Anyone Use Gender Neutral Pronouns?

[+ FreshFluff]

Wow, I am so old... I remember back when it was GLBT!

 

I remember when it was BGL.

[+ sniper]

And for a minute they tried to make "lesbigay" happen.

[TruthBTold]

I am old. I don't get this whole "Q" thing. If you don't exactly have an idea which sex you are attracted to (and you want to be attracted to one) then you are Bi. If you are not attracted to any sex then you are not attracted to any sex. Get rid of this "Q" bullshit.

[+ FreshFluff]

I am old. I don't get this whole "Q" thing. If you don't exactly have an idea which sex you are attracted to (and you want to be attracted to one) then you are Bi. If you are not attracted to any sex then you are not attracted to any sex. Get rid of this "Q" bullshit.

 

It seems like a way to invite those who aren't yet ready to call themselves "gay" or "bi" into the fold.

[bostonman]

I've always been under the impression that "Q" is more of a politically/socially charged term (think back to "Queer Nation" etc) than just one of sexual orientation. One can be "gay" but not necessarily feel like part of the "queer" movement, etc.

[Phil_musc]

Maybe I should just let this thread die a natural death, but I've just re-read it (silly me). At least 2 posts mention the usage of they as a singular third person going back to Chaucer. Two points: 1) Chaucer is actually considered Middle English (I think, not sure) and as such is not really on point. 2) Could we have a specific quote from Chaucer that demonstrates the third person singular? It's been generally referenced twice now but the actual quote might give us a better context for claiming it is an old historic usage.

[+ FreshFluff]

Maybe I should just let this thread die a natural death, but I've just re-read it (silly me). At least 2 posts mention the usage of they as a singular third person going back to Chaucer. Two points: 1) Chaucer is actually considered Middle English (I think, not sure) and as such is not really on point. 2) Could we have a specific quote from Chaucer that demonstrates the third person singular? It's been generally referenced twice now but the actual quote might give us a better context for claiming it is an old historic usage.

 

From the Canterbury Tales (Source). I'm not a Middle English expert, but I'm a little dubious that "whoso" is always singular.

 

“And whoso fyndeth hym out of swich blame,

They wol come up […]”

[+ pitman]

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...

I would be thrilled were you to address my hiney....in any way you want. I know you have the proper equipment.

[+ pitman]

And for a minute they tried to make "lesbigay" happen.

There was also (s)he - pronounced "shu-hee".

[+ pitman]

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."

Or "One is a drama queen".

[JayCeeKy]

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

 

And in Kentucky, the plural of Y'all is "All of Y'all."

[+ Charlie]

From the Canterbury Tales (Source). I'm not a Middle English expert, but I'm a little dubious that "whoso" is always singular.

 

“And whoso fyndeth hym out of swich blame,

They wol come up […]”

This is a slightly different situation, in which the plural pronoun "they" is used to refer back to the singular pronoun "hym" [sic], but the verb attached to "they" is "wol," which has the same form in both singular and plural, so there is no obvious confusion about subject-verb agreement.

[+ FreshFluff]

This is a slightly different situation, in which the plural pronoun "they" is used to refer back to the singular pronoun "hym" [sic], but the verb attached to "they" is "wol," which has the same form in both singular and plural, so there is no obvious confusion about subject-verb agreement.

 

I thought that "they" refers back to "whoso." "Whoso" seems more likely to be plural to me, but the blog argues that it's singular.

 

I agree that subject/object agreement isn't the issue here.

[+ Charlie]

"Whoso" and "hym" are the same person (it is a reflexive statement: "whoever finds himself" would be the modern English wording), so the "whoso" is singular. "Whoso [whoever]" is not gendered, and the "himself" is masculine only because the fallback pronoun in English is masculine when the person's gender is unknown. Speakers and writers in English often switch at that point to the genderless plural "they" with the proper plural verb (in this case, the future tense verb is the same for both singular and plural), because it is easier to be inclusive of both genders with a genderless plural pronoun. The Pardoner's audience is both men and women, and he does not know who among them may take up his offer (he undoubtedly hopes several of them will, not just one male).

 

Forgive me, I am a pedant.

[+ FreshFluff]

"Whoso" and "hym" are the same person (it is a reflexive statement: "whoever finds himself" would be the modern English wording), so the "whoso" is singular. "Whoso [whoever]" is not gendered, and the "himself" is masculine only because the fallback pronoun in English is masculine when the person's gender is unknown. Speakers and writers in English often switch at that point to the genderless plural "they" with the proper plural verb (in this case, the future tense verb is the same for both singular and plural), because it is easier to be inclusive of both genders with a genderless plural pronoun. The Pardoner's audience is both men and women, and he does not know who among them may take up his offer (he undoubtedly hopes several of them will, not just one male).

 

Forgive me, I am a pedant.

 

I hadn't realized that "hym" (him) was reflexive; I thought it was a third party.

 

If you're okay with the colloquial use of "they" when gender is unknown, then why is it a big stretch to use it when gender is indeterminate (because the person is bi-gender or whatever)?

[+ Avalon]

In college I had a German teacher (ethnic German). One day he came to class and said he saw a poster that said "HERSTORY". He thought it was a typo. A student explained to him it was about women's studies.

 

Interesting man. He was a Sudeten German. He said when he was a boy in school he was taught in Czech. During WWII he fought in the German army.

[+ purplekow]

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.

I do not have a preferred pronoun but I do have a preferred noun.....bovinity, it sounds like a cross between bovine and divinity. Heavenly.

Here is my take on it....for persons who have to deal with so much in their lives, getting so rankled by pronoun designation seems especially thin skinned and energy sapping. I think they should buck up and take it like a human.

[+ Avalon]

I do not have a preferred pronoun but I do have a preferred noun.....bovinity, it sounds like a cross between bovine and divinity. Heavenly.

Here is my take on it....for persons who have to deal with so much in their lives, getting so rankled by pronoun designation seems especially thin skinned and energy sapping. I think they should buck up and take it like a human.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quod_licet_Iovi,_non_licet_bovi

[+ purplekow]

They are a drama queen works for me.

 

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

Why not the simple What a drama royal that person over there is and the person adjacent is also a drama royal. Both of those persons are drama royalty.

[+ purplekow]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quod_licet_Iovi,_non_licet_bovi

Listen Mr./Mrs/Ms/Miss/Master/Dr/Your Highness/...bovi licet me any time.

[Phil_musc]

They are a drama queen works for me.

 

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

 

Why does the second example defy grammar? Second person singular or plural takes the "are" of the verb "to be." No error or confusion here.

[mike carey]

Why does the second example defy grammar? Second person singular or plural takes the "are" of the verb "to be." No error or confusion here.

'Are' is plural and 'a stud' is singular. My point was that the language has shifted so the second person plural is also used as the singular, so there is no reason why the third person plural could not similarly migrate.

[+ Charlie]

I hadn't realized that "hym" (him) was reflexive; I thought it was a third party.

 

If you're okay with the colloquial use of "they" when gender is unknown, then why is it a big stretch to use it when gender is indeterminate (because the person is bi-gender or whatever)?

In theory, it may make sense to use "they" when a singular person's gender is bi or indeterminate, but the lack of normal subject-verb agreement in "they is" is very distracting, because 95% of listeners won't understand the point and will just think of it as a grammatical error. Of course, you might argue that it opens an opportunity to explain the topic of gender orientation, but more than likely a simple statement will end up getting lost in a long discussion like this thread.

[+ Charlie]

In college I had a German teacher (ethnic German). One day he came to class and said he saw a poster that said "HERSTORY". He thought it was a typo. A student explained to him it was about women's studies.

 

Interesting man. He was a Sudeten German. He said when he was a boy in school he was taught in Czech. During WWII he fought in the German army.

Before WWII, the Sudetenland was part of the new nation of Czechoslovakia, so the public schools used Czech as the language of instruction, although a majority of the population were ethnic Germans. In 1938, the Czechs were forced to cede the Sudetenland to Germany, and the Sudeten Germans fought for Germany. At the end of the war, the German residents were forced to leave their homes, and the area was re-settled with Czechs. During the Communist years, when the East Germans were only allowed to travel to Warsaw Pact countries, many of them went to the Sudetenland for their vacations, because the older Czechs could still speak and understand German.

 

I lived and worked in the Sudetenland shortly after the fall of the Iron Curtain, and the tourist industry in the area still was heavily dependent on the Germans.

[+ quoththeraven]

From Twitter:

 

"My 73-year-old aunt wrote a poem about my pronouns in her church writing group and it’s the sweetest thing"

source