Gender Neutral Pronouns

[Reon]

First, a little grammatical lesson for everyone hurr (and also a free lesson in African American vernacular English!) .

Pronouns take the place of nouns. Comes from the latin pronomen (and lessons in latin!....because I took latin). Pretty awesome stuff. The English language already has gender neutral pronouns such as the singular they, the plural they, and the plural them, and the colloquialism 'em. There are specific, singular, incidences that one can not avoid saying him/her and that's where the new(ish) movement of gender neutral pronouns come in.

An example of a gender neutral pronoun that is used frequently are the words: Ze (or zie or sie) and hir. With a brief search though you can find a multitude of words that are gender neutral and invented. Other languages, most notably swedish as of recently because of the creation of a gender neutral pronoun iirc, range on the issues of gender and linguistics. Some languages, like spanish and german (which I also know! I'm so amazing *fans self*, have genders allocated to every word (or neuter, in the case of german, acting as a gender category as well). Other languages do not have gender as a emphasis.

So, my question is thus: How do you feel about gender neutral pronouns? At my university, I fight for LGBT rights and my mix of friends and acquaintances all have differing views on it. Some believe that it is inherently confusing and slows down the flow of conversation and inter-relation. Others believe that if a person wants to be referred to as as specific gender, or lack of one, let them. To which the response is: How is anyone else supposed to know. Which leads t; why do you get to make an assumption.

So, clearer.

Do you think gender neutral pronouns are confusing to both society and the person using them (example: If I'm not a boy or a girl...where do I fit in)?
Is it a problem when people associate with genders they don't seem to be a part of, especially in the business community/corporate world?
If gender neutral pronouns are going to be used, should they be added by linguists?

Also, if you have any personal dealing with GNPs, I'd like to know what you've experienced.

Before you ask, I don't "believe" in gender. I know it exists and I am aware of it, but when I interact with people I try to look at them from a non-gendered standpoint. Due to this issue, I always refer to people by name so that I don't offend anyone and also so that I don't come off as a hypocrite: I have to acknowledge and be aware of gender to use GNPs in a way. If I have to refer to someone that I don't know and for some reason I can't use the singular they or "that one", I'll most likely either say a GNP or say the sex I think the person is.

 

[Nixie]

Color me Ol Fashioned. I still see boys/girls and men/women. I believe your physical self is part of who you are. I also believe that your spiritual, intellectual and emotinal self are also part of you. I respect other's right ot choose how they live their life and if they respectfully ask me to use certain phrases such as GNPs, I don't have a problem with that. I dislike the strident tones that you get from most transgendered and assorted when it comes to how they "should" be addressed. I understand the angst and the struggle but more often than not, there is definate "tone" that I don't appreciate. I don't mind being corrected but I won't stand to be lectured. I'm entilted to my beliefs too--I believe you are born gendered. How you choose to express yourself is up to you but how I learn to recognize your physical self is part of my worldview.

 

[Edith]

I think it's a nice idea but impractical.

 

[manatee]

If I have to refer to someone that I don't know and for some reason I can't use the singular they or "that one", I'll most likely either say a GNP or say the sex I think the person is.

The objectively most appealing GNP, thon (which I'm still repping by the way), is a contraction of 'that one'.


The Swedish hen isn't really new, but yes, a debate sprang up about it recently, but it's horrifyingly ignorant on both sides, where one thinks using it will make a big change toward equality in other areas and the other that communication will be significantly harder. Just look at the empirical evidence: there are languages without gendered pronouns (eg Finnish, Turkish, Indonesian), and the countries that use them aren't significantly different in those aspects. So, for some individuals it might feel more appropriate, but on the larger level it's purely symbolic.

 

[Saru Inc]

Post-modern gender hate is such a waste of time.


if you have a penis youre a man

if you have a vagina or ovaries yourre a woman

if you have boobs but a penis youre a tranny

if you have a vagina and no boobs youre a victim in a malpractice lawsuit

if you have a human body youre a human


its all you need to know. if they're dressed like how a man usually dresses so you call them bro and they cry because their a girl then sorry. we can't slow down for all these people changing all these genders.


next thing you know women are gonna wanna be let outta the kitchen

 

[Blind Bandit]

As was already mentioned its nice, but impractical. Its kind of like a women not wanting to be called a girl, chick or women because that makes her feel inferior. Eventually we have to call you something. Do you want to be call an it? I'm all for equality but eventually the inferiority complex must be checked and gotten over. I think a lot of people misunderstand the difference between a mistaken reference and hate speech. There is a need for malice or willful ignorance at the least. I'm not a big fan of seeing malice or willful ignorance where their isn't any.

And before anyone accusing me of not understanding. What I get labeled as are still not great. I'm either legally blind, disabled or handy capable. None of which I like But its the reality. I can't see well. That's just how it is.

At some point the person who differs from the norm must do some work themselves and come to term with their difference and resulting inferiority. I don't like injustice. Nor do I like people exploiting the pandering to an inferiority complex.

 

[Craft]

This issue also involves the qualities that society assigns to each gender and that these qualities are not static but change and differ through different eras and societies. So there is biological gender and social gender roles which are not the same. One is how we are born while the other is how we are expected to act.

The problem then becomes that a person has to act exactly in the manner prescribed by society or suffer negative treatment.

I understand this is a different issue than gender neutral language but I feel it is one that will resolve itself sooner and naturally. Maybe when it is resolved gender neutral language will not be an issue since it won't matter if you are called a boy or a girl when they are allowed to do the same things without social expectations limiting our choices.

 

[acd]

It's about the person defining themselves, not feeling inferior.
Sure it's impractical for some people--change can be inconvenient when you are unwilling to accept it.
Language evolves to suit our cultural needs. Language constructs reality and our reality and cultures are changing.

 

[Blind Bandit]

It's about the person defining themselves, not feeling inferior.
Sure it's impractical for some people--change can be inconvenient when you are unwilling to accept it.
Language evolves to suit our cultural needs. Language constructs reality and our reality and cultures are changing.

I've fine with change. I'm just tired of people seeing malice and intent to be mean when its not there. Sometimes people simply don't know what call someone new. A good example is the use of African American vs black. I don't what people like to be called. I will use either just don't jump down my throat for not knowing what you like to be called. I'm not ignorant I just don't know what every person wishes to be addressed as. Its kinda like asking someone to call you a nickname instead. Its fine you just have let people know. And not flip out when they use the wrong name the first time.

 

[acd]

I've fine with change. I'm just tired of people seeing malice and intent to be mean when its not there. Sometimes people simply don't know what call someone new. A good example is the use of African American vs black. I don't what people like to be called. I will use either just don't jump down my throat for not knowing what you like to be called. I'm not ignorant I just don't know what every person wishes to be addressed as. Its kinda like asking someone to call you a nickname instead. Its fine you just have let people know. And not flip out when they use the wrong name the first time.

Personally, I think that an individual or group of individuals should be able to be called whatever they want to call themselves.
It doesn't bother me that the terms change, because ideas and attitudes change.

But we look at this differently, obviously. I have never been frustrated that the terms people use for themselves change.
I've always been eager to adopt those terms because I understand how important it is to the individual to feel accepted and respected.
That's what it comes down to.
I don't imagine I'd enjoy being called something I don't identify with every day--everywhere I go.

 

[Emerald Dreams]

This topic has plagues me quite a bit over the years, especially during college. I believe gender neutral pronouns are absolutely essential to creating a society that places equivalent value on both genders. So many authors and people use "he" as the generic pronoun for a person, and that serves to perpetuate the patriarchy of our society. Pronouns by themselves are quite harmless, but they are an indicator of current social trends and sentiments. That is why trying to create popular gender neutral pronouns is important. It is not to replace all instances of gendered pronouns, but to offer a neutral alternative that does not favor one gender over another when there is no need.

There's a lot of feminist scholarship out there on how God/Lord/He are quite damaging to the feminine image. And this is not so much a problem for Christianity, as God is definitely male there so using "He" makes total sense. But this language has influenced the translation of other religious texts into English (I specifically have studied and worked with Sikhism and their holy book the Guru Granth). In the Sikh faith, the Divine is gender neutral, but many translations of the Guru Granth have used popular Christian, masculine titles. My professor is a pretty strong feminist, and she always stressed to me the importance of using "It" to refer to the Divine. And the difference between "He" and "It" is really quite striking when imagining the Sikh poetry in English.

Trying to embrace this gender sensitivity, it was hard for me in my thesis to refer to a person neurally without gender, because English does not have a common gender neutral pronoun. I really love elegance and efficiency, so using a him/her or she/he everywhere made it feel messy. I used "one" as much as I could, but ultimately ended up relying on a lot of gender neutral nouns like "person" or "Sikh."

I guess what I'm trying to say is that English really should have a gender neutral pronoun that doesn't make a person an object (i.e. it). I won't use the singular "they" because "they" is a plural pronoun to me, but it has been adopted fairly regularly as a gender neutral singular pronoun, and is therefore a marker of English evolution. Because of that, I think there is resistance to introducing "ze" and "zim" or "zir." New things take time to accept, and the problem I have with them is that they sound too inelegant for me. Also, the objective form of zim/zir/hir don't succeed in taking away the gender, because it's clear in each case that one of the gendered pronouns has been altered and is favored phonetically.

As for those who respond negatively the first time you call them a name or pronoun incorrectly, I would just say that they are insecure. It is clearly an area of contention and anxiety for them, and so they've learned to be immediately defensive because so many people have reacted negatively to their feelings on the issue. Of course, that's no reason for them to take out their negative emotions on others, but to me it cries of a need to be understood and accepted. But no one is required to accept the responsibility to be nice and patient in response to someone snapping at them for using the wrong word unintentionally.

 

[Nixie]

I'm not resistant to gender neutral identifiers. But neither will I pretend that I buy into your sex vs. gender ideology. A man is a man. A woman is a woman. A hermaphradite? Hard to say but they are usually encouraged to pick a gender. I am talking about the physcial self--it has a biological identity. Emotionally/Spiritually/Intellectually--you believe you are something---I'm cool with that. However, you are BORN with a physcial identity that is unchangeable no matter what you do surgically.

 

[Nixie]

@Stormy1 I think we're misunderstanding each other. I'm not talking about people who are biologically 100% man or woman but identify with the opposite gender, or people who undergo sex change. I'm thinking more of the ones that are born without a distinguishable physical sex; or the ones who have the anatomy of a male or female, but their chromosomes tell otherwise. Biological sex is not always black and white.

And how many of these type of people exist? Seems a bit farfetched. There are always outliers to any set.

Among Natives, there is a mixed bag of acceptance for those who are transgendered. Those that don't have issues with homosexuality (and the like) and modern interpretation have labled such people as Two Spirits.

 

[This]

I came in here to state my opinions on things and Stormy has pretty much already said everything I wanted to say on it.

 

[Reon]

The objectively most appealing GNP, thon (which I'm still repping by the way), is a contraction of 'that one'.


The Swedish hen isn't really new, but yes, a debate sprang up about it recently, but it's horrifyingly ignorant on both sides, where one thinks using it will make a big change toward equality in other areas and the other that communication will be significantly harder. Just look at the empirical evidence: there are languages without gendered pronouns (eg Finnish, Turkish, Indonesian), and the countries that use them aren't significantly different in those aspects. So, for some individuals it might feel more appropriate, but on the larger level it's purely symbolic.

Ah. Thank you for informing me. Thon sounds pretty awesome. Rolls off the tongue. Is hen sort of an archaic word or was it just a forgotten grammatical concept? I did notice the polarity in american sentiments about the word. For some reason, America depicted as the most awesome thing since sliced bread.

I've fine with change. I'm just tired of people seeing malice and intent to be mean when its not there. Sometimes people simply don't know what call someone new. A good example is the use of African American vs black. I don't what people like to be called. I will use either just don't jump down my throat for not knowing what you like to be called. I'm not ignorant I just don't know what every person wishes to be addressed as. Its kinda like asking someone to call you a nickname instead. Its fine you just have let people know. And not flip out when they use the wrong name the first time.

I think people who are legit angry just because you addressed them wrong, by mistake, are the individuals who feel inferior. Not the people who just want to be called what they feel like.

And how many of these type of people exist? Seems a bit farfetched. There are always outliers to any set.

Among Natives, there is a mixed bag of acceptance for those who are transgendered. Those that don't have issues with homosexuality (and the like) and modern interpretation have labled such people as Two Spirits.

I'm curious:what about individuals who got a sex change as a baby? Would their true/first spirit be the one they were born as or the one that changed to since that's how they lived? If I follow correctly, the first spirit/original spirit would be the one that they were born as, right?

 

[This]

Quick little side-rant, what the hell is "patriarchy"? I keep hearing this word in feminist circles.

 

[Nixie]

Patriarchy referes to societies that place power and importance on the male figure.

My status is derived from who I come from but there is more emphasis on the female relatives. Some Native tribes are matriarchial--especially Dine--Navajos.
[MENTION=362]Reon[/MENTION]
Two Spirits acknowledges the person is one of gender but has the spirit of another inside them. It doesn't have anything to do with what you are born. Although there is little or no consideration given to the femaile to a male scenerio and the term Two Spirits refers to the male to female. Most tribal socieites have strong beliefs about proper behavior. Some are not welcoming of homosexuality and such. However, family and tribal identity is very strong and everyone is usually accepting of such things--however, you can be barred from certain activities/societies and such if you follow an alternative lifestyle. LIke everything, there are consequences for your personal decisions/actions in a tribal society. It doesn't mean you are shunned or hated, it just means that if you follow certain paths, some things are not open to you.

 

[Reon]

Patriarchy is the social system in which males "rule" over females in an overall sense. That's the quick definition of it but that easily details into various arguments about patriarchy vs matriarchy because they both tend to coexist at the same time. At the end of the day, patriarchy now tends to be considered the social system in which funds are slanted towards men, law tends to be slanted towards men, and opportunity seems to be slanted towards men.

[MENTION=3096]Stormy1[/MENTION]: I see. Why is the emphasis on male to female? Also, that sounds pretty neat. I wish I knew more about native american societies. I should but my family is kind of cray and ghetto. >.>

 

[This]

At the end of the day, patriarchy now tends to be considered the social system in which funds are slanted towards men, law tends to be slanted towards men, and opportunity seems to be slanted towards men.

So why do a bunch of people think the USA is a patriarchal society? that is the part I'm confused on.

 

[Blind Bandit]

So why do a bunch of people think the USA is a patriarchal society? that is the part I'm confused on.

Because that is the doctrine feminists have preached at women for a while now. And feminism has changed over and over. Feminism is as much about blaming men for things as it is about lifting up women, even though this view may only be extreme the undercurrent of anger is present with many feminists. Even if feminism wants to approach gender on equal fronts its to often easier to blame men and point out that men need to be fixed of their ills. Or simply doing away with social roles all together while ignoring the often trouble some nature of unstructured social interaction which may in fact do more harm than good. The rational and often insightful feminists like other groups are marginalized behind people who sound more interesting and end up hurting the feminist movement. There is a reason I'm humanist and not feminist.