2 ms·

The problem here is that "it" tends to not just de-genderize, but de-humanize at the same time. "It" is a term used for machinery, for inanimate objects. Some e

The problem here is that "it" tends to not just de-genderize, but de-humanize at the same time. "It" is a term used for machinery, for inanimate objects. Some even prefer to use "it" for animals even when their gender is obvious. Personally I kind of bristle at the idea of someone being called "it", even when they've insisted on being androgynous. Lacking a better option, "they" steps in to fill the gap. I also can't stand the idea of "xe" catching on. Is that "che" or "ze" or chay?" It seems like the very sort of thing Tumblr's hive mind might churn out.

yellowapple 11y ago
Perhaps it's just because I consider humans to be machines (or at least minimally different from other animals, which tend to be referred to as "it" when a gender is unknown) that I don't also bristle at the idea of someone being called "it". I call squirrels and dogs and dolphins and giraffes "it", so why should humans get special treatment? I bristle more at the use of a plural pronoun for a singular entity, which would be the case by adopting "they" as such a pronoun. To me, it implies even more impersonality by lumping folks whose gender is indeterminate or non-binary into a plural group, as if only people in the male/female binary deserve a singular, personal pronoun. That, to me, seems more wrong than "it". Once upon a time, "he" was usable in gender-neutral contexts in the same way that "man" was equated to "human" rather than "male" (i.e. the "generic he"). If the words "she" and "woman" hadn't been introduced (and if certain lawyers had taken "he" and "man" by their intended, original meanings rather than those in common vernacular), we'd be avoiding all sorts of problems, but seeing as that cat's already out of the bag, we now need a proper neuter singular third-person pronoun to replace "he". I don't particularly care for "xe" either (though I can see where the precedent comes from; some countries - like Australia - have formally recognized an 'X' gender for those who fall outside the male/female binary system), but so far it's the best we've come up with that doesn't make English even less grammatically consistent than it already is. I personally use "one" in a lot of these circumstances, however; while it, too, lacks perfection, one could use it for a lot of situations where one's writing would normally include a more typical pronoun.

yellowapple 11y ago

Perhaps it's just because I consider humans to be machines (or at least minimally different from other animals, which tend to be referred to as "it" when a gender is unknown) that I don't also bristle at the idea of someone being called "it". I call squirrels and dogs and dolphins and giraffes "it", so why should humans get special treatment? I bristle more at the use of a plural pronoun for a singular entity, which would be the case by adopting "they" as such a pronoun. To me, it implies even more impersonality by lumping folks whose gender is indeterminate or non-binary into a plural group, as if only people in the male/female binary deserve a singular, personal pronoun. That, to me, seems more wrong than "it". Once upon a time, "he" was usable in gender-neutral contexts in the same way that "man" was equated to "human" rather than "male" (i.e. the "generic he"). If the words "she" and "woman" hadn't been introduced (and if certain lawyers had taken "he" and "man" by their intended, original meanings rather than those in common vernacular), we'd be avoiding all sorts of problems, but seeing as that cat's already out of the bag, we now need a proper neuter singular third-person pronoun to replace "he". I don't particularly care for "xe" either (though I can see where the precedent comes from; some countries - like Australia - have formally recognized an 'X' gender for those who fall outside the male/female binary system), but so far it's the best we've come up with that doesn't make English even less grammatically consistent than it already is. I personally use "one" in a lot of these circumstances, however; while it, too, lacks perfection, one could use it for a lot of situations where one's writing would normally include a more typical pronoun.