3 ms·

There are many third person pronouns that people have suggested that are not widely in use today, including singular they. Ze, zhe, per, zer, e, etc. [1] have a

by least 7y ago

There are many third person pronouns that people have suggested that are not widely in use today, including singular they. Ze, zhe, per, zer, e, etc. [1] have all been proposed at various points in time (and some have resurfaced in the past several years) and there are people who identify by these pronouns. If singular 'they' is valid, then so are they (plural, referring to the alternative third person gender neutral pronouns in this case). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-person_pronoun#Preferred_pronouns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-person_pronoun#Preferred...

JabavuAdams 7y ago
So ... I probably shouldn't write anything here. Anyway, in the spirit of learning and communication and respectful dialogue ... I think one of the tensions here is between people who think that providing one non-gendered pronoun is a sufficient individual vs. societal customization setting versus those who think that every(-ish) stated individual pronoun choice being mandatory is the appropriate and respectful customization setting. I first started thinking about these issues not from a trans / non-binary / fluid direction, but from the point of view of removing unnecessary gendering when it was irrelevant to the situation under discussion. So, from that perspective a single unambiguous non-gendered pronoun seemed sufficient. I wasn't looking at things in terms of providing people with fine-grained customization to express themselves. I find the desire for fine-grained gender-expression customization in tension with the desire to de-emphasize gender. But I can also see how he/she/they sounds suspiciously like he/she/other(not normal) and could be interpreted as alienating or insulting. I still don't really understand, but frankly I don't have much skin in the game. I'm half and half white/black so I've never really felt the urge to identify with either. I identify as a tennis player or scientist or programmer. We live in a society where these days lefties are not disadvantaged, although they were brutalized in the past, and I see no intense desire among lefties to identify as lefties. It makes me wonder whether, if we did not brutalize non cis-gender conforming people, would we see such intense desire for recognition and affirmation of fine-grained gender identity? But obviously we don't live in that world yet. I may have offended someone here, but I hope it's clear from my care and tone that it's not from a place of disrespect, but one of unfamiliarity and desire to understand. EDIT> By "lefties", I mean left-handed people.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > I find the desire for fine-grained gender-expression customization in tension with the desire to de-emphasize gender. I think a problem is the failure to distinguish between gender identity and externally imposed gender and gender stereotypes. Increasing range of expression and social recognition of gender identity is aligned with reducing and eliminating socially-imposed gender and gender stereotypes.
- least 7y ago
  I actually do think there is too much focus on pronouns and gender, though for some people it is something that preoccupies a lot of their life for various reasons. I'd imagine a trans person is confronted with these issues frequently because they see their identity being questioned so frequently. I do think there is something to be said about how western society may inform the ways in which people that don't conform to traditional gender identities behave, but that's not particularly relevant to pronouns, I don't think. With that being said, I think English is a language ill-suited for 'gender agency' because the gendered pronouns are third person and innately require other people to acknowledge your preferences. You're placing a burden on someone else to not only remember your preference in name, but also in your pronouns. To me this is what I find so troublesome about the whole affair since I typically prefer to avoid placing burdens on other people to accommodate me. I also think that third person pronouns exist to be convenient and that treating them as a second name makes it as inconvenient to use as a proper noun. If someone prefers singular they, I'm much more likely to just always refer to them properly because it requires less effort to think about the sentences I am saying/typing, albeit awkward to my ears. In Japanese, there are gendered first person pronouns that allow a person to easily communicate this part of their identity. Those who identify with the male gender might say "boku" or "ore," while someone who identifies as a female might use "atashi." Those that don't identify with either could use "watashi," since it is gender neutral. It doesn't place any unnecessary burden on other people. You get to communicate it yourself. You don't have to rely on other people to acknowledge your gender in their language, you can do it yourself. As for the 'they' pronoun, Stallman is at least correct in that it does present itself with challenges that other pronouns don't face. Since it has a duality of meaning it can create a lot of confusion, particularly when it's in print since there are far less context clues usually. In fact I implicitly pointed this out in my original comment.
pseudalopex 7y ago
Singular "they" has been widely used for over 600 years.

by least 7y ago

JabavuAdams 7y ago

So ... I probably shouldn't write anything here. Anyway, in the spirit of learning and communication and respectful dialogue ... I think one of the tensions here is between people who think that providing one non-gendered pronoun is a sufficient individual vs. societal customization setting versus those who think that every(-ish) stated individual pronoun choice being mandatory is the appropriate and respectful customization setting. I first started thinking about these issues not from a trans / non-binary / fluid direction, but from the point of view of removing unnecessary gendering when it was irrelevant to the situation under discussion. So, from that perspective a single unambiguous non-gendered pronoun seemed sufficient. I wasn't looking at things in terms of providing people with fine-grained customization to express themselves. I find the desire for fine-grained gender-expression customization in tension with the desire to de-emphasize gender. But I can also see how he/she/they sounds suspiciously like he/she/other(not normal) and could be interpreted as alienating or insulting. I still don't really understand, but frankly I don't have much skin in the game. I'm half and half white/black so I've never really felt the urge to identify with either. I identify as a tennis player or scientist or programmer. We live in a society where these days lefties are not disadvantaged, although they were brutalized in the past, and I see no intense desire among lefties to identify as lefties. It makes me wonder whether, if we did not brutalize non cis-gender conforming people, would we see such intense desire for recognition and affirmation of fine-grained gender identity? But obviously we don't live in that world yet. I may have offended someone here, but I hope it's clear from my care and tone that it's not from a place of disrespect, but one of unfamiliarity and desire to understand. EDIT> By "lefties", I mean left-handed people.

dragonwriter 7y ago
> I find the desire for fine-grained gender-expression customization in tension with the desire to de-emphasize gender. I think a problem is the failure to distinguish between gender identity and externally imposed gender and gender stereotypes. Increasing range of expression and social recognition of gender identity is aligned with reducing and eliminating socially-imposed gender and gender stereotypes.
least 7y ago
I actually do think there is too much focus on pronouns and gender, though for some people it is something that preoccupies a lot of their life for various reasons. I'd imagine a trans person is confronted with these issues frequently because they see their identity being questioned so frequently. I do think there is something to be said about how western society may inform the ways in which people that don't conform to traditional gender identities behave, but that's not particularly relevant to pronouns, I don't think. With that being said, I think English is a language ill-suited for 'gender agency' because the gendered pronouns are third person and innately require other people to acknowledge your preferences. You're placing a burden on someone else to not only remember your preference in name, but also in your pronouns. To me this is what I find so troublesome about the whole affair since I typically prefer to avoid placing burdens on other people to accommodate me. I also think that third person pronouns exist to be convenient and that treating them as a second name makes it as inconvenient to use as a proper noun. If someone prefers singular they, I'm much more likely to just always refer to them properly because it requires less effort to think about the sentences I am saying/typing, albeit awkward to my ears. In Japanese, there are gendered first person pronouns that allow a person to easily communicate this part of their identity. Those who identify with the male gender might say "boku" or "ore," while someone who identifies as a female might use "atashi." Those that don't identify with either could use "watashi," since it is gender neutral. It doesn't place any unnecessary burden on other people. You get to communicate it yourself. You don't have to rely on other people to acknowledge your gender in their language, you can do it yourself. As for the 'they' pronoun, Stallman is at least correct in that it does present itself with challenges that other pronouns don't face. Since it has a duality of meaning it can create a lot of confusion, particularly when it's in print since there are far less context clues usually. In fact I implicitly pointed this out in my original comment.

pseudalopex 7y ago

Singular "they" has been widely used for over 600 years.