Good grief, this is not new. It’s part of the English language. They/them has always been around to use when one couldn’t, or didn’t want to use a more specific pronoun. Cumbersome, maybe, but much language is. It is NOT a big deal.
[deleted]
Submitted 2 months ago by whtiza@sh.itjust.works to [deleted]
Comments
Lladra@lemmy.world 2 months ago
mindlesscrollyparrot@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
It isn’t a big deal, but we do need the language to evolve a little bit. The problem with they/them is that it implies that you don’t know the person, or that it doesn’t matter who they are (like you say, you can’t or don’t want to use a more specific pronoun). It can feel quite rude to apply it to somebody that you do know.
Kolanaki@yiffit.net 2 months ago
We don’t need a new word. “Dude” already exists.
knightly@pawb.social 2 months ago
I’d ask “So how many dudes have you slept with?” but I don’t think that one works on most of us furries =3
Kolanaki@yiffit.net 2 months ago
“Like… For real or just in my headcanon?”
h3mlocke@lemm.ee 2 months ago
No stupid questions, eh?
MissJinx@lemmy.world 2 months ago
why use many word when few word do trick?
r00ty@kbin.life 2 months ago
Really? I used they when I wasn't sure of gender (online games for example) before the pronoun use became common. I cannot remember anyone ever being confused.
morphballganon@lemmy.world 2 months ago
confusing and difficult
It’s really not, if you try. Have you tried? No. So give it an earnest shot before you lament your woes and push for others to bend over backward for you.
then_three_more@lemmy.world 2 months ago
It’s not though. Singular they goes back to middle English (14th century) it was just grammar Nazis in the 18th century that tried to stamp it out.
gregorum@lemm.ee 2 months ago
i didn’t know that. i genuinely thought it was a new/contemporaneous usage.
TIL
then_three_more@lemmy.world 2 months ago
It was more for an unknown individual than a known one, but extending it the way it has been is a very natural progression
So an example where you don’t know the individual would be
Somebody left their umbrella in the office. Could you please let them know where they can get it?
The more modern extended usage that people seem so up in arms about would be
Kate left their umbrella in the office. Could you please let them know where they can get it?
aarRJaay@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Person 1: Is your friend Bob coming over? Person 2: No, they can’t make it, they’re busy
One Bob, and we all know it’s one Bob, no confusion. Look for context. It’s not that hard.
CluckN@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Person 1: Are Bob and Janice coming over? Person 2: They can’t make it.
Sometimes additional context is needed.
Syn_Attck@lemmy.today 2 months ago
Person 1: Are Bob and Janice coming over? Person 2: They can’t make it.
Alternative:
Person 1: Are Alice and Janice coming over? Person 2: She can’t make it.
Alternative:
Person 1: Are Alice and Janice coming over? Person 2: Alice can’t make it.
This is far less ambiguous than you’re trying to force it to be.
Devccoon@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Your example is unambiguously plural. It’s not a good illustration of “they” creating confusion.
WhoresonWells@lemmy.basedcount.com 2 months ago
Bob said he’s coming, but Janice said they can’t make it.
jbrains@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
One does not do this. The singular “they” is many hundreds of years old.
Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I totally get your opinion, because I used to share it and even created a similar post on Reddit a few years ago. Just start using it and you’ll be surprised how quickly it becomes natural. There’s no good reason not to do something that is easy and can potentially prevent people from feeling uncomfortable.
hperrin@lemmy.world 2 months ago
If you don’t know someone’s gender, what do you call them? Like, what if they present in a really ambiguous way? Or what if you’ve never even met them? Like say you’re about to sit down at a restaurant, and you notice a jacket on the seat, would you tell the hostess, “excuse me, I think the last person to sit here left their jacket.” Or would you just be unable to refer to them because you don’t know their gender?
BassaForte@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I love the irony of this comment lol
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 months ago
This is typical for the English language.
There used to be thou, which was a singular form of you. However, thou also implied you were talking to someone at or lower that you were. Eventually, it became seen as rude to call someone thou, so its usage dropped in favor of a uniform you.
A singular they fits this role, as the gender isn’t defined enough to use he or she and the use of it would be seen as an insult.
kbal@fedia.io 2 months ago
Unfortunately you're at least ten years too late in trying to get people to ask themselves this question
then_three_more@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You mean 600 years too late.
kbal@fedia.io 2 months ago
Nah. Maybe twenty years tops. That so many people fell for the fallacious line of argument you're thinking of was part of the difficulty in trying to push for any of the various theoretically "better" choices that are still available should humanity unexpectedly swerve in the direction of caring about such things.
Slatlun@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Me talking at dinner: “Will you pass me the peas?” Cut to 5 people confused about whether I mean just one of them or if I want the whole table to all hand me the peas.
I get why they/them can be confusing because of the plural thing, but we are used to a quirky language. With a little practice, the tone and context clear up nearly all confusion. The rest is as easy or hard as what we have to do with an ambiguous “you.”
PS Sorry to the “yous/yous guys” people. I am not trying to turn a blind eye to you obviously superior usage. It just really ruins my point.
knightly@pawb.social 2 months ago
I rather enjoy “y’all” as a plural second person pronoun. =D
glimse@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You say “with a little practice,” but there’s no practice needed when it’s already part of our language. I guarantee every English speaker complaining about it uses “they” as a singular pronoun quite often.
Today@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Real conversation at my house… Me - You invited your friend, Taylor, to Thanksgiving?
Kid-Yeah, they’re looking forward to meeting you guys.
Me-Oh, is Taylor bringing a date?
Kid- i don’t think so. I told them to come over about 4.
Me- ??? How many chairs do we need??
So, while they singular is correct, it’s also confusing as hell!!
Maven@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I have no idea how you would be this confused here.
ABCDE@lemmy.world 2 months ago
It’s really not, it’s very common usage in the UK.
Jtee@lemmy.world 2 months ago
What about this is confusing?
aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 2 months ago
“Sorry for the confusion. Taylor uses they/them pronouns.”
Confusion lifted, problem solved.
Today@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Yeah, that would have helped.
ted@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
one always thinks of a plurality of people
Speak for yourself! I don’t immediately think plural when “they” is used.
ABCDE@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Using “one” yet it refers to multiple people, my days.
joyjoy@lemm.ee 2 months ago
IMO only one person is allowed to use the one pronoun: Keanu Reeves
knightly@pawb.social 2 months ago
Sadly, many educational institutions still teach a prescriptive form of English that fails to acknowledge this, but singular “They” is centuries older than using “You” instead of “Thou”. It was already in common use way back in Shakespear’s time. If thou thinkst this confusing, change thyself before demanding others change for thine own comfort.
Also, some people are plural, so the ambiguity of “they” is inclusive to them.
Also-also, the only other pronouns in common use that aren’t explicitly gendered are “it/its”, which works just fine for me but some people find dehumanizing. Nonbinary and agender folks often prefer “they/them” over "it/itsx or neopronouns.
Also-also-also, “picking new words to use” is extremely non-trivial for pronouns because it requires the entire English-speaking population to relearn fundamental communication habits. It’s much easier to simply accept the fact that singular they is extremely common.
otp@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Also, some people are plural, so the ambiguity of “they” is inclusive to them.
Like the former Queen of England’s royal we?
knightly@pawb.social 2 months ago
Yeah!
The Royal “We”, aka the “Majestic Plural”, is the use of a plural pronoun to refer to a single person holding a high office.
For plural folks, using a plural pronoun to reference the multiple persons existing within a single body is also appropriate (though I don’t know if that usage has a fancy name yet~). And when referencing these persons individually, we just use their own pronouns the same as with non-plural folks. 🤓
Deestan@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Entering academia early 2000s, I saw people refer to authors of research papers as “they” as a default to sidestep gendering.
On one hand it’s nice to not insert gender where it isn’t needed, but on the more practical hand it wasn’t always possible to tell by name either. European names can have different gender in different regions, or be all Sztrkökla, and names from Asia are even harder to guess.
ABCDE@lemmy.world 2 months ago
names from Asia are even harder to guess
Good luck in Cambodia where Samnang and many other names can be used for both male and female names.
my_hat_stinks@programming.dev 2 months ago
You get gender-neutral names in English-speaking countries too, eg Alex, Jordan, and Dylan. It’s just not possible to reliably guess everyone’s gender from their name alone.
PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 2 months ago
“Every customer should be greeted when they walk into the store.”
The singular “they” is traditional in English - it is very much proper English and has been around (iirc) since the 17th century. It’s only a big deal now because conservatives want to make gender a factor in elections.
gregorum@lemm.ee 2 months ago
i had an English teacher in high school that insisted sentences like this were grammatically incorrect, and should be, “Every customer should be greeted when he or she walks into the store.”
Impound4017@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Well said! My go-to example is ‘If someone calls and I’m not here, tell them they can leave a message’ because it covers both they and them in a singular usage.
Sidenote: I also hate the way that some people act like languages are static things, despite the known history of languages to shift and change over time. English is arguably a German creole; we don’t get to act all sanctimonious now.
PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world 2 months ago
If we actually followed the “your gender identity is mildly inconvenient to me so should be banned” crowd and made everything unambiguously gendered, language would become far more awkward.
“If someone calls and I’m not there, tell him or her that he or she can leave a message”.
We could start doing this right now – every time
theyhe or sheuseuses the word “they”, insisttheyhe or she repeatsthemselveshimself or herself in a way that leaves no gender ambiguity…
coolmultitool@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That’s a good explanation. English isn’t my native language, and I always found the they/them weird sounding. With that sentence of the customer you made it click for me. Thanks!
jbrains@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Thanks!
I have always loved the OED. As a kid I used to sit in the library and just read it. It was always a dream of mine to buy my own copy and just have it the way people used to have encyclopedias.
ABCDE@lemmy.world 2 months ago
It is much quicker to understand they as a neutral instead of introducing new language and trying to disseminate that through textbooks. This way, there’s no need for any (or many) edits, we can just maintain existing grammar with new understanding.
There are other languages with similar concepts, and you don’t have a problem with ‘you’ when referring to singular/plural, so I assume that people who suddenly take umbrage are just kicking up a fuss for the sake of it.
neptune@dmv.social 2 months ago
Conservatives would probably get mad about that too so “they” works just fine
Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
Why not just pick new words to use?
Because the current word for it works just fine?
aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 2 months ago
And also because when people try to use neopronouns they take as much flak for that if not more. Imagine this same argument: “I’m not used to these newfangled pronouns. Why can’t they just use normal ones?”
Blaze@dormi.zone 2 months ago
We have that in French, the amount of discussions the new pronoun (“iel”, as a mix between “il” et “elle”) is absurd
SigmarStern@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
As someone speaking German, a brutally gendered language, let me tell you, they/them is awesome and I’d love to have something similar in German. There is so much fighting and discussions about “gendern” and it consumes so much energy that could be better spent elsewhere. And conservatives are having a field trip with this.
Looking for a new word is equally as hard if not way harder than using what already works fine.
Carrolade@lemmy.world 2 months ago
“They” is the traditional English-language pronoun when an unknown person could be of either gender. “Mommy, my teacher said a funny thing at school today!” “Oh? What did they say?”
Teacher is singular, but assigning a gender would feel awkward if one doesn’t know, so “they” is used instead.
bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 2 months ago
Thou shouldst campaign for the resurgence of a second person singular pronoun as well.
pantyhosewimp@lemmynsfw.com 2 months ago
2nd person singular: ya’ll 2nd person plural: all ya’ll
Using “youins” for second person plural is considered archaic.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
This isn’t a new thing, so you’re just having trouble with centuries old English, not some modern trend.