Talk:Tooru Mutsuki/@comment-31190419-20170226033102/@comment-31190419-20170228042301

There’s no reason to look at non-binary/trans people as some kind of group that must be treated in the same matter. They are all individuals with their own deviations from gender normativity. So rather than try to deduce some system where you, the observer, decides what they should be called, that should be up to the individual in question. And I see that you’ve made reference to that. In the case of “he” vs “she” there is no reason to set a high bar for the use of trans pronouns, looking for some sort of intense trueness, authenticity, or demands. If a person seems to be more comfortable being referred to as “he”, why not just call that person “he”? This whole idea of “well they haven’t forcefully demanded to be called he so let’s just refer to them as their biological gender” is an attitude that as far as I am concerned really has no place in this world as it puts all sorts of non-cis people in a situation where they don’t feel welcome at all and they have to be extremely assertive (zealous in your words), perhaps making them unlikable in the process. I think you can see how this unnecessarily alienates people who aren’t cisgender.

So what if Mutsuki is “opportunistic” about gender? That doesn’t change how he wants to be seen by the public at large. But even your points don’t make that much sense, if your goal is to show inconsistency.

1. Mutsuki seems to be fine being seen as male/not female, by both genders. Just because he is more averse to being seen as female by males, doesn’t change the fact that he seems to be consistently okay with being seen as male by both genders.

2. Being “almost embarrassed” by traditionally feminine traits, is actually a great example of dissonance. But taking a step back, you don’t have to hate your biology to not want to be identified as your biological gender. There are full-on trans people who don’t root their trans identity in any feelings of biological dissonance, but being full-on trans shouldn’t (in my opinion) be a prerequisite for “earning” trans pronouns, nor do I believe they even have to be “earned”. If someone for whatever reason wants to be referred to as the opposite gender, why not respect their choice?

3. Kaneki uses feminine charm to his advantage way more than Mutsuki, but I don’t think that we usually see him being called manipulative. Anyway, do you really think that non-cis gender pronouns have to be “earned” by categorically adhering to some gender dogma? If not, I don’t see how this is even an issue.

If there is anything strange to me, it’s that people who I will call “trans skeptics” seem to both require that non-cis people act very vocal and assertive about their gender identity before even acknowledging it, probably knowing quite well that these hoops that they set up put these non-cis people at odds with society, and generally make them a target for bullying and discrimination. And sometimes even this same people ridicule trans people for being over-the-top with their zealous trans behavior.

And in your closing part, you are, just like in your opening, looking at non-cis gendered people as a group rather than a diverse collection of individuals all with their own individual motives, values, and desires.

As far as I can see, from the harder evidence that we are given, Mutsuki is solely okay with being referred to as male, and you can’t say the same with female, so if you’re choosing a pronoun from between those two, why not just go with the one that doesn’t seem to conflict with Mutsuki’s wishes? Just to... not be a dick. If you think Mutsuki is really transitioning to a female identity then why not just let that play out and see if it happens? Like I’ve said before, I like gender-neutral pronouns for slightly cloudy situations like this (see: Whiterose’s treatment in the Mr. Robot wiki), but as of now he is still someone that non-dicks would be calling “he”, when choosing between “he” and “she”.