Pronouns
I found the following on Reddit /r/relationships.
https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/mtm1xd/my_friend_19nb_is_mad_at_me_19f_for_refusing_to/
I was tempted to reply, "Your friend is clinically insane. Call them what you like but don't let them near sharp objects." But I didn't want to get 10,000 downvotes, so I didn't.
There are a couple of dozen comments, every one of them taking this story totally seriously. One person asked, Why do they want you to call them it? And the answer was:
Question: Am I just too old to be on this planet anymore and might as well drown myself in the gene pool now? Or is this generation clinically insane? "Asking for a friend."
My friend [19NB] is mad at me [19F] for refusing to call them "it"
My friend recently decided to go from she/her pronouns to they/them, which I was totally happy to do. Unfortunately they have now decided that they want to go by it/its pronouns and I'm just not comfortable with that. I haven't done it and just avoid using pronouns or stick with they/them since it's the most neutral.
My friend is mad because they say I don't get to make that decision for them and that it's not about my comfort. They have tried explaining their reasoning, and I feel bad because I think of myself as someone who respects other people and their pronouns but like...the thought of calling a human being an "it" sends a shiver down my spine. It would be like if someone asked me to use a slur as their pronoun...I'm also extremely uncomfortable with random people hearing me call someone "it" because they would have zero context and just think I'm an absolute monster.
I felt like a jerk but I told my friend that I wasn't going to use those pronouns and that if they didn't want to be called anything else I'd be defaulting to they. Now they aren't talking to me and our other friends are asking me to just do it to avoid drama. I don't know what to do...I just don't see any situation where I would be willing to call a human being "it."
Tl;dr: NB friend recently switched to it/its for their pronouns and I just can't.
https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/mtm1xd/my_friend_19nb_is_mad_at_me_19f_for_refusing_to/
I was tempted to reply, "Your friend is clinically insane. Call them what you like but don't let them near sharp objects." But I didn't want to get 10,000 downvotes, so I didn't.
There are a couple of dozen comments, every one of them taking this story totally seriously. One person asked, Why do they want you to call them it? And the answer was:
Yes, it has to do with the fact that we refer to animals as "it" and they want to be seen as part of the natural order and not someone who is above animals.
Question: Am I just too old to be on this planet anymore and might as well drown myself in the gene pool now? Or is this generation clinically insane? "Asking for a friend."
Comments (27)
I'm not sure, but perhaps that post is a parody? Since 'it' is so objectifying ('it rubs the lotion on its skin'), it's easy to think this is a joke. On the other hand, people are strange...
[quote=wiki]
Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of the views being parodied.[1][2][3]
[/quote]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
Just found this:
[quote=wiki]
While some genderqueer people use it as a gender-neutral pronoun,[12] it is generally considered a slur against transgender people[13] and should not be used unless requested by a specific person.
[/quote]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_(pronoun)#:~:text=In%20Modern%20English%2C%20it%20is,neuter%2C%20third%2Dperson%20pronoun.
So perhaps not a parody.
We're getting old, my friend.
No, this is the new generation of young adults in the US. They are deadly serious. A couple of people did mention that "it" is a slur against transgenders.
Back in post-feudal Hungary (and I suppose in all other post-feudal European countries; and would not be surprised to hear it is / was / has been the case in most cultures) as recently as the end of the second world war, there were something like 17 different ways of saying "you", depending on the social status of the person addressed, and in some cases, the relativity of the social status of the person addressed compared to the person addressing. Some of the "you"-s even commanded different persons (as in plural-singular, and second- or third person) in the conjugation of the verb in the address.
And you needed to know the status of your vis-a-vis before you could properly address them.
Now if you add non-binary sexual or gender definitions, the number of "you"-s could very easily reach three-digit counts.
They would have lopped my head off most ricky-tick. :death:
Who fucking cares
A lot of the pronoun abusers are mad period, They can call themselves whatever they want, but I get to make the decision about what I call other people, and I prefer gender-conforming terms. If they don't like it, tough shit.
I'm opposed to using new and peculiar pronoun usages. I also opposed to a lot of the gender nonconforming drivel. Theirs isn't the cry of the oppressed, it's the buzz-speak of the very confused.
Agreed. It's the cry of the entitled. Real oppression doesn't leave space for such pathetic concerns. You ever hear of a society suffering under a famine complain about gender pronouns? Only in the west could this phenomenon happen. Its an insult to people with real oppression.
And yeah maybe I'm just an old fart too
In a professional environment, where I wish to remain professional, where I have no desire to push any agenda of any sort, I will call men he and women she unless asked otherwise. If a man is angered by my assumption that he be called he, then I'd apologize and move forward because I'd rather not pick a fight. I'd likely offer some self-deprecating comment that I'm out of touch with the times, that I'm still trying to figure out how to use my cell phone, so give me so leeway when it comes to all these changes. In short, I'd be giving the person a silent eye roll while trying to ignore what I found to be an entirely stupid situation. That's the bottom line here. No one is gaining any respect. We're all just navigating complicated social situations, without any real changes of heart and probably internally building bigger walls around us.
The poor downtrodden get the regular.
I think it best to call them what they like. If people call you what they like you may not like what some of them call you.
It is a matter of civility and respect. If a student told me they had a preferred pronoun I would put aside my own opinion of the matter and honor the request.
It's not as simple as that though. You presumably don't comply with any and all of your student's requests, just out of civility and respect do you? You deem some requests to be reasonable and others not. The question in the post was over whether the OP's discomfort at using such a de-humanising term as 'it' was sufficient reason to see the request as unreasonable. If a student asked me to refer to them a some offensive term I would refuse on the same grounds (my justifiable discomfort at using the term makes the request unreasonable).
The issue is whether the discomfort is well-justified. with 'she' (instead of he), or some new term like xe, it's very hard to make a case that they would reasonably make anyone uncomfortable since they're words with either harmless of absent connotations.
This is described in the OP as being clearly not the case with 'it' which, quite unarguably, has connotations attached to it.
If I think the request uncivil or disrespectful I would not comply. The meaning of words and their connotations change. Case in point, see the etymology of the term 'it':
Quoting Isaac
Many people would be uncomfortable referring to a male as 'she' instead of 'he'. What connotations that may accrue to 'Xe' is anyone's guess.
What is at issue here is gendered language. Some are in favor of preserving it, others of changing it. Agreed upon terminology does not yet exist. As we stumble forward I would take my lead from someone who wants to be referred to as 'it' and comply.
Absolutely. But they normally do so gradually and by following use, not by dictat determining use.
Quoting Fooloso4
I think that's begging the question. It would be uniquely obsequious to presume that someone's saying an issue is about gendered language is sufficient to demonstrate that it is, in fact, about gendered language. The mere existence of a serious issue doesn't purge all fadishness, capriciousness, and plain foolishness from the population experiencing it. I can't think of a reason to simply assume all such requests are about gendered language.
Quoting Fooloso4
Indeed, you might. But by advocating such a response for others too I think you're extending a default assumption of sincerity beyond what experience shows us is reasonable of new cultural movements in general.
Personally, I'm in favour of phasing out gendered language altogether (along, perhaps with the very concept of gender), but I have to say I quite detest this new hyper-individualism of the modern age where each and every person's individually tailored solution to the problem must be respected at the expense of any attempt to muddle through together, each giving a little to reach some jointly amicable solution.
I have a long first name (it's not really Isaac). My colleagues at work shortened it. The thought that I might deny them their convenience to insist on my preferred longer version didn't even cross my mind. We used to just get along and accept that not every aspect of the world can be tailored to our individual preference.
Anyway, enough rant, I'm already enough of a cliché of a retired academic as it is, without adding frequent coronach for the past.
Your use of the preposition "forward" implies progress. It seems to me that what they are actually doing is just stumbling, possibly stumbling in circles. Suggesting that some people are stumblers is, of course, ableist and oppresses people who are not graceful on their feet -- but then there are people who don't have feet, so I just offended them/they/its.
This whole discussion is triggering so I demand you all stop immediately.
Fine, but you must refer to me as "Your Majesty."
Sort-of radical groups often hold highly ineffective meetings in which all sorts of irrelevant issues are processed to the exclusion of the stated agenda.
Which is OK, because 'majesty' can reference males, females, or God forbid, gender-liquified sovereigns or, for that matter, one's neutered cat.
Whose use is one following if not that of those who request to be identified as such? It is a matter of frequency of use.
Quoting Isaac
I won't speak for all cases but in this case the person making the Reddit post said:
Quoting Isaac
I have said nothing about what others should do. I am speaking about what I would do and why.
Quoting Isaac
While I agree some people are excessively sensitive and too eager to take offense or become obsessive in their fear of not giving offense at every perceived 'micro-aggression", real or imagined, what you see as just getting along might mean for someone else keeping quiet and hidden their deep seated shame for not fitting in.
That's okay, so long as you don't trigger me by pointing that out.
By forward I mean from today to tomorrow, as in, from this day forward. I do not mean progress but rather change. We do not live in a time of cohesive culture. How things will develop remains to be seen.
Quoting Bitter Crank
When I say "we" that includes them, both singular and plural as well as the rest of us.
You're all wankers, don't pretend otherwise. And don't go insane over being called what you are.
Not just frequency. We share a language (or at least we used to - doesn't seem so much interest in shared enterprises any more). It's about being inclusive and constructive about the solution to the problems we face. 'He/She' was a community-shared distinction. I could see if you look like a man - you could see if you look like a man. We both had an equal part in the process which was judged by freely available standards.
That distinction causes serious problems for people who feel constrained by those freely available standards and being reminded of that every time they're referred to is clearly very distressing for them.
So we need another solution. But I don't see why it needn't be one which is also a community-shared term judge-able by freely available standards.
'Xe' would be a perfect example of such. The only judgement required is to distinguish that the subject of the sentence is a person (not an object) and one thereby knows that 'xe' is the correct pronoun to use. The information is shared, publicly available and easily judged.
Quoting Fooloso4
Not quite. You said...
Quoting Fooloso4
What is and is not civil and respectful is something we agree on (or at least debate), not something we merely leave up to personal opinion. I'm arguing that calling them what they like is neither civil nor respectful. It's uncooperative, hyper-idividualistic (about as opposite of civil as you can get), and disadvantages the speaker before the conversation has even begun. I can't see how that qualifies as respectful.
Quoting Fooloso4
Yes, it might. And if it does then hopefully we'll solve that problem as a community too.
All that has emerged over the last few years is that some people are caused great distress by the action of gendered pronouns imposing gender identities on them that they struggle deeply with.
At the moment we've no reason at all to think that the gradual replacement of gendered pronouns with a gender-free pronoun won't solve that problem.
I can't see why a) we would take excessive precautions against a situation we've no evidence is going to cause any problems, and b)why, even if we were to do so the best approach would be to ask each individual what their preferred solution is and act on that.