[Type 4] 4s & gender

[Vendrah]

they/them

My major problem with they/them is that it seems like you are now not only one person, but you seem now to turn into a multiple entity or a group. They should really create or push to a truly neutral and singular pronoun. Its like me calling God 'e' rather than he/she, I would prefer using e - e is going to school, e is going to do that, etc... rather than they is/are going to school, they is/are going to school, it confuses as multiple persons. Got no idea with people pushing this didn't created a word or just used 'e', though (not you, surely).

This goes to my second language controversy, which is that after I knew a little bit of japanese indirectly both English and my native language miss a filler word. In Japanese, there is the 'eto...' while you are thinking at your speaking, which is way better than "hmmm....", "soo..." ; "eeetttooooooo......" sounds much better.

 

[Jai]

My major problem with they/them is that it seems like you are now not only one person, but you seem now to turn into a multiple entity or a group. They should really create or push to a truly neutral and singular pronoun. Its like me calling God 'e' rather than he/she, I would prefer using e - e is going to school, e is going to do that, etc... rather than they is/are going to school, they is/are going to school, it confuses as multiple persons. Got no idea with people pushing this didn't created a word or just used 'e', though (not you, surely).

This goes to my second language controversy, which is that after I knew a little bit of japanese indirectly both English and my native language miss a filler word. In Japanese, there is the 'eto...' while you are thinking at your speaking, which is way better than "hmmm....", "soo..." ; "eeetttooooooo......" sounds much better.

They/them has been used to refer to singular people though for goodness knows how long (a quick google search says since the 14th century), and if someone were to talk about someone they've never interacted with before, they would use they/them most likely, as I'm doing now, and no one would have a problem with it, so I've never really bought the whole 'it's only for plural use' argument. Anecdotally, what I've observed online is that people meet someone, use they/them, find out their sex and then switch to he/him or she/her; it's only after they've assumed the person's gender that they suddenly have a problem with they/them, and I'd guess that's due to stubbornness and an unwillingness to retrain themselves to have a less open mindset. While they/them doesn't feel like the complete answer for myself, I'd still use it over something like xe/xem for example because the former feels more natural language-wise and the latter would also make me feel pretentious while not even achieving the goal of highlighting how I'd like to be represented. I do see how it could be confusing for a non-native English speaker though.

 

[Vendrah]

They/them has been used to refer to singular people though for goodness knows how long (a quick google search says since the 14th century), and if someone were to talk about someone they've never interacted with before, they would use they/them most likely, as I'm doing now, and no one would have a problem with it, so I've never really bought the whole 'it's only for plural use' argument. Anecdotally, what I've observed online is that people meet someone, use they/them, find out their sex and then switch to he/him or she/her; it's only after they've assumed the person's gender that they suddenly have a problem with they/them, and I'd guess that's due to stubbornness and an unwillingness to retrain themselves to have a less open mindset. While they/them doesn't feel like the complete answer for myself, I'd still use it over something like xe/xem for example because the former feels more natural language-wise and the latter would also make me feel pretentious while not even achieving the goal of highlighting how I'd like to be represented. I do see how it could be confusing for a non-native English speaker though.

Not only confusing, its illogical actually. There should be a singular neutral pronoun (it doesn't cut). Its simply that. Others highly using since 14th century doesn't make it more logical lol (INTP moment now...). Its still confusing in general, when people starting to refer "they/them" you are still supposed to imagine multiple people.

 

[Jai]

Not only confusing, its illogical actually. There should be a singular neutral pronoun (it doesn't cut). Its simply that. Others highly using since 14th century doesn't make it more logical lol (INTP moment now...). Its still confusing in general, when people starting to refer "they/them" you are still supposed to imagine multiple people.

You're operating on the premise that language, especially the English language, is inherently logical though when in reality there are many 'rules' in English that are contradicted all the time. As I said, it isn't confusing in general either, from a native English speaker's point of view anyway; when someone comes up to me and says 'did you hear what they said?', I naturally assume that they're talking about one person if anything, not a group of people. Finally, usage determines a lot in language, that's how it develops in the first place; look at how the word 'literally' morphed to have an opposing meaning through usage alone - that would be certainly 'illogical', but it happened all the same, and you'd get very weird looks if you took the sentence 'I'm literally dying right now' seriously in the context of someone replying to a joke being made for example. The concept of gender neutrality is not a recent one, nor is it one exclusively tied to identity. If I as an author want to keep someone's identity a secret in a book, I would use they/them when referring to them, and no one would be confused because context is there to help out. If someone says 'I like Koto, they're a cool person', it would take a great deal of willful ignorance to somehow be surprised that the sentence is referring to a singular person. In fact, I've been confused when people say 'he/she' when they don't know someone's gender, as not only is it an unfounded assumption, but it also requires more effort to both say and type than 'they' while achieving the exact same result. It's hard not to feel that those that reject 'they/them' as singular pronouns, while undoubtedly using it as such on occasion, have an ulterior motive that's masked by an appeal to language rules that don't support their claims.

Edit: Because I'm petty, here are a couple examples of you yourself using they/them singular:

'A person that has these 3 types on their tri-type are quite likely to be introverted, and if these are the 3 types they relate the most (regardless of tritype underlying rules of heart-head-gut) then it is imminent that they are introverted, otherwise it is just poor self-report.' Vendrah, Jan 12th, 2021

'I will wait to see if somebody else got the straight answer. If they don't, tomorrow or the other day I will state the answer and my answer to the thread.' Vendrah, Oct 23rd, 2020

 

[Indigo Rodent]

My major problem with they/them is that it seems like you are now not only one person, but you seem now to turn into a multiple entity or a group. They should really create or push to a truly neutral and singular pronoun. Its like me calling God 'e' rather than he/she, I would prefer using e - e is going to school, e is going to do that, etc... rather than they is/are going to school, they is/are going to school, it confuses as multiple persons. Got no idea with people pushing this didn't created a word or just used 'e', though (not you, surely).

I remember arguing about that with some guy that was complaining about SJW agenda in a book about a metal squid that was using vi, vis, ver pronouns where he was saying that "singular they" already exists and "modifying language" is bad. Like it makes no sense because singular they butchers structure of language and they proposed it as an alternative to new gender-neutral pronoun.

 

[Vendrah]

You're operating on the premise that language, especially the English language, is inherently logical though when in reality there are many 'rules' in English that are contradicted all the time. As I said, it isn't confusing in general either, from a native English speaker's point of view anyway; when someone comes up to me and says 'did you hear what they said?', I naturally assume that they're talking about one person if anything, not a group of people. Finally, usage determines a lot in language, that's how it develops in the first place; look at how the word 'literally' morphed to have an opposing meaning through usage alone - that would be certainly 'illogical', but it happened all the same, and you'd get very weird looks if you took the sentence 'I'm literally dying right now' seriously in the context of someone replying to a joke being made for example. The concept of gender neutrality is not a recent one, nor is it one exclusively tied to identity. If I as an author want to keep someone's identity a secret in a book, I would use they/them when referring to them, and no one would be confused because context is there to help out. If someone says 'I like Koto, they're a cool person', it would take a great deal of willful ignorance to somehow be surprised that the sentence is referring to a singular person. In fact, I've been confused when people say 'he/she' when they don't know someone's gender, as not only is it an unfounded assumption, but it also requires more effort to both say and type than 'they' while achieving the exact same result. It's hard not to feel that those that reject 'they/them' as singular pronouns, while undoubtedly using it as such on occasion, have an ulterior motive that's masked by an appeal to language rules that don't support their claims.

Edit: Because I'm petty, here are a couple examples of you yourself using they/them singular:

'A person that has these 3 types on their tri-type are quite likely to be introverted, and if these are the 3 types they relate the most (regardless of tritype underlying rules of heart-head-gut) then it is imminent that they are introverted, otherwise it is just poor self-report.' Vendrah, Jan 12th, 2021

'I will wait to see if somebody else got the straight answer. If they don't, tomorrow or the other day I will state the answer and my answer to the thread.' Vendrah, Oct 23rd, 2020

Just one of the reasons that if there was an actually global language things would be better.
Having English as native language is a luxury for a few... At the cost of headache and many study hours of many... It would still be better if there was a singular gender neutral pronoun.

 

[Jai]

Just one of the reasons that if there was an actually global language things would be better.
Having English as native language is a luxury for a few... At the cost of headache and many study hours of many... It would still be better if there was a singular gender neutral pronoun.

All of this is detracting from the real point, which is that respecting someone's decision to use they/them shouldn't be so much of an issue. You can't simply rationalise away the decision not to by waving grammatical pitchforks as though suddenly the 'logical consistency' of the English language must be upheld at all costs and is of greater importance than respecting the person you're trying to communicate with.

Like it makes no sense because singular they butchers structure of language and they proposed it as an alternative to new gender-neutral pronoun.

That's quite ironic since I assume you're referring to the author of the book as they in this very sentence. Not only that but as I said before, language is not static, I'm all for the modification and development of language; the issue I have is when language does indeed develop, and then people go 'no, not like that', because it's not in the way that conforms to their narrow worldview. They/them has been chosen to represent some non-binary people, that's just how it goes, and to reject that is to reject both the development of language and the basic dignity of those that it applies to, and I'm not particularly fond of associating with those that are unwilling to respect my basic dignity.

 

[Vendrah]

All of this is detracting from the real point, which is that respecting someone's decision to use they/them shouldn't be so much of an issue. You can't simply rationalise away the decision not to by waving grammatical pitchforks as though suddenly the 'logical consistency' of the English language must be upheld at all costs and is of greater importance than respecting the person you're trying to communicate with.

I don't have anything against that and my whole point from the beginning have nothing to do with that, Im actually anti-Jordan Peterson in terms of politics in most or at least on a lot of issues. Its only my forever wishing for a singular gender neutral pronoun... with also my wishing for an equivalent of "eto...", both would make my native language and English better. My native language does not have both either.

 

[Totenkindly]

My major problem with they/them is that it seems like you are now not only one person, but you seem now to turn into a multiple entity or a group. They should really create or push to a truly neutral and singular pronoun. Its like me calling God 'e' rather than he/she, I would prefer using e - e is going to school, e is going to do that, etc... rather than they is/are going to school, they is/are going to school, it confuses as multiple persons. Got no idea with people pushing this didn't created a word or just used 'e', though (not you, surely).

This goes to my second language controversy, which is that after I knew a little bit of japanese indirectly both English and my native language miss a filler word. In Japanese, there is the 'eto...' while you are thinking at your speaking, which is way better than "hmmm....", "soo..." ; "eeetttooooooo......" sounds much better.

In English we've used "they" for singular unidentifiable people before non-binary ever came around. It was the best choice if you did not know a person's gender or they were unidentified.

We're a mutt of a language, quite the pastiche -- American English is not that formalized, we just swipe words and bits of things to add to our vocabulary without any overseeing structure honestly. There is still a structure of sorts in the sentence structure because we know when one things "sounds better" than another... but for a constantly mutating language driven by usage rather than by "authoritative rules" derived from some central authority, good luck at getting a new specific pronoun added. I doubt "ze" and other manufactured language will take off, because it's driven by a small minority and not natural for the bulk of the speakers.

 

[JocktheMotie]

Just one of the reasons that if there was an actually global language things would be better.
Having English as native language is a luxury for a few... At the cost of headache and many study hours of many... It would still be better if there was a singular gender neutral pronoun.

It's they/them.

But personally I'm a fan of the Hanar "this one/it."

 

[Coriolis]

In English we've used "they" for singular unidentifiable people before non-binary ever came around. It was the best choice if you did not know a person's gender or they were unidentified.

Exactly. I readily use "they" when the identity of the person is unknown or irrelevant. When the person is known to me and who they are is relevant, I use he or she, unless they prefer they.

All of this is detracting from the real point, which is that respecting someone's decision to use they/them shouldn't be so much of an issue. You can't simply rationalise away the decision not to by waving grammatical pitchforks as though suddenly the 'logical consistency' of the English language must be upheld at all costs and is of greater importance than respecting the person you're trying to communicate with.

Yes. Using preferred pronouns is a matter of simple courtesy, just like using someone's preferred name.