Anyone Use Gender Neutral Pronouns?

[+ Avalon]

http://www.pomodorospizzas.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/blt-600x365.jpg

 

Kevin Slater

 

YUM!

[+ OliverSaks]

No. If you look or are female I will call you her/she and he/him for male. I will not refer someone as they/them just to make them feel special. Thatd be like me saying I ID as a carne asada taco so you need to start referring to me as such. It sounds stupid. Cause it is stupid. There are two genders. Not 80 or whatever those that didn't get properly fatherly love say there are.

 

Hugs,

Greg

Why sign something so unpleasant, tone-deaf, and judgmental with “hugs” ?

[BasketBaller]

I remember in a episode of "Shameless" when Trevor was introducing Ian to a group of friends and they went around the table identifying their gender and pronoun preference.

And such a scene is not fiction. On my recent work trip I attended a conference where, in a breakout session, the moderator asked our names, titles, and preferred pronouns.

[mike carey]

I believe I've seen examples from Chaucer.

That was as I thought I remember too, but I cited Shakespeare as I was sure of his (their?) use of it.

 

This (which I could have found quickly yesterday but didn't) is the Economist's Prospero column's Jan 2016 take on the issue.

 

Why 2015’s word of the year is rather singular

Singular "they" has been used since Chaucer. Why is it still controversial?

 

AT THE turn of each year, several dictionary publishers and language groups choose Words of the Year. How did everyone do for 2015? If you’re a traditionalist, whether on language or culture more broadly, they did terribly. If you think change is more good than bad, it’s an interesting crop.

 

The Oxford Dictionaries went far afield, choosing something even most linguists wouldn’t consider a “word”:

 

http://emoji.fileformat.info/gemoji/joy.png

In case that didn’t render properly on your screen, it is an emoji, one of those adorable or maddening (depending on your view) faces that convey a sort of metamessage in online communication. So what does it mean? “Tears of Joy”, according to the keepers of Unicode. A debate rages about whether emoji are language. (In your columnist’s view, they are best considered “paralinguistic”, the written equivalent of body language or tone of voice.) In any case, emoji go beyond pure signs, like a picture of a dog meaning “dog”: plenty of emoji, and this is one, take acquired knowledge to understand. A bit like Saussure's arbitrary signifier. A word, no, but Oxford’s choice of an emoji was certainly very 2015.

 

The next WOTY choice wins Johnson’s award for “most baffling”. When you think “Word of 2015”, did you think of “-ism”? Merriam-Webster’s lexicographers did. Peter Sokolowski, one of Merriam-Webster’s editors, gamely explains that Merriam-Webster does not go for a top-down choice, but makes its selection based on the words most looked up on Merriam-Webster’s excellent free online dictionary, and which ones climbed the most, year-on-year. “Socialism”, “communism”, “fascism”, “terrorism” and “racism” all saw big spikes in lookup traffic. (Some year.) So did, more happily, “feminism” and “capitalism”. How to crown a single word? Slice off that “-ism” and present it to the world. It was a Solo monic choice: about as satisfying as winning half a baby in a custody dispute.

 

Dictionary.com is one of the newest WOTY purveyors. They, at least, got a word that feels intimately connected to this year’s news, despite not being a terribly interesting word in itself: “identity”. America’s college campuses have been rocked by racist incidents on one hand, and rowdy protests over careless use of language—taken to be grossly offensive by a minority—on the other. “Cultural appropriation” was also a hot topic, self-evidently insulting to some, robustly defended as cultural exchange by others. So there was plenty of heated talk about "identity" and its uses in 2015.

 

Finally, the American Dialect Society, meeting last week, made in a way the most unusual choice. To capture 2015, members tapped a word almost a millennium old, a borrowing from Old Norse that improbably became part of the English pronoun system. Languages typically don’t borrow pronouns, but the Old English nicked “they” from their Viking foes.

 

What made the third-person plural noteworthy in 2015? The fact that it is not always plural at all: the ADS specified “singular ‘they’” as the word of the year. In casual running speech, nearly everyone says things like “find a good teacher and take their advice.” But some conservatives insist that “a good teacher” is singular and therefore it must be his advice, or his or her advice, or making it find good teachers and take their advice, an unsatisfying change to the sentence.

 

Linguists and historians (and Johnson) point out that singular they has deep historical roots: in the King James Bible, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Jane Austen and beyond. English has a gap in its pronoun system (other languages have an impeccable singular gender-neutral pronoun, but we do not). “His or her” is clumsy, especially upon repetition, and “his” is as inaccurate with respect to grammatical gender as “they” is to number. Invented alternatives never take hold. Singular “they” already exists; it has the advantage that most people already use it.

 

If it is as old as Chaucer, what's new? The Washington Post’s style editor, Bill Walsh, has called it “the only sensible solution” to the gap in English’s pronouns, changing his newspaper's style book in 2015. But it was also the rise in the use of they as a pronoun for someone who does not want to use “he” or “she”. Facebook began already in 2014 allowing people to choose “they” as their preferred pronoun (“Wish them a happy birthday!”). Transgender stories, from “The Danish Girl”, a hit movie, to Caitlyn Jenner, an Olympic athlete who has become the world’s most famous trans woman, were big in 2015. But such people prefer their post-transition pronouns: “he” or “she” as desired. “They” is for a smaller minority who prefer neither. But the very idea of "non-binary" language with regard to gender annoys and even angers many people.

 

In other words, as transgender people gain acceptance, “non-binary” folks are the next frontier, like it or not. Who knew a thousand-year-old pronoun could be so controversial?

[+ Keith30309]

I’ve become (platonic) friends with a young (20) FTM trans guy via SA. We have lunch and chat and, absent any stated preference from him, I adopted masculine pronouns as soon as we met. Although he never said anything I suspected that it was probably pretty important to him and he seemed OK with my choice.

 

The topic never came up until a couple of months ago when my friend showed up pretty upset and angry because of an incident involving a dear friend of his -> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/georgia-tech-killing-student.html

 

My friend was very emotional and allot of his energy seemed to be around his deceased buddy being different, proud of who he was and an example to other students... and his preference of being referred to as “they” seemed to be a big part of that. I got a thorough, emphatic lesson that afternoon.

 

I guess my takeaway from this is that sometimes things that seem trivial really matter allot to people and the right thing to do is to be sensitive to that.

Why stick my thumb in somebody’s eye on purpose?

[TruthBTold]

I cannot wait until I achieve "Queen" status on the site. At that point I will be able to begin using the royal "we."

[+ OliverSaks]

 

I guess my takeaway from this is that sometimes things that seem trivial really matter allot to people and the right thing to do is to be sensitive to that.

Why stick my thumb in somebody’s eye on purpose?

Claps claps!

Beautiful post!

 

As an example, we literally changed how we addressed the president once he became president - changing how you address someone is fucking simple and we do it all the time (“oh you’re mrs. Johnson now? I didn’t know you got married” etc etc )

[+ Tygerscent]

http://www.lgbt.ucla.edu/Resources/LGBTQ-Terminology

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spivak_pronoun

Nope... I gave up in that after being repeatedly ambushed by people who wouldn't warn me ahead of time what gender noun they relate to at any given time and then reprimanded me for not instinctively knowing~

I found that in general convo, addressing one or more individuals by plurals, (when the rest of the context of what is being spoken is really addressing a single individual), causes a breakdown in communication... not a clarification of it~

My solution: I address people who are not "gender pronoun public/obvious" simply by their name...

Referring to single person as "them", "they", "y'all" gets confusing when you're with a group... people

Can't figure out who you are talking about~

Pronouns are a part of grammar/speech.

I find I'm more open to rethink my pronouns when I know what that persons rules of respect are... When someone pulls the pronoun card, (misuses it), because they have a personal anger agenda I become annoyed and am less interested in complying...

When people forget about the intent of what is being said and concentrate more on their own personal interpretation of some word... I feel that communication is lost and the convo becomes about some other issue~

I could use the word "bellflower" like and adjunctive:

"What a bellflower day-!"

Am I saying it with joy, sadness, sarchasm, anger~?

The word itself is a grammatical tool but, the intent as context to its use modifies the end and the means of the conversation~

Does a truly gender neutral/fluid person in a demonstration with a bleeding head say, "hurry we are hurt, our heads are bleeding~!" ...or is it more accurate to say, "hurry, I'm hurt, my head is bleeding~!"

If a truly gender neutral/fluid person is a police officer and commits the act of hitting some gender neutral/fluid person over the head, do people respond with this: "look, those police officers hit them over the head and they are bleeding~!"

The grammar has to properly communicate a message to work in the language~

In various Asian languages there may be 100+ different words for "rain" or "snow" within a single language... There seems to be context and structure on how/when to use them~

Perhaps what might be of considerable help is if Gender neutrality/fluidity, (as a functual concept/part of communication), develop some sort of functional contextual structuring...

For example: "jossaifyck" wants to be called they and them... So, add the ending "-cop", (stands for "collective operative pronoun"). (-cop can also take the place of the verb "to be" ie., replacing and omitting words like am, is, are when those words would normally follow the traditional pronoun).

So instead of dealing with the pronoun issues singularity per sentence, you use a collective term...

ie.,

"How is Jossaifyckcop today~?"

" I took jossaifyckcop to the store."

" Jossaifyckcop wants to go out to dinner with her friendcop/friendscop~"

" Look, that officercop hit that citizencop over the headcop and there is bleeding."

The goal is to immediately communicate the gender neutrality/fluidity and yet communicate an idea that is easily comprehensible and translatable...

I'm just making up a solution here... I'm sure it's flawed...

Icop trying to be part of the solutioncop~

 

Tyger~

tygerkink@yahoo.com

971.400.2633

https://rentmen.eu/AAATygerscentXXX

http://www.daddysreviews.com/venue/usa/oregon/tyger_portland

P.S. I don't live in Portland anymore but travel there frequently. I live south of Seattle now... my entire downstairs is a dedicated play space: sling, rim chair, toys all of that...

[+ Tygerscent]

I cannot wait until I achieve "Queen" status on the site. At that point I will be able to begin using the royal "we."

I love that~! We are quite amused~!

Tyger~

tygerkink@yahoo.com

971.400.2633

https://rentmen.eu/AAATygerscentXXX

http://www.daddysreviews.com/venue/usa/oregon/tyger_portland

P.S. I don't live in Portland anymore but travel there frequently. I live south of Seattle now... my entire downstairs is a dedicated play space: sling, rim chair, toys all of that...

[TruthBTold]

I love that~! We are quite amused~!

Tyger~

tygerkink@yahoo.com

971.400.2633

https://rentmen.eu/AAATygerscentXXX

http://www.daddysreviews.com/venue/usa/oregon/tyger_portland

P.S. I don't live in Portland anymore but travel there frequently. I live south of Seattle now... my entire downstairs is a dedicated play space: sling, rim chair, toys all of that...

 

While I greatly appreciate the sentiment, you are a viscount and I am a prince. I should have been address as "Your royal highness." Please remember this next time.

[+ Tygerscent]

While I greatly appreciate the sentiment, you are a viscount and I am a prince. I should have been address as "Your royal highness." Please remember this next time.

Yes... your Hiney~ (Tyger bowing)...

❤️

Tyger~

tygerkink@yahoo.com

971.400.2633

https://rentmen.eu/AAATygerscentXXX

http://www.daddysreviews.com/venue/usa/oregon/tyger_portland

P.S. I don't live in Portland anymore but travel there frequently. I live south of Seattle now... my entire downstairs is a dedicated play space: sling, rim chair, toys all of that...

[bostonman]

I can think of only one gender-related new term that has entered common usage in my lifetime, and it succeeded because it solved a generally recognized problem: the use of "Ms." (pronounced "miz") when the marital status of an adult female was unclear or irrelevant. Newly invented terms that don't address an issue that is perceived as real by those who are told to use them don't go much beyond threads like this one.

 

And, I cannot think of an incident where I have referred to a woman as "Ms" and she has objected, even if she is married. But perhaps this is also because Miss, Ms, and Mrs all sound very close to each other in casual conversation.

 

I have a student (college senior, actor) who has, just this year, decided to start identifying as "they." That's fine. But since we've known him as "he" for the last 3 years, it's a tough adjustment to make. He - um, they - has also slightly changed their first name in a way that they most probably perceives as less male, though I would disagree that it does - it just feels like more of a nickname to me. It's also been tricky to always remember this new form of name. (Actually, there were TWO name changes - one last year, to an alternate spelling of the original name, and now, this new shortened version.)

 

Outwardly, this student seems to be ok with our lapses as we try to adjust. But in course evaluations from last semester, I got a comment that I seemed not to be sensitive to pronoun issues - and I have to suspect that it was a comment from this student. (This student also has kind of set themselves apart from the rest of the class, personality-wise, so I tend to doubt it was anyone else sticking up for them.)

 

Many of us still use "un-PC" gender terms in a colloquial/conversational sense - I have certainly addressed a mixed-gender class or theatre cast as "guys" (i.e. "you guys really sang great today" or "hey, guys - we need to go over this section again" etc). I don't tend to feel that that bothers the female students - if it does, they don't say so. Also in theatre, we still have a tendency to use "boys" and "girls" in cast terms (i.e. "the chorus boys" or "the dancing girls") though I do try to use "ladies" and "men" when I think about it. But again, most actors don't tend to equivocate much about all of that.

 

But oh, in a recent department-wide forum on diversity issues (which is becoming, rightfully, a hot button topic everywhere, but it's very much an issue on our campus right now), every student who had something to say introduced themselves with their name AND their pronoun chain. And in 99% of the cases, it was the expected "he/him/his" or "she/her/hers" - which honestly, made it all seem very pretentious and superfluous. I do understand why this is important to the students, and I don't want to trivialize it, but on the other hand, I find it a rather tedious and masturbatory exercise. My apologies for that.

 

I will always continue to give my students the utmost respect, which includes recognizing any changes in the expected gender terms. But I also wonder if this is really being misused as some new fad, some new method of attention-getting, for most of them, instead of reserving it as a true sign of respect for those people who do have valid gender identity issues.

 

I would much rather be politely corrected by a student if I have their nomenclature wrong, than to constantly have pronoun chains recited at me.

[Walker1]

They/them already has a meaning , so it is not fair and quite confusing to use that term for a single person. I have no problem if they have a new term or a new word to describe people who feel fluidic or multi-gender. Just don't butcher existing language.

 

Language expands and new words are added all the time, why take a word/words that have specific meanings and try and change them? Singular, plural etc are all founding blocks.

 

1+1 = 2. But if you think you are male and female-that does not make you two persons?

 

If you feel multi gender and sometimes I have identified more with say the female gender than the male-there should be a new word or term for that. Language evolves.

[mike carey]

They/them already has a meaning , so it is not fair and quite confusing to use that term for a single person.

It's not new, if you read back through the thread, this has already been discussed. The singular they has been used by good writers for hundreds of years.

[Walker1]

It's not new, if you read back through the thread, this has already been discussed. The singular they has been used by good writers for hundreds of years.

If you are describing they/them and point to a singular person-no regular person would understand. They/them has a meaning-plural, a crowd-it could mean a million people, 10, 70, it could also mean non-humans, insect swarms etc eg when they fly, they flap their wings or when they run from a predator, they bunch up and keep their young in the middle of the herd.

 

. Writers especially LGBT friendly may use the term, but then again that broadens to say someone with multiple personalities. By forcing people to accept that word for a single person -it just makes it confusing.

 

A new word/term is best-language evolves- elevator, airplanes, submarines are all new words that got added as human understanding evolves?

[+ sniper]

The purpose of pronouns is to be LESS specific, not more. Adding a whole bunch of different ones seems against the actual point of a pronoun. I would submit we should just stick with a genderless pronoun and leave it at that. "They" seems sufficient.

[+ Charlie]

The problem with using "they" as a substitute for an individual is that is screws up the verbs that have singular and plural forms. "They are" is awkward to refer to a specific individual, and "they is" requires too much mental gymnastics. I would suggest substituting genderless "person" for the gendered pronoun: "Person is a drama queen."

[mike carey]

They are a drama queen works for me.

 

Just as 'You are a stud' defies grammar but works.

[bostonman]

The problem with using "they" as a substitute for an individual is that is screws up the verbs that have singular and plural forms. "They are" is awkward to refer to a specific individual, and "they is" requires too much mental gymnastics.

 

Also, in the academic situation I presented above, when our department meets to talk about how classes are going and how the students are doing, it can at times get very confusing to know if we're talking about the student I mentioned above ("they") or the full class of students ("they"). Which only tends to lead us to refer to the student as "he" (or the first name instead of a pronoun) so that we understand who we're talking about.

[+ GregM]

Also, in the academic situation I presented above, when our department meets to talk about how classes are going and how the students are doing, it can at times get very confusing to know if we're talking about the student I mentioned above ("they") or the full class of students ("they"). Which only tends to lead us to refer to the student as "he" (or the first name instead of a pronoun) so that we understand who we're talking about.

 

And that's why I keep it old school, he/him/his and she/her/hers.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[gallahadesquire]

My roomate, who is trans-female, has a trans-female honey, who has a daughter who is non-binary, and prefers to go by "they."

 

I mention this, not for commentary on the use of "they", but for the trans-feamle "homosexual" arrangement. Maybe it's "homogender." I can't figure it out.

[TruthBTold]

I address a group as "Y'all". Not a bit of southern blood in me. American South that is.

[gallahadesquire]

I

I address a group as "Y'all". Not a bit of southern blood in me. American South that is.

 

The linguist in me has to point out that the word is "yinz" in Western Pennsylvania, as in Pittsburgh.

[bostonman]

I

 

 

The linguist in me has to point out that the word is "yinz" in Western Pennsylvania, as in Pittsburgh.

 

I can't quite get on board with "yinz" but I won't complain about it either.

 

I have a Texan friend who told me that "y'all" can also be used as a singular pronoun - and that "all y'all" is for a group.

[TruthBTold]

I can't quite get on board with "yinz" but I won't complain about it either.

I have a Texan friend who told me that "y'all" can also be used as a singular pronoun - and that "all y'all" is for a group.

 

I personally have never used it that way as I can simply use "you" directly toward the individual. I would "y'all" for more than one. Also, there is hating to do anything that is done in Texas.