
Official StackOverflow FAQ on Gender Pronouns and Code of Conduct Changes - nsoonhui
https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/334900/3834
======
xkapastel
Sometimes I have a hard time believing that this gender stuff is really
happening. That there are really people who want to divorce the words "man"
and "woman" from a person's sex, and instead make them about personal
identity. That they have enough political power to force changes like this
with no discussion and no dissent allowed.

It is not in any way bigoted or transphobic to believe that a person being a
man or a woman, and therefore the pronouns used to refer to that person, are
determined by that person's sex at birth. This was the accepted belief of the
vast majority of the human race up until about 20 minutes ago, when it
suddenly became a bannable offense.

StackOverflow going all-in in support of social engineering on behalf of
political activists is baffling to me. Where does this end? Is the goal really
to force all of society to change to placate a small group of activists? A
reasonable compromise would have just been to allow "they" to refer to someone
in a neutral way, but I understand that this is actually _not allowed_ if the
person being referred to has stated they would like "he" or "she". This is
what makes me think it's more about social engineering than actually
protecting anyone from harm.

~~~
ykevinator
The presumption of malicious intent is what's off putting. Plus its a fool's
errand, you cannot retrain a few billion people by public shaming. I'm a
liberal, and this is stupid.

~~~
ihatemondays
One of the central ideas that lead SE is "Assume good intent". There's no
presumption of malicious intent.

~~~
rednixion
... didn't they just fire someone like two weeks ago based on a presumption of
malicious intent?

------
duxup
Moderating it and encouraging the community to run around policing each other
seems like it is a bit too much.

No matter how gently you moderate a person many take it harshly and I suspect
the response will be to push back at the moderator, moderation, and ultimately
the rule.... and it ends up being more counterproductive than anything else.

Very very generally I would compare the response to say police detaining
someone as far as a someone's response goes. It is hard to do so no matter how
lightly it is presented and not get a strong response.

Another issue is that moderators can't know if two people know the correct
pronoun unless clearly stated in that conversation, so they are going to be
guessing the vast majority of the time...

~~~
ihatemondays
The FAQ clearly states that if you don't know then you're free to use
they/them, and only are required to use their preferred pronouns if you're
asked to do so by the person or if you very clearly knew before (say that you
wrote 10 answers to someone over a week, if you defaulted back to they/them on
each, then it could be seen as intentional).

~~~
duxup
I read that, i'm not entirely sure how that relates to my post.

------
chaorace
It seems like the rule changes boil down to three points:

* Use gender neutral pronouns in most prose

* When directly addressing a user, use their pronouns, as configured on the user profile

* Specifying your own identity is optional, intentionally ignoring the identity specified by others is not

On the one hand, SE can be esoteric enough as it is, more rules will make for
less ease of use. I absolutely think that there should be some level of
natural resistance to all new (and existing) barriers to entry.

On the other hand, this new rule isn't particularly difficult to understand
(imo) and aligns fairly well with current best practices. I feel that it's
particularly disingenuous to foist this issue as _the_ straw that will break
the camel's back, given how thoroughly declawed this rule is. Most infractions
won't even constitute an official warning (though I am certain there are
people who will test this rule to the limits, which will certainly be
interesting to watch unfold).

------
19ylram49
> Q9: Do I have to use pronouns I’m unfamiliar or uncomfortable with (e.g.,
> neopronouns like xe, zir, ne... )?

>

> Yes, if those are stated by the individual.

Yikes.

I’m 100% in support of all gender identities, sexual orientations, races,
etc., and I’ll fight for everyone’s rights and well-being, but this is
insanity.

It’s one thing restrict offensive language but it’s a whole different beast to
mandate specific language.

Nope. Nope. Nope. I’m not doing it.

Sorry not sorry.

~~~
cmrx64
Not doing what? Being 100% supportive as stated and addressing people
respectfully? Seems strange to express displeasure with a corporate policy
about a website by being disrespectful to unrelated individuals.

~~~
19ylram49
> Seems strange to express displeasure with a corporate policy about a website
> by being disrespectful to unrelated individuals.

What are you even going on about? Whom have I disrespected?

Allow me to repeat myself: It’s one thing restrict offensive language but it’s
a whole different beast to mandate specific language.

If, e.g., you tell me to not refer to a certain group of folks using a
particular racially offensive term, that’s fine and pretty reasonable, but if
you tell me that I _must_ refer to a certain group of folks using a term that
you or they chose simply because you or they said so, as far as I’m concerned,
we’re slowly walking ourselves into a dictatorship. For the first option, I
can simply not do anything and avoid being a “bad” person, but for the second
option, I’m implicitly a “bad” person if I don’t explicitly do as told (in
this case, aka, ordered).

There’s no way I could ever accept that. Nope. No way.

~~~
anp
How do you feel about using someone's name?

~~~
eveFromKarmaFm
I think the argument boils down to fundamentally restructuring the syntax of
our language to the point where pronouns are now individual identity-level
constructs. I won't take a position, but I will say that this restructuring is
expensive and confuses the hell out of me.

~~~
neonate
You might want to be getting your site back up:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21252544](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21252544).

~~~
eveFromKarmaFm
LOL thanks, nice blip of traffic there pushing my little VM to its limits.

------
blablabla123
I really have problems following through this complex discussion. But if
pronouns are such an issue, this proves that too many discussions on
StackExchange are about people and not about technical issues.

They should focus again on technical issues and also find ways to reward
questions and answers about really specific issues. It could be observation
bias but it seems that questions/answers on very generic topics get most
upvotes, although these things can usually also be found on other websites
easily and with more detail.

~~~
wgjordan
> this proves that too many discussions on StackExchange are about people and
> not about technical issues ... They should focus again on technical issues

StackExchange is a network of Q+A sites covering a diverse range of topics,
many of which are non-technical by design.

I think you might be confusing StackOverflow, the original and most popular
technically-focused programming Q+A site, with the broader collection of Q+A
sites this policy is addressing.

Unless you're suggesting that all non-technical StackExchange sites should be
shut down, which is a bit more drastic.

------
Demoneeri
I agree with this. I use any pronouns or name someone wants to be called. I'm
not a jerk.

I don't understand the backlash, do you go around and call people other name
that they want to be called because "you don't feel like it"?

~~~
mckirk
The problem isn't that people should be referred to in the way they want. The
problem is trying to mandate it from above.

Ideally, it would be perfectly "allowed" to insult someone by referring to
them in a way they explicitly asked not to be referred to. And it would then
also be perfectly allowed to call that person out for being a jerk. That's how
a naturally formed community would handle such trolling -- but here, the idea
is that the "right behaviour" has to be enforced by rules from above, and
that's really not a good idea if you're dealing with anything other than a
group of pre-schoolers.

~~~
ihatemondays
Relevant: [https://xkcd.com/1357/](https://xkcd.com/1357/)

You're still perfectly "allowed" to maliciously misgender people, it'll just
get you warned or banned.

~~~
mckirk
Well, I'm pretty sure "being a dick" was a bannable offense before, so the
change of rules is then basically unnecessary.

~~~
ihatemondays
Obviously some people didn't understand that this policy would be included in
"don't be a dick", otherwise we wouldn't be seeing all this pushback.

~~~
mckirk
The pushback is totally justified. Because this is about "you have to say what
we command you to", instead of "you should just not be a dick".

------
RenRav
Unless they include the pronoun by their name... good luck.

There could be a macro that expands into the pronoun or whoever you're
responding to.

~~~
benmmurphy
+1. This is actually a really good idea and solves the issue with people
potentially abusing pronouns on their profile page in bad faith.

------
rossdavidh
So, I wonder if the most likely result of this is that SO just becomes more of
a "place I look stuff up", and less of a "place I post things"?

Also, I wonder what happens the first time somebody says their preferred
pronoun is "God", or something 127 characters long? or Little Bobby Tables?
or...?

~~~
ihatemondays
> Also, I wonder what happens the first time somebody says their preferred
> pronoun is "God", or something 127 characters long? or Little Bobby Tables?
> or...?

As they said on the answers... bad faith actions like having a 127 character
pronoun means that it must be reported:
[https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334900/official-
faq...](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334900/official-faq-on-
gender-pronouns-and-code-of-conduct-changes/334908#comment1098246_334908)

~~~
ThrowawayR2
Seems logically contradictory to have an individual decide their identity but
have an external body determine whether that's in bad faith or not.

~~~
krapp
It isn't. If one accepts the premise that gender is separate from biological
sex, one accepts chosen gender-based pronouns as acceptable descriptors of a
person's gender identity, but the premise of gender-based pronouns is that
they describe gender. As the set of human genders is not infinite, the set of
valid pronouns to describe human gender is also not infinite.

"I identify as an attack helicopter" is _obviously_ stated in bad faith, as
"attack helecopter" is not a valid human gender. "God" or a base64 hash are
also obviously not valid genders. The only people who would do so to begin
with are trolls who want to mock trans identity.

~~~
jeromic
Though where is the line drawn about what is a valid gender/pronoun? For
instance, are all the pronouns listed on
[https://askanonbinary.tumblr.com/pronouns](https://askanonbinary.tumblr.com/pronouns)
acceptable or not?

~~~
krapp
99% of this issue is about the validity of calling someone either "he" or
"she" when their gender identity is not the same as their biological sex. The
use of such "nounself" gender identifiers[0,1] is uncommon and controversial
even with the LGBT community[2].

Personally, if I know someone is sincere and wants me to use such a pronoun, I
probably would, even though I'd find it odd.

So let's draw the line here: _at the very least_ if someone wants to be called
"he" or "she" that should be respected regardless of their biological sex, and
agree that it gets "complicated" from there.

[0][https://nonbinary.miraheze.org/wiki/Nounself_pronouns](https://nonbinary.miraheze.org/wiki/Nounself_pronouns)

[1][https://anagnori.tumblr.com/post/75752291700/a-non-binary-
pe...](https://anagnori.tumblr.com/post/75752291700/a-non-binary-persons-
guide-to-invented-pronouns)

[2][https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/2oj7jt/thou...](https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/2oj7jt/thoughts_on_nounself_pronouns/)

------
halfarmbandit
The people that don’t understand why this is awful concent to speech
regulations. I can’t see how this differs from homophobia enforced by law.
Both limit a person’s freedom. It is totally different to mispronounce and to
make racist remarks. The former can be solved by asking the other person the
latter won’t be solved because the other person is an asshole. One is a mishap
directed towards a single person and the latter towards a group of people.

------
jonny383
And this is the beginning of the end of SE. They should never have gotten
anywhere near involved in such a controversial topic. Especially, given their
site is _international_ and I'm assuming a huge amount of their customer base
is coming from conserved, third-world countries, who are simply not ready to
change to make a first-world minority feel better of factually correct
wording.

Save yourself the burden: $ echo "127.0.0.1 stackoverflow.com
www.stackoverflow.com stackexchange.com www.stackexchange.com" >> /etc/hosts

~~~
tsegratis
I found SO useful, but it is copy-left

[https://stackoverflow.com/help/licensing](https://stackoverflow.com/help/licensing)

So even GPL works need relicensing if they include anything from SO??

~~~
tsegratis
Ah, GPL is an exception; including something from SO makes your work:

Either GPL, or one of two licenses they consider equivalent

------
johannkokos
Somehow I feel StackOverflow is preparing itself to be bought. Part of
contract is for SO to deal with these hard problems before the it is made
public.

------
kangnkodos
Can StackOverflow provide a technical solution?

When I write my question, answer, or comment, allow me to add markup such as
<pronoun @CaesarM />.

And then StackOverflow will display the pronoun in the correct way.

\---

Or StackOverflow could take it one step farther. If I write a question, answer
or comment with a pronoun, a dialog pops up asking me which username the
pronoun refers to. The software does the rest.

------
generalpass
If I were 15 nowadays, I'd be getting so many people banned, lol.

I can't comprehend how SE can be so ignorant.

------
qbaqbaqba
Are there any reasonable SO alternatives?

