3 ms·
What? "It" identifies as an inanimate object? This neopronoun thing really is getting absurd.
by ripdog 4y ago
What? "It" identifies as an inanimate object? This neopronoun thing really is getting absurd.
- tbossanova 4y agoAbsurd? Maybe, but I’d hate a life without any absurdity.
- tsimionescu 4y agoI agree with you on this, but I feel a need to note that "it" refers to non-persons, not just inanimate objects. It's perfectly normal to refer to animals as "it", and it is also quite common to use it for babies (and even more common for fetuses). Not that this makes it any less weird to ask to be referred as "it", mind you.
- ripdog 4y agoThanks for the correction, you're quite correct.
- jupp0r 4y agoI've also seen it being used to refer to aliens. What's wrong with letting people choose their pronouns?
- tsimionescu 4y agoLetting people choose whether to be referred to as men, women, or neutral (perhaps using neo-pronouns or singular them/they) is perfectly fine. But re-purposing existing words with other meanings is not. And "it" has a very specific meaning, one that just doesn't apply to conscious adult people. If I asked to be called "the object" that would not be a reasonable request, anymore than asking to be referred to as "it". And particularly for "it" and other objectifying language, it has the huge problem that it makes other people uncomfortable. Especially those who overhear without being aware of your preference (imagine sending an email to a new client with text like "in my absence, contact my colleague X, it will assist you, it is an expert").