It responded here: https://lemm.ee/post/12418057

Here’s the nuance: If you call someone who uses they/them they/them, then you are REFERRING to them correctly, but you’re not GENDERING them correctly, because you aren’t gendering them at all. You’re referring to them neutrally, which is the correct way to refer to someone who wants to be referred to neutrally.

I sympathise and agree with much of what you are saying.
“they is not ideal, but until you know better it will suffice.” might be the intended message.

If the person is replying in good faith and actually trying to both to understand and be understood. And that would include explicitly stating somewhere that it acknowledges that being pedantic about de-gendering vs misgendering is not constructive.

Paraphrasing, the events went along these lines.

• user: TERFs use they/them pronouns for people who they damn well know use different pronouns as a way to de-gender people and as a slight against trans people
• dronerights: actually, they/them is right anyways because it doesn’t do anything with gender, so the TERFs aren’t doing anything wrong, they are using language correctly

Descriptivism vs Prescriptivism. Its argument is that prescriptivism and technical definition is the only correct interpretation of they/them pronouns. Compare ‘they banned me for saying gender neutral pronouns exist’ with, for instance, JKKK Rowling claiming to be canceled for saying gender exists. Its a false argument. Descriptively, they/them is not used neutrally, and is used to hurt people, therefore they/them can be gendered. TERFs use they/them as a stand-in for misgendering, therefore it is misgendering. They/them means she/her for people who use he/him, and vice versa. They/them means ‘I refuse to use your made up neopronouns’. The gender neutral definition isn’t the only one, and dronerights insisting upon the gender neutrality in all circumstances is incorrect.

The pedantic insistence that the context shouldn’t matter because they/them is technically correct, or should be correct, is where the transphobia lies.

And until I see any acknowledgement by dronerights of this, instead of constantly doubling down on it, I do not see a good faith argument.

Instead we have this. The user misrepresenting events. Misrepresentation is bad faith. If it said it was being a pedantic jerk and clarified, that would go a long way to earning this generous interpretation of its position that you want to give it. It is trying to be right and win an internet argument at any cost and constantly starts fights between users and instances (also bad faith actions).

I think what was meant was “they is not ideal, but until you know better it will suffice.”

That doesn’t make it better holy shit. For some of us, they is ideal. That’s the point.

Also holy shit, you: I’m gonna need proof

[proof]

you: