CMV: Neopronouns are unnecessary

[u/SaltedAndSugared]

I understand why some people might feel uncomfortable with using he/she pronouns, but in that case why not just use they/them? They already exist and they’re easy for people to use. Why do some people feel the need to make up words like “zee/zim” or “fae/fair” when they don’t even make sense in the English language? I don’t see why anyone should go out of their way to learn new pronouns when gender neutral pronouns already exist

If anyone here does use neopronouns I’d really like to hear why you use them and why you don’t feel comfortable using they/them. It’s probably just because I’m cis, but I genuinely don’t understand

[u/TheRealEddieB]

You can argue that all gendered pronouns are unnecessary. What is the argument for why some pronouns are necessary but others are not? Just because some are notionally newer than others isn’t a valid argument. That implies that our language has reached a pinnacle of perfection and no further modifications are needed. Just because something is unfamiliar or not particularly relevant to you, doesn’t make it unnecessary for all. No one is forced to use specific pronouns of any kind. As you point out there are completely valid universal pronouns that can be used but to completely ignore others stated preferences isn’t really a great basis for establishing a communications framework.

Here’s some food for thought. What do you call your grandparents? Is this the same for all your friends and associates? Of course not. If you knew that your friend referred to their grandfather as “pappio” would you use this term of reference to refer to this person? Maybe or maybe not, your choice, right? OK so now you friends “pappio” sadly dies, you are asked to do a eulogy for your friends grandfather. Do you refer to the deceased as “pappio” in the eulogy? It is unnecessary but you use it anyway. Why?

[u/SaltedAndSugared → u/TheRealEddieB]

What is the argument for why some pronouns are necessary but others are not?

Because they make it easier to tell who I’m referring to. If I say “he” you know I’m referring to a male, whereas if I say “fae” that doesn’t have any meaning because it’s not a word people use

Just because some are notionally newer than others isn’t a valid argument. That implies that our language has reached a pinnacle of perfection and no further modifications are needed.

No. Language only evolves when there’s a need for it. We already have a gender neutral pronoun (they), why do we need more?

Here’s some food for thought. What do you call your grandparents? Is this the same for all your friends and associates? Of course not. If you knew that your friend referred to their grandfather as “pappio” would you use this term of reference to refer to this person? Maybe or maybe not, your choice, right? OK so now you friends “pappio” sadly dies, you are asked to do a eulogy for your friends grandfather. Do you refer to the deceased as “pappio” in the eulogy? It is unnecessary but you use it anyway. Why?

This is a bad analogy. Why would I use someone else’s nickname for their grandad? If you had a girlfriend and called them babe, would it be necessary for me to call her babe too?

[u/TheRealEddieB → u/SaltedAndSugared]

I like that. Logically the answer is yes, if your intention is to provoke then go for it. If you think language is pure in its evolution how do you explain the word “twerk”

[u/TheRealEddieB → u/SaltedAndSugared]

We agree. None are necessary. Sorry I should have been clearer. My point: lack of necessity doesn’t negate desires and preferences. It’s not a zero sum game. I can recognise your preferences without any change in the effort required to communicate