While I appreciate the positive intent behind the thoughts and the attempt to empower people, I'd just like to express my personal dislike for sentiments that suggest people are giving others the power to hurt them, that they're
letting words hurt them, that they can
decide to not react to them, etc. I'm happy if anyone has developed in a way that allows them to do that but not everyone can, not everyone wants to, and nobody should have to. Personally, I often regard such views as verging on effectively victim-blaming because they allow the onus for pain suffered and change to be focused on the victim rather than on the original aggressor.
Language is an incredibly complex sign system that we often intuitively understand. Accordingly, I believe it's commonly the case that we can have limited conscious control over its effects on us since we've automatically absorbed and reacted to what is conveyed almost immediately after hearing/seeing it. This means I'll always personally defer to trying to understand the pain people endure from it, help them with that pain, and use that pain to try to encourage societal change that leads to those harmful things no longer being conveyed by people. I don't want them to feel they have to suppress or ignore the harm.
QuoteGuess what? If you take offense at someone else's identity, it's your problem, not theirs. That's identity politics 101 for you.
Personally, I don't see where anyone in this topic has expressed that people cannot identify as they desire. I only see people expressing personal distaste for it being applied to them or think it's ill-suited to them. With regard to your point, I agree but I also believe there is a duty on the people that do try to reclaim slurs or identify in a way that would be frequently objectionable to stress that it should not be applied to others without their consent. Naturally, I think it can be insisted that it's not their duty because the person using the word is doing the generalising so is the one creating the harm but that's simply not pragmatic and is callous disavowing of responsibility for potential outcomes started by their personal choice to me. I think anyone that identifies as a '->-bleeped-<-' or 'trap,' as some people I know do, and doesn't make it clear that it shouldn't be generalised is being naive or selfishly blinkered since some people will often then apply it to other trans people while citing them as an example of why they thought it was acceptable.