How do you address someone as they/them?
"they Alana Smith" instead of Ms/Mrs? Makes them sound retarded
Preferred pronouns
- Thread starter Ayahuasca
- Start date
How do you address someone as they/them?
"they Alana Smith" instead of Ms/Mrs? Makes them sound retarded
How do you address someone as they/them?
"they Alana Smith" instead of Ms/Mrs? Makes them sound retarded
That's not the context in which it works. It's more like 'I like Alana they are a nice person' instead of 'I like Alana she is a nice person'.
Of course mandating what language you use when they aren't even in the conversation is (as I pointed out earlier) fascistic language control and should politely but firmly be refused. (IMHO).
I honestly couldn't give a toss what people want to be called. It literally doesn't affect me in the slightest. Wanna be him/her/it/whatever? Cool with me. It doesn't put me out in any way. If someone tells me what I'm to be called, that would be a different story, of course, but nobody is doing that. Someone at work changed their name and pronouns. It was weird at first, but I genuinely can't remember their old name etc by now. Just roll with it and stop worrying about it.
Which is fine, until you say 'he's great at x' and they take offence because you didn't use 'they' then get done over for it.
The same way you use any other third person pronoun. It's a very simple like for like substitution. It's just using the existing third person plural pronouns as singular ones. It's not even new - it goes back centuries. Shakespeare? They did it. Chaucer? They did it. I've just done it. Twice. I doubt if you found it difficult to understand. You might well not have noticed. It's a normal part of English and has been for at least 700 years. Using the same pronoun for singular and plural does have the potential to cause ambiguity, but it works and English is full of potential ambiguities anyway.
"they Alana Smith" instead of Ms/Mrs? Makes them sound retarded
Would you address them as "she Alana Smith"? If so, why? Pronouns aren't usually used that way in English.
Exactly like this Alana thing. Has a female name, competes in the woman's sport, gets confused when people refer to her.
Are they confused? Have they complained or is it just other people complaining?
Why do they prefer ungendered pronouns? It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with trans blah blah. Some people (including myself) would prefer language to be ungendered and (obviously) prefer to use ungendered pronouns for that reason.
Yeah but then you go "oh my bad, she. Sorry this is a bit new to me" and eventually you forget you ever called that person he. That's how it's gone for me anyway. I think it was about a month off feeling a bit weird about it before I kinda mentally transitioned my view of that person to match their own.
Well yes, hence feeling the need to put their preferred pronouns on their board.
You might want language to be ungendered but, newsflash, people are gendered. Sexual dimorphism produces tangible physical and mental differences which shouldn't be ignored, hence two primary genders in humans. As a species we'd be screwed without it. In fact, separate genders have been recognised all the way through recorded history with every civilisation I can think of making the distinction.
Well no, hence your inability to provide any evidence for your assertion. Expressing a preference is not proof of confusion and I've already explained why preferring ungendered pronouns isn't necessarily anything to do with anything trans.
I think you're confusing sex and gender. Also, there already are languages that aren't gendered and modern English is already almost ungendered. Far from being screwed, English-speaking countries have done rather well in the last millenia or so. Hmm...was Middle English gendered? I don't know. So at least the last ~500 years (modern English isn't gendered other than the remnant of pronouns), maybe the last ~1000 years (if Middle English was ungendered).
Not sure you've got what I said correctly but nevermind.
You might not care what people call themselves, but they might care what you call them. Hence me pointing out you saying it wrong and getting done over.
Yeah, I mean you just apologise if you get it wrong. I'm sure there are plenty of nutters who wouldn't accept a single mistake and will go to the papers about it, but my experience is that people get that they have changed something about themselves and it might take a bit of time for people to get it right and to feel comfortable with it.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,311
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
When people continually type would have, could have, should have and ect on here are you surprised they wouldn't know how to use they/them?
I fully appreciate the difference between sex and gender, however you dont seem to be accepting the intrinsic link.
Physiological differences drive mental differences. Men and women are fundamentally different in the way they think and behave. Yes, there are rare exceptions but these really are rare.
We're also not discussing whether a chair is masculine or feminine, we're discussing the use of she/her he/him when referring to living things in terms of gendered language.
Because the "intrinsic link" isn't intrinsic for most things and is statistical (and therefore irrelevant to any indivudual) for the rest.
So you don't fully appreciate the difference between sex and gender. I was pretty sure you didn't when you said that there were two genders. There are two sexes and an infinite number of genders since gender is a vast number of spectrums. Even the aspects of gender that are intrinsic due to sexual dimorphism (e.g. height) are spectrums.
Even when everyone is heavily conditioned from birth (or even before) to conform to whatever farcically over-simplified and overly-applied ideas of gender are fashionable in any given time and place there's still a large degree of individual variation.
Ungendered singular pronouns for a person have been used in English for at least 700 years and that includes the period of time in which English-speaking countries have been at their greatest power, i.e. the opposite of screwed. Which proves that we won't be screwed if we don't use gendered pronouns.
So no...you're not accepting the intrinsic link instilled by biology then...
Yes things are in a spectrum but even spectra have limits. And outliers are just that, outliers. Abnormalities. For example I could be a tall man, or a short man. Height is a spectrum, I could also be abnormally tall, or abnormally short but I'm still a man. The same applies to gender. You can lie anywhere on the spectrum but you're still on it. Unless you can tell me where unicorn Princess sits on the gender spectrum?
Again I'll point out we're not discussing inanimate objects but people where gendered terminology is entirely appropriate and has nothing to do with the might of the British Empire.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2020
- Posts
- 2,410
If you're genuinely serious, then no there isnt.
If this was true then there would be evidence of it dating back a long time across multiple civilizations.
The whole 'infinite genders' crap has zero scientific credibility, and has only existed for like the last 5 years. Its mostly people having a complete laugh at societies expense.
Also theres a huge issue with 'nature vs nurture', a lot of people who are transitioning nowadays are not doing so based on a genuine psychological need, they are doing so based on being brainwashed by peer pressured at their schools, or due to their mothers thinking 'YOU LIKE PINK? THAT MEANS YOU'RE A GIRL NOW, OFF COMES YOUR BALLS'.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
They're doing what you're doing - believing that there are only two genders. If there are only two genders, then every gendered trait is the same thing as sex. So (in this country at this time) liking pink makes a person female if you believe there are only two genders. But that belief is nonsense driven by extreme sexist stereotyping.
They're doing what you're doing - believing that there are only two genders. If there are only two genders, then every gendered trait is the same thing as sex. So (in this country at this time) liking pink makes a person female if you believe there are only two genders. But that belief is nonsense driven by extreme sexist stereotyping.[/QUOTE]
Liking pink has nothing to do with gender or sex. It's a farcical example and shows the level of your argument.
If I'm over 7ft tall, does it mean I'm not a man? It lies outwith of the normal spectrum of heights.