unlawfulbooger@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 year agoMisgendering does not rulelemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square67linkfedilinkarrow-up1628arrow-down126
arrow-up1602arrow-down1imageMisgendering does not rulelemmy.blahaj.zoneunlawfulbooger@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 year agomessage-square67linkfedilink
minus-squareGladaed@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up10·1 year agoYes, but actually no. Using deadnames of companies is much more acceptable than for people.
minus-squareGlytch@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·1 year agoDespite what the Supreme Court will tell you, corporations aren’t actually people, so you don’t have to worry about dead naming them.
minus-squaresamus12345@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·1 year agoDeadnaming is not necessarily misgendering. Sometime people have deadnames for reasons other than gender.
Yes, but actually no. Using deadnames of companies is much more acceptable than for people.
Despite what the Supreme Court will tell you, corporations aren’t actually people, so you don’t have to worry about dead naming them.
Deadnaming is not necessarily misgendering. Sometime people have deadnames for reasons other than gender.