LogFAQs > #929146914

adjl posted...

"My name is Andrew" is an objective fact. "I prefer to be called Andy" is also an objective fact (or at least it would be if I had such a preference). Were I to change my name to Bob, Jim, or Sally, "My name is Bob/Jim/Sally" would become an objective fact.

Your name is also "that prick" to people who don't know you.

You call yourself Andrew but there's no reason to be called Andrew. It's your moniker that's entirely circumstantial, you're not objectively an Andrew. It's only offensive to call you another name as there's no reason to refer to you by another name thus it can be assumed to be to antagonise you.

Calling an MtF he can simply be going by how they understand the world, and not using she is refusing to say what they believe is false. It can't be inherently offensive as the intent can be divorced from offense.

adjl posted...

It also doesn't change the fact that refusing to call somebody by name is just plain rude at best

Or not directed at the referenced person and speaking in terms that least confuse the audience as to the rest of their sentence.

Regardless, it is not illegal to be rude so thank you for agreeing that it isn't inherently hateful/discriminatory.

adjl posted...

None of that spectrum should be considered an acceptable way for a teacher to treat their students.

Teachers should be clear and honest with their students, students should learn to put their pride aside when they are coming to learn. You won't die because your teacher doesn't agree with your opinion, and perhaps you'll learn to respect people who don't agree with you.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...
The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas.