- 19 Nov 2016 20:44
#14739848
Some people do choose the they pronoun as their prefered pronoun. So actually if you're already keen on accepting that prefered pronoun, why not extend it to other pronouns? Seems a bit like you're making something out of nothing to me. How many people could possibly want to be called an alternative pronoun that you actually meet that are not on a university campus? Seeing as the man is a professor, he should be aware of the fact that his position of power dictates a higher degree of responsibility than many other jobs, such as @Decky, who is a bricklayer that doesn't need to have nuance in his articulation. Decky can just continue being ignorant no problem, because nobody is actually expecting anything better of him. People in positions that are paid for by the government or receive money from the government or are conferred special status by the government, they should have to have the responsibility to every one of their constituents and not just the cisgendered ones.
However, it's not a big issue to me because it personally doesn't affect me. But I respect those that it does affect enough to give them their credence and let them be who they are.
Probably because it and its refers to objects, not people. Although I am sure there are some people out there that do prefer that pronoun, they are probably few and far in between.
As far as I can tell, her argument was that it's not that difficult to remember it and used a smart phone as an example of how to remember it. My suggestion was that, as a teacher, they can write down the preferred pronoun on the role sheet or simply call people by their name. How many opportunities does he actually have to misgender people on a daily basis? I am sure it happens quite rarely, even for someone that refuses to adhere to the person's desired gender. I bet it has barely even happened if at all.
I think I may have misgendered you as a man because you're acting like a whiny mouse.
Bulaba Jones wrote:This silly 60-some pronoun fad presents some problems for basic grammar. Verbs following a third person singular like he, she, it take -s or -es, such as He drives the car. A verb that follows plural pronouns like we and they as well as I and you doesn't. It's common parlance to use they (I do it fairly often) when there's no need to identify gender (this is useful in some professional settings where you are keeping the identity of a client, a student, or a peer confidential, but I've also used it in more informal settings), like This person I helped today told me that they drive a car, rather than This person I helped today told me that they drives a car (since they is used in the singular sense to refer to one particular person).
What happens when people insist they identify as multiple identities/beings and should be referred to in the plural sense (e.g. He drive the car rather than the correct He drives the car)? Or if they take on a plural gender but insist on verb forms that correspond to a singular pronoun? The current use of a pronoun such as they to refer to someone of an unspecified gender does use verb forms that continue to correspond to a plural pronoun, but how long until some idiot makes a big fuss out of using a plural pronoun and then complains about grammar rules concerning their chosen pronoun not referring to them as one single individual?
Some people do choose the they pronoun as their prefered pronoun. So actually if you're already keen on accepting that prefered pronoun, why not extend it to other pronouns? Seems a bit like you're making something out of nothing to me. How many people could possibly want to be called an alternative pronoun that you actually meet that are not on a university campus? Seeing as the man is a professor, he should be aware of the fact that his position of power dictates a higher degree of responsibility than many other jobs, such as @Decky, who is a bricklayer that doesn't need to have nuance in his articulation. Decky can just continue being ignorant no problem, because nobody is actually expecting anything better of him. People in positions that are paid for by the government or receive money from the government or are conferred special status by the government, they should have to have the responsibility to every one of their constituents and not just the cisgendered ones.
However, it's not a big issue to me because it personally doesn't affect me. But I respect those that it does affect enough to give them their credence and let them be who they are.
Cookie Monster wrote:But as a solution why not extend the use of it and its to also transgenders, non-genders, etc?! After a generation it won't sound ackward anymore and it would be much more sensible than adopting new pronouns and adjectives for each gender identity.
Probably because it and its refers to objects, not people. Although I am sure there are some people out there that do prefer that pronoun, they are probably few and far in between.
Sabbaticus wrote:As I said, a 'Ghost in the Shell' response. Having to rely on electronic devices for basic social interaction.
As far as I can tell, her argument was that it's not that difficult to remember it and used a smart phone as an example of how to remember it. My suggestion was that, as a teacher, they can write down the preferred pronoun on the role sheet or simply call people by their name. How many opportunities does he actually have to misgender people on a daily basis? I am sure it happens quite rarely, even for someone that refuses to adhere to the person's desired gender. I bet it has barely even happened if at all.
Except that the constant need to bring out an electronic device for basic social interaction could also be perceived as bigotry and indirect misgendering.
I think I may have misgendered you as a man because you're acting like a whiny mouse.