... and what's actually the problem with that stance that justifies what is being done to Stallman? It should be OK with everyone to be referred to by name and the set of generic English words that can be applied to anyone.
You try to force RMS to say some words? guess what, he will now try to force his words onto you. You don't agree? neither does he, great, just great. There is no difference here. It is no more valid for you to force language on others than it is for him to try and do it.
You mean like “GNU/Linux”? It's really not a big leap from RMS’s thinking he gets to name other people’s things without their consent (and insist that other people folloq his preference) to his thinking he gets to name other people without their consent, and its truly backwards to think that either of those stems from people trying to “force” anything on Stallman.
No, I recognize that RMS is wrong on trying to impose his choice of names as designators of other people’s work, and also recognize that he is wrong, for pretty much the exact same reason though with more significance, to impose his choice of pronouns as designators of other people’s persons.
Whatever the situation, no one has to comply with such demand.
Nope. No one is demanding that Richard Stallman restrict which pronouns he uses to some set of nonobjectionable pronouns.
People are demanding that, when referring to another person, Stallman not impose names or pronouns he has chosen when he has been informed of the name or pronouns (if any; in some cases the applicable preference is “don’t use pronouns”) which the person identifies as labels for themself.
> Whatever the situation, no one has to comply with such demand.
There are very few times when one strictly has to do anything. OTOH, people don’t have to voluntarily associate with, work with, or contribute to Richard Stallman, or projects or organizations he is associated with, either.
You are free to proudly, publicly proclaim that you will only refer to the 43rd President of the United States as Bu$Hitler, and that no one can impose on you a different choice of names for that person, but you probably should not expect to get a job as executive director of his Presidential Library having done so.
Doing essentially the same thing to a much larger set of people is likewise something one can do, but expecting it to not have consequences, especially on one’s suitability for a position that is fundamentally about public communication, is irrational.
> People are demanding that, when referring to another person, Stallman not impose names or pronouns he has chosen when he has been informed of the name or pronouns (if any; in some cases the applicable preference is “don’t use pronouns”) which the person identifies as labels for themself...
So in short...yes, they are demanding someone else to only use the words they deem tolerable.
again, no.
They are insisting that Stallman only label individuals with the labels the individuals have defined.
This isn't about Stallman being allowed to use words any more than insisting he not rape people is about him not being allowed to have sex.
And please do not insult and offend rape victims by claiming not using the words you want is the same as rape.
What should blow your mind is people mounting huge campaigns to completely cancel someone and then when unable to really defend their positions having the guts to say "it isn't really an issue, it has 0 impact!"
It either is an issue and worthy of ruining someone's life or it isn't. Either simply "feeling" discriminated against is the bar or it isn't. Some people feel bullied when forced to speak a certain way, shouldn't others also be forced to accommodate their feelings?
You can't have it both ways.
And the people "asking" can also be considered assholes.
If somebody told you that their preferred pronoun was "we", I doubt you'd use it.
> not every transgender person wants to be thrown into an "other" category with their pronouns
RMS's pronoun "perse" is gender-neutral (not non-gender).
The stance is IMO crazy, but he does have a point that using "they" as both singular and plural introduces ambiguity.
Can he be in a leadership role and organize conferences? No.
Conferences on gender studies? Maybe.
Conferences on software and IT? Why not?