I dont know what that even means. If a republican deadnames a trans person, I already know if I want to talk to voters about that I have to explain the attack on their dignity and personal choice, not just rely on the term. But that also doesnt mean abandoning mainstreaming the term over time.
Normal people have no idea wtf you are talking about. No one talks like this
Talks like what? If a Republican intentionally uses trans person's former name, what is your plan for how to talk about it? You can avoid the term "deadname" if you like, say, in a commercial. But also, language does change and new terms arise. In 20 years "deadname" will be widely understood.
I'd say, wtf is wrong with you. You picking on a trans person like your in high school, stop being a douche and act like an adult.
Picking on them by doing what? Cmon man. Explain it.
I don't need to explain it. We all know, they know. Why on earth do you think it's effective to start explaining shit like life is a masters course in gender studies. WAKE UP WE ARE IN A FASCIST COUNTRY.
Yeah that's what I thought. "Deadnaming" isnt masters course in gender studies stuff. It isnt fully mainstream yet, but it is getting there. You can paraphrase and talk around it but it's inefficient.
keep talking efficiently, everyone has tuned you out, and while you were blabbering they started following a fascist.
Let me know the last time "deadnaming" was used in voter facing communications, don quixote.
Voters don't have social media?
OK but can we kill land acknowledgements? I thought that performative bullshit was dead already
My point is using this preferred language is inefficient for gaining votes.
Yes, my point.
We can hope.