• SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    20 hours ago

    My only comment is that at least you only have to learn it once (or, well, thrice), not for any given conversation.

    He, she, or they works well enough for most circumstances. Do we really need to broaden it beyond that?

    Once pronouns become unique and personalised instead of generic, you lose the advantages of having them in the first place, and may as well refer to everyone by name every time. It’d be less confusing, especially if you’re re-using existing words as pronouns.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      20 hours ago

      He, she, or they works well enough for most circumstances. Do we really need to broaden it beyond that?

      I would say probably not. I expect (and hope, I suppose) that things will sort themselves out more or less that way. We live in a time of great reconsideration of gender norms, and it’s not absurd to see experimentation in such a period. I use neopronouns (nounself style excluded) as a courtesy, because I understand it brings comfort to many who use them and it’s not much trouble simply to do so, but they/them is what I hope we all eventually settle on as standard for NB gender identities.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          17 hours ago

          They/them is not used exclusively to refer to neuter things, so enbies not being gender neutral is irrelevant here. ‘They’ is a useful and pre-existing catch-all.

          • rxin@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            17 hours ago

            they/them is what I hope we all eventually settle on as standard for NB gender identities.

            This part is the one I’m referring to. I’m not opposed to they/them — it’s good, but I don’t think it’s fair to reduce enbies to just “they/them”.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              12 hours ago

              … why?

              Is that any more absurd than “reducing males to he/him” or “reducing females to she/her”?

              It’s language, not a campaign medal. You don’t need a separate example for every instance.

              • rxin@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 hours ago

                Well exactly because they/them is a catch-all and there aren’t just he/hims and she/hers

                let enbies express themselves too!

              • SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 hours ago

                The whole point of pronouns, I would argue, is to not need a separate set for every instance.

                Otherwise you may as well just use Dan/Dan/Dan’s/Danself conjugated for each name.

                Pronouns:

                • Are (generally) shorter than names, because there’s less need for them to be unique and they’re used more frequently.

                • Can be used even when you don’t know specifics about a person or object, or they don’t want to give out their name.

                • Everyone knows how to conjugate them, so once you know someone is a ‘they’, you can readily extrapolate to them, their, theirs.

        • FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Non-binary is a broad spectrum of identity. What you’re suggesting only works for identities like genderfluid or demi-gender people.

          I’m agender, which exists outside of the male-female binary (in which you are either one or the other). Agender and it’s derivatives, like gendervoid, are completely gender neutral. I only use they/them because it’s really difficult for the average person to not use a pronoun when referring to me, I very much prefer people using my name in place of one.