This happened to me last week. It’s an unprecedented intersection (for me) of astronomy and small mindedness:
https://spectrumpodcast.org/2026/02/06/polite-words-real-exclusion/
Polite Words, Real Exclusion
Wow they couldn’t even stomach the thought of working alongside a person they weren’t politically or perhaps religiously aligned with…. I bet this is one of those people who love to refer to others as ‘snowflakes’! Oh the irony.
What exactly in his remarks did you consider “homophobic”? Perhaps I grew up in a less enlightened era, but I’d suggest that we judge people by their behavior, not their beliefs. If someone advocates discriminating against other people based on their immutable characteristics, I’ll be the first to call them out. But I don’t think disagreement per se is bigotry.
If I were considering a project with someone who included commentary about Trump (pro- or con), immigration, vaccines, or any number of other political topics in their email signature, I’d potentially back out whether the commentary was right wing or left. To me it raises the concern that they don’t share my ideas about interpersonal boundaries.
Well Written Engaging
A fair question. Basically, he totally overreacted using right wing terminology to the use of pronouns in an email signature. Historically, when people try to exclude other people from association, they try to pretty up the language to make it look like they are being reasonable when in fact they are just trying to justify their own intolerance.
I appreciate your taking the time t read or watch it. I know to someone not in the LGBT community this doesn’t necessarily look like intolerance but it’s a story familiar to anyone who has lived it.
I agree it’s a stronger reaction than I would have thought the putative “offense” deserved. But I think some might say the same about your decision to post this interaction to an astronomy forum. We all react in the way that we react.
“Preferred pronouns” can be a little bit awkward. I don’t think it’s necessary to believe that “transwomen are women period” in order to be respectful and kind in your interactions with transgender people and to mind your own business regarding personal decisions that do not affect you personally.
To me, asking someone you just met what their preferred pronouns are (I recognize that you did not actually do this), is a little bit like asking them which of Jesus’ miracles is their favorite. You’ve asked a question that requires them to answer either by implicitly affirming a certain viewpoint or to awkwardly disagree with your implied premise. I’m not sure its a good idea.
John, there's nothing political about someone calling you by the name you prefer to be called. You introduce yourself to others with the name you expect them to address you by, right? If you knew my name was David, you'd typically address me as such, right? I'd say it's a pretty baseline level of respect you'd show any person.
It's really no different then, that some people prefer to let others know that they'd prefer certain pronouns used when addressing them. Using those pronouns when addressing them is a pretty baseline level of respect 🤷
Well Written Respectful Engaging
David, you are spot on! Perfectly said.
David Foust · Feb 7, 2026, 03:03 PM
John, there's nothing political about someone calling you by the name you prefer to be called. You introduce yourself to others with the name you expect them to address you by, right? If you knew my name was David, you'd typically address me as such, right? I'd say it's a pretty baseline level of respect you'd show any person.
It's really no different then, that some people prefer to let others know that they'd prefer certain pronouns used when addressing them. Using those pronouns when addressing them is a pretty baseline level of respect 🤷
If I ask you to address me as “Your Highness”, will you comply as “a simple matter of respect”? Or would you regard it as a demand for affirmation of a belief about myself that you don’t agree with?
Your name is your name. It’s not the same as asking me to call you “Your Highness” or refer to you as He/She because these are not simply names. They are attributes that you lay claim to. When you tell someone your name and they use it, you are not asking them to affirm a claimed attribute. When you ask someone to refer to you as Your Highness or as she, you are.
I think the issue is a little more complex than you are making it out to be. Its also a “simple matter of respect” to accept the idea that other people may have views different from your own and to not demand that they implicitly affirm yours.
All in all I think there is room for people to have and express different beliefs so long as they are kind and respectful to one another. Kindness and respect, do not in my mind, require that I agree with you or positively affirm your beliefs.
I see where you are coming from, but I think like most issues, it’s more complex than advocates on either side make it out to be.
John Tucker · Feb 7, 2026 at 03:28 PM
David Foust · Feb 7, 2026, 03:03 PM
John, there's nothing political about someone calling you by the name you prefer to be called. You introduce yourself to others with the name you expect them to address you by, right? If you knew my name was David, you'd typically address me as such, right? I'd say it's a pretty baseline level of respect you'd show any person.
It's really no different then, that some people prefer to let others know that they'd prefer certain pronouns used when addressing them. Using those pronouns when addressing them is a pretty baseline level of respect 🤷
If I ask you to address me as “Your Highness”, will you comply as “a simple matter of respect”? Or would you regard it as a demand for affirmation of a belief about myself that you don’t agree with?
Your name is your name. It’s not the same as asking me to call you “Your Highness” or refer to you as He/She because these are not simply names. They are attributes that you lay claim to.
I think the issue is a little more complex than you are making it out to be. Its also a “simple matter of respect” to accept the idea that other people may have views different from your own and to not demand that they implicitly affirm yours.
All in all I think there is room for people to have and express different beliefs so long as they are kind and respectful to one another. Kindness and respect, do not in my mind, require that I agree with you or positively affirm your beliefs.
John,
Even “your name” is not as simple as one might think. We’re starting to stray from the intent of my post, but our local school board was going to ban the use of any but a legal name for students in an effort to make transgender students unwelcome. I attended with a boy whose legal name was Charles but he preferred to go by Skip. The school board’s proposed policy would have prohibited teachers from calling him by his preferred name.
The inclusion of pronouns in my email signature was simple identification. There was no “ideology”. It was simple politeness. Granted, I have a name that most people from western cultures would recognize as belonging to a woman but for someone to overreact to the inclusion of two words in an e-mail signature seems extreme to me. I know that not everyone will agree with that.
You are making a “slippery slope” argument and I don’t think that’s really applicable here. Your example is a title, not a name or a pronoun. It only serves to distract from those issues.
For B to react to an email signature in such a way can only be rooted in homophobia or transphobia. He can still be politely phobic but it’s still phobic.
John Tucker · Feb 7, 2026, 03:28 PM
All in all I think there is room for people to have and express different beliefs so long as they are kind and respectful to one another. Kindness and respect, do not in my mind, require that I agree with you or positively affirm your beliefs.
We are well beyond that today. When it comes to a set of topics (getting larger every day), each “side” perceives the other “side” not as offering different opinions, but as evil, as morally wrong and dangerous. You can see it here - B didn’t just perceive Linda’s beliefs as something they disagreed with, but they saw Linda as a danger, as someone “morally inadequate”.
I asked myself “would I be willing to collaborate, even informally and temporarily, with someone who at this point is “on the other side” of topics which are important to me?”; I wish the answer I gave myself was positive… And of course I justify myself with the argument “they are morally bankrupt! how could I accept to have anything to do with them!?”.
Not offering solutions, or anything here - of course; just highlighting that, the way our society works today, we don’t see different opinions, or different beliefs anymore; we only see “enemies”.
Well Written Insightful Respectful Engaging
“The inclusion of pronouns in my email signature was simple identification. There was no “ideology”.”
I don’t use the word “ideology” to imply something is “out there” or incorrect. But I’d say that you are making an implicit assertion when you list “preferred pronouns”. If you were not, why would anyone object? If people object, how is it not ideology?
I’m not making a “slippery slope” argument at all. David claimed that using someone’s preferred pronouns was an act of “simple respect”. I pointed out that it is more than this. It is claiming an attribute and asking that the other person affirm it. You did not address this point.
I also pointed out that B may well have been reacting to the fear that your interpersonal boundaries might not in line with his own, and stated that I would likely have a similar response to someone who included links to political or social issue blogs in their email signature. You did not address this point either.
One of the most unfortunate parts of our culture wars is the tendency to demonize those we disagree with, and attribute their actions to the worst imaginable motivations. I don’t think it’s realistic in most cases, nor is it productive.
John Tucker · Feb 7, 2026, 03:28 PM
David Foust · Feb 7, 2026, 03:03 PM
John, there's nothing political about someone calling you by the name you prefer to be called. You introduce yourself to others with the name you expect them to address you by, right? If you knew my name was David, you'd typically address me as such, right? I'd say it's a pretty baseline level of respect you'd show any person.
It's really no different then, that some people prefer to let others know that they'd prefer certain pronouns used when addressing them. Using those pronouns when addressing them is a pretty baseline level of respect 🤷
If I ask you to address me as “Your Highness”, will you comply as “a simple matter of respect”? Or would you regard it as a demand for affirmation of a belief about myself that you don’t agree with?
Your name is your name. It’s not the same as asking me to call you “Your Highness” or refer to you as He/She because these are not simply names. They are attributes that you lay claim to. When you tell someone your name and they use it, you are not asking them to affirm a claimed attribute. When you ask someone to refer to you as Your Highness or as she, you are.
I think the issue is a little more complex than you are making it out to be. Its also a “simple matter of respect” to accept the idea that other people may have views different from your own and to not demand that they implicitly affirm yours.
All in all I think there is room for people to have and express different beliefs so long as they are kind and respectful to one another. Kindness and respect, do not in my mind, require that I agree with you or positively affirm your beliefs.
I see where you are coming from, but I think like most issues, it’s more complex than advocates on either side make it out to be.
John, I don’t really want to argue, but I did want to respond to make it clear that this is not a complex issue. You say it’s a simple matter of respect to accept that other people have different views and beliefs and that they don’t have to affirm yours. I agree. But it’s not a “view” or a “belief" to tell someone your name or the pronouns you prefer to be called by. It is, however, reflective of a view or belief, to choose to respond to someone in such a way as to attempt to deny someone of who they are.
Well Written Respectful
My polite request is that we restrict Astrobin to discussions of astronomy.
There is plenty of space for political discussions in other parts of the world.
At least in America, at least 40% of people on each side feel that the other side is wrong and people they cannot work with. And believe me, it is not restricted to the right or left. I have seen this on both sides, where friendships were lost based on who you voted for.
So again, as a request to Sal, let us restrict this to astronomy.
There is plenty of space for political discussions in other parts of the world.
At least in America, at least 40% of people on each side feel that the other side is wrong and people they cannot work with. And believe me, it is not restricted to the right or left. I have seen this on both sides, where friendships were lost based on who you voted for.
So again, as a request to Sal, let us restrict this to astronomy.
David Foust · Feb 7, 2026, 04:26 PM
John Tucker · Feb 7, 2026, 03:28 PM
David Foust · Feb 7, 2026, 03:03 PM
John, there's nothing political about someone calling you by the name you prefer to be called. You introduce yourself to others with the name you expect them to address you by, right? If you knew my name was David, you'd typically address me as such, right? I'd say it's a pretty baseline level of respect you'd show any person.
It's really no different then, that some people prefer to let others know that they'd prefer certain pronouns used when addressing them. Using those pronouns when addressing them is a pretty baseline level of respect 🤷
If I ask you to address me as “Your Highness”, will you comply as “a simple matter of respect”? Or would you regard it as a demand for affirmation of a belief about myself that you don’t agree with?
Your name is your name. It’s not the same as asking me to call you “Your Highness” or refer to you as He/She because these are not simply names. They are attributes that you lay claim to. When you tell someone your name and they use it, you are not asking them to affirm a claimed attribute. When you ask someone to refer to you as Your Highness or as she, you are.
I think the issue is a little more complex than you are making it out to be. Its also a “simple matter of respect” to accept the idea that other people may have views different from your own and to not demand that they implicitly affirm yours.
All in all I think there is room for people to have and express different beliefs so long as they are kind and respectful to one another. Kindness and respect, do not in my mind, require that I agree with you or positively affirm your beliefs.
I see where you are coming from, but I think like most issues, it’s more complex than advocates on either side make it out to be.
John, I don’t really want to argue, but I did want to respond to make it clear that this is not a complex issue. You say it’s a simple matter of respect to accept that other people have different views and beliefs and that they don’t have to affirm yours. I agree. But it’s not a “view” or a “belief" to tell someone your name or the pronouns you prefer to be called by. It is, however, reflective of a view or belief, to choose to respond to someone in such a way as to attempt to deny someone of who they are.
Well David, I think it’s good to exchange ideas. But if you’re going to completely ignore my points and simply reiterate what you’ve said before, I’m not sure there is much reason to continue.
Well Written
John Tucker · Feb 7, 2026, 03:28 PM
Its also a “simple matter of respect” to accept the idea that other people may have views different from your own and to not demand that they implicitly affirm yours.
Who’s “demanding”? She simply put that she prefers to be referred to as she/her.
If you’d want to call Linda “Your Highness” if that’s your preference, I’m sure she wouldn’t mind a bit 👸
Respecting what culture someone is from, who they love, what they look like and what they like to do is simply about empathy, which the world needs a whole lot more of right now.
Well Written Respectful Supportive
Rick Krejci · Feb 7, 2026, 04:29 PM
John Tucker · Feb 7, 2026, 03:28 PM
Its also a “simple matter of respect” to accept the idea that other people may have views different from your own and to not demand that they implicitly affirm yours.
Who’s “demanding”? She simply put that she prefers to be referred to as she/her.
If you’d want to call Linda “Your Highness” if that’s your preference, I’m sure she wouldn’t mind a bit 👸
Respecting what culture someone is from, who they love, what they look like and what they like to do is simply about empathy, which the world needs a whole lot more of right now.
Again, it’s good to exchange ideas. But if people are going to simply ignore my points, pound the table and insist that their own view is the obviously correct one, I’m not sure its worthwhile to continue.
Well Written
John Tucker · Feb 7, 2026, 04:32 PM
Rick Krejci · Feb 7, 2026, 04:29 PM
John Tucker · Feb 7, 2026, 03:28 PM
Its also a “simple matter of respect” to accept the idea that other people may have views different from your own and to not demand that they implicitly affirm yours.
Who’s “demanding”? She simply put that she prefers to be referred to as she/her.
If you’d want to call Linda “Your Highness” if that’s your preference, I’m sure she wouldn’t mind a bit 👸
Respecting what culture someone is from, who they love, what they look like and what they like to do is simply about empathy, which the world needs a whole lot more of right now.
Again, it’s good to exchange ideas. But if people are going to simply ignore my points, pound the table and insist that their own view is the obviously correct one, I’m not sure its worthwhile to continue.
With that I agree.
Arun H · Feb 7, 2026, 04:29 PM
My polite request is that we restrict Astrobin to discussions of astronomy.
There is plenty of space for political discussions in other parts of the world.
At least in America, at least 40% of people on each side feel that the other side is wrong and people they cannot work with. And believe me, it is not restricted to the right or left. I have seen this on both sides, where friendships were lost based on who you voted for.
So again, as a request to Sal, let us restrict this to astronomy.
100% agreed, but in theory this post is in the “LGBTQIA+ Astrophotographers” group. I think it leaked out because of the tags (in theory only people in the group should see it in the recent posts list). I'll have to fix this as it's definitely a bug.
Well Written
Salvatore Iovene:
100% agreed, but in theory this post is in the “LGBTQIA+ Astrophotographers”. I think it leaked out because of the tags (in theory only people in the group should see it in the recent posts list). I'll have to fix this as it's definitely a bug.
Thanks, Sal, my recommendation is that if we need a space for discussion of "controversial" topics, such forums should be "opt-in", and not visible to the general user. Otherwise, we run a great risk of the same toxicity that has infested every other discussion space from also affecting AB.
I find it wild that some people cannot handle pronouns. Linda, honestly I think you dodged a bullet there.
.
Very interesting topic 🤔
SonnyE · Feb 7, 2026, 06:11 PM
I vote that this post be returned to the section it was dragged out
I'm working on that. Thanks!
😉Arun H · Feb 7, 2026 at 05:05 PM
Salvatore Iovene:
100% agreed, but in theory this post is in the “LGBTQIA+ Astrophotographers”. I think it leaked out because of the tags (in theory only people in the group should see it in the recent posts list). I'll have to fix this as it's definitely a bug.
Thanks, Sal, my recommendation is that if we need a space for discussion of "controversial" topics, such forums should be "opt-in", and not visible to the general user. Otherwise, we run a great risk of the same toxicity that has infested every other discussion space from also affecting AB.
Not sure lgbtqia+ astronomy as a forum should be more controversial than how iotd is chosen, whether remote imaging is cheating or whether you should take luminance images or not.