Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafemuddy

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!

Bonzo3legs 26 Jan 18 - 04:22 PM
Bonzo3legs 26 Jan 18 - 04:55 PM
Greg F. 26 Jan 18 - 05:00 PM
Bonzo3legs 26 Jan 18 - 05:04 PM
Iains 26 Jan 18 - 05:18 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Jan 18 - 05:19 PM
Senoufou 26 Jan 18 - 05:21 PM
Bonzo3legs 26 Jan 18 - 05:28 PM
Mrrzy 26 Jan 18 - 05:29 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Jan 18 - 05:52 PM
Greg F. 26 Jan 18 - 05:52 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Jan 18 - 05:56 PM
Jeri 26 Jan 18 - 05:56 PM
Dave the Gnome 26 Jan 18 - 06:05 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Jan 18 - 06:10 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Jan 18 - 06:11 PM
Jackaroodave 26 Jan 18 - 06:11 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Jan 18 - 06:12 PM
Bonzo3legs 26 Jan 18 - 07:01 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Jan 18 - 07:19 PM
Donuel 26 Jan 18 - 07:26 PM
Joe Offer 26 Jan 18 - 07:37 PM
meself 26 Jan 18 - 07:46 PM
Joe Offer 26 Jan 18 - 08:00 PM
frogprince 26 Jan 18 - 08:06 PM
Steve Shaw 26 Jan 18 - 08:30 PM
meself 26 Jan 18 - 08:58 PM
Joe Offer 26 Jan 18 - 11:36 PM
Senoufou 27 Jan 18 - 01:44 AM
meself 27 Jan 18 - 02:18 AM
meself 27 Jan 18 - 02:23 AM
BobL 27 Jan 18 - 03:13 AM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 03:31 AM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 05:17 AM
Steve Shaw 27 Jan 18 - 05:29 AM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 06:04 AM
Steve Shaw 27 Jan 18 - 06:41 AM
Iains 27 Jan 18 - 06:44 AM
Steve Shaw 27 Jan 18 - 06:50 AM
Mr Red 27 Jan 18 - 06:57 AM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 08:48 AM
wysiwyg 27 Jan 18 - 09:41 AM
Iains 27 Jan 18 - 10:07 AM
Steve Shaw 27 Jan 18 - 10:17 AM
Senoufou 27 Jan 18 - 11:11 AM
keberoxu 27 Jan 18 - 11:21 AM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 11:24 AM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 11:48 AM
Steve Shaw 27 Jan 18 - 12:00 PM
Jackaroodave 27 Jan 18 - 12:01 PM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 12:07 PM
Steve Shaw 27 Jan 18 - 12:17 PM
Senoufou 27 Jan 18 - 12:34 PM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 12:35 PM
Will Fly 27 Jan 18 - 12:38 PM
Steve Shaw 27 Jan 18 - 12:41 PM
keberoxu 27 Jan 18 - 12:48 PM
Jim Carroll 27 Jan 18 - 12:48 PM
Steve Shaw 27 Jan 18 - 01:04 PM
Jackaroodave 27 Jan 18 - 01:14 PM
Senoufou 27 Jan 18 - 01:15 PM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 01:33 PM
Bonzo3legs 27 Jan 18 - 01:39 PM
meself 27 Jan 18 - 01:45 PM
Mrrzy 27 Jan 18 - 02:01 PM
Jeri 27 Jan 18 - 05:15 PM
robomatic 27 Jan 18 - 08:30 PM
Mr Red 28 Jan 18 - 03:25 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 03:48 AM
Senoufou 28 Jan 18 - 04:06 AM
Iains 28 Jan 18 - 04:24 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 04:38 AM
Dave the Gnome 28 Jan 18 - 04:51 AM
Big Al Whittle 28 Jan 18 - 04:56 AM
Iains 28 Jan 18 - 04:57 AM
Jackaroodave 28 Jan 18 - 05:01 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 05:26 AM
Iains 28 Jan 18 - 05:29 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 05:45 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 05:48 AM
Dave the Gnome 28 Jan 18 - 05:51 AM
Jackaroodave 28 Jan 18 - 06:32 AM
Steve Shaw 28 Jan 18 - 06:43 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 06:59 AM
Jackaroodave 28 Jan 18 - 07:51 AM
Steve Shaw 28 Jan 18 - 08:17 AM
Jeri 28 Jan 18 - 09:45 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 11:22 AM
Acme 28 Jan 18 - 11:31 AM
Greg F. 28 Jan 18 - 11:40 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 11:44 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 11:58 AM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 12:01 PM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 12:01 PM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 12:11 PM
Iains 28 Jan 18 - 01:48 PM
Dave the Gnome 28 Jan 18 - 01:55 PM
keberoxu 28 Jan 18 - 01:58 PM
Dave the Gnome 28 Jan 18 - 02:02 PM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 02:16 PM
Dave the Gnome 28 Jan 18 - 04:18 PM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 04:23 PM
Senoufou 28 Jan 18 - 04:29 PM
Senoufou 28 Jan 18 - 04:37 PM
Jackaroodave 28 Jan 18 - 04:55 PM
Steve Shaw 28 Jan 18 - 05:19 PM
Backwoodsman 28 Jan 18 - 05:26 PM
Mo the caller 28 Jan 18 - 05:29 PM
Jeri 28 Jan 18 - 05:33 PM
Bonzo3legs 28 Jan 18 - 05:37 PM
Jackaroodave 28 Jan 18 - 05:39 PM
Backwoodsman 28 Jan 18 - 05:50 PM
Steve Shaw 28 Jan 18 - 06:10 PM
keberoxu 28 Jan 18 - 07:09 PM
meself 28 Jan 18 - 08:42 PM
Iains 29 Jan 18 - 10:33 AM
meself 29 Jan 18 - 11:28 AM
robomatic 29 Jan 18 - 01:23 PM
Bonzo3legs 29 Jan 18 - 01:35 PM
Steve Shaw 29 Jan 18 - 01:41 PM
Jackaroodave 29 Jan 18 - 02:43 PM
Bonzo3legs 29 Jan 18 - 03:07 PM
meself 29 Jan 18 - 03:11 PM
Greg F. 29 Jan 18 - 04:03 PM
Bonzo3legs 29 Jan 18 - 05:00 PM
Iains 29 Jan 18 - 05:09 PM
Bonzo3legs 29 Jan 18 - 05:36 PM
Steve Shaw 29 Jan 18 - 05:51 PM
Jackaroodave 29 Jan 18 - 06:44 PM
BobL 30 Jan 18 - 03:13 AM
Senoufou 30 Jan 18 - 04:01 AM
Jackaroodave 30 Jan 18 - 07:00 AM
Senoufou 30 Jan 18 - 07:37 AM
Bonzo3legs 30 Jan 18 - 08:05 AM
Mooh 30 Jan 18 - 09:37 AM
robomatic 30 Jan 18 - 10:22 AM
Mr Red 30 Jan 18 - 10:51 AM
Steve Shaw 30 Jan 18 - 12:38 PM
Bonzo3legs 30 Jan 18 - 01:36 PM
meself 30 Jan 18 - 02:29 PM
robomatic 30 Jan 18 - 07:07 PM
robomatic 30 Jan 18 - 07:34 PM
Bonzo3legs 31 Jan 18 - 02:58 AM
Mr Red 31 Jan 18 - 08:05 AM
Senoufou 31 Jan 18 - 08:28 AM
Mooh 31 Jan 18 - 09:53 AM
keberoxu 31 Jan 18 - 12:11 PM
Bonzo3legs 31 Jan 18 - 01:35 PM
Steve Shaw 31 Jan 18 - 03:38 PM
Bonzo3legs 31 Jan 18 - 03:57 PM
Senoufou 31 Jan 18 - 04:04 PM
bobad 31 Jan 18 - 04:22 PM
Jackaroodave 31 Jan 18 - 04:45 PM
Bonzo3legs 31 Jan 18 - 04:59 PM
Steve Shaw 31 Jan 18 - 07:06 PM
Backwoodsman 01 Feb 18 - 02:19 AM
Bonzo3legs 01 Feb 18 - 02:48 AM
BobL 01 Feb 18 - 05:09 AM
BobL 01 Feb 18 - 05:55 AM
Iains 01 Feb 18 - 06:08 AM
Jackaroodave 01 Feb 18 - 06:11 AM
CupOfTea 02 Feb 18 - 09:16 AM
CupOfTea 02 Feb 18 - 09:20 AM
keberoxu 02 Feb 18 - 12:22 PM
Steve Shaw 02 Feb 18 - 07:52 PM
robomatic 03 Feb 18 - 07:26 PM
Kenny B 06 Feb 18 - 03:19 PM
Mrrzy 06 Feb 18 - 03:26 PM
robomatic 07 Feb 18 - 07:35 PM
meself 07 Feb 18 - 10:23 PM
Bonzo3legs 08 Feb 18 - 07:52 AM
Jackaroodave 08 Feb 18 - 01:02 PM
robomatic 08 Feb 18 - 03:45 PM
Jackaroodave 08 Feb 18 - 05:28 PM
BobL 09 Feb 18 - 04:43 AM
Nigel Parsons 09 Feb 18 - 07:08 AM
Jim Carroll 09 Feb 18 - 07:23 AM
Jackaroodave 09 Feb 18 - 09:38 PM
Mrrzy 10 Feb 18 - 08:56 AM
Bonzo3legs 10 Feb 18 - 10:30 AM
Bonnie Shaljean 10 Feb 18 - 10:57 AM
Bonzo3legs 10 Feb 18 - 12:10 PM
Donuel 10 Feb 18 - 12:36 PM
Bonzo3legs 10 Feb 18 - 12:57 PM
Greg F. 10 Feb 18 - 06:01 PM
Bonzo3legs 10 Feb 18 - 06:23 PM
Bonzo3legs 11 Feb 18 - 04:21 AM
Bonnie Shaljean 11 Feb 18 - 06:27 AM
Steve Shaw 11 Feb 18 - 07:07 AM
Bonzo3legs 11 Feb 18 - 07:22 AM
Steve Shaw 11 Feb 18 - 08:10 AM
Mrrzy 11 Feb 18 - 08:21 AM
robomatic 11 Feb 18 - 04:25 PM
keberoxu 11 Feb 18 - 04:34 PM
Steve Shaw 11 Feb 18 - 05:51 PM
Greg F. 11 Feb 18 - 06:13 PM
Jackaroodave 11 Feb 18 - 07:49 PM
Bonzo3legs 12 Feb 18 - 02:49 AM
Joe Offer 12 Feb 18 - 03:00 AM
Mrrzy 12 Feb 18 - 10:49 AM
Mrrzy 12 Feb 18 - 10:52 AM
Senoufou 12 Feb 18 - 11:23 AM
Bonnie Shaljean 12 Feb 18 - 11:42 AM
Steve Shaw 12 Feb 18 - 01:22 PM
Mrrzy 12 Feb 18 - 01:34 PM
Steve Shaw 12 Feb 18 - 01:47 PM
Bonnie Shaljean 12 Feb 18 - 02:03 PM
Bonnie Shaljean 12 Feb 18 - 02:04 PM
robomatic 12 Feb 18 - 07:45 PM
Mrrzy 13 Feb 18 - 11:14 AM
Steve Shaw 13 Feb 18 - 01:27 PM
Mrrzy 14 Feb 18 - 10:28 PM
Mrrzy 15 Feb 18 - 07:26 AM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 04:22 PM

The gender neutral brigade - bonkers!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 04:55 PM

Some really aggressively obsessed cranky women


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:00 PM

Some really aggressively obsessed cranky Bozos is more to the point.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:04 PM

I suggest you provide some reasoned argument instead of your usual insults lad.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:18 PM

Just keep polluting the water with synthetic oestrogen and the problem will eventually go away.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:19 PM

You are decades behind the times, Bonzo. You're a luvly feller in many regards but the world is changing. It's great to be trans, it's great to be a feminist, it's great to oppose pussy-grabbing, it's great to have me-too, it's great to bollock people who won't bake your same-sex wedding cake. Tell me: are you the sort of bloke who still thinks that gay means happy and carefree?

You don't mean it, do you, you ould bloody reprobate! :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:21 PM

Firstly I think it's most interesting to be made to realise just how gender-stereotyped our language is. I've never considered this before, but our culture is, so it would seem, geared to accepting only two types of humans, and having a plethora of words/expressions to that end.

Secondly, I see no harm in modifying our vocabulary if this would make people who don't regard themselves as either 'male' or 'female' more comfortable. I wouldn't want to upset or exclude anyone by my choice of words.

Thirdly, language does evolve, but fairly slowly. This new idea may take quite some time to become accepted by society.

Lastly, there are those (like Bonzo, I assume) who find all this ridiculous and unnecessary. Obviously there will be voluble dissenters and scoffers.
I'm all for it myself, but can understand the other point of view.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:28 PM

The whole point is that we should not have unacceptable language forced on us by a tiny tiny minority. If they want to use that very wierd language, let them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:29 PM

As someone who identifies as non-binary and has asked people to use They when referring to me in the third person...

I was sharing a cabin with a young person to whom I told this, and he was so fine with it he referred to me as They in the third person and I found myself wondering whom he was talking about! I almost jumped in and said No, that was me, when I realized what he had said.

I need some getting used to my own preferences!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:52 PM

Let's just celebrate humanity in all its multifarious guises. Nobody's forcing language on you. I come on here and use exactly the language I want to use. King Canute demonstrated to his local idiots that you can't turn back the tide. Language evolution is the ultimate democracy. Ultimate because, unlike lots of other things in democracies, it's free! A cat can look at a queen!

Oops...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:52 PM

You don't mean it, do you, you ould bloody reprobate!

Yes he farking well does.

Therin lies the problem....................


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:56 PM

I'm not sure. He loves to goad but I've detected a soft centre. Come on now, Bonzo. We're talking about you and you bloody love it, don't you!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 05:56 PM

Not that much of a minority, since I believe a lot of us have problems with gender-based terminology. I think that's primarily what your problem is: not knowing where the hell your familiar, safe world went. You're adrift in a changing sea, and you're angry about it-not the best way to deal.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 06:05 PM

It is difficult to change language but change it must. Let me ask an open question to those dissenting. Why does it matter if we refer to someone as male or female? Surely it would be better for all of we freed ourselves from preconceived notions of what men and women can or cannot do and judged everyone on their own merits rather than on their gender?

Gnomes have always been gender free of course. Right down to our beards...

DtG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 06:10 PM

Top beard or bottom beard, Dave?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 06:11 PM

Bonzo never comes across as angry. Just wackily deluded. And he loves it...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 06:11 PM

It's only common courtesy to call people what they want to be called, and not something else. I would expect the guardians of traditional values to be particularly scrupulous about this.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 06:12 PM

Agreed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 07:01 PM

The female writer hit the nail on the head. I think it?s little more than a few troublemakers.   Nothing wrong with evolving language, but everything is wrong with imposed language.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 07:19 PM

Who's imposing language on you? Nobody! When's the last time a cop (or one of Franco's goons - I've lost track of where you live) ever picked you up for your un-PC talk? Never! Claiming that language is forced on you is utter bullshit. It's an illusion resulting from the fact that you have still to migrate yourself out of the nineteenth century!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 07:26 PM

New pronouns like hiser will evolve or disappear into one pronoun like in Chinese.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 07:37 PM

Using language that's acceptable, is very confusing to me. I try not to be offensive, but I'm a clumsy sort of person and get myself into awkward situations at times. As usual, I like Mrrzy's attitude and humor about such things.

Here in California, we have a law that decreed that all "one-holer" bathrooms are Unisex. To me, that seems absolutely sensible. If one restroom is occupied, why should I have to wait if the other one is open? Perhaps it may encourage business owners to provide one restroom in the future, not two; but for now, it's a great advancement.

The North Carolina legislature has done all kinds of legislative gymnastics to put transgender people in awkward positions when it comes to bathroom use. When I was visiting Dani and Janie and Amos in Hillsborough NC last fall, I noted that restaurant owners are waging a revolution of their own against the legislature, and declaring all restrooms Unisex, like we do in California. It sure felt nice to see the restaurant owners rebel against the bigots in the legislature.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 07:46 PM

I have no problem in theory with gender-neutral pronouns - my beef is that, where possible, we should avoid adding confusion to the language - which this new twist on the use of 'they' does. I wish some egg-heads who care about language for its own sake had been consulted; it wouldn't have been impossible to come up with a less problematic work-around. It looks like a fait accompli already, though .....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 08:00 PM

"One" works quite well in a lot of situations, meself.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: frogprince
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 08:06 PM

I find it interesting that Bonzo referred to "Some really aggressively obsessed cranky women", when the woman in the group who really stood out as "aggressively cranky" was the one taking the "Bonzo stance".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 08:30 PM

In many circumstances I find myself having to ditch my beloved construction, start afresh and build my sentence all over again. Sometimes, I read my posts back to myself and wish I'd done that more often. I'm a bit guilty of over-elaborating at times, but how hard it is to consign your beloved linguistic baby into the bin. So I have no patience with people who arrogantly declare that they are being somehow constricted in the way they can write by by the "demands" of disadvantaged minorities. Quite simply, they are not. Type whatever you like, Bonzo et al. It won't be the repressed and misunderstood minorities who shoot you down. It'll be me. And maybe Joe. Or Greg. Or Jim. Or Dave. All totally masculine testosterone-fuelled hulks to me knowledge. Or Jeri or Maggie. People with a balanced and a damn sight more modern and empathetic view of the diversity of humanity than the one you are celebrating.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 08:58 PM

It doesn't matter what you or I think, Joe - it's been decided: he, she, they, and they.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Jan 18 - 11:36 PM

Well, I dunno, meself. If I'm the one doing the talking, I'm the one choosing the words I speak. I was raised otherwise, so it's unlikely that I will ever get used to using "they" (a plural term) to refer to an individual person.

However, I have been quite adept for years at substituting gramatically-correct words that are not gender-specific - "One," "persons/people/humans," "we," "you" - and many more. I believe in that practice, and do it as often as I can.

But "they" to refer to a singular person? That makes me cringe. "They" are going to have to come up with something more gramatically elegant, something that flows a little better and doesn't sound like a Neil Diamond song....not that I can find the damn song when I'm looking for it.

But "between you and I," we know the songs I'm talking about:
    Shinin in the sky
    For you and I
    Makes me wanna die...


And because of this, Neil Diamond songs are going to play in my head all night until I come across that song.

Here's one (click):

    Me and you
    Are subject to
    The blues now and then


-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 01:44 AM

I'm old enough to remember when people called gay folk 'poofter' or 'pansy'. I can even remember black people being called 'nig-nogs'. It makes me cringe with shame even typing those words now, but back then it was nothing out of the ordinary. We've adapted our choice of words in order to be considerate of others' dignity and to respect one another.
I would always want to be kind and aware of others' feelings. Therefore I'm happy to adapt my language to this end.
It's just a bit complicated at first, but I'll get the hang of it I'm sure.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 02:18 AM

I'm with you - I'm going to have a tough time getting my head and tongue around 'they' as singular, in direct speech - and, yes, we do use 'they' as singular in casual speech in certain situations ("Someone was here, and they ate my porridge"), but it's a big jump from that to what is being mandated now. And no one is asking us ....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 02:23 AM

(That was directed to Joe).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: BobL
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 03:13 AM

Once upon a time, like a century or two ago, were not the grammatically masculine pronouns accepted as having an inclusive sense? It seems that substituting "he/she" for "he" has only happened during my lifetime.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 03:31 AM

Perhaps equality should be changed to hequality or shequality depending on the day!!!!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 05:17 AM

My wife is referred to as ?this charming lady? by her Consultant Orthopaedic Spinal Surgeon - that is correct reference !!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 05:29 AM

Make sure she always has a chaperone is my advice!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 06:04 AM

Aha, 10 minutes or less each at £175 a time, I don?t know what the hospital charge but he must be on highest tax rate!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 06:41 AM

Four years ago, around the time I needed spinal surgery, my NHS back doctor always saw me just a few days after I rang for an appointment, and he did my operation about six weeks (which included an MRI) after I first went to him. I wasn't a particular emergency either. That was Mr Wafai at Barnstaple. Great bloke. Didn't cost me a bean. I suppose the Tories have had an extra four years since then to carry on wrecking the NHS.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 06:44 AM

A couple of generations ago homosexuality was dismissed as an aberration and sodomy prosecuted when discovered. We now live in a more "enlightened age?" where being gay is nothing more than a label(to most)
Probably in another 50 years gender issues will no longer cause any kind of controversy.
I wonder how it will all be resolved in mixed jails and the military?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 06:50 AM

The gender-neutral use of "they" and related words ("themselves," etc.) as singular has been part of the English language for 800 years and is completely unobjectionable. In common parlance it's far more popular than using just "he" for everybody, or clumsy constructions such as "he or she." And don't get me started on silly things like "s/he"!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mr Red
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 06:57 AM

synthetic oestrogen ???

Tell that to the poor cows wot provide it.

There is an American craze that is creeping in over here in Contra Dancing. Larks and Ravens.

The problem being that old farts like me have is: to translate a call for Larks to Gent before we hear what us blokes is (sic) meant to do. And if it is a bloke bearing down on you is it (sic) a Lark (translate) Gent or a blokess dancing as a Lark or did I not see the raven haired Lark who looks like a Raven in the wrong place looking as confused as I am?

And must I dance in Waltz hold with a Man-Raven who is mentally turning as he would always turn?

Women dancing as men is confusing but at least they usually have it right in their head.

Confused? You will be!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 08:48 AM

So Ladies and Gentleman, I will not have a way of speaking imposed on me by some microscopic minority. Do they (3rd person plural) honestly believe that they (3rd person plural) will impose their way of speaking, just because they (3rd person plural) can't make up their minds from day to day whether they (3rd person plural) are male or female????

I don't think so!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: wysiwyg
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 09:41 AM

Judgemental much?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 10:07 AM

100 years ago if you mentioned the idea of gay marriage you would likely end up in bedlam.
Difficult to be emphatic when trying to describe the mores of the future. Can't even predict the weather or election outcomes with any accuracy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 10:17 AM

They were there doing the "imposing" 750 years before you came along, Bonzo, and they're a majority!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 11:11 AM

I try to imagine myself in the shoes of LGBT folk. It must be very difficult for them, navigating through today's world and facing stereotyping and prejudice. Being referred to as one thing while knowing those epithets don't apply is upsetting. If changing the odd word here and there makes them more comfortable, what's the problem?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: keberoxu
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 11:21 AM

Joe Offer and I were exchanging PM's recently
about the bothersome word "binary."

I mean,
it isn't a bit bothersome in a data-processing context, "binary."
As long as we're talking about computers, machine language,
Base Two maths, and strings of zeroes and ones,
"binary" fits right in.

Then I am confronted with my fellow human beings
describing each other, describing themselves,
as "binary" or "non-binary", and
I go, HEY, are we talking about
humans or computers??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 11:24 AM

If people are OK with changing words to make LGBT folk comfortable that's fine, but I will not be chastised for not doing so, I'll have no part of it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 11:48 AM

Even worse are the "gender neutral vegans".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:00 PM

How about born-again Christian gender-neutral homeopathy-loving vegan organic sackcloth-wearing biodynamic gardeners? You OK with them? What if they only eat muesli with soya milk? Does that make a difference?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:01 PM

'Even worse are the "gender neutral vegans".'

That would be me. I'm honored.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:07 PM

Aha we do homeopathy - I have a Coffea Cruda every night before lights out, and always have Aconite and Arnica with me in my camera bag.

Muesli frankly is arguably one of the most disgusting substances known to man, and don't mention born-again fucking Christians - very high up on the bonkers ladder!!!!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:17 PM

And you don't think that homeopathy is even higher up the bonkers ladder?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:34 PM

Oy! I adore muesli, especially with double cream. It keeps one..er..'regular'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:35 PM

It could well be, but it's cool!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Will Fly
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:38 PM

I've always been amused when in US tv shows, somebody walks in to a group of men and women and says, "Hey, you guys..." Where did that come from?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:41 PM

I'm not much of a muesli cruncher. Gimme a bowl of porridge or Weetabix any day. Trouble with Weetabix is that you need a ton of milk for just three of 'em. I tried to beat the issue by using less milk and eating fast before they turned to sludge, then I realised that they were then probably soaking up all my body fluids instead...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: keberoxu
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:48 PM

Will Fly,
as a US native,   my question would be "When?"
because "Hey, you guys!" has been around for generations.
A group of girlfriends do not think twice about
grabbing each other's attention by hollering,
"Hey, you guys! You guys! Look at this..."

If I were going to investigate the When question,
where would I look?
I would look to literature and journalism.

Solidly in place, this turn of phrase, throughout the 20th Century in the US, it appears to me.
Maybe if I looked closer at the era of World War One,
or at the turn of the century,
I would locate a generation of journalists and writers
who shrank from "You guys" and found it a vulgar colloquialism,
but yes, it must go back nearly a hundred years.

How did it get there in the first place? Couldn't guess.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 12:48 PM

""Hey, you guys..."
"fellers" and "lads" is still very common in Ireland when aimed at men, women or both
I'd have thought that the events regarding treatment of women, particularly unequal payment and the Dorchester predators should have been enough for even Bozo to get his head around the fact that 'Something's gotta give' eventually
What more does it take, for cryin' out loud, a return to the ducking stool and the branque??
Jim Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 01:04 PM

A woman PE teacher at my last school stopped a girls' hockey practice in order to give them some tips by shouting to them " Ok, gather round me and listen up, guys!"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 01:14 PM

"I've always been amused when in US tv shows, somebody walks in to a group of men and women and says, "Hey, you guys..." Where did that come from?"

English used to distinguish 2nd person singular and plural as "thou/you." But like French, it also used the plural form as an honorific. This gradually generalized as a generally polite form, except among Quakers, so "thou" became obsolete, and the singular/plural distinction was lost.

In Southern American English, "you" became the singular form and "you all" or "y'all" became the plural. In mid-Atlantic dialects, "you 'uns" is the plural form. (Although that is sometimes used as the general form, and "you ' unses" a new plural.)

In dialects without these resources, "you guys" is the gender-neutral second person plural.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 01:15 PM

In my (long) life, language has changed amazingly. I don't much mind the changes. 'Guys' is just a fashion; it will be something else soon.
Remember 'fab'? Everything was 'fab' in the Sixties. You never hear it now.

Another strange word use is 'like' as in "I was like..." followed by some direct speech. Fascinating!

My favourite is 'innit?' But even that is fading away.

One only has to re-read the Famous Five books (in their original form) for a good laugh at how people spoke sixty years ago.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 01:33 PM

Go back to the 1940s and you had phrases like " I must say", "and that's a fact", "no mistake" - see the David Lean film This Happy Breed!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 01:39 PM

60009 - Union of South Africa will pass thorough East Croydon next Saturday afternoon - or shouldn't I say she will pass through!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 01:45 PM

In Canada, "you guys" including females or completely females emerged only during my lifetime; in fact, I've only been hearing it since the early or mid- 1990s, I'd say. That's not to say you wouldn't be able to find earlier examples, but it wasn't common before then. I still 'notice' it, because I was far into adulthood before I heard it used that way. And I've never heard "this guy" referring to a female. In the singular, it's still understood to indicate a male, always.

I find it ironic that just as the gender-neutral (supposedly, anyway) 'man' and 'he' became pretty well eliminated from the language, the new gender-neutral 'guys' appeared. To some extent, language will find its own way.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 02:01 PM

There is a great bit in an Asterix when Julius Caesar, who always refers to himself in the third person, says something self-aggrandizing. A roman says, He is great! Julius Caesar says, Who? Roman: Well, um... you! Caesar: Oh, him!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jeri
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 05:15 PM

I'm from NY state, and "you guys" means everybody you're talking to, or "all of y'all".

This is, since I read the article about "whose monkey is it" in leadership school, my philosophy: figure out whose problem it is.

If it's yours, do something about it. If it's somebody else's, you can choose to help, but it's THEIR thing to deal with.

If your language gets you into trouble, either try to do better, or realize you're going to get shit about it until you try to do better. You have no control over anybody else. About the only thing you can do about it is bitch on an internet forum, where you can do something about it, or learn to live with people telling you you're messed up (in which case, you can bitch about that on an internet forum).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 27 Jan 18 - 08:30 PM

In Jewish services there has been a change over the past ten years where prayers refer not only to the standard (three) forefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but to the (four)foremothers: Sarah, Rebecca, Leah, and Rachel. (No one makes a big deal about one of the forefathers marrying two of the fourmothers). BUT: It makes it hard for us growing oldsters who grew up with prayers that were intoned as part of a chant, 'cause now we have to interpose a bunch more syl-a'-bles into the mix. Turns out that while my conscious mind is very amenable to giving credit to the mothers, my metric side is a bit more conservative about changing meters.

Wonder if it's a left-brain right-brain thing? Never gave it much thought before.

I believe the proper term for somewhat de-testosteroned males is 'metrosexual'. There were some South Park episodes about the subject quite a few years ago, now, so this is not really a 'new' thang.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mr Red
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 03:25 AM

Language is about communication and English is reckoned to be 50% redundant. For good reason. In a difficult (noisy) environ - missing words - we can re-construct the meaning and most likely get it about right first time. When describing a group/crowd, gender is part of the description.

The modern way of (say) using actor instead of actress is removing information. "The actress on the left" reduces the possibilities. In the same way we might say "in the green dress" (which these days at UK Folk Dances doesn't imply gender per se)

And the actor/actress thing is driven by the performers - who perform to an audience and it is the audience who are important. Without them - actor/actress - well - aren't. But who can ignore the tide of fashion?

"Hey, you guys..." I can accept if the group are mixed. "you fellas" if all male, "you gals" if all female. That is clear communication. Or Plain English as in another modern fashion (where found).

And as for gender neutral toilets ...........


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 03:48 AM

I always use actress when referring to an actress, as I do mayoress, air stewardess, bus conductress.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:06 AM

Your post robomatic really made me think. I was brought up on the 1662 Book of Common Prayer and the King James bible at church. The words of both were burned into my brain since early childhood and I absolutely love them. They have a poetry, elegance and rhythm which carry one along beautifully. But when the Common Worship, and Alternative books were introduced, I (and many others) was horrified. It just didn't feel the same. It jarred. I felt angry and rebellious (not good feelings when participating in a religious service!)
This in turn has given me an insight into Bonzo's objections. I see now Bonzo why you feel affronted.
Perhaps we cling to our old, familiar word patterns and become uneasy with change.
Most interesting.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:24 AM

The link below has some comments that raise some interestng issues
on resource allocation in the NHS. Somewhat pertinent to the thread.



https://order-order.com/2018/01/22/labour-trans-activists-circulate-radical-feminist-hit-list/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:38 AM

Aha the King James Bible, great stuff whether you believe in it or not. I agree 100% about the Common Worship and Alternative books - trendy and incomplete - just like all this "non-binary" nonsense, reminds me of the grotesque Boy George and his entourage of cranks!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:51 AM

Iains. The link posted is neither relevant to the thread nor anything to do with the NHS. I suspect you have provided the wrong link.

DtG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:56 AM

i hope they never make a gender neutral guitar.

the slim neck, the curvaceous body, the hole in the middle....

perfection really!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:57 AM

Thanks Dave. Take 2!

https://order-order.com/2018/01/22/labour-trans-activists-circulate-radical-feminist-hit-list/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:01 AM

Senoufou:"This in turn has given me an insight into Bonzo's objections. I see now Bonzo why you feel affronted.
Perhaps we cling to our old, familiar word patterns and become uneasy with change."

It's especially understandable when it's change sought by or on the part of people we despise or fear.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:26 AM

I don?t fear them, I laugh at how ridiculous they sound, no mistake!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:29 AM

Dave scroll down thru the comments section that I originally highlighted.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:45 AM

It?s nothing but a frenzy of crank trans gender brubism!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:48 AM

Piers Morgan has the right attitude on his tv programme!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:51 AM

I can't see what you are referring to, Iains, and the second link is the same as the first. I must be missing something but I don't think I am missing much considering the nature of the site.

DtG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 06:32 AM

"I don?t fear them, I laugh at how ridiculous they sound, no mistake!!"

says one whose talk is of 'mayoresses' and 'Japs.'


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 06:43 AM

"The modern way of (say) using actor instead of actress is removing information."

Absolute sexist nonsense. We have brains that are perfectly capable of processing contextual information. You may be looking at a photo, you may have her name, you may know the part she's playing. I promise you that you'll never have to work very hard to decide the gender of the actor. The word actress has been proscribed by the Guardian style guide for many years now. When I'm reading cast lists or film reviews or the like I never find the loss of the unloved "actress" a source of difficulty.

Another thing. The word "actor" ends with two letters of the word "more." The word "actress" ends with three letters of the word "less." That in itself is repulsive enough for me.

"Conductress," Bonzo? Well I caught buses to school from Radcliffe to Bolton and back for seven years. I rode the buses in London and the West Midlands for years. Of course, there aren't many actual conductors left any more. But, when there were, as there were in those days, there were plenty of women doing the job. And I never heard anybody calling them "bus conductresses," not once. If you really needed to point to the fact that the person selling you the ticket and bollocking you for smoking underage on the upstairs back seat was female, which you rarely did, you'd say woman conductor or, condescendingly, lady conductor. I wonder whether Marin Alsop or Jane Glover would appreciate your referring to them as orchestral conductresses...

Things like "policeman" are so embedded that they're with us forever, and "policewoman" quite often signifies a slightly different community role, so those two entrenched words can at least claim to be functional. I've found that the jocular "lady policeman" goes down pretty well in the right context even with policewomen. We are allowed to lighten up as long as the intent is clear. But arrogantly clinging to things such as "actress" because you claim to be so thick that you can't work things out properly without it is ludicrous.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 06:59 AM

Woman conductor - not on our buses to grammar school, they were always "conductress" I forgot policewoman, I must say.

Piers Morgan has all this in perspective!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 07:51 AM

"The modern way of (say) using actor instead of actress is removing information."

Of course one of the uses of gender information was to encode gender discrimination: Waiters were hired for higher positions and paid more than waitresses. Poetesses and authoresses were diminutive versions of real poets and authors, who this linguistic opposition itself informed us were male.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 08:17 AM

Absolutely right.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jeri
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 09:45 AM

If a person wants to use offensive, or simply outdated language,
whose problem is it?

It probably comes in handy to let people know what sort of individual they're listening to.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 11:22 AM

Aha I forgot waiter and waitress!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Acme
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 11:31 AM

When old farts die who currently insist on the distinction of difference in otherwise gender-neutral jobs, then some of the problem will go away. A lot of us have worked for a long time to take the diminutive titles out of jobs.

I was a park ranger - one day a woman asked me if I wasn't really a "rangerette." I looked her square in the eye when I answered that I was a ranger with the same responsibilities, skills, and pay as the male rangers in the service. And that the "ette" ending was insulting and shouldn't be used. She kind of slunk off after that, but it wouldn't have been a teachable moment if I'd politely accepted her assessment of what my role there was. I'm sure she went around after that telling her friends she met a bitchy female ranger. :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 11:40 AM

...she met a bitchy female ranger.

Good for you, Maggie!

As a one time park manager, I could tell you stories of what my female employees had to put up with from "the public".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 11:44 AM

Usherette, The Albionettes - remember them in the mid 80s!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 11:58 AM

Good for Piers Morgan !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 12:01 PM

Good again for Piers Morgan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 12:01 PM

Gender claptrap


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 12:11 PM

Nice 40's ladies doing their wool for knitting!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 01:48 PM

The view of the abbacus:

Never mind such dated concepts such as aptitude or attitude.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-calls-for-race-and-gender-checks-on-job-cuts-2078607.html


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 01:55 PM

Why does it matter if you are served by a male or female Bonzo?

DtG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: keberoxu
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 01:58 PM

That's a good point about "you guys"
connected to
the loss of the second person in English.
It bears contemplation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 02:02 PM

100!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 02:16 PM

I am reminding that a man serving me is a waiter, and a lady serving me is a waitress.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:18 PM

What a daft statement. Why does it matter?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:23 PM

It matters, masculine and feminine - as in these languages:
Albanian The neuter has almost disappeared.
Akkadian
Ancient Egyptian
Amharic
Arabic However, Arabic distinguishes masculine and feminine in the singular and the dual. In the plural it distinguishes between male humans, female humans and non-human plurals (including collectives of humans, such as "nation", "people", etc.); non-human plurals are treated as feminine singular regardless of their gender in the singular.
Aramaic
Breton (Brythonic)
Catalan although it has the pronoun "ho" which substitutes antecedents with no gender, like a subordinate clause or a neuter demonstrative ("això", "allò"). For example: "vol això" (he wants this)-->"ho vol" (he wants it), or "ha promès que vindrà" (he has promised he will come)-->"ho ha promès" (he has promised it).
Coptic
Cornish (Brythonic)
Corsican
French
Friulan
Galician (with some remains of neuter in the demonstratives isto (this here), iso (this there/that here) and aquilo (that there), which can also be pronouns)
Hebrew
Hindi
Irish (Goidelic)
Italian There is a trace of the neuter in some nouns and personal pronouns. E.g.: singular l'uovo, il dito; plural le uova, le dita ('the egg(s)', 'the finger(s)').
Kurdish (only Northern dialect; Central or Southern dialects have lost grammatical gender)
Ladin
Latvian
Lithuanian There is a neuter gender for all declinable parts of speech (most adjectives, pronouns, numerals, participles), except for nouns, but it has a very limited set of forms.
Maltese
Manx (Goidelic)
Occitan
Oromo language
Pashto The neuter has almost disappeared.
Portuguese There is a trace of the neuter in the demonstratives and some indefinite pronouns.
Punjabi
Romani
Sardinian
Scottish Gaelic (Goidelic)
Sicilian
Spanish There is a neuter of sorts, though generally expressed only with the definite article lo, used with adjectives denoting abstract categories: lo bueno.
Tamazight (Berber)
Urdu
Venetian
Welsh (Brythonic)
Zazaki


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:29 PM

Sorry to be rather crude, but whether someone serving me a meal in a restaurant has a willy or not doesn't cross my mind. As long as the food is as ordered, I'm quite content to call the server whatever they want me to call them!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:37 PM

This is quite interesting and pertinent - I've just consulted my husband about Malinke, and I'm amazed that the pronouns for 'him' and 'her' are the same word. Adjectives have no different forms when applied to either men or women. So gender neutral folk would be quite at ease in Ivory Coast!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 04:55 PM

It's a category confusion to equate grammatical gender with the sex of real-world referents. "Gender" in linguistics is a technical term for a form of adjective-noun agreement. (Compare genre = kind). It can be partially congruent with natural or cultural gender, but obviously never completely so, and the two are often at odds. Moreover, in some languages grammatical genders, e.g. concrete/abstract, have nothing to do with gender in the everyday sense.

So when we apply "gender-neutral" expressions to people, it has nothing whatsoever to do with grammatical gender (which is absent from English). It's not a question of grammatical morphology, but a question of the vocabulary we use to talk about real people. The presence or absence of a neuter grammatical gender in various languages is irrelevant to the issue of "gender-neutral" language.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:19 PM

..."whether someone serving me a meal in a restaurant has a willy or not doesn't cross my mind."

As long as the willy is well-cooked and is that of a stallion or a Hereford bull, I don't care what the waiter brings me!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:26 PM

Masculine? Feminine? Gender-Neutral?

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mo the caller
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:29 PM

When talking to someone pushing a baby in a pram why must you know what is under the nappy before you can compliment or ask about broken nights?
I wondered this 50 years ago and wished there was a neutral singular personal pronoun. 'They' does sound odd - but so did 'Ms' back then.

I am a person first and the parts of my life when the fact that I am a woman matters is smaller.

As for Larks & Ravens that Mr Red objects to - well men often have less practise in dancing both roles, so in the long term it could lead to a generation of better dancers. But it might be hard for those of us with half a century or so of old habits. Many dance moves can be described without assuming anything. "Your partner is on your right, your corner on the left" - FALSE for half the dancers. "Men, you have your partner on the right, your corner on the left" - implies that the men lead, ladies do as told (or work it out in reverse). "You are standing between your partner and your corner" - true. "Men look on the right diagonal" - yes and so do the women.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jeri
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:33 PM

I think (and I'm talking out of my ass here) the different terms for what is technically the same job is done to enforce the idea that "Hell, of COURSE women are a lesser species than men!"

This is also why the ignorant get the reaction they do. Same job, same title. Funny that there isn't a feminized version of "fuckwit", or "idiot", or "asshole". Maybe because those are male-only occupations?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:37 PM

I watched a couple of interviews with pilots on the Dam Buster Raid, real men with guts, far removed from these pathetic specimens who can?t make up their minds what sex they are!!!!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:39 PM

I wonder why in the British Isles "the monosyllable" is a term of abuse for a man we in the states would call a "prick."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 05:50 PM

We'd call him a 'prick' in the U.K. too, JD. Or more likely we'd call him a 'fuckin' prick'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 06:10 PM

Or dick. Dick is best employed as a complete sentence, for example, "Look at that bloke over there who thinks he's the dog's dangly bits. Dick."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: keberoxu
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 07:09 PM

Jackaroodave, if I guess right,
was referring to the word
notoriously favored by Frank Begbie in Trainspotting.
(I'm too whooever to spell the word.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 28 Jan 18 - 08:42 PM

"It's a category confusion to equate grammatical gender with the sex of real-world referents."

Sorry - that battle was lost a long time ago now.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 10:33 AM

https://debuk.wordpress.com/2016/12/15/a-brief-history-of-gender/


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 11:28 AM

Interesting - according to that article, the battle was lost by the 12th century ... !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 01:23 PM

I don't remember the name of the eatery, but I could find it again in Cambridge, Cambridge Massachusetts, if it is still there. One of the reasons is that they used the term 'waitron' for the walk-around order takers.
Also, when I was a-growing, the word 'teacher' referred invariably to a female. I was very aware when changing from elementary to what we then called 'junior high' coincided with a bunch of teachers who were male.
English is already gender neutral in not having nouns linked through grammer to gender. Once I was introduced to the Romance languages and the Slavic languages and the- pretty much any other language, I was heartily appreciative of my native tongue.
It didn't seem to me that the use of actor versus actress was a problem. I personally think sex is something we are all aware of, and the use of -man in a non-sex generic sense meant no derogation of either sex.
The use of the term 'policewoman' does not connote a lesser form of the term 'policeman' but someone I would rather have search a female relative or escort her to lockup.
But, my opinion is only mine own. The world, particularly the hypercharged internet driven world, goes on, and everyone gets not get merely a say, but an instantaneous say.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 01:35 PM

Aha - schoolmistress!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 01:41 PM

"Mistress" is an egregious example of a word, or suffix, that has connotations that disqualify it from that kind of usage.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 02:43 PM

"Interesting - according to that article, the battle was lost by the 12th century ... !"

I'm sorry, meself, I don't see the battle. I understand a plea for "gender-neutral language" to urge the use of language that is free from bias based on cultural or biological gender, not a plea to reform syntax.

Japanese, for example, is an astonishingly gender-biased language: There's even an entire subset of "women's speech." But Japanese has no grammatical gender.

When studying French or Italian, it's prudent to learn nouns with their definite articles, as well as their meaning, so that you memorize their gender at the same time. There's nothing corresponding to that in Japanese or English.

I know this is not news to you, so I'm afraid I missed your point.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 03:07 PM

Meter maid!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 03:11 PM

I don't know - maybe I missed your point: I thought you were arguing that the use of the term 'gender' is pertinent to grammar only, as opposed to actual sex identification (in the sense of male versus female). You know - the way it always used to say "sex" on forms, and now says "gender". That's the battle that's lost ....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 04:03 PM

I don't know - maybe I missed your point:

Bozo HAS no point other than stirring shit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 05:00 PM

I am most grateful to gregf for his most informed and intelligent comments.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 05:09 PM

He tries. In fact trying is an apt description of him.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 05:36 PM

I am pleased that Piers Morgan is like minded in that the sometimes male/sometimes female are totally crackers.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 05:51 PM

Now that isn't very nice at all, Bonzo. Maybe you just don't know any. Or avoid them, more like.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 29 Jan 18 - 06:44 PM

Meself,

No, I only meant that "gender" as we've been discussing it in this thread and "gender" as a property (or not) of a language are two different things. Likewise "neutral," the linguistic gender category and "neutral" the stance being debated here. Hence a catalog of languages and their gender structure has no bearing one way or the other.

(I'm just guessing, but I'm pretty sure the sociolinguistics professor who taught me this would come down on the opposite side from me on the issue of "gender-neutral language," though we'd agree that the language would find its own way, regardless of our opinions.)

Sorry I wasn't clearer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: BobL
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 03:13 AM

I have nothing against terms such as "actor" and "waiter" being used in a gender-inclusive sense. I find it curious though that this should be encouraged, when elsewhere the word "man" is opposed as sexist, even when used in its gender-inclusive sense.

A question for the linguists: I know Latin has different words, homo and vir, for Man as opposed to (other) animal and Man as opposed to woman or child, but is this distinction found in many other languages?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 04:01 AM

Oooh BobL, I'll ask my husband about Malinke when he wakes up. (He's snoring away just now!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 07:00 AM

BobL, I'd phrase the question a little differently:

"All languages presumably have a word distinguishing humans from beasts, and one distinguishing male humans from female ones. In what languages besides English can the same word be used for both distinctions?"

I would guess other Germanic languages and the Romance languages (e.g. "homme,"'"uomo," "hombre"), and Greek ("aner," "anthropos") also use this homonym. I have no idea how far back towards Indo-European this goes.

For example, Japanese has "ningen" (human-kind) for humanity; "dansei" (male sex) and "josei" (female sex) for man and woman. There's no sense of synonymity between "ningen" and "dansei." And of course in English we don't necessarily use "man" or "mankind" to distinguish ourselves from beasts.

I think here again we have the interplay of grammatical gender and cultural assumptions. (I'm assuming that "homo" is of masculine grammatical gender.) And for thousands of years the European pontificators of humanity's place in the universe have been mostly male, and many of them to varying degrees have seen women as not quite or incompletely human.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 07:37 AM

Apparently, Malinke has the following words:-

A man   - cheh
A woman - mousso
Mankind - bunadamadeh

What's interesting is that there's obviously no connection between 'man' and 'mankind' linguistically. Even our English word 'human' has 'man' in there.

These new genetic distinctions and 'gender neutral' requirements are a complete mystery to West Africans. My husband can't understand it at all!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 08:05 AM

Neither can my Anglo-Argentine wife!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mooh
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 09:37 AM

Some of this thread has given me hope for the future, and some has very much disappointed me. For most of my life I was untouched by such things, but when my eldest (at 30) decided they'd be healthier and happier as a recognized agender person, all I could feel was the matter was their choice and it wouldn't change the way I love them, it's still unconditional and profound. Every family member has accepted them and their choices. Even the discussion around a name change has gone very well.

The only way I am hurt is when I see the hurt in their eye and hear it in their voice when they suffer the slings and arrows from the bigoted world, and I am unable to offer protection.

I'm still liable to slip on pronouns, but that's my problem and I'm working on it, so far I am forgiven for my mishaps.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 10:22 AM

Many years ago I read and enjoyed Ursula K. LeGuin's "The Left Hand of Darkness." I do not remember the details but I remember being thoroughly impressed. It's about a planet of who are not sexually arrayed as the humans we know and love. Maybe it's time for a re-read if for nothing else to honor the very recent passing of its author.

My attitude is that acknowledging the sex of a person is not to rate that person as greater or lesser, but to take note of their attributes. How we take such note I used to think is more important than simply ignoring it. But maybe that is no longer the case, for the time being, as we wrestle with its significance. I remember a well-known movie about a male lawyer and his female wife, also a lawyer. They go into a trial against each other. The movie is full of wit and humor, AND IGNORES NOTHING. The actors who portrayed the husband-wife pair were lovers, though not married, at least not to each-other. My memory is that the American movie ended with the words "Vive la difference!"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mr Red
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 10:51 AM

We have brains that are perfectly capable of processing contextual information

misses the point entirely. We have brains that can phrase properly. But this parish is witness to the inevitability that people don't. And there is a responsibility on the teller and the receiver to understand. And comics like the Sun bear witness, in extremis, to the fact that it doesn't always happen. Brevity leads to stupidity. Wordiness (put yer hand up then) leads to fatigue. People are lazy, people suffer confirmation bias, and don't spend the time analysing, even if the teller is precise.

"Eats shoots and leaves" - "Eighth Army push bottles up Germans" - "McArthur flies back to front". Newspaper (and comics') headlines - never troubled by punctuation.

It's a jungle out there. Redundancy is the cure.

Like hospital beds, or London ambulance telephone service. Redundancy is not waste, it is insurance. Pick your level, and it won't be enough - you just gamble, and take the hit rarely. Or too often if you skimp.

The reason English is so useful (apart from it being fairly ubiquitous) is the fact that we have a larger lexicon than (say) French.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 12:38 PM

Er, Mr Red, whilst your use of English is beyond reproach, you do write in a manner that gives us (me, anyway) a fair amount of mental processing to do at times. I find it odd that you can demur at a simple and painless thing such as dropping the sexist word "actress" yet revel in producing writing that is scarcely yea yea, nay nay. An observation, not a criticism.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 01:36 PM

Sorry but "but when my eldest (at 30) decided he'd be healthier and happier as a recognized agender person"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 02:29 PM

'I have nothing against terms such as "actor" and "waiter" being used in a gender-inclusive sense. I find it curious though that this should be encouraged, when elsewhere the word "man" is opposed as sexist, even when used in its gender-inclusive sense'

You know, I thought I was the only one on earth who found that ironic (along the lines of "guys" used for females coming at the time it did). But no doubt we will be enlightened in short order.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 07:07 PM

Back aways, last century, I lived in a part of University Campus where we had some large buildings, Row Houses we called them, because they were on a street named 'Row', which had been for fraternities but after the frats had abandoned them, or gone defunct, these Row Houses were tenanted on a theme. Mine was international, named after onetime U.N. Secretary Dag Hammarskjöld, I was one of 4 Yanks out of 26 live-ins. Another was Androgyny House, which was based on, youguessedit, exploring the commonality between the (human) sexes. I can't be more explicit because I didn't live there. But as for MY house, we had unisex showers and bathrooms.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 30 Jan 18 - 07:34 PM

Oh, another blast from the previous millenium, but thread related, I swear!

King Missile:
Detachable Penis
I woke up this morning with a bad hangover
And my penis was missing again.
This happens all the time.
It's detachable.
This comes in handy a lot of the time.
I can leave it home, when I think it's gonna get me in trouble,
Or I can rent it out, when I don't need it.
But now and then I go to a party, get drunk,
And the next morning I can't for the life of me
Remember what I did with it.
First I looked around my apartment, and I couldn't find it.
So I called up the place where the party was,
They hadn't seen it either.
I asked them to check the medicine cabinet
'Cause for some reason I leave it there sometimes
But not this time.
So I told them if it pops up to let me know.
I called a few people who were at the party,
But they were no help either.
I was starting to get desperate.
I really don't like being without my penis for too long.
It makes me feel like less of a man,
And I really hate having to sit down every time I take a leak.
After a few hours of searching the house,
And calling everyone I could think of,
I was starting to get very depressed,
So I went to the Kiev, and ate breakfast.
Then, as I walked down Second Avenue towards St. Mark's Place,
Where all those people sell used books and other junk on the street,
I saw my penis lying on a blanket
Next to a broken toaster oven.
Some guy was selling it.
I had to buy it off him.
He wanted twenty-two bucks, but I talked him down to seventeen.
I took it home, washed it off,
And put it back on. I was happy again. Complete.
People sometimes tell me I should get it permanently attached,
But I don't know.
Even though sometimes it's a pain in the ass,
I like having a detachable penis.
Songwriters: Chris Xefos / Dave Rick / John S. Hall / Roger Murdock
Detachable Penis lyrics ? Warner/Chappell Music, Inc


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 02:58 AM

Bonkers gender neutral brigade


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mr Red
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 08:05 AM

use of the word man instead of homo sapiens or human race is sexist, and hopefully falling out of favour. And might lead to ambiguity in rare cases, which is bad communication.

actress is communication.

As with, ie Italian: bambinos for mixed/all male assemblage and bambina/bambini for female/assemblage, surely actors would suffice for mixed company and actresses for all female troupes.

actor(s) for indeterminate contexts, but where appropriate actress is saying two things, thespian and gender.

Of course if you want don't value precision - go ahead. I am free to think you less than perfect a communicator, by choice! And spend more time analysing your schpiel, if I can be arsed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 08:28 AM

This is all so very interesting to me.
One thing I've always pondered is the pantomime Dame. I absolutely adore pantomime, and the Dame is the best thing in it. But why should it be even funnier because a man is playing the part of a woman? Why would it be much less funny if that role was played by a lady? The fact it's a man in the outrageous costume is a scream. But why is that?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mooh
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 09:53 AM

Bonzo3legs, when you misquoted me, whatever was your point?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: keberoxu
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 12:11 PM

One says "misquote"
and the other says ... I can guess what the other says. Hmmm,
how do you acronymise "Not On My Thread."

"NOMT"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 01:35 PM

"use of the word man instead of homo sapiens or human race is sexist"

Can a man or lady reach a higher level of absolute stupidity?????


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 03:38 PM

Let sensitivity and common sense prevail!

Mr Smith is our new chairman - fine.

Mr Smith is our new chairperson - if you really must.

We need to choose a new chairperson - sensible in a mixed-gender club.

We need to select a new chairman - wrong in a mixed-gender club.

Mrs Smith is our new chairman - ludicrous but I've seen it done.

Mankind - OK with me as it's so entrenched. I feel the same about policeman and policewoman. Policeperson would be very silly. Police officer might be a copout as a description of any given policeman or policewoman. It would make sense in most contexts.

Humankind - also fine. Use it as much as you can and it just might supplant "mankind." But why try to force it? In spite of received wisdom peddled by homophobes, no-one forced "gay" on us. Its usage simply evolved. Just nudges are what's needed. Humankind is an unobjectionable and nice-sounding word.

I like nice-sounding words. Mellifluous and helicopter are nice-sounding words.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 03:57 PM

That makes sense.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 04:04 PM

The English Hymnal revised version has tried to change the words of some of our much-loved hymns and carols to make them more inclusive, and I have now to confess that it makes me absolutely fume.
For example:-

'Good Christian men rejoice'
With heart and soul and voice' is now:-

'Good Christian friends rejoice'   Gaaaaaah!!!

And of all the hymns to change, what about Hark the Herald Angels Sing?
Instead of '..born to raise the sons of Earth' we have
'..born to raise each child of Earth' Gaaaaaah again!!!!!

I'm sorry, but for decades I've sung the CORRECT words to these ancient and beautiful hymns, and I will not co-operate at all. I loudly sing the original format, and so do most of the congregation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: bobad
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 04:22 PM

Nonsexist Alternative Language: Handbook for Conscious Writers


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 04:45 PM

'"use of the word man instead of homo sapiens or human race is sexist"

Can a man or lady reach a higher level of absolute stupidity?????'

Except that it's a fact of history. Among the historical "rights of man" has been the right to head the household, subjugate the women and children, and control the disposition of its property. This was defended, no not defended, assumed, by a political theorist as "enlightened" as John Locke.

We can see the sexism at work in the American Declaration of Independence: "All men are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. Among these are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Sounds like "men" refers to "humanity," doesn't it? (Well, except for slaves.) But women's property rights were restricted, their right to vote was not guaranteed until about 150 years later, and it was almost 200 years (1964) later that discrimination on the basis of sex was made illegal.

Throughout the history of Europe, women were restricted from positions of power in the family, the church, the government, and the economy. Unlike men, they were not "made in the image of God." Their secondary status as "mankind" was self-evident: they didn't have a penis. Historically, the "ambiguity" of "man" as alternately "human" or "male human" isn't quite as ambiguous as we make it out to be. I can readily see why feminists are averse to it.

I think that when we find an innovation suggested by an oppressed class to be "ironic" or "ridiculous," it's a good idea to look for reasons that might not be apparent from a position of privilege. Generally, in unequal social relations, it's the underdogs who have a better understanding of them, because they are the ones who have to pay the closest attention. It's easy to see this looking back at earlier times, perhaps not so much in our own.

I don't mean to suggest that the problem of male privilege is purely a linguistic one, or that those agitating for reform think so. But the historically deep encoding of sexism in our language does contribute to it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 04:59 PM

Anyway, you now have just 2 hours and 2 minutes to submit your UK tax return. otherwise the "taxman" or "taxlady" will send you a £100 penalty notice!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 18 - 07:06 PM

"That makes sense."

Bloody hell, Bonzo, if you think I make sense I worry like shite! Though I do think you're probably a luvly feller deep down!

Can you lend me a tenner...?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Feb 18 - 02:19 AM

Strictly speaking, it's the HMRC Computer that send the £100 Penalty Notice. Fuck all to do with the Tax-Man/Woman/Person.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Feb 18 - 02:48 AM

Yes, I think they will need to take on more manpower to check all the 100s of thousands of penalty notices!!!

I hope y'all declared all bank interest received over 50p - if not, and HMRC find out, it's an automatic investigation, which isn't nice!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: BobL
Date: 01 Feb 18 - 05:09 AM

'"use of the word man instead of homo sapiens or human race is sexist"

NO IT ABSOLUTELY IS NOT!!!!

It is a refusal to differentiate between two meanings of the same word. Yes, two different meanings - as is shown by the fact that some languages have different words for them (see my earlier post), and you'd get no points for using the wrong one. In this respect the word "man" is no different from any other word which has more than one possible meaning. Granted, in this case there is an added complication that one meaning actually includes the other - as for example does "day", which can mean either a period of 24 hours, or "day" as opposed to "night". If I said a week is seven days, not seven days and seven nights, would you say I was discriminating against the hours of darkness, and call me a lucist?

Sorry to get hot under the collar about this, but I contend that there is no excuse for wilful ignorance of something that is, let's face it, PRIMARY SCHOOL stuff. At least, it was when I was at primary school.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: BobL
Date: 01 Feb 18 - 05:55 AM

Whoops!!!! Got my knickers in a complete twist there. I meant, of course, that the "sexist" tag arises from failing to understand the difference in meaning, etc.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Iains
Date: 01 Feb 18 - 06:08 AM

Most dictionaries equate man with being a person/human being among other meanings.

The world is going pc mad.
If there is no distinction between sexes,the question will become academic as we all die off.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 01 Feb 18 - 06:11 AM

BobL, I don't believe that people who call the "use" of the term "man" for "humanity" sexist weren't paying attention in primary school and are unaware of its double meaning--or that they feel that every use of it has a sexist purpose. I believe they feel, and I think rightly so, that this ambiguity has a history of exploitation for sexist purposes.

Usually when a set is denominated by a term that also denominates a subset, that subset is the dominant one--as your example of "day" indicates. We describe a week as "seven days"--although we could use "seven nights"--because the daylight hours are the important ones, and the nights are just there to keep the days apart. In that sense, it is "lucist."

It is the historical usage of the term "man" that explains why the same people who oppose it simultaneously support the extension of, say, "author" to include females, even though the semantics are similar. The use of "author" to denominate both males and females does not have a sexist history. On the contrary, it is the opposition of the pair "author/authoress" that does.

I used to feel as you do. Further, I maintained that suffixal -man, pronounced (roughly) "mun," as in "postman"--or "woman"--was an etymologically different morpheme from stand-alone "man."

I came to feel that these distinctions weren't relevant to the issue of sexist language, while their history as part of a sexist language system was.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: CupOfTea
Date: 02 Feb 18 - 09:16 AM

The whole trend of "pick your pronouns" hit me upside the head with astonishment when I had a friend who chairs a (very) liberal college's Psychology Department detail how their school works it out. Oberlin is a place that is, and has been, very friendly to all sorts of people to whom gender and expressions of it, have been fluid. Gay, cross-dressing, bi, trans, queer, whatever the classification of one's identification with gender or sexual preference, ways have been found to make folks feel safe and comfortable. That's what it really is about, isn't it? Dealing with our fellow humans in a way that respects who they are, and who they strive to be.

What gobsmacked me is how freaking complicated it can be. The younger generation has substantially less problem with sorting it out, and as others have commented, for older folks the years of language being "binary" are deeply imprinted. I remember being annoyed that I was to be referred to as "cisgender female" - being "female" was just NORMAL to me. What continues to be problematic for me is how, without that male/female choice of identifiers, you somehow need to know more about a stranger's personal life than perhaps you want to.

I've had no problem with pronouns for several trans friends over the years, but likely because they have also been binary in their choice of pronoun. The rest of the "queer" and "fluid gender" spectrum are a mystery to me entire. This does not impact my life in any way, so I tend to not want to deal with it


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: CupOfTea
Date: 02 Feb 18 - 09:20 AM

whoops - that last post went off before proofing or finishing the thought: it is disconcerting to have to consider a stranger's gender or sex life in just having a term to refer to them. "Gender neutral" pronouns are an easy out for this - and is more comforting a concept for me.

Joanne in Cleveland (she/her/hers)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: keberoxu
Date: 02 Feb 18 - 12:22 PM

I prefer "agender" to "non-binary";
as stated before, it only complicates matters
when a term reminds me of computers.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Feb 18 - 07:52 PM

But you're OK with "agender" reminding you of meetings?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 03 Feb 18 - 07:26 PM

Last night I heard a report on I believe "As It Happens" that "O Canada" is subject to revision because its lyrics invoke 'sons' so this is to be ungenderized (degenderized). The interviewee wouldn't touch the French version.

This morning listening to the gender culture wars discussed on the radio show "This American Life" the subject of sex education came up and certain parties are objecting to 'male' and 'female' because this does not include those who have equipment that they do not identify with, hence the suggestion 'penis owner' and 'vagina owner'. I was transfixed at the program. I regard it not so much in a scandalized manner as with fascination how we are parsing out issues we have long thought to be well understood but apparently not so much.

Tonight going to see a movie called "The Women's Balcony" which plays out to certain issues within the Jewish Community (or maybe between Jewish Communities) but I can't speak to it yet as I have neither seen it nor got a description in detail on it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Kenny B
Date: 06 Feb 18 - 03:19 PM

Can anyone fit in the appropriate words of or Im short of a Limerick

The was young ...... called Broom
Took a ..... up to his room
They agued all night
About who was right
To do what and with which and to whom


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 06 Feb 18 - 03:26 PM

Over who HAD THE right is how I learned that one, ay ay ay ay, in China they do it for chili, so here comes another verse that's worse than the other verse, so waltz me around again, Willie.

I'm not agendered, I have a gender, it's just not one two usually available choices but somewhere in between, so nonbinary seems more precise and true.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 07 Feb 18 - 07:35 PM

I also enjoyed Mr. Trudeau's use of peoplekind. What a language with which to engender literary provender about gender.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: meself
Date: 07 Feb 18 - 10:23 PM

The question is, was he serious or joking? To the right-wing, he was dead-serious; to his supporters he was joking around. I don't care enough to watch the video ....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 07:52 AM

Trudeau, behaving like a wanker!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 01:02 PM

KennyB: "Can anyone fit in the appropriate words of or Im short of a Limerick?"

A cisgender gay man named Broome
And a trans lesbian went to their room.
They frolicked all night
In perverted delight,
Which shows you should never assume.

fify


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 03:45 PM

Is perverted still okay?

I don't want George Harrison to be left out as non-courant:

? I don't know how you were diverted
You were perverted too
I don't know how you were inverted
No one alerted you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 08 Feb 18 - 05:28 PM

"Is perverted still okay?"

I meant it in an honorific sense, but maybe it wasn't a good idea: "creative" would probably be better.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: BobL
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 04:43 AM

Second line doesn't scan, unless you reduce lesbian to two syllables. How about "Took a lesbian trans to his room"?

On second thoughts no - a gender-specific pronoun would be inappropriate in this context. Bugger.

On third thoughts better stop before I get in any deeper.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 07:08 AM

From: BobL - PM
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 04:43 AM
Second line doesn't scan, unless you reduce lesbian to two syllables. How about "Took a lesbian trans to his room"?


Problem is with metre (accented syllables) as well as scansion.
How about:

A cisgender gay man named Broome
And a lesbian trans took a room.
They frolicked all night
In perverted delight,
Which shows you should never assume.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 07:23 AM

Marlon Brando and Richard Prior !!!!
How many more revelations will it take to make the eejits realise that "perversion" exists only in the eye of the beholder?
Ji, Carroll


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 09 Feb 18 - 09:38 PM

Thanks for the improvements, hope you had fun!

But I was kind of fond of "their," as it could mean the gay man's room, or the transgendered lesbian's, if that's either's pronoun of preference--or both in any case.

Jim: "How many more revelations will it take to make the eejits realise that "perversion" exists only in the eye of the beholder?"

Jim, I hope I clarified that the poem was a celebration of "perversion." Compare "polymorphous perversity," " the ability to find erotic pleasure in all parts of the body." But like the second line, it could have been done better.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 10 Feb 18 - 08:56 AM

OK, a few points: If you sit down, all toilets are gender-neutral. Also, when I was younger, metrosexual only applied to men who seemed gay (by the straight stereotypes of gays, mostly caring about their own appearance) but weren't. And third, when I came out as non-gendered/binary a couple of years ago, I only had to do it with my Anglophone friends; in French I can be as male as a chin or as female as a table, doesn't apply to me, don't matter. In English, though, I really dislike being referred to in the third person with a gendered pronoun. Either of them.

I think I told this story, that the total rando stranger I shared a cabin with on the Star Trek cruise used They in the third person when referring to me, and did it so naturally that I almost jumped in with Wait, no, that was me, who are you talking about? So I guess I better get used to my own preferences!

Also (small digression) in Hungarian, like Malinke, there is no gender; Hungarians don't usually use pronouns at all as the verbs are conjugated, but they have them for stress and emphasis purposes, and there is only "third person singular" - not He or She. Or him or her. There are words for things which have gender, like man and woman, mother and father; further digression, they have no word for brother or sister because you have to specify whether your sib is older or younger. So they have older bro, younger bro, older sis, younger sis, twin, and sibling, but no just plain brother or sister.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 10 Feb 18 - 10:30 AM

Grotesque


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 10 Feb 18 - 10:57 AM

The use of "perverted" bothers me too. It just comes across to my ear as insulting, and I don't have a horse in that particular race. But I know plenty of folks who would either take, or intend, offense by that word. Following on from Nigel, how about:

A cisgender gay man named Broome
And a lesbian trans took a room.
They frolicked all night
In uncensored delight,
Which shows you should never assume.

And this is going up on my fridge door:

> If you sit down, all toilets are gender-neutral.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 10 Feb 18 - 12:10 PM

gender neutral brigate - bonkers as vegans!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Feb 18 - 12:36 PM

The young speak of the gender tree of many branches.
When I was young just climbing trees was thrilling


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 10 Feb 18 - 12:57 PM

The North Korean cheerleading squad, which will perform at the Winter Olympics opening ceremonies, this Friday, in Pyeongchang, South Korea, occupies its own stratosphere of weaponized comeliness and discipline. The squad, which has been dubbed, in South Korea, the ?army of beauties,? presents a doll-house version of military service: girls in their late teens and early twenties are plucked from the country?s most prestigious universities and charged with making North Korea look good. The cheerleaders are chosen on the basis of appearance and ideology?they undergo background checks, to insure that there are no defectors or enemy sympathizers in their families, and they must be pretty (and at least five feet three)

They are all nice girls - Girls are always right!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Feb 18 - 06:01 PM

Bozo, what the fuck has that got to do with anything? Or is it just gratuitous bullshit, of which you are an acknowledged master?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 10 Feb 18 - 06:23 PM

noted


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 04:21 AM

University professor sparked vicious battle over gender neutral pronouns

It's a good job somebody has some sense!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 06:27 AM

Word meanings evolve over time, to reflect the changing societies they serve. I don't see why we couldn't keep He and She, but expand their definitions, so that "he" indicates anyone born or currently identifying as male, and "she" signifies the same for females. For those who are on the border or prefer not to be classified, say "they" and its related forms. Theirself and Themself may take some getting used to, but it feels natural.

The lack of a singular neuter-gender pronoun for humans has always been a headache for writers, in a million ways unrelated to political correctness. So much so that "they" is becoming acceptable whether one is speaking of a group or an individual. Word-nerd that I am, the grammar still jars on my ear a bit - but not as much as the verbal hoops authors sometimes jump through to avoid the issue.

I would like us to [be allowed to] go on using He, She, and They - but in awareness of their increased field of interpretation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 07:07 AM

"They" as a gender-neutral singular has been used in English for at least 800 years. I don't see a problem with it, along with related words such as "them" or "their." I do see a problem with using "he" for everybody, and I'm not thinking of filling my prose with loads of "he or she"-type constructions. English is a noble and mighty language and we don't need to be bolting on clumsy and awkward things like that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 07:22 AM

Possibly


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 08:10 AM

Definitely


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 08:21 AM

He already means anyone who identifies as male whether they were born that way or not, I thought... and she for females, ditto.

I'm on a fridge! I am so flattered!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 04:25 PM

So is this why English sovereigns refers to themselves as "We"? Is this just an example of preternatural gender fairness, or a pluralism of 'we' all English sovereigns through time? Was Henry VIII's codpiece just a personal affectation? Maybe Elizabeth had one under all that upholstery?

We're behind the looking glass, people!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: keberoxu
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 04:34 PM

....and not just any fridge, Mrrzy,
but
Bonnie Shaljean's fridge, to boot.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 05:51 PM

In 1989, Maggie Thatcher announced to the nation "we have become a grandmother."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 06:13 PM

Charles I would be proud.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 11 Feb 18 - 07:49 PM

"They frolicked all night in uncensored delight"

Thanks, Bonnie. Appreciate it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 02:49 AM

Nice to see real very brave men decking a terrorist in "15:17 to Paris". You won't get pansy gender neutrals in a Clint Eastwood film thank you very much!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 03:00 AM

I think it's good if language can be gender-neutral. Language that expresses preference for the male gender, subtly indicated that the male gender is thought to be superior.

But I don't think people can be gender-neutral. People who call themselves "non-binary" have their own place somewhere in the spectrum, but they are most definitely not "neutral." The word "non-binary" does sound awkward, but it's the best term I've heard so far. It will take time to develop language that works without being awkward.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 10:49 AM

French cannot be gender neutral, but since gender applies to inanimate objects too, I'm OK.

Both *I* and *we* are gender-neutral, as are You, thee, and y'all. Youse guys is getting there.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 10:52 AM

And keberoxu, I need a pic!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Senoufou
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 11:23 AM

In Norfolk we have

Oi
Yew (singular)
Yew-tergether (plural)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 11:42 AM

I do think the language police will need to settle for three categories, especially since one is neutral. A new invented pronoun for every single mathematical permutation is going to be greeted with resistance & resentment, and will just wind up being more divisive than ever.

I find "non-binary" so clunky and jargon-ish that I can't see it being widely adopted either. And "tripartite" isn't much better, I know. (Threefold? It's more poetic anyway.)

In the end, it's up to each person to decide - or discover - for themself where their pronoun preference lies.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 01:22 PM

Non-binary is ridiculous. Binary relates to being in either one state or another. By that measure, as a full-blown bloke (I think) I'm non-binary. I'd have thought that people who define themselves as transgender have far more claim to be binary. Still, if it catches on it'll become standard English and that'll be that. Or this and that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 01:34 PM

Um, if men and women are the only possible categories, the category (not the men, nor the women) is binary. If you do not indentify as either of those possibilities, or as both at the same time, then nonbinary is the only available term.

It is a lot easier to re-purpose an existing word than to invent a new one. "You" used to be the plural in English when "thee" was the singular, now You is both plural and singular and "thee" is obsolete (unless you're Quaker). So "they" becoming a singular pronoun in English is easy, and is already happening anyway.

Steve Shaw and my darlin' Bonnie Shaljean, what existing term do you think could be repurposed to mean nonbinary? That is, would be better than nonbinary?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 01:47 PM

I dunno. I get confused. I'll go with the flow.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 02:03 PM

Couldn't we get rid of the whole numerical thing altogether and start speaking (thinking) in more global terms? The "non' in non-binary just seems to emphasise a dual nature, even while denying it.

Maybe something like Inclusive, or Universal? I dunno. If I come up with any decent ideas, I'll post.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 02:04 PM

LOL - I wrote my "I dunno" before I even saw Steve's. Guess that's the new bottom line...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: robomatic
Date: 12 Feb 18 - 07:45 PM

I'm sure all you girls will get it all figured out. (Sorry about that word 'all').


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 Feb 18 - 11:14 AM

I agree that nonbinary is clunky and promotes the idea of binarity, if that's the word. But I don't feel Universal or Inclusive, I feel as if I were neither male nor female according to the usual definitions, or male on one side and female on the other (sides being inside and outside, not left and right), so neither or both is more "right" for me. I am neither cis nor trans, in that while I definitely do not identify as the sex assigned to me at birth by the appearance of my genitals, I do not indentify completely as the "other" one either.

I am reminded of the term Atheist for someone without god beliefs, which includes the theism we reject right there in the word. But "freethinker" to me seems PC and prettified, and I wish the hoodoo could come off the word Atheist. But I would like a PC and prettified term for Nonbinary if it was as nice. Gender-free? Still uses gender. Hmmm. Ideas?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Feb 18 - 01:27 PM

There was an interesting programme on BBC Radio 4 at 4 o'clock this afternoon called Word Of Mouth which examined the issue of language and gender identity. It was very interesting so if you can access it it's well worth a listen.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 10:28 PM

Thanks! Available here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: The grotesque 'gender neutral' craze!
From: Mrrzy
Date: 15 Feb 18 - 07:26 AM

And I listened to it. I especially like the trans person saying something like, not my *preferred* pronoun, *my* pronoun; the others are not correct.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 18 February 2:18 AM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.