> It's not courtesy if it's non consensual, same way that wealth redistribution isn't charity I truly don't understand what you are talking about. When I was i

> It's not courtesy if it's non consensual, same way that wealth redistribution isn't charity I truly don't understand what you are talking about. When I was in primary school, and perhaps in no small part due to some prosopagnosia, I was unable to determine the gender of my peers reliably. This occasionally resulted in violence as I misgendered peers. Do you live in a part of the world where you can use whatever pronouns you want on people? If no, what exactly are we disagreeing about? > standing for Can you explain what, exactly, it is that you're standing for? > There's nothing to feel, these people are neither male or female and would indeed deserve a specific pronoun, but pragmatism would make it as logical as making all cars fit for one-armed people That's why they generally choose one or the other? Occasionally, someone will prefer a "non-standard" pronoun but I have never faced someone that didn't accept "they" (which, by the way, was my coping strategy in my childhood - when in doubt, use "they"! This was in pre-internet era of regional Queensland, Australia, where we barely had dictionaries, let alone knew what a pronoun even was) You've obviously put a lot of energy and thought into this issue but I'm not exactly sure what the issue /is/