Thinking Out Loud with Alan Shlemon - Why It’s Reasonable to Refuse to Use Preferred Pronouns

Episode Date: December 15, 2023

Alan addresses whether it’s reasonable to refuse to use a transgender person’s preferred pronouns.

If a person who identifies as transgender asks you to use their preferred pronouns, should you honor that request? Well, I'd like to answer that question in this episode of my podcast, Thinking Out Loud with Alan Schliemann. I'm told that all we're being asked to do is to change one word, right? It's a simple request. Just use a different pronoun. Now, it might seem like a no-brainer for a believer to comply, right? Why cause unnecessary tension by refusing a request to be courteous?

Even some Christians encourage the church to practice what they call quote-unquote pronoun hospitality and to use the preferred pronouns of a person who identifies as transgender. And the reason is they believe it's just a simple act of kindness that engenders relationship and avoids unnecessary distress in a transgender person's mental health. But I want to argue that it's not that simple, right? It's not that we don't want to be kind to people or that we're being indifferent about their well-being. In fact, I think the opposite is the case. It's because we care about truth, we care about fidelity to God, and we actually care about their well-being as well.

Right? And it's for these reasons why many believers abstain from this social ritual. And so I want to offer you some reasons to consider that justify why it's reasonable to refuse to use person's preferred pronouns. Here's the first one. I think it's important for us to distinguish between using preferred pronouns and using preferred names. And here's the reason why. Names are a matter of convention, meaning they are something that is a subjective preference. Pronouns, however, are not a matter of convention, but rather they're a reference to an objective reality, and that is biological sex. And that's why when

it comes to preferred pronouns, they cannot be chosen. So let me try to unpack that for you a little bit here. To say that names are a matter of convention means that names can be chosen because they are not inherent to who a person is. For example, traffic light colors are also a matter of convention. Green means go and red means stop. Now, it's possible that our society could have determined different meanings for these traffic light colors. Red could have meant go and green could have determined different meanings for these traffic light colors, right? Red could have meant go and green could have meant stop, right? There's nothing inherent about green that means go. It was simply a matter of a preference, a convention, that green was chosen for go,

but noticed it could have been otherwise. And in the same way, names are a matter of convention. And in the same way, names are a matter of convention. So, for example, my wife and I considered naming our daughter Anya, but we ended up choosing Sarah. Now, either one would have worked, right? There's nothing inherent about the name Sarah that refers to our daughter. And furthermore, our daughter could one day change her name to Shelly or something else as you desired. could one day change her name to Shelly or something else as you desired. And again,

that's because names are a matter determined by preference and can be chosen. And so it's for this reason I can abide by a person's preferred name, right? And in many cases, I don't have any other option anyways, right? Since they decide what name to share with me. Now, I understand that some parents insist on using the child's given name because of the uniqueness of their relationship. Now, when it comes to this, I'm not, keep in mind, I'm not arguing that preferred names should be used, but rather that they can be used. But when it comes to a person's preferred pronouns, right, I don't think it's the same thing since pronouns refer to an objective reality, which is one's biological sex. See, whether you are male or female isn't a matter

determined by preference, and therefore it cannot be chosen. So for example, age is also a biological reality that can't be chosen, right? There's this one Dutch positivity guru. He's a television personality. His name is Emil Radelband. And he decided many years ago to identify as a 49-year-old when actually he was like 69 years old at the time. Now, no one should be obligated to refer to him as the younger age because age is a biological reality that can't be changed and is therefore not a matter of preference. And in the same way, sex is a biological reality that also can't be changed and also is not a matter of preference. is not a matter of preference. And using a pronoun that refers to a person's chosen sexual identity is like using a number to refer to a person's chosen age. Both of these are illegitimate because neither age nor sex is a matter determined by choice. Now, some people claim, well,

language evolves and pronouns can now refer to not only biology, but also to gender identity, which is, if I were to define gender identity, it'd be simply a person's kind of internal sense of whether they believe they're a man or a woman or something else. Okay. So it's a self-perception about what you think you are. So it's a self-perception about what you think you are. Now, though there might be a segment of society that believes that, there's also another large portion of the population that doesn't accept that shift in language. In fact, they believe words matter and allowing and or collaborating with the change in what a pronoun refers to is actually a big problem. And they don't see the attempt to change language to embrace transgender ideology as simply a benign matter. So anyways, that's the first point I wanted to make is the distinction between preferred names and preferred

pronouns and how it might be possible or permitted to use a person's preferred name, but not a preferred pronoun. All right. Here's a second point I want to bring up. And that is to be aware of the fact that when talking to a person, you don't typically use their pronouns, right? You just use their name, like, hey, Caitlin, can I meet you for coffee? Or if you don't use your name, you might just say the word you, like, hey, you did an amazing job. And these are the ways either their name or the word you is what we say to refer to them. In other words, declining to go along with a person's preferred pronouns will not likely

upset that person since they're not usually present when you use their pronouns. since they're not usually present when you use their pronouns, right? I mean, think about it. Pronouns are most often used when you're talking about someone with another person. Now, it's possible the person you're talking to might get upset or remind you that the transgender person that you refer to prefers a different pronoun than the one you used. And perhaps they might even report you, you know, and that you're quote unquote misgendering them, you know, and they might tell the transgender person about that.

In other words, they'll require you to use preferred pronouns even when you're not around the transgender person. But now this raises another problem. And here is my third point. another problem. And here is my third point. Preferred pronouns entail compelled speech. In other words, you're expected to use an approved set of words when speaking about a person, even when you're not around them. Now, this is odd, right? If I'm in a different building, do they dictate how I should speak? But what if I'm in a different city or in a different state or in a different country, right? Do they have the right to control what I say? I mean, think about it. There's no precedent for such a demand. For example, you know, I do a lot of work on the subject of Islam and end up talking to a lot of Muslims.

Well, Muslims don't have the right to demand I say Prophet Muhammad every time I refer to the founder of Islam. Nor do I demand that they refer to Christ as Lord Jesus. Still, I know there's Christians who say, well, you're not required to use a person's preferred pronouns, but it's courteous to do so if you're asked, right? They're saying, basically, it's simply a matter of being a kind Christian. Now, whether it's courteous or kind to comply, however, depends on the nature of what is being asked of you, which leads to the next problem. And here's the fourth point. Using preferred pronouns entails adopting a foreign worldview, right? Think about it. I mean, complying with a transgender person's request might seem like a minor change in your behavior, but I would argue it is not, right? They're not merely asking you to speak different words. You're being asked to abandon your worldview position on this

topic and adopt their worldview. And the belief that pronouns can refer to gender identity or that a biological man can become a woman, this is not some sort of, you know, minor matter. It's embedded in a worldview that bifurcates biology and gender identity. And if that's not part of your belief system, why are you expected to participate in someone else's worldview? Fifth, using preferred pronouns ignores the principle of reciprocity. You see, for decades, I've heard non-Christians tell Christians something like, hey, look, you can believe whatever you want. You know, you can believe the Bible is God's word. You can believe that sex outside of marriage is sin.

You can believe whatever you want, right? Just don't expect the rest of us to live according to your Christian beliefs. Okay, I hear what they're saying. Fair enough, right? If that principle is legitimate, then we should be permitted to respond in a similar fashion to a transgender person's request, right? Why should we be able to not say something like, hey, look, you can believe whatever you want. You can believe you're a woman when you're biologically a man or

vice versa, right? Just don't expect the rest of us to live according to your beliefs, right? Isn't that fair? As the previous point suggests, why is it only that Christians are expected to abandon their worldview position on sex and gender and adopt a secular view that is unbiblical? Okay, so here's a sixth point. Using preferred pronouns participates in social transitioning, which is a first step in a process that can lead to self-harm. You see, Christians who promote this, you know, thing called pronoun hospitality are concerned that misgendering a person can cause emotional distress and potentially lead to depression and or self-harm. Now, it's legitimate to be concerned about not hurting

other people. I totally get it. Obviously, we don't want to harm anybody, right? So we should be mindful about what kind of impact our decisions have on others. However, given the concern of harm, the question of what kind of harm we ought to protect the transgender person from is precisely what the debate is about, right? This whole thing about pronoun hospitality, these people who are advocating for that assume that the harm comes from misgendering someone. But those who refrain from using preferred pronouns are concerned about the self-harm that comes from the psychological, hormonal, or surgical procedures that are euphemistically called gender-affirming care.

A person who has declared a new name with new pronouns has already taken the first step by socially, quote-unquote, transitioning. And if they continue, the next step includes pumping their body with puberty-blocking hormones and or cross-sex hormones. And then finally, surgical transition often entails amputation of healthy sex organs and or the mutilation of other body parts. And in these surgeries, doctors harvest tissue from a person's forearm or thighs or their back to fabricate an artificial, and by the way, I'll add non-functioning, an artificial penis, right? Or to create an artificial and non-functioning vagina,

doctors will either invert a penis or harvest part of the man's intestine. Now, I don't mean to be, you know, gross just for sake of like shock value. But I want to be frank here. This is genital and bodily mutilation. And so many people who refuse to use preferred pronouns do so out of a genuine concern that their friend or family member will engage in that kind of self-harm, right? And they don't want to participate in the first step of social transitioning because they fear their collaboration could lead to hormonal and or surgical procedures that are barbaric. Okay, then the seventh point I want to make is that practicing pronoun hospitality is not hospitable, but rather it's insincere.

pronoun hospitality is not hospitable, but rather it's insincere. And so the reason I say that is because if you don't believe a biological man can become a woman, but you use a female pronoun to refer to them, well, then you're being disingenuous, right? You're saying something with your words, which is referring to them as a woman, that you don't believe with your mind, right? Would a transgender person really appreciate you pretending to affirm their chosen identity when you actually don't believe it in your heart? I mean, let me give you an illustration here. I mean, if I invited a friend to my son's baptism, but let's just pretend that my friend was not a Christian and they didn't agree with the ritual. Well, I wouldn't want them to say to me, hey, congratulations, right? If they didn't mean it,

right? There's no point to their paying lip service to a theological truth that they don't believe. And in the same way, using preferred pronouns when you reject the transgender identity is, it's two-faced, right? And so with these seven kind of principles or reasons in mind, I want to offer you a practical tactic that you can use when you feel pressure to comply to using a person's preferred pronoun, right? Somebody asks you, hey, will you please use my preferred pronouns? And they tell you what they are. So here's my suggestion. I invite you to tell them no for the reasons that I just said, but I want to offer you a tactic as to how to perhaps articulate this last concern. All right. And I call this tactic the authentic dilemma. All right. So if a transgender person asks you to use a preferred pronouns,

don't comply for the reasons I just stated. But instead, I want you to ask them these three questions. Okay. Here's the first. Do you believe it's important for people to live an authentic life? Now, notice this question operates on their value system, right? Transgender people obviously believe in living authentically. So most likely they're going to answer to you, yes, to that question. Okay, here's the second question. What do you call a Christian who lives inconsistently with their convictions, right? Who preaches one thing, but practices something else? Now, again, most likely they're going to say,

oh, well, that's obviously called a hypocrite. All right, perfect, fine. So now here's the third and the final question. Are you asking me to be a hypocrite with regard to my own convictions instead of living authentically? Now, notice what you've done then. You've put them in a dilemma. Because for you to use their preferred pronouns would be to not live authentically, but to live as a hypocrite, which they just agreed would be bad. But if they believe living authentically is the right course of action, well, then that means that you have the freedom to refuse to use their preferred pronouns. So do you see the dilemma that they faced? Which is, of course, why I call it the authentic dilemma? Now, the point here is not just to sort of trap them or to make them look foolish, right?

But rather, it's to show them that their demands are unfair and unreasonable. Notice, we're not asking to impose our beliefs on them. All we're simply asking if we're allowed to hold our own beliefs and live authentically in light of them, even when we're not around transgender people and they can't hear us. This seems totally fair and reasonable. So, given these numerous concerns that I presented here, I think using preferred pronouns is anything but simple, right? It's not that Christians are being transphobic or that we're being unwilling to be courteous. Rather, I think there are principled reasons that justify holding off on this cultural trend. And so if you decline to use preferred pronouns,

I can just tell you that most likely there'll be some Christians that will claim that your decision might jeopardize your relationship with that transgender person. And what they'll tell you is that if you want to maintain the relationship, you need to use preferred pronouns. pronouns. Now, although I agree that we should lean into our relationships with friends and family who identify as transgender, I think there are limits, right? And if what you're being asked to do violates your conscience, right, based on one or more of the reasons that I just talked about, I think it's reasonable to refuse to use a person's preferred pronouns. I think it's reasonable to refuse to use a person's preferred pronouns. And too often, the goal of this sort of maintaining the relationship is elevated to an unreasonably high priority, right? There's no principle that requires you to violate your conscience to maintain a relationship, right? If the relationship suffers as a result,

my thinking is, so be it. There's only so much you're responsible to do. Your efforts to maintain a relationship should not trump your fidelity to biblical values, to truth, and to what you might think is the right thing to do. Preferred pronouns, by the way, I'll just add here in closing, is not the first cultural trend that Christians should reject, and it won't be the last. And I kind of think of, this reminds me of the story of Daniel from the Bible, who, like him, were basically living in exile in a place called Babylon, right? Of course, that's where Daniel was.

And just like Daniel was pressured to yield to the land's laws, you'll be pressured to succumb to society's social rituals. And that's why I think, just like Daniel, I think you should make fidelity to God a priority. You might feel like you're standing alone, but I'll just tell you this, you are not alone. Well, that's all I have for you today. If you've enjoyed this episode, I'd encourage you to share it with a friend. And also don't forget to subscribe to my podcast so you don't miss any episodes. And thank you for listening. I look forward to thinking out loud with you next time.