| > Modern readers are taught from childhood that gender isn't binary Is that a fact? Repeating another comment I made on this thread: If we take "gender" as meaning "biological sex," then it IS binary;* I can no more declare, "I have no gender" than "I have no eye color" or "I can fly by willing myself to defy gravity." * Modulo those exceedingly-rare people who are born hermaphrodites > Finally, your use of "Ms." seems to conflate pronouns and titles Um, no — in my education, I learned about the use of analogies, comparisons, and precedents to illustrate a point. Here, the precedent is the coinage of a new title; there's no reason similar coinage shouldn't happen for a gender-neutral singular pronoun (which I'd be fine with using, BTW). > you're effectively demanding people create a new singular pronoun because you refuse to adapt to a usage you personally disagree with -- regardless of it being grammatically and historically correct. I'm only partly surprised that — in a forum where so many people complain about subpar software UIs, hard-to-read code, and the like — there are those who think it's perfectly fine to demand that the rest of us accede to "nonbinary" people's confusing language preferences for written communication. |
-- but "we" don't, because they are two entirely different words with entirely different meanings. Gender is a social construct. Your supposed arguments are fallacies which fail to even get off the ground.
There is no need to create a new singular gender-neutral pronoun to appease your bitter, bigoted self, when a perfectly adequate one exists, and has both historical and contemporary use. Your refusal to acknowledge or accept history, new or old, does not invalidate grammatically correct usage that you personally disagree with.
Love how you're using scare quotes again -- do you deny those identities existing? -- or, despite the empirical evidence, and the majority of the world having no issue with it, are you just set on being hateful bigoted, and exclusionary?
The only one "confused" by singular 'they' in this context is you, old boy -- everyone else is managing to read the article without getting their proverbial panties in a bunch... so why aren't you?
Nobody "demanded" anything. It's a matter of education, and a matter of respect.
1. You refuse to acknowledge history or even the OED, the principal historical dictionary of the English language.
2. You refuse to educate yourself when your ignorance and bigotry is challenged.
3. You refuse to offer the article's author (or anyone like them) the simple common courtesy and basic respect of acknowledging and respecting their pronouns.
These are simple acts of learning and courtesy, taken by intelligent and reasonable, polite people. The fact that you make baseless accusatory claims of "demanding" when none have been made, just show further that you're engaging in ad hominems and fallacies out of bigotry and hatred, rather than any reasoned point of logic or fact.
Keep cleaning it's "confusing" all you want, but non-binary and gender non-conforming people existed long before you, outnumber those with such blinkered, exclusionary views, and will outlive you. Oh, and that goes for the existence and usage of singular 'they' too ;)