82,891
edits
Pronoun: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Second, for the great majority of the population — the whole “cis-normal” part, at least — there’s already a way of unfussily designating your gender: your ''title'': Mr., Mrs., Ms., Miss, and Master. Of this great mass of hetero-normativity, only academics and medics have a quandary. Even they could fix it, if they cared to, by adding a gendered title to to their honorific, the same way judges do: Mr. Doctor Jung; Mrs. Doctor Freud, and so forth. | Second, for the great majority of the population — the whole “cis-normal” part, at least — there’s already a way of unfussily designating your gender: your ''title'': Mr., Mrs., Ms., Miss, and Master. Of this great mass of hetero-normativity, only academics and medics have a quandary. Even they could fix it, if they cared to, by adding a gendered title to to their honorific, the same way judges do: Mr. Doctor Jung; Mrs. Doctor Freud, and so forth. | ||
Third, this pronoun angst is directed only at ''third person singular'' pronouns. The other five buckets are fine as they are. Yet, when we address someone directly, we don’t use the third person, except to distance ourselves from our own tendentious but firmly-held opinions, as the [[JC]] often does. Though this is to switch ''first'' for third person, not second. I hardly need lecture the world on how I should gender ''myself'' | Third, this pronoun angst is directed only at ''third person singular'' pronouns. The other five buckets are fine as they are. Yet, when we address someone directly, we don’t use the third person, except to distance ourselves from our own tendentious but firmly-held opinions, as the [[JC]] often does. <Ref>Though this is to switch ''first'' for third person, not the second. I hardly need lecture the world on how I should gender ''myself''.</ref> | ||
The ''second'' person pronoun, — “you” for most of the English speaking world, “y’all” for the Americans, “youse” for the kiwis — is perfectly gender inclusive already.<ref>Australian comedian Hannah Gadsby made this point well in her show ''Douglas''.</ref> This is the one we use interpersonal communication | The ''second'' person pronoun, — “you” for most of the English speaking world, “y’all” for the Americans, “youse” for the kiwis — is perfectly gender inclusive already.<ref>Australian comedian Hannah Gadsby made this point well in her show ''Douglas''.</ref> This is the one we use invariably for interpersonal communication: wherever you may be on the gender spectrum, you remain politely, unoppressively, uncontroversially, incontrovertibly, ''you''. I dare say language evolved like this precisely ''because'' of the difficulties one would otherwise have making polite conversation with unfamiliar individuals of an apparently, but not definitively, feminine or masculine bearing. | ||
So, the “(he/him)” designation appears to stipulate how | So, the “(he/him)” designation appears to stipulate how one should gender a person ''when communicating about that person with someone else''. I am going to get in trouble for saying this, readers, but that strikes me as rather ''bossy''. Who are ''you'' to tell ''me'' how to moderate the language I use with ''someone else''? Not to say, a little delusional: aren’t my choices of the pronoun to use when talking about you the least of your concerns? (What if I call you “bossy”? Or a “pronoun bore”?) | ||
The [[JC]] dreads to think what people say about (he/him) behind (he/his) back: if the worst they do is to mis-gender (he/him) then all is well in the world, frankly. | The [[JC]] dreads to think what people say about (he/him) behind (he/his) back: if the worst they do is to mis-gender (he/him) then all is well in the world, frankly. | ||