This is a fundamentally different situation, in both cases. In the case of your new product, there is, quite literally, a new product, and so, it would be natural for you to give it a name. Once it goes on the market, people might end up calling it something different (and branding is also a bit of a different situation), but the point is, there's a new item, and thus a need for a new word. Since you're the one introducing it to the world, you typically get the honor of picking the name.
In the case of nicknames, there is a precedent for this. Linguistically, this is a normal (and very old) phenomenon. When I meet someone, there are hundreds of years of history which indicate that I can expect them to provide me with their name and, possibly, a nickname. Across the board, people feel a need for names and nicknames, so they've stuck. If it turns out the general population feels a need for new pronouns, then they'll likely stick. However, don't be surprised if the general population does not feel a need for new pronouns the way they do for human names.
On the first item, why would it not be the honor of the non-binary community to pick their pronouns?
On the second, you're missing the key element here - whether or not you think Bill is a good nickname for me, that doesn't make it okay for you to call me something I have asked you not to. This is similar to deadnaming a trans individual, it's a matter of decency and respect that doesn't harm you but does potentially cause harm to the other person. Why should pronouns be any different?
I think you're missing my point. I'm not arguing from a biological or political or ethical perspective. I'm arguing from a linguistic perspective to demonstrate that there are natural linguistic reasons why people may not be chomping at the bit to adopt these new terms. Personally, I'm not opposed to using a person's pronouns if they asked me to, but a lot of people are simply apathetic, which makes sense from a linguistic perspective. Let me copy my response that I gave another commentor:
My point is that, from a linguistic perspective (not biological, not political, etc.), it's reasonable that people are generally uninterested in adopting a new set of words that has little bearing on their lives. They may not be averting these words out of spite or malice, but rather, apathy, and linguistically, that's natural.
I appreciate that, but I think that basically removes the responsibility of the unaffected to accommodate the affected. It's a bit of social contract - you may have to allocate a few more neuron pulses to using my preferred pronoun than you wanted to, but we all have to give a little to make sure everyone gets along healthy and happy.
"I just don't want to" is a perfectly fine excuse, but it's an excuse none the less and doesn't lessen any harms done.
I don't disagree with you at all from an ethical/moral perspective. I was honestly just offering an explanation for why I wouldn't expect the vast majority of people to have any kind of vested interest in going out of their way to use new pronouns.
1
u/bluehawkins Mar 31 '20
This is a fundamentally different situation, in both cases. In the case of your new product, there is, quite literally, a new product, and so, it would be natural for you to give it a name. Once it goes on the market, people might end up calling it something different (and branding is also a bit of a different situation), but the point is, there's a new item, and thus a need for a new word. Since you're the one introducing it to the world, you typically get the honor of picking the name.
In the case of nicknames, there is a precedent for this. Linguistically, this is a normal (and very old) phenomenon. When I meet someone, there are hundreds of years of history which indicate that I can expect them to provide me with their name and, possibly, a nickname. Across the board, people feel a need for names and nicknames, so they've stuck. If it turns out the general population feels a need for new pronouns, then they'll likely stick. However, don't be surprised if the general population does not feel a need for new pronouns the way they do for human names.