculous, and clearly just targeting them.
Please explain how you'd know how to pronounce Mrs as missus\mizzes without someone explaining it? It's no more confusing than that archaic bullshit.
They're abbreviations for master and mistress. Of course those are archaic etymologies, but that's how they evolved into abbreviations.
The strange thing is that Mx is an abbreviation that doesn't have a basis in a word as far as I know. It's literally conforming to those heteronormative traditions and adapting them with an "X" bandaid.
The point is that the teacher is non binary and forced to choose an honorific. They wanted to use a neologism because there isn't an established term and they were fired because of bigotry. It doesn't really matter if the term makes sense to you or anyone else, it was their choice.
Your comments reek of the same smug shittiness of people who throw a fit about they\them pronouns not being "grammatically correct" when singular they has been in use for ages.
Non binary people exist, and if they are required by their job to use a formal title, they should have one that recognizes who they are.
Your knee-jerk reaction is that any criticism of the word is a criticism of non-binary people. I explicitly made a point to explain that's not the case. And I used "they" in my first comment, so I have no idea where you're coming from.
Treating any discussion as black and white and immediately becoming defensive isn't helping as much as you think.
There are plenty of titles they could use. The issue is this school rejected those other titles too, and that's not right.
You sound like you're the type of person who gets offended for other people when in fact, those other people aren't offended in the first place. I wish I could downvote you more than once
I don't want to send me kids to a school where the teachers intentionally try to impose their made up beliefs on them. Is it too much to ask for teachers to stick to the subjects they are supposed to teach?
Your comments reek of the same smug shittiness
Their comment doesn't read this way at all. You're just arguing past them.
I kinda feel the same about Xe/Xim. I think the reasoning is just "they have to abide by the same conventions or people won't get it." It would be a lot cooler to just fully break away from those traditions and have something more eloquent, but language keeps taking the path of least resistance.
Sounds like a first world problem if I have ever heard of it. I think you can survive going as Ms or Mr.
Mr./Mrs. are evolutions of language, like you said. They don't really refer to the original words for the most part. Mx. is an evolution of the same language and just as easy to pronounce. Sure, it's a "bandaid" if you want to call it that, but the English language is 90% bandaids. To rule out this one when there isn't a good alternative for general use (prof. or teacher would be fine for this person, but not for someone who's not a teacher) is pretty narrow minded.
Mr/Ms/Mrs all makes sense.
Mr -> You are a male
Ms -> You are a female
Mrs -> You are a married female
Mx -> You uhh feel like you are neither male or female or something. keyword being "feel". The 3 above all are objective characteristics. The latter is not.
An adult should be able to teach kids without feeling the need to impose their own wacky views on them. Just use mr or ms. You are an adult, you can handle it.
I'm not saying it is, but it should be enough to start a discussion on whether there's a better, more easily pronouncable term while we're in a discussion about titles.
If I really think about it, what makes Mr. Or Ms. any easier to pronounce? They are actually a bit less intuitive because they are abbreviations.
As far as two letters go, I feel like Mx. is just one step removed from Mix, so it seems easy to me. Perhaps Mr. and Ms. are just easier to accept because we have lived with them our whole life. A lot of the English language seems weird when we step outside of it.
Mr. is derived from master and Ms. is derived from mistress. Their pronunciation is derived from their etymology.
I agree though that common usage plays a part.
Master and Mr are different in usage, the former for young people (under 18).
Ms is pronounced with the /z/ sound, not the 's' in mistress.
Ms. Mrs. And Miss are all from mistress apparently, and Ms. (MIZ) was used to address a woman regardless of marital status.
Today I learned.
I'm all for the "Ey", "em", "eir" pronouns, but I don't have a stake in the game.
For example,
Ey worked as a teacher for the school until ey was fired for using neutral pronouns. Eir opinion stated in an interview was that e will not change how e refers to emself.
English needs gender neutral pronouns because they can be useful in a situation such as needing to refer to a person named Smith, but don't know their gender. ("They, them, their" should be reserved for groups, imo).
"Mey." Or "Mer." could be the solution for a title in this situation.
Seems a hell of a lot easier to just use “they/them” as we already do. If it were too confusing, it would evolve into something else naturally anyway. German gets by just fine with “they” and the formal form of “you” being the same. I think we’ll be fine.
Singular they has existed for centuries, and been used that way for centuries. In normal usage, it should be obvious from context whether you're using singular or plural.
To me a professor teaches at a college or university but teacher should 100% have been an option.
I live in MA and have an X marker. I really like it? It’s a common variable, and I like the relationship.
I usually say Mixter, but it’s English so it’s all made up.
I'm not trying to be negative but shouldn't coach be reserved for people who actually coach something? I think teacher should have been available.
“I was told that professor was not okay, Dr. was not okay for me because I didn’t have a Ph.D., but there are lots of people at FLVS who do use Dr., which, coincidentally, is also in violation of the same law I got disciplined for,” Vary said. They were told the other acceptable courtesy titles were Mrs., Ms., or Miss. Using "teacher" was also out of the question.
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?
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
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??
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.
You just read an article about a non-binary person, so I think we can assume they are, indeed, "a thing." Something tells me you don't interact with a lot of queer people anyways, so your acceptance of their terms of address feels pretty irrelevant.
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?
Try reading a book that's a few decades old. Language evolves. Though wonder if you read books.
Here's an idea- let's not care if it's fucking stupid and call people what they want to be called?
I want to be addressed as "your highness", can you do that for me? Would be pretty bigoted if you don't, just saying
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.
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.