• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

LGBTQ Stuff (split from other political threads)

It's impossible to keep up with the growing list of pronouns. It was very simple before this liberal mental health epidemic started - He/Him, She/her. Now it seems like an infinite list depending how that person feels that particular day. If someone wants to be preferred as "they", I'll just laugh, shake my head and walkaway.
If it is "impossible" for you to mind your P & Qs and show respect when addressing your peers, subordinates, and superiors; I hope you're not in any position to lead people or face outward to our citizens, allies, or enemies. That is an embarrassing attitude and behaviour to have from someone who claims to uphold our Ethos.

The parable of the dude who fucks up folding a shirt into a 12 X 12 square but wants to be a JTF2 super ninja sniper comes ferverently to mind with your above point
 
If it is "impossible" for you to mind your P & Qs and show respect when addressing your peers, subordinates, and superiors; I hope you're not in any position to lead people or face outward to our citizens, allies, or enemies. That is an embarrassing attitude and behaviour to have from someone who claims to uphold our Ethos.

I self-identify as a lizard king. You shall address me as such.
 
It's impossible to keep up with the growing list of pronouns. It was very simple before this liberal mental health epidemic started - He/Him, She/her. Now it seems like an infinite list depending how that person feels that particular day. If someone wants to be preferred as "they", I'll just laugh, shake my head and walkaway.
In my 32 yes of service, I have held 9 different ranks. Absolutely no one has ever been challenged to address me by how I identified at that particular moment in time.

I have concurrently held an even greater number of appointments at various ranks. And, as the old adage goes: "Every clown in this outfit has a rank and a last name, but only certain people in a unit are given appointments, and it is a mark of respect to address them by their appointment". Again, absolutely no one has been challenged to address me by how I identified at any particular moment in time while I held those appointments.

While I was a Commanding Officer of an HMC ship, it is also customary to identify me as "the Captain" instead of "the Commanding Officer". This isn't something that is taught, it is simply something that is known. Again, never come across a mentally challenged person who was unable to address me appropriately at that moment in time.

Post-Command, I have held additional, completely unrelated appointments simultaneously- being double-hatted as it is known. I fully expect someone to address me by whatever double-hatted appointment I was holding, depending on the nature of their query. Again, no issues,. Ever. Because our members, by and large, aren't that dumb. And if they are, well we have both administrative and disciplinary measures (and a whole host of below the threshold, grey-zone measures as well, like Extras and shit) to correct that dumbness. And if those measures aren't effective, then we have the Admin Review process to review their value to the organization and ultimately solve this type of problem with a 5F release item.

Edited for spelling
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, MARS, that is one of the biggest "apples and oranges" comparison I have seen in a while.

In my 32 yes of service, I have held 9 different ranks. Absolutely no one has ever been challenged to address me by how I identified at that particular moment in time.

Fist of all, your family name and rank is not how you identified at that particular moment. It's how the CAF identified you, and to make sure everyone could instantly get it, they gave you rank badges and name tags, which every member has been taught to read. But walking downtown Halifax at night in civvies, members who did not otherwise know you would not have been able to get it right. People outside the military don't wear badges saying "My preferred pronoun is xxx", yet when you meet them at random and improperly address them based on their outlook (apparently male and dressed like a male, for instance), they get all insulted.

I have concurrently held an even greater number of appointments at various ranks. And, as the old adage goes: "Every clown in this outfit has a rank and a last name, but only certain people in a unit are given appointments, and it is a mark of respect to address them by their appointment". Again, absolutely no one has been challenged to address me by how I identified at any particular moment in time while I held those appointments.

I have my doubts on this one. If you had said no one in those units at the time had been challenged, I would have agreed. Even then, it would only be because the actual appointments have a specific existence that is taught to the military members, thus they now the name of the appointment (CO, XO, Navo, DeckO, etc.) and they were either there when they knew you had been appointed to the position, or joined after and were told who you were, appointment wise. Members from outside your unit may not know and would not address you as such until they found out (if I am sent to another ship to hand something over to the Deck O, I wouldn't know who the person is if five Lieutenants come out of the wardroom at the same time. But again, here, this is NOT how YOU identified at that moment , but rather how the CAF identified you, within a system that is known and taught to all members.


While I was a Commanding Officer of an HMC ship, it is also customary to identify me as "the Captain" instead of "the Commanding Officer". This isn't something that is taught, it is simply something that is known. Again, never come across a mentally challenged person who was unable to address me appropriately at that moment in time.

Actually, that is taught - through osmosis like most customs - as new members do not instinctively and out of the blue come up with that. They learn it by seeing that the longer serving members use that form of address. And it is not something universal. I suspect, for instance, that most CAF members who have not had a chance to serve with the USN wouldn't know that in their navy, they call the CO "Skipper" instead.

Post-Command, I have held additional, completely unrelated appointments simultaneously- being double-hatted as it is known. I fully expect someone to address me by whatever double-hatted appointment I was holding, depending on the nature of their query. Again, no issues,. Ever. Because our members, by and large, aren't that dumb.

That is not my experience. Outside of ships, wether on base, at a military school or at HQ, I don't remember any of us using our position/appointments as form of address. When I was at fleet school, we addressed the Commandant Fleet School As Captain Davies. At HQ, we used ranks and name to address one another - we would not call someone by position, such as "SO Plans, can I talk to you" (I am from before the N1 ...N7 etc. days).

None of this again is because our members are not stupid, as opposed to civilians that are outside of a structured organization and wear no distinctive marks, but because IT IS a structured system, with clear identifier, that is taught to all members from day one, and how you are identified is NOT your own choice but rather imposed on you and all members by the said organization.
 
Unfortunately, MARS, that is one of the biggest "apples and oranges" comparison I have seen in a while.
All fair points OGBD.

I will quote one thing you wrote

"Members from outside your unit may not know and would not address you as such until they found out"

Once someone has told me how they identify in terms of their personal pronoun, I have now "found out" as you say, and thus, I no longer have an excuse to fuck that up, just as I expect members from outside my unit to not fuck it up. At least, not too often. Sure, immediately after a promotion, or after someone gets married, I have occasionally messed up and used their old rank or old last name. Perhaps its the "fine" of buying beers in the Mess that corrects that kind of behaviour quickly. Or perhaps I simply engage my brain and stop making that error
 
Last edited:
True MARS.

But in my experience, they get insulted and feel "attacked" when you don't know them and don't use the right one the first time you address them. Also, think about the university professor who teaches, say, four different classes of 200 students. Her teaching assistants, who deal with subsets of these, may get to know the "preferred pronoun" of most of their charges after a few weeks, but the actual professor may never have enough interaction with each one of them to do so - yet face complaints from some of these students that feel "insulted and belittled".

P.S. The marriage thing would not be problem if all provinces adopted the firmly anti-sexism/equality rule that Quebec uses: Women keep their family names in marriage - period, no choice. It would save on the name tag budget too. ;)
 
In my 32 yes of service, I have held 9 different ranks. Absolutely no one has ever been challenged to address me by how I identified at that particular moment in time.

Established organizational ranks which are taught in basic are completely different from pronoun use for gender identification, especially ones that are constantly changing. It's like an NCM wanting to be addressed as an officer rank because they feel like, in their head, they are one.
 
You don't define you as a person, I define you! Stop playing dominance games and accept my dominance!
A person's power to define self does not empower a person to police others' speech - that would be an intrusion into others' freedom of expression. I will refer to a person as "that twit" if I choose.
 
Established organizational ranks which are taught in basic are completely different from pronoun use for gender identification, especially ones that are constantly changing. It's like an NCM wanting to be addressed as an officer rank because they feel like, in their head, they are one.
When is it you are ever forced to use a person's "pronouns"? A pronoun is, literally, in place of a name. There's little to be gained* in fretting over others' dress, deportment, personal care, and other forms of self-expression.

*The little that is to be gained is, chiefly, amusement.
 
A person's power to define self does not empower a person to police others' speech - that would be an intrusion into others' freedom of expression. I will refer to a person as "that twit" if I choose.
A particulary excellent segue, thank-you. Doing so- as with any decision to act rudely, or even just outside of accepted social decorum, may come with consequences.

This is no different.

You may choose to act like an ass and repeatedly call a coworker "that twit down the hall"- it just may come with consequences.
You may choose to act like an ass and repeatedly call Alex in accounting he despite despite her requests to be referred to as she- it just may come with consequences.

Come off the fucking soapbox. This isn't about people infringing upon your or anyone's freedom of expression- it's about not liking there being consequences for being an ass.
 
A particulary excellent segue, thank-you. Doing so- as with any decision to act rudely, or even just outside of accepted social decorum, may come with consequences.

This is no different.

You may choose to act like an ass and repeatedly call a coworker "that twit down the hall"- it just may come with consequences.
You may choose to act like an ass and repeatedly call Alex in accounting he despite despite her requests to be referred to as she- it just may come with consequences.

Come off the fucking soapbox. This isn't about people infringing upon your or anyone's freedom of expression- it's about not liking their being consequences for being an ass.
Calm down. I don't habitually use pejoratives when speaking about people with shortcomings; I'm usually specific about the shortcomings, in objective terms. The example is theoretical, to emphasize the futility and impotence of trying to police my expression.

I'm retired and not really beholden to anyone for anything, so pressure points on me might be a little hard to find.
 
Calm down. I don't habitually use pejoratives when speaking about people with shortcomings; I'm usually specific about the shortcomings, in objective terms. The example is theoretical, to emphasize the futility and impotence of trying to police my expression.

I'm retired and not really beholden to anyone for anything, so pressure points on me might be a little hard to find.

Lol the bolded.... doesn't read like you think it does.
 
Back
Top