Pronouns

My boomer parents will die on the hill that it sounds "wrong" to use "they" to refer to a singular entity. And whenever they bring that up, I always remind them that the word "they" has been used in that way for AGES.

Example: "Whose umbrella is this? Did they already leave?"

It doesn't seem to make a difference.

Watched a video that addressed this in good faith, because it is a tad awkward. They brought up and old term (because this isn't new), "thone", short for "the one". And I'mma be real with you, "THE ONE, DIRK MCCALLAHAN" does ring kinda hard.
- There's a few things from history we should start using again, and this is one of them
It doesn’t seem to make a difference.
Most people arguing about this are coming from an emotional place, so facts and truths don't really matter. If gender in language is important to your in-group, that's what matters. Not the history of language. Not the dictionary. The group believes this. If you reject your group, you'll die alone. Or that's what the brain would have you believe. We're all a little susceptible to social influence on belief. Some people are just unwilling or unable to overcome it.
Belief is social.
For many people, emotion is the only truth.
- What's craziest to me is that people so often adopt beliefs as to belong to some sort of in group, right, but won't necessarily adopt the set of beliefs that actually immediately benefits them, ingratiates them to their immediate surrounding environment, gives them a more functional outlook. No, it's way simpler, people just adopt the beliefs of what they perceive in their immediate surroundings. Oftentimes this manifests more as people locking themselves into increasingly insular media environments, rather than, say, having productive conversations with their kids, or allowing themselves to be convinced by their friends, or being able to even really talk on a surface level with their co-workers. Their immediate environment, their "in-group", can supercede physical reality.
- yep.
  my entire life I got shit form grammar nazis for preferring gender neutral language. now i get shit for not asking everyone their pronoun. and my entire life I have had to put up with people's shitty assumptions about me based on my physical appearance.
  it never ends. people just want to be angry and feel superior to others who don't agree with them and browbeat others into submission, all the while being judgemental about how others look vs how they think they should look.
"He or she" sounds and looks so cumbersome. "They" is the superior pronoun on style/conciseness alone.
It was beaten into me in school that this is incorrect. “They” is to be used as a plural pronoun only. It’s commonly used in the singular, but it’s wrong according to the English teachers I had. In referring to a person, you must choose either he or she under those grammar rules.
With that said, maybe it’s time for me to move into the future and accept that the meaning of the word has changed. I am confident those English teachers weren’t concerned about actual gender issues. Now, I think those issues are more important than the technical grammatical issues of English.
I’ve offended people in a social setting by insisting that this is the correct usage, when truly it was just me being autistic and informal rather than political.
- Perhaps it was the English teachers who were wrong.
  Correct or not, people have been using it like that for a while.
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
- It used to be correct APA/MLA formatting to use “he/she” when the gender of a subject was unknown. That was changed back in the mid 00’s I think. The preferred format is now “they” over “he/she”.
  That being said, people use singular they/them all the time in casual conversation. We just aren’t used to using it when we know or think we know the gender of the person. But let’s be honest, there have always been people that have been hurt by being misgendered. Hell, it was common for some racists to use they/them with black women in an attempt to dehumanize them. So this idea that the singular they is new is absolutely ridiculous.
- Ok, even there we have bigger issues. How can literally mean figuratively?
- I'm curious when and where "singular they" was taught as incorrect. Coming from the Midwest in the 80s (not exactly a liberal or forward thinking place), I was taught in no uncertain terms that singular they was appropriate in many circumstances. And my teacher was old as hell, so her education on the matter probably dated to around WW2.
- It's not correct though, it's a style choice. Just like it's not incorrect to avoid the Oxford comma.
  I know a lot of people have a hard on for Strunk & White, myself included, but this is one stylistic choice that is now outdated.
- Grammer rules are rooted in racism or classism pretty much every time. At least when they're used to exclude someone instead of teach someone how to speak the language.
- I think of that like I think of the anti ain’t and anti Oxford comma stances. They weren’t entirely correct, they were enforcing the style of the time for educated use of English. Today educated use of English still doesn’t include ain’t, but it does use the singular they for people of unknown or nonbinary gender, and it uses the Oxford comma.
  The language keeps evolving and stuff like this is part of that. Hell at one point the singular they was far less controversial than the singular you
- Yeah I told exactly one friend it wasn’t proper English and they were so offended. They were. So, so offended.
- Yeah, if I recall the English classes from my language institute, They is only plural and the X cannot be used to neutralize masculine/feminine nouns.
It's funny to me how easy English has it. All you have to do is use "they", and if people think that's awkward, they should see how difficult it is to navigate it in a language with complex verb conjugations with gendered nouns and verbs. It's complicated to the point that non-binary people will still use their assigned-at-birth (if that's the term?) pronouns, to save everyone - including themselves - a headache. There's of course a movement to change the language, but it's difficult.
They went with them and then they decided to take off and took them with them, so we met up with some friends and then got together with them even though they didn't join because they ultimately wanted to go home.
It's less precise. That's just a problem with English though. That said, just using people's names more often isn't that big of a deal and using gender neutral pronouns otherwise is, similarly, not hard and not a big deal. Nevertheless, I was referring to seven different distinct individuals in the above.
He went with her, but then she decided to take off and took him with her, so we met up with some friends and then got together with him though she didn't want to join because he ultimately wanted to go home.
It's still confusing, and the sentence is absurd, but you can get a better sense of how many people are involved with gendered pronouns. But no one talks that way, contextual clues would make it more obvious, and we'd use proper names in many of those instances by habit for clarification. That said, it would be easier if we just used a number-word in place of a pronoun. Thone, thwo, theree, thour, etc or something. Then we could refer to whom we mean with a numbered-pronoun to indicate agents. That would be the clearest way to differentiate agents in a sentence.
And to be very clear, I have no problem using non-gendered pronouns, but the idea that it isn't slightly less precise is facile. But, again, only slightly. And who cares if it makes people more comfort and seen?
- You don't even need a convoluted sentence like that, just now on the news the reporter was talking about a trans woman's mental health problems and said "Jane's parents were concerned that they may harm themselves"
  It is a bit of an awkward way of speaking
- Unless the people in innane sentence are the same gender and it's back to the same issue. You exists and it's not an issue for anyone.
yet the word you literally is about multiple entities
Since nobody has mentioned the actual reason for this phenomenon yet, the difference here is usually one of known vs. unknown gender/referent. (At least for practically all older speakers of English. Some younger speakers do seem to be able to use "they" grammatically to refer to known people. Changes in progress, woo!)
Your example is a perfect one: in a question like "whose umbrella is this?" we have no idea what gender the owner is, and so "they" is grammatical for the vast majority of English speakers.
Once the gender/referent is known, however, for many/most speakers of English (myself included), "they" becomes ungrammatical and the speaker must switch to "he" or "she":
"Whose umbrella is this? Did they already leave?"
"That's John's."
*"Oh, they need to come get it then." (The asterisk here is the common linguistic notation for ungrammaticality. This also assumes that both speakers are familiar with who John is. You can still get grammatical "they" after responses that refer to unknown people, especially with common gender-ambiguous names like Pat.)
So, for anyone wondering why many speakers, probably including themselves (if they're honest enough to admit it), seem to find known-gender singular "they" to be awkward/ungrammatical when supposedly "it's been grammatical for a thousand years", that's why!
- Alright, I made this comment in another thread but I'm copying it here. No, it has been used to refer to people of a known gender for centuries:
  https://www.englishgratis.com/1/wikibooks/english/singularthey.htm
  There's not a man I meet but doth salute me / As if I were their well-acquainted friend — Shakespeare, The Comedy of Errors, Act IV, Scene 3, 1594
  'Tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o'erhear the speech. — Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act III, Scene 3, 1600–1602
  So lyke wyse shall my hevenly father do vnto you except ye forgeve with youre hertes eache one to his brother their treaspases. — Tyndale's Bible, 1526
- "They" also refers to plurality. In the case of an individual having either both or neither and you aren't trying to be disrespectful with "it" then it's not confusing at all because it's accurate.
- Once the gender/referent is known, however, for many/most speakers of English (myself included), "they" becomes ungrammatical and the speaker must switch to "he" or "she":
  I must be one of these "younger" people because I don't get this. I have no problem referring to people as "they." Sometimes I do so because the gender is irrelevant, sometimes to obfuscate who I'm talking about, and sometimes because they might not identify within the s/he binary.
  What I don't get is, how can knowing the gender suddenly make it difficult to use a neutral term, if it worked before?
When my brain interpreted 'they' singular to refer to a unspecified so-far unnamed person or an already mentioned group, it was definitely confusing to have it suddenly used to refer to someone who had just been referred to by name. This was definitely a novel use of 'they' for me at the time and I don't understand why no-one else ever seems to have this kind of confusion. I did get used to it but I don't think it's as universal as some of y'all realise.
Edit: I just learnt the term 'indeterminate antecedent' from the Wikipedia article someone else linked. Thanks to them, I just got a little bit smarter. ;-)

It's important to understand that Hank is specific to say "correct prounons" and not "preferred prounons". We as creature of civilization have to right to control our place in that creation, so when someone misgenders, it's not that they are nessecarily showing disrespect, but being factually wrong. It's okay to state the wrong thing if you don't know, but if you insist that only YOUR interpretation of another person is correct, even more so than how THEY THEMSELVES interpret themselves, then you have crossed the rubicon in to bigotry.

To see another person on the street and think you have a better view of them than they do in a mirror is just wild levels of arrogance. They know themslevss far more than you ever will.

That's John Green, but they're the same person, according to the internet.
This is exactly the comment I was gonna leave, I strongly dislike the phrase "preferred pronouns," because that implies that it's a preference. Big props to John for making the distinction
- The problem with "correct" pronouns is that what's considered correct will differ depending on who's saying it. There's no confusion with "preferred" pronouns. Also, it is a preference, because some people use pronouns that are not the standard he/she/they ones. It's not their gender that they chose, it's (potentially) what pronouns they want to use to refer to said gender.
Try some proofreading your own comments. Dimwit.
- Hey, just FYI the period before "dimwit" should be a comma. If you're going to hold other people to a standard, at least hold yourself to the same one, asshole.
- 🤣 😂
  Sorry if the quick comment I left on my phone while on the toilet wasn't up to your standards, but since you aren't actually contributing anything of substance I don't see a reason to care what you think.
  Edit: Jesus your comment history is sad. Seems like you never can think of anything worthwhile to say. Stay mad I guess?
- It's also proofreading

Bro just use singular they. Why is it so hard.

- You used they in this comment but don't state you use they as a generic pronoun. Dude just use they
- From my experience most trans people are pretty clear cut. I get that they change their pronouns a lot when transitioning and coming out of the closet because it must be hard to pick a pronoun when you dont even know who you are. They are usually ok with the singular they. My problem is with tiktok queers and people who just change it for fun basically. I dont care if your pronoun is xe or idk but i do care when you dont accept if i use they(which i even use for cishet people because in my native language we dont have genders and its just generally easier).
- Avoid "them" meaning all trans people or the handful of dipshits you were choosing to talk to?
- That is a quality of life issue. This person's issue is not their changing pronouns, it is that they are an asshole, who loves to milk the victim role.
  I am a cis, male guy, who due to some hormonal issues looked androgynous and sounded like a girl when I was in my late teens and early 20s, and was addressed as "miss" quite often, and for the most part, people would just say "Sorry" when corrected, then address me as a guy.
  This is how people should behave, the person you describe is just an asshole, whether they are aware of it or not.
  Same issue I used to have with gay people, I used to think they were all loudmouth assholes, until I found out that what I had been exposed to was a loud minority, a ton of gay people are your regular Joe and Jane, and you would never know they were gay unless they told you.
  Don't let a loud minority sour your day, you have been doing the right thing, and the downvoted are overzealous, reactionary assholes.

It also never happened to me but I imagine the conversation would be something like:
Hello X
Please don't call me X I don't like it, call me Y instead
Ok
~ _{The end} ~
- You'd hope that.
  But in my experience it's a 50/50 chance they will go off on you.
- "OK comrade!"
- Okay imagine that... but with an internal crushing anxiety knowing that under best case there will be probably around five somewhat invasive follow up long answer questions either about your personal history or about trans people's existence in general. Then an optional depressing thing people think is them being magnanimous where they say "I don't get it but okay." OR they look at you like you grew another head and walk swiftly away to watch/glare you with furtive long stares or try and speed run whatever brief social interaction you are participating in like you have the plague.
  Aaaaand mental picture complete!
People genuinely do care considering Jordan Peterson's entire career is based on the whole "you can't force me to use your pronouns" bullshit that no one was trying to force him to do in the first place.

I'd even go simpler than that. "If calling people by their preferred pronouns is one of the hundred biggest challenges...." Inserting "correct" into the statement just begs to get into an argument with a conservative and feels like you're trying to force them to accept a different reality than they want to.

IMHO it's simply a personal preference thing. Let people live how they want to live. You don't have to convince everyone that Sally is really a woman trapped in the body of a man, you just have to say that it's her preference you call her as a "she". People should have the freedom to define themselves. That's it. End of story.

My conservative neighbor brought up trans stuff thinking he'd use all the conservative media talking points and my answer was simply "it doesn't really bother me. I'm a live and let live kind of guy. If they want me to use a different pronoun I'll do my best to switch to that pronoun." If you spin it as a freedom instead of a reality then it's easier to accept.

It's the right phrase, and if it triggers a conservative to start arguing, so be it
but someone's preferred pronouns are the correct ones to use for them
I agree with most of the sentiment, but we don't let children go around saying things (especially wrong things) that offend people just because they believe them. Why should we accept when an adult does it?
There IS a correct answer, though. If someone says, "My name is John", you don't get to tell them, "Well you look like a James to me, so I'm only going to call you James". That would be incorrect. You don't get to define other people's existence like that.
Same thing. 'John' isn't a preferred name. It's his name. Calling him a different name would be incorrect just like using different pronouns.
- We had a temp receptionist called Joyce at my job. She said that at her old job they called her Mama J, and indicated that she would like to be called that here as well. I guess we were all assholes who defined her existence by calling her Joyce.
Yeah, let people live. But also, let me live. Let me define myself the way I want. Stop telling me what the fuck to say and do and think and labeling anything that is 'different' than your way of thinking 'bad and wrong'.
That's a fair point. When I said "choose" I meant that they did not necessarily go with what they were assigned at birth. So it was "choose" in the sense of choose to be honest about who you are. I guess saying coming out of the closet would be more accurate. Sorry for the confusion.
Isn't using they is just better all around because
Not everyone identifies as binary, so they makes it better for everyone
Not everyone is willing to come out and reveal their identity, especially at workplace, so why only use correct term with those who reveal themselves. It is not relevant at work, in fact it may lead to biases
Specific pronouns do increase cognitive overload for everyone. Imagine trying to remember not only names but also pronouns of 100s of colleagues and friends. Linkedin has started adding pronouns? If you forget, someone will get offended.
Now even conferences are manufacturing pronouns pins. These pins get discarded and this just causes more waste
They is just simpler and better for everyone. I think we can even start to eliminate he and she to make more inclusive society.
My conservative neighbor brought up trans stuff thinking he’d use all the conservative media talking points and my answer was simply “it doesn’t really bother me. I’m a live and let live kind of guy. If they want me to use a different pronoun I’ll do my best to switch to that pronoun.” If you spin it as a freedom instead of a reality then it’s easier to accept.
That sounds to me like he realized he couldn't have the argument he wanted to have, not that he accepted anything. Edit - but I generally agree with your overall point.
It's an inherently anti conservative thing, funny enough. At least with how some conservative voters think -- Keep government out of it and let people live how they want to. Respect how they want to live, as a good neighbor.
I agree with you that spinning it as freedom is a good way to do it. You could probably put a Christian tilt on it as well.

I'm getting pretty old.

Transgender stuff is new and confusing to me.

My only experience with it was in a bar I used to frequent in Los Angeles, though I think they were more transvestite than transgender. Pronouns never came up there. We just used names.

It's easy for me to use any name given when introduced. If you introduce yourself to me with a feminine name when you appear quite male, it's no skin off my teeth.

Pronouns are more difficult simply because of my embedded native language of English dictating gender. While difficult, it's no more inconvenient than to slow myself down, think about what I'm saying, and try to use what's preferred. If I should slip up, then maybe a brief, "oops, sorry about that," is in order.

The hardest thing for me is if I have known you as one name and now I've got to use a new name. This has nothing to do with gender or politics however. It's just how my brain stores things. My sister uses a different first name in adulthood than when we were kids, and I never have been able to adapt. Since my sister is awesome and understands me, she gives me a pass on this.

Bottom line, the linguistics can be difficult for us oldies, but that doesn't give us reason to fear, hate, or persecute.

I think (in general) any one should be just allowed to say "oops" in any situation, in any case, however bad it is, to note he/she/(add any extra pronouns) has said/done and gone something that should not have happened or taken place. It's like software crashing of thinking, which happens and will happen more than we would like to.
38 years here. Pronouns based on appearance are pretty solidly baked into my brain.
I'm willing to improve if you're willing to be patient and deal with my fuck ups.
The hardest thing for me is if I have know you as one name and now I’ve got to use a new name. This has nothing to do with gender or politics however. It’s just how my brain stores things. My sister uses a different first name in adulthood than when we were kids, and I never have been able to adapt.
That's interesting. I'm certainly not young myself (approaching 47), and while I had no problem with remembering the new name for my high school friend who had transitioned in the years between us knowing each other then and getting back in touch, I have so much trouble remembering to call my own (cisgender) daughter by the shortened version of her full name, which she'd prefer. Maybe because my friend also changed her gender and, obviously, her look so it's easier to remember when I talk to her?
Luckily most people are going to be like your sister.
Sometimes people have their own shit going on that might make them "overreact" to your slip ups.
Weirdly you'll see people that trust you more react more strongly but it's not a you problem. They're likely venting against constant micro aggressions in a "safer" space, so try and be forgiving:)
You're right about it taking more work the longer you've known someone the harder it gets... It takes zero time for me to register "they/them" for someone I just met... But I still fuck up with a 20 year friend that switched 5 years ago..
Just remembering it's not about you and as long as you try your best you'll be fine.

Part of accepting someone is accepting their pronouns since it's part of their identity.
Don't stereotype people by the online facade. I've met maybe one weird trans person who fits the stereotype but most of the time they are normal people

Guarantee most of the people who argue about pronouns on the internet don't even know a trans person.

- I mean... I care about pronouns, so do most of my trans friends, and I'd like to think we're all "decent" trans folks. It sucks when someone misgenders you. I would also like the conservatives in my country to stop using trans rights as a wedge issue. I can care about both of these things at the same time.
I have found this to be 100% true. That is why they don't have a grasp on that they are people with feelings.

What's with the comments in this post?

I feel like it was written by people where English is their ~~third~~ fifth language.

Not knocking it. But even AI sounds more natural.

the bots and trolls are here now.

As a person who learned English as a 2nd language, I would like it if you could transform the language into gender neutral and end this insanity.

I still get classic genders wrong, this whole LGBTQ movement is confusing me even more when I'm trying to type/speak.

English is gender neutral. You have to deliberately apply a gender to something unless that word is gender specific, like cow or bitch referring to female animals.
In my brief forays learning other languages one of the more frustrating things to learn is that you can have female refrigerators, male buses, and gender neutral roofs. That is not gender neutrality.
So I don’t get your issue with genders, seeing as they have nothing to do with English language neutrality and everything to do with how you address a specific individual at their request.
- In one of the languages I know, there isn't a different pronoun for each gender; there's just one pronoun to indicate 'they' in the singular form. Maybe that's what they meant.
- In what fucked up language are refrigerators female? They're obviously male.
- In Persian we don't have genders for anything. No words, no pronouns, nothing. So having gendered pronouns for me is not gender neutral. I would rather call everyone equally "they" than get into this game of what are you identifying yourself because it makes the language more complex for me.
Wait until you learn languages with gendered articles
- The thing about grammatical gender is that it doesn't really have much to do with sex or gender identity. In German, for instance, 'mädchen' (girl) is neuter. Gender in French is 98% assigned based on the pronunciation of the three final syllables. In Danish, living things tend to be 'common gender' and inanimate objects tend to be 'neuter'.
  It'd be more accurate to call it 'noun classes' than gender.
Honestly biggest reason I list they/them is just because I don't think we should gender language in general. Any pronouns are fine, as long as you aren't trying to be dehumanizing with it. I use they/them a lot when referring to other people and most people don't care, but a few cissies thought a hissy fit over singular they.
bro, there are folks out there who think spanish/french and other gendered languages are wrong and bad.

I mean what will they make us do next??? Ask us to call them by their names as well?

Seriously. There are a bunch of people in this thread who seem to think that the most very basic amount of courtesy is too much for them.

Yeah, kinda true, kinda whataboutism... If calling other people by their chosen pronouns being their biggest problem, is your biggest problem... I'm envious of their life and your life... Thanks, I'm fine, lets not trade lives.

Honest question - what is the whataboutism here?
- *crickets
- Not OP, but couldn't "what about other, bigger problems?" be construed as whataboutism?
  Although personally I'd put it closer to ridicule, which I also believe is John Greene's intent (judging from how he talks about the issue in other social media).
- That pronouns isn't a legitimate problem to have, because "what about" more severe problems in life. That Green is implying to trade with the non-issue (or lesser issue) of pronouns.
Hmm. >80% of Lemmy voters don't like the same logic applied in reverse? Is that being hypocrites, or am I missing something?
- The problem with your "logic" is that Green never said it was his biggest problem. And if you can find me someone who does say that people not calling others by their correct pronouns is their biggest problem, I would be very surprised.
  I would suggest to you that if this was John Green's biggest problem, he wouldn't make a glib tweet about it.

What exactly do you need to "be on board" with? Not being a raging douche?
- Seriously.
  Gay agenda : we exist, please acknowledge our rights as people and treat us with basic human respect.
  Bigots : Can't be done.
- That’s the thing. While I don’t use any of the labels myself and I don’t feel personal connection to the movement, it looks to me like there’s the side of 1) reasonable human being and 2) asshole.
not on-board with the LGBTQ movement
Seeing as the movement is equality and not being persecuted, I'm gonna say yes.
That you asked that question like it makes any sort of sense tells us that you already have some specific aspect of the vast array of topics that could be covered under "the LGBTQ movement" in mind. So why don't you tell us what exactly rustles your jimmies and then we can help you sort if you are a bigot or not.
If you're not "on baord" with the Jewish movement, are you an anti-semite?

One of john green's tiny, ridiculous problems is that he has an ego that requires him to share his thoughts via tweets to fix the world.

His thoughts are like mine, fairly irrelevant, reprehensible to some and an echo chamber to others. At least I have the modesty and humbleness to know that my thoughts belong in the comments section of an unknown social media platform where it will be read by, at most, 20 people.

Someone sharing their thoughts on the platform literally made so people can easily share their thoughts? Absolutely insane thing for John to do, you're right.
So you're saying calling people by their preferred pronouns is a great difficulty for you?
- I didn't give my thoughts on the matter, since it's irrelevant.
- I call people by their preferred pronouns because this is something that's completely inconsequential and meaningless to me. But the same kind of argument can be made against you: "So you're saying taking "no" for an answer is a great difficulty for you?"
  If I traveled to some country where a particular religion - let's call it X - was the most common, and in X people were ascribed different pronouns based on some rules or rituals, I would call them by their preferred pronouns because as an atheist and moral anti-realist that's just not something important to me. But if a Christian felt uncomfortable doing so because it goes against their religion their position is just as valid - arguably it's more valid since in this example the people from X are asking the Christian to change their vocabulary, while the Christian isn't asking anything of the people from X.
He's building hospitals/maternity wards in Sierra Leone, fighting healthcare companies to reduce the cost of life-saving medications, and creating free educational content as some of his side projects while also being a writer and consistent YouTuber. He's doing far more than 'sharing his thoughts via tweets to fix the world'. He's doing the work too.
What you're projecting doesn't come across as 'modesty and humbleness'. Feels more like jealousy and bitterness.
- I know what he's done because I've followed his instructional video channels for years. You know, where he teaches stuff, not just ridicules groups he doesn't agree with.
Goodbye, one month old account that had nothing to say in the past week until John Green suggested that refusing to use someone’s pronouns is a stupid hill to die on 👋😊
- buhbye.
You could also tweet your opinions and it would only be seen by 20 people
- Buuuuurn.
Sounds like you're just jealous that John Greene has more people that care about him than you do.
But don't count yourself short, the votes on this comment of yours suggest more than 20 people read your comment!
- Super jealous. So very jelly.
John Green actually has a large following. You have no one who cares what you say.
- Buuurn.
And yet you're still posting. If you posted on Twitter, no one would give a shit. That's because people like him and find value in what he has to say. And he's trying to help people in that tweet.
If you think you're posts are so valueless, couldn't you just take your own advice and shut the fuck up?
- I could but then I wouldn't benefit from all this constructive criticism and life pro tips.
So who in your opinion has the right to post to twitter?
- I didn't speak about anyone's rights. Just about egos and the need to share ridicule.
I like how you realized you had to hedge at the end to not look like a ridiculous hypocrite. "What I'm doing here is totally different because my audience is smaller." You can just delete the comment if you find yourself backed into a corner like that. It's sunk cost fallacy to go ahead with posting it.
- Thanks for the enlightened pro-tip.
This almost reads like an ironic shitpost
Almost
- I love italics.
  Love
That's sad. I hope you gain the courage to speak your truth openly someday
- Thanks for the kind thoughts. It means a lot.

I have never met anyone in real life that doesn't address you the way you ask them to. My language, however, does not have gender neutral pronouns so the "did you just assume X gender" question is kinda annoying.

I definitely have, just last week my girlfriend got intentionally misgendered multiple times while going to get her gender marker changed, by a social security agent. Some people can be incredibly cruel like that. An overwhelming majority of people are not like that though, in my experience, but the sting of cruelty is louder than passive acceptance.
Like this is a question that people ask and not a troll ragebait. People most positively misgender on purpose upon inspection that a person is trans. If a cis person says "but I am a boy" they will bend over apologizing.

My personal favorite for singular gender neutral pronouns are Zi/zir/zirs/zirself or Ze/zer/zers/zerself.

Xe is just trying to be Zi/Ze and it would be confusing for Chinese people. There's also female connotations with X genome vs Y genome. Which is he Ye is also meh.

I wouldn't mind Ve, ver, vers, verself either.

Ze sounds more unique and it's kinda neat how it's Gen Z helping push it too.

Otherwise just use the pronouns they prefer.

Having to write official documents while having to use they/them is annoying without gender neutral terms coming into it.

English really just needs a better gender neutral singular and plural pronouns. Since they has been used for plural most of my life it feels like better singulars are the way to go, but it doesn't really matter. Just someone make it official please lol.

We should just go back to the generic he and make it really easy.

Sorry, why is it such a hardship for you if someone says "don't call me he, please, call me grit?" What does it matter if it sounds funny or weird? Lots of things in English sound funny or weird. We drive on a parkway and park on a driveway.
- You're right, but you can never be left....darn that's even wrong but not even right. You could say we're uneven right 👍. Like the word fuck. I can fuck up but haven't ever fucked down! But there are many ways to fuck up and non of those ways is doggy style. You can fuck someone up, but you can't fuck them up doggy style. You can only fuck them doggy style. The only way to fuck is up, but there are a huge number of ways to fuck. Like you can't fuck forward, but you can fuck missionary. But although you can run forward towards a goal, you can never run missionary towards a goal. Two guys can't fuck scissor style, they can get into that position but it would be painful. Now you can back up and back down, but you can't back left or right. You can back up a little to the left but your can't fuck up a little to the left. English is so dumb!
Bruh... Just use they and them. If people get pissy about it just tell them you struggle really hard with memory and this is your way of making sure you treat everyone with kindness.
...this really isn't that hard
- Nice reply. I had to remove my comment because it seemed offensive. It was just poking fun at English as a whole. But whatever. Thanks for the suggestion though.
God I really can't imagine just how sad your life must be that you would actually go out of your way to write this comment.
- Fine pine. We can't poke fun on ourselves.
Wtf is going on here? I was expecting a jabberwocky to make its appearance.
- Who that?

Perhaps we could all just use he/her for everyone because its less typing (e and r right next to each other vs im on him or he on she) and less space taken up on screens and paper? It would end run the haterade bigots looking to stir shit up and the self serving jackasses that inject themselves as the main character in every else's life choices and experiences.

In my own case, I only really take issue with the singular vs plural pronouns because they/them implies multiple people. Declaring they/them as your pronoun feels like an awkward adjustment to force on everyone else, not at all from a gender fluid or gendered language position, just from a logical expedience of exactness of language position.

We make all this shit up anyway, so let's just collectively define a shortest pronoun to represent individuals universally. Equality of respect among peers.

'They/them' has been used for singular people for centuries.
The Oxford English Dictionary traces singular they back to 1375, where it appears in the medieval romance William and the Werewolf. Except for the old-style language of that poem, its use of singular they to refer to an unnamed person seems very modern. Here’s the Middle English version: ‘Hastely hiȝed eche . . . þei neyȝþed so neiȝh . . . þere william & his worþi lef were liand i-fere.’ In modern English, that’s: ‘Each man hurried . . . till they drew near . . . where William and his darling were lying together.’
https://www.oed.com/discover/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/?tl=true
- So that means that's the best way for it to work in the future? Having a distinction between singular and plural is useful, so why *not adjust our language and repurpose the not useful gendered pronouns?
- Yes and languages evolve. I also worry that your same sort of historial logic can be used in favor of preserving gendered language and traditional gender definitions that is contrary to the goals here.
  I'm arguing for a standard usage, he/her for everyone covers always having a singular standardized pronoun so that they/them can be used as plural pronouns without the potential confusion that you may be talking about more than one person in the same literal contextual frame of a discussion. Preciseness of language improves the quality of communication.
  Even in that example, and perhaps the modern English translation is just incorrect in its wording, "Each man hurried... til they drew near" is still a plural representative form of usage, as 'each man' is an implied amount of more than a singular man.
  To say "Each man hurried... til he drew near... where William and his darling were lying together" creates a confusion of singular subject and does not work since 'each man' and 'they' represents more than a single self identifying entity.
This person, they understand singular pronouns, if everyone was like them no one would use they or them to refer to one person.
- I mean, my only real argument is about efficiency and language exactness for the sake of clarity of meaning. Here's a version based on my suggestion:
  "This person understands pronouns, if everyone was like her then no one would use they are them to refer to one person."
  I'm not attacking pronoun users, I'm advocating for more efficient pronoun usage rather than arbitrarily requiring others to redefine their pronoun usage for every single individual that wants to use a different unique pronoun. Why, you ask? A pronoun is a shortened identifier than can be used in many different instances to represent a noun, in general, individual pronouns are a substitute for individual names.
  Your name is the actually unique identifier more-so than any pronoun is or needs to be.
Just want to make sure I'm understanding your post:
Making "he/her" non-gendered: perfectly acceptable.
Using "they/them" as singular: unacceptable gibberish.
- More like...
  Using gendered singular pronouns: kinda weird and pointless
  Using they/them for both singular and plural: possibly confusing
  Making a non-gendered singular pronoun: reduces confusion
I've been arguing this for a while and I don't understand why so many people are against it.
He/Him: okay i guess
She/Her: weird change and doesn't fit previous convention
He/Her: actually builds off of each other
That and while the distinction between Male and Female pronouns is kind of pointless, having a distinction between singular and plural pronouns is actually a helpful feature.

Ok, we get it. John doesn’t care if she gets addressed with the right pronoun.

That's literally the opposite of what he said. Good job.

My question comes from a grammar /German background: We have four cases. They have different pronouns. Which ones should I list?

Whichever ones you want English speakers to use when referring to you.
Simple, isn't it?
- Everything is simple when you know the solution.
  I was not really expecting English speakers to use my German pronouns, they are for German speaking people.
  Would that be the Dativ or Akkusativ form? They are both quite common and important
English also has cases, we just don't think of them much. It's why pronouns are typically given as nominative/objective pairs: she/her, they/them, etc. So, similarly in German you'd probably only need to give one or two examples to make it clear which set to use. Or give all four.
Most commonly used English pronouns are typically listed as "he/him", "she/her". Sometimes people add possessive forms as well ("ie "she/her/hers". "They/them", "she/they", "he/they", "they/he", "they/she", "he/she", "any" are other common options. There's not hard rules though.
whichever one you feel is the most correct any any one time
From what I recall from briefly studying German, there's still a masculine/feminine/neuter pronoun in all 4 cases. Couldn't you just use the appropriate one in each case?

Huh? Did someone claim that???

I have to deal with extremely bad gender dysphoria, so yes I would trade my struggles with any transphobe who thinks they have it rough

….

This isn't actually a real issue. Your language preference isn't the same as someone pushing you to change your own pronouns.
Thanks for being receptive to treating people with decency (I mean that), but this conflict you are perceiving isn't actually a thing. Unisex and gender neutral in this context mean the same thing -- this is just the more commonly used term in this era, but that's just because patterns of language usage have changed.