• _cnt0@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I criticized singular they/them for increasing language ambiguity and suggested replacing it with something new like xe/xer multiple times. The reply is usually a shitstorm and downvote tornado. I’ve given up on that front.

      • _cnt0@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Doesn’t feel like you want to have an honest argument when you ask how far we should go back on a proposal about going forward and don’t address the single motivator ambiguity.

        • UnpledgedCatnapTipper@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Correct, because there is no argument to be had. Intentionally refusing to use someone’s pronouns is unacceptable, every time, with 0 exceptions. If there’s a dire need to be explicitly clear you’re talking about a single person, you could just use their name in that instance.

          • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            You don’t get to decide how other people refer to you. I’m sorry but you don’t have that authority. You can dislike people using the “wrong” pronouns, but you cannot compel the usage of the ones you want to be called because of your beliefs. If I say my pronouns are “your majesty” it’s not unacceptable if you don’t use them.

      • waddle_dee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I always found this argument funny because how would you use pronouns for someone whose gender you do not know? They. It’s they. E.g. you are given the sentence: Jordan went to the store to buy apples. And you want to ask a followup question regarding how many, you reply: How many apples did they buy? It’s not that complicated. They has been used for gender ambiguity in everyone’s lives since grammar school. People just have an inherent bias towards trans folks and it’s incredibly depressing and sad.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          It hasn’t been used for “gender” ambiguity, but sex ambiguity, because the separation of sex and gender is only a recent thing and it’s not even unanimously accepted.

          • waddle_dee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Oh my gosh, you’re being pedantic. It has been used for “gender” ambiguity for quite some time. If you choose to be ignorant, then that’s your dill, pickle. At the end of the day, you get to choose whether you make someone happy, or sad. Why is that difficult? Why can’t you comprehend the concept of providing joy to someone? Why can’t you just be nice? That’s what this whole thing is about, right? You can either choose to be nice, or not. And I’m so tired of arguing with people to be nicer. Why can’t people get it through their thick skulls, that people just want to live and be considerate of each other. That’s what we all want, right?

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Is calling an extremely underweight anorexic person healthy, a good weight, and encouraging them to keep losing weight the right thing to do? Is that good because it’s providing joy to someone?

        • _cnt0@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I always found this argument funny because how would you use pronouns for someone whose gender you do not know? They. It’s they. E.g. you are given the sentence: Jordan went to the store to buy apples. And you want to ask a followup question regarding how many, you reply: How many apples did they buy?

          And that’s not how English was taught to me or 99℅ of the population (including English as a second or third language) 20+ years ago. Singular they was only used for situations where the gender (read as superficially visible sex) was factually unknown. You see a forgotten umbrella and never saw who forgot it: “Somebody forgot their umbrella.” As soon as you only got a glimpse on the person forgetting it you would make a guess about he/she.

          They has been used for gender ambiguity in everyone’s lives since grammar school.

          If you’re younger than ~30 and from Great Britain, maybe. GB were the first to formalize and teach it like that less than 2 decades ago (if I recall correctly).

          People just have an inherent bias towards trans folks and it’s incredibly depressing and sad.

          That’s bullshit projection.

          I, a non-native speaker, complain about increased ambiguity of the language because of singular they as a personal pronoun and make a proposal about new pronouns for the purpose.

          You: Ah, must be transphobe. Let’s ignore everything he said (which doesn’t relate to transphobia at all).

          It’s so frustrating not to be able to have a discussion about stuff making a language harder than it needs to be without people invoking transphobia, like, instantly.

          But hey, I called it: can’t have a discussion about it and I’ve given up on it.

          edit: tiny add-on. I was still taught gender-neutral he and only heard about they later while being discouraged to use it in writing.