TomC said:
I am attacking the opinions you have posted.
You made it very clear that you consider the use of pronouns other than the preferred ones rude. You also made it clear that your usage of the pronoun 'it' when referring to me, was not an instance of your being rude unintentionally. It seems rather obvious that you were being rude deliberately.
TomC said:
You generally ignore what I post.
That is not true. And it is weird that you say that, because I have been trying repeatedly to try to get you to engage. If you were to explain your position better, I would be able to address it better. But you continue to fail to address my questions, misrepresent what I say, put words into my keyboard, etc.
TomC said:
So, I'll ask again, "Why do you think that I'm part of the 'pronoun police', while you and Metaphor, Sigmathezeta, etc. aren't?
No, you are not asking again. You never asked that before. The reason I thought you were part of the pronoun police is precisely the reason I stated in the post you quoted 4 lines above asking the question. The reason is that you post moral condemnations of those who do not use pronouns in the way you like - allegedly matching the preferences of the person people are speaking about, but not in all cases, so your standards are unclear.
Let me further unpack: not only you make your moral condemnation loud and clear, but you accompany it with false and disparaging accusations about the intentions of those who use pronouns in a way that differs from whatever it is you want. And those are accusations that you should not believe are true.
So, those are the reasons I believed that you are part of the pronoun police. However, I may have misunderstood the use of the expression 'pronoun police' in this context, so I was asking.
As for me, well I am not part of the pronoun police because I do not do any of the above, nor do I take any other coercive action against people who use their own preferred pronouns (coercion =\= force; using force or the threat of force is a way of coercing, but there are forms of coercion that do not involve force, for example public condemnations, false accusations, etc., that do not involve threats of force, but involve explicit or implicit threats of other negative social consequences if a person fails to comply).
As for [removed fr consistency] etc., I never said anything about whether I thought they were part of the pronoun police. I do not even know who "etc." is, so your question is both odd and another instance of attributing claims or beliefs to me that you have no good reason to suspect I have. [removed for consistency]
All that aside, if you read this and my other posts carefully, you would notice that I do address what you say in your replies to me, as long as it has some relevance to the matter being discussed, and even some things that do not have any. Now let me direct you again to
this post. Have you considered my points there? Do you have answers?