(April 3, 2021 at 6:13 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: According to the hidden part of the article, it's meant to make preferred pronouns more visible and the hope is that if enough cisgender people take part in it, just stating a person's preferred pronouns would become normal.
Is "becoming normal" really a goal anyone should be striving for? I've known quite a lot of people who lived in that blurry place between genders, and lemmie tell ya, many of them found it exhilarating to be freaks who lived their lives outside the boundaries of normalcy.
I get that some people want to enjoy the status of "normal person" that many cis people enjoy. And "normal" goes a long way with society in general accepting who you are and allowing a person to participate in said "normal society" and in many ways opens the door for someone to advance in a society because the society at large deems them "normal." Normalizing expressions of gender fluidity could help people who are denied opportunity and participation in society to become successful within that society, and also help them feel like they are not "some weirdo" because such-and-such actresses that they look up to (like the actress person being discussed) expresses what pronouns she prefers. And this makes it feel more "normal" for anyone else to do the same. And that's good. People shouldn't feel shame in expressing their views about what their own gender actually is.
But at the same time, nobody should be obligated or coerced into "normalizing" this or that expression of genderhood. "Normalization" is a damaging, and underrated affair. It suffocates the imagination of those many, many individuals who would prefer to remain freaks. Those real people who live in that "blurry in between" of genders who, rather than wanting to participate in a society through some forced normalcy ritual, would rather rebel against it, and bring the bricks of its walls cascading down upon the heads of the ignorant and confused conformists who will never accept them.
