4 ms·

How else do you refer to non-binary people?

sgt 6y ago
He or she, depending what the person looks like. I'm not going to use they/them, the same way I'm not going to force someone else to refer to me as "my lord".
- prepend 6y ago
  Comically I was registering for an event and they required a prefix with choices “Mr, Mrs, Ms, Dr, My lord” and like a hundred other prefixes for fancy people. I was surprised that there wasn’t a non-gendered prefix to call someone by unless they have some prefix due to training or station. “Honorable” and “Dr” have requirements before use.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mx_(title) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mx_(title)
- no-s 6y ago
  > He or she, depending what the person looks like. Well, that may be perceived as insulting by the addressee, and they might have a point. The previous consensus was not to presume offense. Too bad we can't all efficiently communicate in a polite language free from irrelevant embedded idiosyncratic perceptual distinctions, so as to avoid giving and taking offense. Yet for some reason we are required instead to recognize new distinctive pronouns and use them consistently or face ostracism. A forced consensus is a false consensus. > the same way I'm not going to force someone else to refer to me as "my lord". And there's a good point. Forcing others to use a form of arbitrarily self-determined address and banding together to ostracize and punish the uncooperative is uncomfortably similar to just plain old elitist bullying. I understand the thesis is to show respect for the addressee, but insisting and threatening is to transform it into a transaction of dominance and submission. Some argue that to respond by identifying as a surface-to-air missile is just a glib insult, not satirical criticism of the implied superiority expressed as reductio ad absurdum.
Y_Y 6y ago
Like those ternary people? Jerks. Like we get it. There were a couple of experimental machines during the Cold War, but two-state logic circuits have clearly won.
prepend 6y ago
In Greg Egan’s novel Distress [0] he described a whole system of pronouns for different genders that existed in his world. While “they” is harder for me to comprehend because it requires context, if that’s someone’s preference I work on it because I don’t think we’re likely to adopt the non-gendered singular like ve/ver/vis. [0] https://nb-in-sf.tumblr.com/post/186129553898/distress-by-greg-egan-a-novel-about-intrigue https://nb-in-sf.tumblr.com/post/186129553898/distress-by-gr...
cambalache 6y ago
There is a thing called "name".One of the strangest things I've seen, is one "famous" people claiming online (I lost the tweet link, so you have to take my word for it) claiming that using a person's name is weaseling out, and must be considered as offensive as using the wrong pronoun. I am sorry, I will use she/he or the person's name according to the individual preference but I will never say xher/xhum/them/they/xuei, and I will opt for using ONLY that person's name. If that makes me a bigot, so be it.

sgt 6y ago

He or she, depending what the person looks like. I'm not going to use they/them, the same way I'm not going to force someone else to refer to me as "my lord".

prepend 6y ago
Comically I was registering for an event and they required a prefix with choices “Mr, Mrs, Ms, Dr, My lord” and like a hundred other prefixes for fancy people. I was surprised that there wasn’t a non-gendered prefix to call someone by unless they have some prefix due to training or station. “Honorable” and “Dr” have requirements before use.
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mx_(title) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mx_(title)
no-s 6y ago
> He or she, depending what the person looks like. Well, that may be perceived as insulting by the addressee, and they might have a point. The previous consensus was not to presume offense. Too bad we can't all efficiently communicate in a polite language free from irrelevant embedded idiosyncratic perceptual distinctions, so as to avoid giving and taking offense. Yet for some reason we are required instead to recognize new distinctive pronouns and use them consistently or face ostracism. A forced consensus is a false consensus. > the same way I'm not going to force someone else to refer to me as "my lord". And there's a good point. Forcing others to use a form of arbitrarily self-determined address and banding together to ostracize and punish the uncooperative is uncomfortably similar to just plain old elitist bullying. I understand the thesis is to show respect for the addressee, but insisting and threatening is to transform it into a transaction of dominance and submission. Some argue that to respond by identifying as a surface-to-air missile is just a glib insult, not satirical criticism of the implied superiority expressed as reductio ad absurdum.

Y_Y 6y ago

Like those ternary people? Jerks. Like we get it. There were a couple of experimental machines during the Cold War, but two-state logic circuits have clearly won.

prepend 6y ago

In Greg Egan’s novel Distress [0] he described a whole system of pronouns for different genders that existed in his world. While “they” is harder for me to comprehend because it requires context, if that’s someone’s preference I work on it because I don’t think we’re likely to adopt the non-gendered singular like ve/ver/vis. [0] https://nb-in-sf.tumblr.com/post/186129553898/distress-by-greg-egan-a-novel-about-intrigue https://nb-in-sf.tumblr.com/post/186129553898/distress-by-gr...

cambalache 6y ago

There is a thing called "name".One of the strangest things I've seen, is one "famous" people claiming online (I lost the tweet link, so you have to take my word for it) claiming that using a person's name is weaseling out, and must be considered as offensive as using the wrong pronoun. I am sorry, I will use she/he or the person's name according to the individual preference but I will never say xher/xhum/them/they/xuei, and I will opt for using ONLY that person's name. If that makes me a bigot, so be it.