Iām a person who calls everyone ādudeā, ābroā, āmanā etc. regardless of gender. When I talk to a woman using those words, my mentality isnāt that they are necessarilly āone of the brosā specifically meaning āsimilar to one of my male friendsā, but more that Iāve never called anyone āsisā or āgirlā in my life, and Iām not about to start. I also donāt like using gendered pronouns in any conversation, regardless of who Iām talking to. For example, instead of āhimā or āherā, I will usually say " 'em" (short for them).
To me, I am not talking to a man or a woman; I am talking to a human.
With my transfem friends, though, I usually just call them by their name, since that seems to be a good compromise.
Who knows. Maybe Iāll just start calling everyone ācomradeā
I appreciate your sense of trying to do right, but you should really not degender people, as thatās a thing that transphobes do when trying to not be seen as a transphobe. Degendering is very similar to misgendering, btw, in that it doesnāt respect the personās pronouns, and thus is attempting to discredit their gender.
If youāre truly gender-abolitionist and (I will optimistically assume) race-abolitionist, and donāt want to have gender be part of you, congruently, maybe donāt use dude or bro at all anymore? Would you kiss a dude or a bro? Or did that question make you mentally imagine a masculine person?
I dunno. If I met a person in real life that truly never used he or she pronouns, and included me in that, I would probably be okay with it. But if they werenāt consistent and they just used it around me or with other trans people, I would have a huge problem with it. Because the crux of the problem would be whether or not they are truly trying to change everything, or if they just cannot see me as a woman and are trying not to be hurtful without trying to understand.
I notice a lot of corporate-like personalities try to do this by hedging their language. It always feels spineless and shitty, they are NOT trying to change everything, theyāre just trying to manipulate everybody so that they can HAVE everything.
If youāre truly gender-abolitionist and (I will optimistically assume) race-abolitionist, and donāt want to have gender be part of you, congruently, maybe donāt use dude or bro at all anymore?
Gender, race, nationality, and country abolishionist.
I would love an alternative, but the colloquial American English language does not have casual, non-gendered words to refer to people in general other than ācomradeā, but I donāt want to call everyone a comrade because then everyone will think Iām a communist (I am, but I donāt want that to be public).
Thatās strange. Not saying right or wrong, but in my head, dude is like a cowboy, overly masculine, like literally more masculine than calling somebody a mister. But then it got appropriated by guys (meaning men/boys) over the years and eventually got used for referring to somebody else that was a guy, and never girls. Like a good ole boys club that all men were a part of. And over time started getting used on tomboys and masc women, and I guess that and ābroā started getting used on girls, too. Which is, optimistically, great. Except homophobia still exists and a lot of guys who would hear ābro that likes to help out their broā is still commonly used to mean something homosexual.
Bud or Buddy, or pal are the same vein, theyāre still absolutely masculine, could be used in place of friend but are still masculine or desexualizing. A LOT of language is crazy homophobic.
I think a large part of the issue here may be actually the homophobia, and that calling trans girls bros or dudes, and why thatās invalidating, may be because of homophobia and how by coding them as a traditionally desexualized name and that being more comfortable to most guys might be because theyāre uncomfortable with seeing trans women as women, and thus a sexual option. It validates the trans woman as a chill friend person, but says no I refuse to see you in any way sexual, be it straight OR gay (but especially straight/het) because transphobia and homophobia.
I then presume the question(s):
Is there correlation with those trans girls okay with being called dude and whether or not they are interested, sexually, in men?
What about, then, if thereās a correlation between being about to intuit that deep connection? There are also many connections in that logic on the way that simply may not exist.
Or maybe a free mind, free from self imposed homophobia or transphobia?
Or, one that DOES have those self impositions?
An alien, new to our language, culture, and existential limitations would not know or care about such nuances of being called ādudeā unless they had previously been subject to categorization and the bigotry of human culture. So, what then, is the difference between an entirely ignorant alien - a seemingly blank slate, and those of us that feel somethingās off when being called dude, even when the speaker professes beneficence?
To answer that, would require a sample of considered answers from various trans women to why theyāre offended by it, and then drilling down to see what lies beneath.
Unfortunately, this platform is not the place for said incredibly private and sensitive affairs. So this conversation effectively must come to an intellectual dead end, replaced by an alternative, shallower treatment of minimizing collateral invalidation and emotional minimization: if somebody says youāre doing something that truly bothers them, you should stop. Donāt try to justify why it shouldnāt bother them, thatās intrusive, controlling, and hurtful, and is an attempt to invalidate their feelings.
Only if both people want to continue to drill down, respectfully, examining the values of their own perspectives and value in pursuing continued use or dislike of use of the term, should that happen.
But likeā¦ definitely donāt trample somebodyās dignity. Thatās bullshit behavior and is worth punching somebody for.
ā¦Giving me flashbacks to that Mercedes Lackey book that tried to make āsingular yāallā a thing, work characters in Appalachia. (Iām told itās a thing further west, but for Appalachian characters it was nails on a chalkboard).
š
I donāt know about any of that other stuff, but yāall is absolutely you+all, and to me is explicitly referring to other people, meaning more than one. You could do yāall for somebody who is a DiD system maybe.
Yeah, thatās how I had to think of the main character, as a person containing multiple personalities. The author I mentioned is a Brit living in Oklahoma, and I think thatās where The Internetā¢ told me some folks use āsingular yāallā. I grew up in Kentucky and it wasnāt a thing there.
This is kind of the logic that hurts me. People like me will express that those terms make them uncomfortable, but someone will argue that theyāll use gendered words with the intent to be gender neutral. But likeā¦itās not very empathetic to disregard someoneās feelings because using āgirlā is uncomfortable. Itās kind of putting your feelings above thereās. If you have the opportunity to be kind and affirming, to make someone feel safe and comfortable in the world, why not embrace that? A simple change in your language could make someoneās entire day.
Nobody (including you) should put other peoplesā feeling above your own, as that is an extremely unhealthy thing to do. Being considerate of someoneās feelings and sacrificing your own feelings for someone else are two very different things.
The people I talk to donāt mind the way I talk, and that is how I judge my language. I also make sure that I give them the environment necessary to express their discomfort with my language if they have any.
Do you have any non-gendered alternatives to ādudeā and ābro?ā
Nobody (including you) should put other peoplesā feeling above your own
I kinda see where youāre coming from, but I wholeheartedly disagree.
You should never put your needs below anyone elseās, but Iād argue that itās very healthy to mildly inconvenience yourself in order to avoid majorly inconveniencing or hurting others. In fact Iād say thatās kind of the entire cornersone of human civilization.
Yes, and every time someone is bothered by my language, I change my language specifically for them, like how I call my transfem friends by their name instead of saying ādudeā, etc.
Iām a person who calls everyone ādudeā, ābroā, āmanā etc. regardless of gender. When I talk to a woman using those words, my mentality isnāt that they are necessarilly āone of the brosā specifically meaning āsimilar to one of my male friendsā, but more that Iāve never called anyone āsisā or āgirlā in my life, and Iām not about to start. I also donāt like using gendered pronouns in any conversation, regardless of who Iām talking to. For example, instead of āhimā or āherā, I will usually say " 'em" (short for them).
To me, I am not talking to a man or a woman; I am talking to a human.
With my transfem friends, though, I usually just call them by their name, since that seems to be a good compromise.
Who knows. Maybe Iāll just start calling everyone ācomradeā
I appreciate your sense of trying to do right, but you should really not degender people, as thatās a thing that transphobes do when trying to not be seen as a transphobe. Degendering is very similar to misgendering, btw, in that it doesnāt respect the personās pronouns, and thus is attempting to discredit their gender.
If youāre truly gender-abolitionist and (I will optimistically assume) race-abolitionist, and donāt want to have gender be part of you, congruently, maybe donāt use dude or bro at all anymore? Would you kiss a dude or a bro? Or did that question make you mentally imagine a masculine person?
I dunno. If I met a person in real life that truly never used he or she pronouns, and included me in that, I would probably be okay with it. But if they werenāt consistent and they just used it around me or with other trans people, I would have a huge problem with it. Because the crux of the problem would be whether or not they are truly trying to change everything, or if they just cannot see me as a woman and are trying not to be hurtful without trying to understand.
I notice a lot of corporate-like personalities try to do this by hedging their language. It always feels spineless and shitty, they are NOT trying to change everything, theyāre just trying to manipulate everybody so that they can HAVE everything.
Gender, race, nationality, and country abolishionist.
I would love an alternative, but the colloquial American English language does not have casual, non-gendered words to refer to people in general other than ācomradeā, but I donāt want to call everyone a comrade because then everyone will think Iām a communist (I am, but I donāt want that to be public).
folks, friend(s), yāall, sweetie, sugarcube, partner, sport, buddy, pal, chum, sunshine, fam
English has quite a few
I find buddy and pal way more gendered (to me) than dude, tbh
Iām fine with being called dude, it makes me feel like a chill homegirl. But you call me ābudā and Iāll want to punch you.
Thanks Super, saw surprises on the list & helps to have someone jump in for contrast, digest it all in a well-rounded way
Very thoughtful discussion yāall
Thatās strange. Not saying right or wrong, but in my head, dude is like a cowboy, overly masculine, like literally more masculine than calling somebody a mister. But then it got appropriated by guys (meaning men/boys) over the years and eventually got used for referring to somebody else that was a guy, and never girls. Like a good ole boys club that all men were a part of. And over time started getting used on tomboys and masc women, and I guess that and ābroā started getting used on girls, too. Which is, optimistically, great. Except homophobia still exists and a lot of guys who would hear ābro that likes to help out their broā is still commonly used to mean something homosexual.
Bud or Buddy, or pal are the same vein, theyāre still absolutely masculine, could be used in place of friend but are still masculine or desexualizing. A LOT of language is crazy homophobic.
I think a large part of the issue here may be actually the homophobia, and that calling trans girls bros or dudes, and why thatās invalidating, may be because of homophobia and how by coding them as a traditionally desexualized name and that being more comfortable to most guys might be because theyāre uncomfortable with seeing trans women as women, and thus a sexual option. It validates the trans woman as a chill friend person, but says no I refuse to see you in any way sexual, be it straight OR gay (but especially straight/het) because transphobia and homophobia.
I then presume the question(s):
Is there correlation with those trans girls okay with being called dude and whether or not they are interested, sexually, in men?
What about, then, if thereās a correlation between being about to intuit that deep connection? There are also many connections in that logic on the way that simply may not exist.
Or maybe a free mind, free from self imposed homophobia or transphobia?
Or, one that DOES have those self impositions?
An alien, new to our language, culture, and existential limitations would not know or care about such nuances of being called ādudeā unless they had previously been subject to categorization and the bigotry of human culture. So, what then, is the difference between an entirely ignorant alien - a seemingly blank slate, and those of us that feel somethingās off when being called dude, even when the speaker professes beneficence?
To answer that, would require a sample of considered answers from various trans women to why theyāre offended by it, and then drilling down to see what lies beneath.
Unfortunately, this platform is not the place for said incredibly private and sensitive affairs. So this conversation effectively must come to an intellectual dead end, replaced by an alternative, shallower treatment of minimizing collateral invalidation and emotional minimization: if somebody says youāre doing something that truly bothers them, you should stop. Donāt try to justify why it shouldnāt bother them, thatās intrusive, controlling, and hurtful, and is an attempt to invalidate their feelings.
Only if both people want to continue to drill down, respectfully, examining the values of their own perspectives and value in pursuing continued use or dislike of use of the term, should that happen.
But likeā¦ definitely donāt trample somebodyās dignity. Thatās bullshit behavior and is worth punching somebody for.
Lol āsugarcubeā. But yeah, maybe I should take a page from Canadians.
haha, figured it was a thing but all I see is urban dictionary
ā¦Giving me flashbacks to that Mercedes Lackey book that tried to make āsingular yāallā a thing, work characters in Appalachia. (Iām told itās a thing further west, but for Appalachian characters it was nails on a chalkboard). š
I donāt know about any of that other stuff, but yāall is absolutely you+all, and to me is explicitly referring to other people, meaning more than one. You could do yāall for somebody who is a DiD system maybe.
Yeah, thatās how I had to think of the main character, as a person containing multiple personalities. The author I mentioned is a Brit living in Oklahoma, and I think thatās where The Internetā¢ told me some folks use āsingular yāallā. I grew up in Kentucky and it wasnāt a thing there.
Perhaps you should reflect on why you think bro and dude is humanizing but sis and girl is not
Easy. Iām a straight male who grew up around surfers in California.
This is kind of the logic that hurts me. People like me will express that those terms make them uncomfortable, but someone will argue that theyāll use gendered words with the intent to be gender neutral. But likeā¦itās not very empathetic to disregard someoneās feelings because using āgirlā is uncomfortable. Itās kind of putting your feelings above thereās. If you have the opportunity to be kind and affirming, to make someone feel safe and comfortable in the world, why not embrace that? A simple change in your language could make someoneās entire day.
Nobody (including you) should put other peoplesā feeling above your own, as that is an extremely unhealthy thing to do. Being considerate of someoneās feelings and sacrificing your own feelings for someone else are two very different things.
The people I talk to donāt mind the way I talk, and that is how I judge my language. I also make sure that I give them the environment necessary to express their discomfort with my language if they have any.
Do you have any non-gendered alternatives to ādudeā and ābro?ā
I kinda see where youāre coming from, but I wholeheartedly disagree.
You should never put your needs below anyone elseās, but Iād argue that itās very healthy to mildly inconvenience yourself in order to avoid majorly inconveniencing or hurting others. In fact Iād say thatās kind of the entire cornersone of human civilization.
Yes, and every time someone is bothered by my language, I change my language specifically for them, like how I call my transfem friends by their name instead of saying ādudeā, etc.