"They" can be used in singular form as a gender neutral pronoun[footnote]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46ehrFk-gLk[/footnote].Blood Brain Barrier said:
What do you think about "it"?
- Thread starter Ando85
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Without question, a very, very bad idea to call someone an "it."
Because "it" is used to refer to objects.
And I don't think I need to explain why referring to people in the same way you refer to objects is a poor choice.
Because "it" is used to refer to objects.
And I don't think I need to explain why referring to people in the same way you refer to objects is a poor choice.
Damn, forget 'it', I'm totally gonna start using the phrase 'the unborn' to describe pregnant people's unborn babies. 'It' may imply the disrespect of being an inanimate persona-less object, but 'the unborn' sounds like they're about to birth some kind of lovecraftian horror. Now that's cool.DoPo said:
OT: Yeah, what everyone else said. It's technically correct, but doesn't sound nice, and us fleshy meatbags are quite illogical and sometimes require more finesse to our language to stop non-literal implications of words hurting our feelings. So best stick to 'they' or 'that cat' etc.
Also, dudes that insulted the OP's girlfriend, c'mon man, that's not cool. Ain't nothing wrong with showing unnecessary respect and empathy for random animals, and adhering to weird social rules despite bad grammar. For example, I just used a double negative, but I think 'Ain't nothing wrong' sounds more friendly than 'there is nothing wrong', so I'm going to leave it there, grammar be damned.
You could also go for "the-unborn-to-be" - sounds more mystical. You can even try "the nameless", unless the parents have a name in mind. You may even mix it up with "the nameless unborn" which sounds like Cthulhu's boss or something.Bobic said:
Well, I kinda like "Ser" as a gender neutral term. I picked it up from Dragon's Dogma. It has some fairly geek history with it.
http://nonbinary.org/wiki/Gender_neutral_titles#Ser
If not Ser, the page has some other words that might be useful.
http://nonbinary.org/wiki/Gender_neutral_titles#Ser
If not Ser, the page has some other words that might be useful.
What a strange person? Has she asked these animals what their opinion on gender-neutral pronouns are, and the implications of using a pronoun often reserved for inanimate objects to refer to a living creature? What did the animals say? If the answer is anything other than "absolutely nothing, because animals have no understanding of English" then I think it's time to start taking some meds.Ando85 said:
In all seriousness, I love animals, but the idea that you shouldn't refer to them as "it" is absolutely absurd. "It" is a standard way of referencing an animal of unknown sex, and some people use it even when it is known. No offense is intended and no harm is done, and unlike other circumstances, it's impossible to cause offense accidentally. Actually, it's also impossible to cause offense intentionally since animals lack the capacity to fully grasp human language, especially something as complicated as the implications of pronoun use. The only way to "offend" an animal is to shout at it, since they do understand tone.
This is the worst case of being offended on someone else's behalf I've ever heard, and I wish I could say it's the worst I'll ever hear, but I'll probably be eating those words when someone starts complaining about offending the trees or the moss. I guess I'll have to hold my tongue around my teapot in case he/she/ze/ey is offended by my language.
I suppose the socially appropriate response is "yes you jackass call it a gender or "they" because "it" is OBVIOUSLY used for objects and not living things."
...I'm not socially appropriate though so I'll keep calling animals I don't know the gender of and unborn (maybe even sometimes born) babies "it".
In short, I agree. It's not a big deal. Everyone will TELL you that it is, but it isn't.
...I'm not socially appropriate though so I'll keep calling animals I don't know the gender of and unborn (maybe even sometimes born) babies "it".
In short, I agree. It's not a big deal. Everyone will TELL you that it is, but it isn't.
"It would appear that my hypocrisy knows no bounds." - Doc Holliday, Tombstone.DoPo said:
I'll let you know when hypocrisy starts to bug me. "I don't care so you shouldn't, either"
That is true, but in the same way "it" can be used to describe a person. If we're talking about the best way to describe a person, "they" isn't necessarily better.Zombie_Fish said:
"And it is prophesied that the nameless unborn shall come into the world with a trembling cry, and the nameless will be named."Bobic said:Damn, that's not a bad shout. Just rock up to a friend's baby shower wearing a black hooded robe, lean over to her and ask in my most sinister voiceDoPo said:
'How is the Nameless Unborn?'
As for "it", eh. I don't really know.
For a cat, sure, whatever. I don't care. I would advise you to indulge your girlfriend on this one though.
For a baby, certainly not once the are born, but at some point I certainly would call a "baby" it - back when the baby is just a ball of undifferentiated cells. Not sure at what point a baby stops being an it and becomes a person. In this case what the parents thinks is probably more important than what you think, this is known as "not being an asshole", so better to be on the safe side.
My rule of thumb is "it" is for non people things.
As a side not, "it" is never appropriate for a born baby, child, or adult.
Problem is these days is that everyone has a different preference/idea of what is the 'correct' use of pronouns and such to describe genderless people. Fact is, no matter how hard you try you are likely to come across someone that may even be insulted by 'incorrect' use. I'd just use the terms that you think fits best and deal with issues if they arise.
Can't please everyone and why would you want to?
Can't please everyone and why would you want to?
I would consider it disrespectful to refer to humans even babies as an 'it' as it can be considered dehumanizing. I think it's alright to use 'it' if you're referring to fetuses in a clinical sense - I would not say to expecting parents that their unborn child is an 'it'.
Animals I actually think it might be more respectful to call them an 'it' in order to show that you recognise that they are not human and have respect for what they are. That being said, pets that I know (mine and friends), I will call by their genders because I always ascribe them human thoughts and feelings - that's the privilage of owning/knowing pets - being able to make up conversations with them
I wouldn't be offended if people called my pets 'it' at all though.
Animals I actually think it might be more respectful to call them an 'it' in order to show that you recognise that they are not human and have respect for what they are. That being said, pets that I know (mine and friends), I will call by their genders because I always ascribe them human thoughts and feelings - that's the privilage of owning/knowing pets - being able to make up conversations with them
I wouldn't be offended if people called my pets 'it' at all though.
It is fine when there is uncertainty. Have you ever answered a knock on the door by asking "Who is they?"
Well considering that "it" is used as a dehumanizing transphobic slur when referring to humans. That's why "it" is generally considered offensive terminology when referring to someone's baby when the biological sex of the baby is unknown, born, or unborn. Now before someone gets their knickers in a twist, I have trans friends who have been assaulted by people who attempted to brand, or carve things like "it freak", "it whore", and such in to their very flesh. That level of hateful negativity when a word is used to refer to humans means that as a pronoun for humans, all positive connotation is lost in common parlance.
When it comes to babies whose birth sex I don't know then I'll use "the baby", "[parent's name]'s baby", or "your baby". That avoids any stickiness when it comes to the pronouns of a baby.
With animals? Well "it" is often a passable pronoun, but I find that using "it" for animals can lead to confusion. So I default to "the/your/their [whatever animal it is]", to avoid confusion. Comes from being in environments where there are lots of different animals to refer to, which if you say "it" can lead to confusion about which "it".
When it comes to babies whose birth sex I don't know then I'll use "the baby", "[parent's name]'s baby", or "your baby". That avoids any stickiness when it comes to the pronouns of a baby.
With animals? Well "it" is often a passable pronoun, but I find that using "it" for animals can lead to confusion. So I default to "the/your/their [whatever animal it is]", to avoid confusion. Comes from being in environments where there are lots of different animals to refer to, which if you say "it" can lead to confusion about which "it".
If we are to accept people who do not identify their gender to match the sex they are born with, should we not also accept the people who use pronouns in terms of sex rather than gender?Gladion said:
I mean, we don't even have a word for "Gender" in dutch, any discussion on the matter is often met with a typically dutch and indifferent shrug, for better or for worse.
Personally, I prefer clarity over technicality or politeness, I don't like playing the pronoun game because it only serves to complicate communication for no added benefit.
Pronouns are like names, they're a linguistic convenience so you don't have to describe the person in question in detail, using a single word instead, they're not supposed to be part of someone's personal identity.
I've always thought this kind of thinking was funny. When you boil it down humans are an object. We have a complex nervous system, but that doesn't make us not physical objects. I'm not saying this for any sort of political or social reason I just think it's funny. I mean I understand that human life has value to us because we are human, but I do find funny the metal gymnastics people go though to say we are something other then just complex chemistry. Having said that. . .JoJo said:
Yeah it's kind of not a good idea to call children an "it" Like I said human life has value because we are human. Saying it sounds like you're calling "it" not a human.
The only things you're going to call "it" are things that don't gain or lose anything from the disrespect some anal retentive listener perceives. Besides, there are a million more effective options if you really did intend to convey disrespect. I say it doesn't matter.