82,891
edits
Template:Pronouns on the JC: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Generally, there is much to admire about [[pronoun]]s. Lawyers don’t use them often enough: they are more idiomatic and easier on the ear that the lawyer’s usual stand-in | Generally, there is much to admire about [[pronoun]]s. Lawyers don’t use them often enough: they are more idiomatic and easier on the ear that the lawyer’s usual stand-in “such [insert [[noun]]]”. But pronouns tend to commit you to a [[gender]]: “[[chauvinist language|he]]”, or “[[chauvinist language|she]]”, “[[chauvinist language|him]]” or “[[chauvinist language|her]]” — seeing as no-one likes to be referred to as “[[chauvinist language|it]]”, and “[[chauvinist language|he or she]]” is an abomination before all right-thinking men. ''[[And/or]]'' women. | ||
And nor, these days, does that remotely capture the possible universe of alternatives. While the [[JC]] has no wish to get offside with any factions in the presently raging gender wars — we have [[Hary poter|J.K. Rowling and her ingrate actor friends]] for that — he does not propose to even try to accommodate emerging non-binary formulations. | And nor, these days, does that remotely capture the possible universe of alternatives. While the [[JC]] has no wish to get offside with any factions in the presently raging gender wars — we have [[Hary poter|J.K. Rowling and her ingrate actor friends]] for that — he does not propose to even try to accommodate emerging non-binary formulations. | ||
So, without having the patience to be scientific or methodical about it, | So, without having the patience to be scientific or methodical about it, the [[JC]] has tried to randomise his use of “[[sexist language|him]]s” and “[[sexist language|her]]s” [[unless the context requires otherwise|where the context does not require otherwise]]. (By the way, the [[JC]] himself is a ''him'', and that’s just that.) Being a fellow, when speaking in the abstract about individual randoms, he errs in favour of “she” because that makes him think a bit harder about what he’s writing. | ||
The challenge with doing that when writing satire, of course, is that it may be mistaken for some kind of political statement: why is the [[JC]] always mocking ''women''? Be assured, he does not mean to. In any case, he can’t be arsed with xes, hyms, hyrs or whatever else is presently in vogue — and nor is that a political statement other than one on behalf of the impatient party — and, frankly, he will go to the wall before (deliberately!) using “they” to describe any single individual, natural or [[Legal personality|corporate]].<ref>Here, he departs from [[Lord Justice Waller]].</ref> | |||
If this aggrieves you, so be it: you’re welcome to find another resource offering free, satirical observations on the law and practice of derivatives that better suit your preferences. Or you could always bear with it: ''[[Friedrich Nietzsche|Was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker]]'', after all. | If this aggrieves you, so be it: you’re welcome to find another resource offering free, satirical observations on the law and practice of derivatives that better suit your preferences. Or you could always bear with it: ''[[Friedrich Nietzsche|Was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker]]'', after all. | ||