• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Split Thread Pronouns

Then I'm sure Emily's Cat will now badger you with the remarks they were making to me. Because it's about principle. Allegedly.
Why would I?

Rolfe heaves to their principles, and I to mine. Neither of us requires the other to set aside those principles just to make the other feel happier. Somehow, we both manage to accept that we have differing views with strong opinions, and still behave like professional adults.

Rolfe has never demanded that I adopt their approach to pronouns on fear of being "rude". I've never demanded that they adopt my approach, nor treated them as a bad person for failing to do so.
 
Post #435.


I'm glad you acknowledge it's irrelevant, so perhaps you can stop bringing them up. This is the pronouns thread.


I don't know that it necessarily is. Perhaps you should start another thread if you wish to discuss that. I'm certain it will be very interesting to many posters and posterettes.
Your highly selective post snipping has been noted.
 
Slightly relevant story. I was at the opera with a friend, seeing Le Nozze di Figaro. The mezzo-soprano singing Cherubino was very good, both as regards her voice, and her dramatic performance as a young man. The costume and make-up departments had done well, binder and all. When discussing her performance at the interval I inadvertently referred to her as "he", then burst out laughing, saying, see how good that performance was!

Our use of the third person singular pronoun appropriate to perceived (or known) sex is instinctive and hard-wired. Linguistically, it's the hardest thing of all to unlearn. If a learner is acquiring a language whose use of third person singular pronouns is different from their native language, it's extraordinarily difficult to force a change. I heard about a Hungarian woman (Hungarian has no sexed third person pronouns, it's as if everyone and everything is "it") who had moved to London, married an Englishman, and had several children. She became so fluent in English she hardly had an accent. But she still had a tendency to call her daughter "he" and her son "she", randomly.

Third person singular pronouns, when used by someone whose native language makes the distinction, reflect the speaker's perception of the sex of the person being referred to. It takes a lot of effort on the speaker's part to over-ride this. An effort which I am not prepared to make.

 
Why would I?
Are you withdrawing your previous remark because you now agree with Rolfe in post #435 (and confirmed in the next two posts) that using "they" as a singular pronoun is "subverting the language to suit an ideological position"? You disagreed with that notion when you thought it came from me. Are you going to change and stop using singular "they" instead of "he" or "she"?

If you do in fact disagree with Rolfe, why are you not addressing the same post to Rolfe that you addressed to me? To me you said:
No, it's not. It's threading the needle between two irreconcilable positions. I cannot simultaneously use sex-based pronouns and gender-identity-based pronouns. But I can use neutral pronouns that make no reference at all to either sex or gender identity, and thereby avoid the entire mess.

Were your logic to hold, then you would also be berating me for referring to "police officers" instead of policemen and/or policewomen. The same holds for all other previously sex-based terms that are now very commonly neutral.
You have previously claimed your pronoun usages are an outgrowth of your deeply held principles. Isn't it funny how those principles apply or not based on who the other party in an exchange is? There's a name for that kind of thing, can't quite get it off the tip of my tongue.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom