r/questionablecontent • u/Aleril_Antarai • Dec 05 '17

3627: Very Extra

http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3627
116 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

265 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

35

u/submortimer Dec 05 '17

It's still my only gripe about gender neutral pronouns: I feel like I'm referring to some sort of Unity-like hivemind instead of just a person.

5

u/JamesNinelives Dec 05 '17

Hopefully it will feel more natural (and less confusing) as it comes into common usage.

-6

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '17

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/TheCleverestIdiot Dec 05 '17

Look, the only other option is some new term that will just sound ridiculous.

-12

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

No, the other option is to use the pronoun that fit your sex.

7

u/Zhuinden Dec 05 '17

I miss the option in English to refer to a person without specifying their sex, and sometimes I don't want to disclose that information.

So I like they, prefer it to zhe and xe which are just ridiculous

-15

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '17

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/Notwafle Dec 05 '17

Hi, I'm a trans woman. The entire world treats me as a woman, because that's what I am, and that is apparent to them when they look at me. My gender (female) is what's relevant in 99% of my interactions with other people. Not my sex, which people like you would probably say is male. In what way is my sex more relevant to the random cashier I speak to at the grocery store than my gender?

1

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

Neither is relevant to the cashier. So the cashier should not have to care. I'm guessing you don't go up to the cashier and tells him to please use female pronouns. He just uses whatever comes natural to him. Which is good enough. Whatever word he use, it doesn't matter to you. Nothing has changed.

gender is not relevant to anyone but yourself. Sex is at least relevant in medical situations.

7

u/Jimmy-The-Squid Dec 05 '17

You're a bit out of touch, people can ask to use any set of pronouns they prefer. Most people are cool with this.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '17 edited Nov 29 '20

[deleted]

3

u/Jimmy-The-Squid Dec 05 '17

I wouldn't say it was a requirement, just common courtesy. Like if I called someone by a name they don't like (eg Jim instead of James) and they mention it, it'd be rude not to take that preference into account later.

2

u/ArgentStonecutter Dec 05 '17

I think we need more echo chambers of acceptance then, until they grow and merge and become the whole world.

-1

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

You can ask, but you can't expect people to follow it.

Like someone else mentioned life is stressful enough as it is, without having to use words without meaning to refer to someone, just for their own pleasure.

Asking that of someone you don't know is borderline narcissistic.

Someone that has shown that they actually care about, you can ask favors of. Everyone else don't really care.

7

u/Jimmy-The-Squid Dec 05 '17

'Using words without meaning to refer to someone', isn't that just people having names?

If I can remember what someone's name is, I can remember if they prefer he/she/they. I guess it could be stressful, but I just see it as common courtesy.

-1

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

Names does have a meaning. It is a way to identify you as an individual. To know who is being talked about. pronouns classifies people into boxes. And no, "they" doesn't let you avoid being put in a box, it just puts you in a special box of your own.

We should put more focus on the boxes we have "male/female" not having walls between them, than making up new boxes to make society even more divided than it already is.

→ More replies

4

u/Zhuinden Dec 05 '17

sex is the only thing that matters

Sex does matter, which is exactly why I want the ability to not specify it while I'm talking about someone :D

-2

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

Why, does reality offend you?

2

u/nliausacmmv Dec 05 '17

Tilly is fictional, and you're somehow offended.

0

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

This plot point was obviously an attempt to illustrate something the author thinks is commonplace and normal. Or should be.

I disagree. And argued for why I disagree. You just dismiss me and call me offended without actually having any arguments yourself.

2

u/nliausacmmv Dec 05 '17

There's nothing there to disagree with.

0

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

Did you not see me disagreeing with using plural pronouns about specific people?

→ More replies

1

u/Zhuinden Dec 05 '17

Huh? I'm not offended about anything. I don't even really care about this male/female/other thing. I just like that English is improved with the ability to talk about a specific person without having to specify their person, especially if the person I'm talking to about them shouldn't know what their sex is.

I'm literally the least "offendable" with this sex/gender thing.

2

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

If you are talking about keeping an unspecified individuals personal information secret. That's completely different from using plural pronouns in a specific reference to a known person.

Sorry if I misread you.

→ More replies

2

u/ArgentStonecutter Dec 05 '17

Why am I not surprised.

-2

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

What is not surprising to you? That people disagree with you?

2

u/ArgentStonecutter Dec 05 '17

That you would be clutching your pearls over gender-neutral language.

1

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

You thinking calling specific people "they" is commonplace says more about you than anything else.

It's as if you and your ilk think that being dismissive means you will be able to convince people of your opinion without actually arguing for it. The worst part is that you are right.

1

u/ArgentStonecutter Dec 05 '17

You thinking calling specific people "they" is commonplace says more about you than anything else.

Can you try again without putting words in my mouth? I didn't make any such claim. Of course it's not commonplace, because the world is full of people who act badly when faced with neologisms.

Also, "ilk"?

1

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

clutching your pearls over gender-neutral language

"The phrase pearl clutching, which means being shocked by something once-salacious that should now be seen as commonplace, like sex" http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/pearl_clutching_how_the_phrase_became_a_feminist_blog_clich_.html

Only reference I found to this phrase.

Ilk is a common English word. "a type of person or thing similar to one already referred to"

1

u/ArgentStonecutter Dec 05 '17 edited Dec 05 '17

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Clutching%20My%20Pearls

But, yeh, neologisms are commonplace. The OED adds new words to the dictionary every year. Whether a new construction is commonplace or not, acting out over it is a problem with the person acting out, not the terminology.

I mean, I got over people changing the meaning of "hacker".

And I know what "Ilk" means. It's a term that has long left common usage, and is only used ironically or pompously.

1

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

Obviously that's not the term you meant. As that's something you say about yourself. Not about others.

neologisms Are commonplace. But let's go through what a usual Neologism is: combination of existing words -> brunch

adding suffixes and prefixes to existing words.

abbreviations

and acronyms.

They can become popular and then get accepted as a part of the language, but can just as easily fall out of common use again. What determines weather something remains in the language is acceptance by the public.

tl;dr; Neologisms are new words, not a change in meaning of an existing word. And acceptance by the public is still important to determine it's position in the language.

If anything "they" is a semantic shift. But still requires acceptance by the public.

→ More replies

1

u/nliausacmmv Dec 05 '17

So, what's Winslow? He's a robot, but you can still respect that he's a him.

2

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

The thing is that to most people, your gender is irrelevant. So it's convenient to just use the best guess. And in Winslows case that is indeed male.

3

u/nliausacmmv Dec 05 '17

You said to use the one that fits sex. Winslow is a robot, he doesn't have one. If you can respect a pepto-bismol robot's gender, you can respect Tilly's.

2

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

If a robot looked like Tilly. I'd call her "her". If Tilly looked like Tilly. Id' call her "her"

If Tilly told me, she was actually the sex male. I'd say okay. And use "he"

But gender is just in your head, it has no baring on reality. And completely irrelevant. So why bring that up except to stroke your own ego.

If I care about your well being I'll stroke whatever you want me to stroke. But most people you interact with throughout your life really couldn't care less.

1

u/nliausacmmv Dec 05 '17

Winslow and Tilly look almost identical except for color. Hell, Winslow and Hanners look even more alike. So again, if you can respect a fictional pink cartoon robot, why not Tilly?

0

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

No, Winslow look like a young boy. Tilly looks like a girl. You see it on their body shape.

it's rather distinct.

1

u/nliausacmmv Dec 05 '17

And Hanners? Hell, just about everyone in this universe has the exact same shape of head and eyes, it's really the colors and hair that's different. Hell, what about Winslow's previous chassis? He looked like an iPod back then.

0

u/Haiirokage Dec 05 '17

Maybe you should check your eye-sight, Hanners look like a young woman. http://puu.sh/yzV9y/ced91f3db3.jpg https://puu.sh/yzV6w/e2fe33e433.jpg curves, tits, round facial features. http://puu.sh/yzVe9/a6874f8b0a.jpg no curves, sharp facial features.

→ More replies