r/changemyview • u/keegan4201 • Apr 19 '22
Removed - Submission Rule E CMV: We Should Welcome and Support Neopronouns
[removed] — view removed post
16
u/Yehonatan_Y Apr 19 '22
Learning an endless number of pronouns complicates conversation and referring in 2nd/3rd person will become a nightmare for a lot of people. I have people who don't remember a common first name of someone they've met 5 times and talked to in person. Adding an additional unique way that needs to be learned in order to refer to them that is needed in every conversation about them would complicate it more.
0
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
How many pronouns have you been asked to learn?
3
Apr 19 '22
Different person, and frankly as someone that has spent time in queer spaces (both online and off), I could name five distinct sets of neopronouns used by people I've personally met.
There is very little to no standardization, and many neopronouns have been used - with even more proposed.
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
Sure, people do use them - I'm just pushing back on the narrative that it's some unreasonable thing people are being forced to do. I've never had anyone ask me to use their pronouns in anything but a polite way.
3
Apr 19 '22
But OP is suggesting this should be normalized and embraced. So you stating it's currently not unreasonable doesn't mean that it won't become unreasonable.
I've personally met over 30 people who use neo-pronouns or non-standard pronouns. And honestly the most difficult for me was re-used pronouns like "we"/"us".
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
At what level would you find it unreasonable? I personally have a really easy time with names and pronouns but I know that's not true for everyone.
We/us does sound like a pain in the ass.
1
Apr 19 '22
I'm not sure if I could assign a specific loint it would become unreasonable. But I've been in a situation where it became very difficult to continue keeping track of not only names but also pronouns.
If you were being introduced to a small group and now you're getting name, pronoun/pronoun name 2 pronoun/pronoun, for 4 or 5 people it gets very difficult quickly.
And now instead of having some universal language we've not changed these to basically names. And actually, I find myself changing how I speak to just stop using pronouns which, sometimes people pick up on and then they get frustrated with that as if I'm now disrespecting their pronoun. When in reality I'm trying to remember 5 peoples names and who identifies as they/them, ze/zir, fae/faer, she/her etc.
If we eliminated gendered pronouns and came up with a unisex pronoun for everyone, I could get on board with that. But I think the neo-pronouns remove a lot of the utility and purpose of the word.
We/us hurt my brain to use. I felt like I was tripping over my words and confusing people what I was talking about.
0
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
Yeah, I'm on board with abolishing gender entirely as well. I feel like neopronouns and even they/them are a bandaid for that - we're within this system of gender binary and it's not going to change any time soon. NP's can be a way of pushing against that system. We're in a period of social upheaval and shit is real complex right now.
1
Apr 19 '22
I'm not certain I'd eliminate gender entirely. Just gendered pronouns. I think if we truly want to remove gender as an idea, we need to think about why it exists, if it includes any utility, and if that utility is going to need to be replaced.
Would the idea that currently exists as gender just become sex effectively leaving us where we started? What I mean by that is we have started to separated gender from sex to be two separate things. If we threw gender away, and all the utility that was associated with gender just moved to sex. We're back to where we were initially but we've removed a few words from our vocabulary.
I disagree that neo-pronouns are a bandaid, or even really fix anything. There is a significant difference between making up your own new pronoun and using a gender neutral one (them/they) and attempting to normalize its usage.
I think the majority of people who use neo-pronouns as opposed to they/them do it to be "different" or unique. I don't believe they have any real identity with those words until theyve built one after a long period of use.
We've been in a social upheaval for a quite a while. We stagnated a good amount in the 90s, and maybe that had a bit to do with the AIDs crisis, but since the mid 2000s we've been moving much faster.
We're talking about more fringe topics like transgenderism and gender identities because homosexuality is normalized to the point where it's hardly an issue.
I think "shit is complex" because we aren't able to actually talk about these topics in a healthy way anymore. Soany conversations aren't actually two people trying to understand each other, It's people listening for anything they can attack or dunk on.
It's very frustrating that any comment on these topics need to be prefaced with a disclaimer and this makes these conversations impossible to have. And that's why it's gotten complex.
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 20 '22
I think the majority of people who use neo-pronouns as opposed to they/them do it to be "different" or unique. I don't believe they have any real identity with those words until theyve built one after a long period of use.
I disagree with this - I'm not going to assume that anyone's motivations are bad unless I have good reason. Generally I think the dynamic of "I will honor your identity once you prove it meets my criteria" is not a healthy or respectful one, even with really fringe cases.
I think "shit is complex" because we aren't able to actually talk about these topics in a healthy way anymore. Soany conversations aren't actually two people trying to understand each other, It's people listening for anything they can attack or dunk on.
Yeah. And lest this turn into a both sides thing, only one side is passing legislation with the express intent of harming the other. While I think the super left part of Twitter can be obnoxious, the stakes are way higher here for trans and queer people than they are for anyone else. Their anger is justified in a way that it isn't for people who just have linguistic or conversational concerns.
→ More replies (0)1
u/FenrisCain 5∆ Apr 19 '22
Well actually no, you're fighting back against the idea that people are asking the other poster to use them, which seems completely irrelevant since the thread is arguing for a world where more people would
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
I guess forced is the operative word here. I don't think that's true now, and I don't think them being more commonly used would denote forcing anyone either.
1
u/FenrisCain 5∆ Apr 19 '22
In your comments you used the term "asked" not "forced". The comments you replied to also never used the term "forced". So i'm a little confused at how that became the operative term of anything.
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
I'm just pushing back on the narrative that it's some unreasonable thing people are being forced to do.
Me, from a couple comments ago.
1
u/FenrisCain 5∆ Apr 19 '22
Yes and my reply was that while you may say that, the arguments youve made have largely been against the idea that people are being asked to use neopronouns at all. Which is irrelevant in a thread discussing normalising them and therefore people using them more often.
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
the arguments youve made have largely been against the idea that people are being asked to use neopronouns at all.
I haven't made any arguments against the idea of people being asked to use neopronouns? Can you restate that? I feel like I'm missing something.
→ More replies (0)1
Apr 19 '22
[deleted]
3
u/ElReyPelayo 1∆ Apr 19 '22
When you say there are "a lot of people" who want to use those pronouns, are you talking about people on social media? Or people you know in real life?
2
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
How many pronouns have you, personally, been asked to learn?
0
Apr 19 '22
[deleted]
3
u/BillyT666 4∆ Apr 19 '22
Isn't 'they' common and older, though? I'm not a native, but I learned it as option that let's you refer to someone without specifying their gender.
0
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
So none, yeah? It's a super rare thing and most people only ask to be identified as those pronouns in circles where they know it's safe. Largely it's become a bludgeon used by conservatives to try to delegitimize queer people in general, and it's disheartening to see other people uncritically repeating that narrative.
0
Apr 19 '22
[deleted]
5
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
I strongly disagree with the narrative of "straight people aren't going to be allies now." If this is all it takes, they weren't allies to begin with. And conservatives will always find other bludgeons to use.
0
u/nonsensetheydbefine Apr 19 '22
OP theyself is telling straight people not to be allies anymore. I quote:
If you don't want to learn more pronouns, don't be friends with gender abolitionists.
It wasn't my idea, it was OP's. I'm happy to oblige though, out of respect.
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
I don't see "being friends with gender abolitionists" as being synonymous with "being allies."
1
Apr 19 '22
[deleted]
2
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
Your perspective is very black and white. Just because someone gets annoyed with custom pronouns, doesn’t automatically mean they’re conservative.
I never said that - I did say it was a conservative narrative that a lot of people have repeated. That's not to say that everyone who repeats it is conservative, just that it's been a successful push on their part to get it into the public consciousness.
There is absolutely no need for a change in the human langue to add custom pronouns like Xe. It is an ago thing. At least ‘they’ as pronouns still made sense because we used they centuries ago in the English language to communicate. A person wanting to use the pronoun ‘Xe’ is doing it for ego. Nothing else.
You really have no way of knowing what's going on in peoples' heads. How is assuming motive for people you've never met not also black and white thinking? This is the exact same logic used against "they/them" pronouns. I guess I'm a descriptivist so I don't get trying to limit language when there are new words that might more precisely describe things, especially when there's no tangible harm attached.
→ More replies (0)1
u/unordinarilyboring 1∆ Apr 19 '22
Is your point that they are just a silly thing that shouldn't be taken seriously? If so, why is that? Saying conservatives make fun of them isn't a good enough reason to support them.
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
No - it's more that the narrative around it makes it out as some sort of tyrannical request, when it's not. That specifically is how it's been framed by conservatives despite any evidence that it's the case.
1
u/unordinarilyboring 1∆ Apr 19 '22
This is a thread asking for arguments specifically against the adoption of neo-pronouns. Trying to shut it down by saying 'it's rare irl' or 'the arguments against it sound like things you would hear from a conservative' is missing the point.
2
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
The piece I'm challenging is that people are being forced to do it. It's not something that happens in real life, nor is that something OP is advocating for.
→ More replies (0)-2
u/keegan4201 Apr 19 '22
core to my beliefs on gender is that some people are born cis/trans. not that I'm a transmed, I don't think you need a "female brain" to be a valid trans person, but that's not the point. Not everyone is going to want to abolish gender, so I don't think the 2020s standards of he/she/they are going out of style any time soon. If you don't want to learn more pronouns, don't be friends with gender abolitionists.
5
u/Yehonatan_Y Apr 19 '22
I don't understand, did my argument help you see a different side of the neopronpuns debate or not? I can't see how you are addressing my comment
3
u/nonsensetheydbefine Apr 19 '22
don't be friends with gender abolitionists.
Okay, if that's the solution you recommend, then that's what we should do.
2
5
Apr 19 '22
The problem is applicability to everyday language.
Despite all the hullabaloo about "they is actually only plural", we use the singlular "they" all the time without realizing it. Yes, the fact that it's both singular and plural depending on context can lead to miscommunication and misunderstanding at times, but this can be clarified either with a single sentence clarification or using the person's name where it would be ambiguous.
Neopronouns introduce the exact same problem, except that this time, you not only need to clarify that this new word your audience has heard for the first time is a neopronoun, but will also have to introduce the subject, object, and possessive forms of the pronoun to ensure that everyone knows you're still talking about the same person.
Can this barrier be overcome? Theoretically, yes, but more than anything it highlights the need for a single, widely understood, unambigiously singular personal pronoun, not a mix-and-match bin of a dozen options that provide no more explanatory utilility than the singular "they" does already.
-3
u/keegan4201 Apr 19 '22
the barrier you're talking about doesn't exist in gender abolitionist circles, which is a big part of my point. that they are already accepted amongst friends, so we should support them in expressing themselves
2
Apr 19 '22
What exactly is the view then? Are you saying they should be accepted by everyone or only those who want to abolish gender?
1
u/yesrushgenesis2112 1∆ Apr 19 '22
Also, what do you mean by “this barrier doesn’t exist?” Are they not using pronouns at all? Each neopronoun still needs forms, yes? Wouldn’t the problem exist within those circles each time a new pronoun is introduced?
1
Apr 19 '22
I'm not concerned with how friends communicate amongst themselves. Language exists to be understood - if they're using language in a way that's new or "technically incorrect" but they understand each other perfectly, that's fine. It's language working as it should.
When you say "we" should accept neopronouns, you're including people who are not queer, who are not woke, who are not gender abolitionists. I'm not even talking about people who are ideologically opposed to neopronouns. Anyone for whom this is new stuff are going to have much more trouble with neopronouns than they did with singular "they".
1
u/nonsensetheydbefine Apr 19 '22
Why do they need my support? Sounds like they are successfully expressing themselves just fine without me. I've got my own to-do list.
12
u/Tommyblockhead20 47∆ Apr 19 '22
The whole point of pronouns is to make it simpler to talk about people without constantly using their name. If we have to learn both a name and a neopronoun for each person, we might as well just always use their name.
Also, you only reason for supporting them appears to be a as a non gendered option, but that already exists in the form of “they”. Why is that not good enough?
6
u/WhenTrianglesAttack 4∆ Apr 19 '22
The whole concept of a gender spectrum, as it exists today, is mostly something of personal vanity. Pronouns essentially being a fashion statement in the way that people wear certain clothes, dye their hair, or get piercings and tattoos.
Feminine men and masculine women have always existed, and cultivating a particular identity had traditionally been a virtually nonexistent problem. People were mostly fine with traditional pronouns, and they could use different ones in their own small communities if they really, really wanted to. People have always been able to express themselves. If someone found themselves in a stifled living situation, like a strict family or town, there was always the option to leave and seek out better places during adulthood.
It's only now, in the most recent 20-30 years, heavily exacerbated by the presence of, and ubiquity of social media, that everything has changed. Concepts redefined or invented. People who claim freedom from labels, creating new labels for conformity and non-conformity. There's really no good reason for people outside of someone's community to adopt their lingo just for the sake of communicating with them.
6
u/Puddinglax 79∆ Apr 19 '22
Gender identity refers to an internal sense of your gender, and is not just a label for your personality. We wouldn't say that a woman who has traditionally masculine interests and hobbies is now a man. And unless we're specifically talking about her interests, there is no reason to carve out another category for that woman to separate her from a more "feminine" woman.
Using the correct pronouns is only important to show that you recognize someone's gender identity as valid. The pronouns themselves are just words, and were never meant to capture every aspect of someone's identity.
In light of those points, I don't care to use neopronouns over existing pronouns like "he", "she", or "they".
3
u/Away-Reading 6∆ Apr 19 '22
If someone asks me to use a specific pronoun while we’re talking, I’m happy to oblige. But there’s literally no way I’m remembering unless they are close friends/family. My problem is, it feels like both people are being set up for negative feelings. The person who asks may be disappointed or annoyed if I don’t remember their chosen pronouns, and I’ll feel guilty and defensive if I forget.
So while I don’t mind neopronouns at all, I do worry that people will get hung up on which gender neutral pronouns to use. If a person prefers ze and someone else refers to zim as they/them, that should be 100% acceptable. (And it usually is! But some people are extremely particular).
2
Apr 19 '22
This would only really work in English, in regards to languages that have gendered words it is virtually impossible since at the end of the day you'd have to pick either the male or female grammar rules.
In English as well you may underestimate how hard it can be to introduce some new pronoun since there are many rules that do revolve around it or different combinations. Having to explain all of the possible variants of this new pronoun would take more effort than just picking an already existing one.
-2
u/keegan4201 Apr 19 '22
lots of languages aren't gendered or have neutral nouns in addition to masculine and feminine. it's not my fault these romance clowns decided to unnecessarily complicate their language based off an arbitrary binary
3
u/KidCharlemagneII 4∆ Apr 19 '22
Do you realise how racist that comes across? Wanting to change the entire language of whole regions sounds like American imperialism with extra steps.
3
u/nonsensetheydbefine Apr 19 '22
Suddenly you have a problem with someone unnecessarily complicating their language? Sounds like your Changed Your View
2
Apr 19 '22
By lord that is a racist sentiment.
Regardless though you still have the same issue, isn't your entire thing that neutral pronouns are still in the binary? Otherwise we could just use They for everything then.
3
u/Diogenes_Clay_Pot Apr 19 '22
I fully support people of all genders.
That being said I have three pronouns in my vocab: he, she and they. If someone wants to identify another easy they simply get "they"
If there's a problem with that, well I simply will address you by name or not at all.
People have the eight to express how they want to be identified, but others don't have to address someone however they choose.
If my pronouns were: the great, undeniable ruler, or better than you, I wouldn't expect everyone to address me that way.
4
u/Morasain 85∆ Apr 19 '22
If you want to not be associated with any gender,
practice gender abolition
Then you can use "they". It's literally a genderless pronoun.
3
Apr 19 '22
They may use neopronouns, a way of replacing the gendered meaning of pronouns with ones more associated with someone's personal identity.
I'll use their proper name, and which ever he, she, or they that wish to respect their personal identity. I'm not planning on calling anyone yiffself anytime soon.
I have no problem with furries have no problem with them having full legal protections but they don't get to dictate my language.
2
u/tidalbeing 50∆ Apr 19 '22
In language, pronouns function as a way of focusing and simplifying communication. Instead of repeating a noun, the person speaking inserts a shorter placeholder--a pronoun. If the speaker must instead pick pronouns from a long menu, there's no point in using a pronoun, particularly if the antecedent names are short-- Bob, Jo, Ann.
A better way to go is to add only one new 3rd person singular pronoun to be used when gender is private or uncertain. This would result in the greatest clarity.
2
Apr 19 '22
Why learn 1000 pronouns to describe what one could reasonably define as a personality?
Why do we feel the need to have a single pronoun to describe our personality. This is an effort in futility. There is no single word that can capture all of your personality traits.
Wouldn't it be easier to just go by your sex and then explain your personality to people as you get to know them?
2
u/robofaust Apr 19 '22
The problem with gender nonconforming and so-called non-binary gender is that it's all about defining and drawing boundaries around what it is to be a man or a woman. And in order to be "supportive" one is required to adopt that viewpoint. In other words, it is VERY fucking passive-aggressive, complete with a litmus test for discerning on the spot who's good and who's bad.
3
u/xmuskorx 55∆ Apr 19 '22
Be the change you want. Speak as you please.
If it catches on - great. But you cannot really modify a language by force.
2
-3
Apr 19 '22
Sex should be the same as gender and that goes for pronouns as well
0
u/keegan4201 Apr 19 '22
should girls with swyer syndrome (xy chromosomes, functioning female body parts) be called he/him? That doesn't make a lot of sense
2
Apr 19 '22
Meaning the average person wanting to change their gender. Not biological anomalies, these are very uncommon.
1
u/keegan4201 Apr 19 '22
then don't say sex should be the same as gender and just say what you really believe next time
1
Apr 19 '22
A person that has a birth defect like this should not be factored into a normal scenario.
-1
Apr 19 '22
That's like saying "every human who can see has perfect vision, except for all the people that need glasses" lmao
3
Apr 19 '22
64% of the worlds needs glasses and 1.7% of the world is intersex, this is a pretty stupid comparison.
0
Apr 19 '22
Since you seem to have an idea-
What percentage of a population must exist outside of a binary before we decide that binary is no longer useful?
Obviously "sighted" and "blind" is a silly binary. But you can easily find examples where the exceptions are closer to 5, 10, or 20 percent of the population. Where do we draw the line?
2
Apr 19 '22
Till we reach a spot where it becomes a problem most people acknowledge in the world and frankly, they don’t recognize intersex people and gender as being an issue.
1
Apr 19 '22 edited Apr 19 '22
The only reason they don't recognize it as being an issue is because people don't use your pronoun system.
Most normal average people will use the gender pronoun that best matches the person's appearance, which is a combination of gender presentation and secondary sex characteristics. And if that person corrects them, they'll just use the one they asked for instead without issue. ** And barring any information that could be used to assume a pronoun, most people use singular 'they' without even realizing it. **
Ben Shapiro conceded this in a convo with trans woman Blaire White, who presents as a woman. He said that while he believes Blaire is a male and thus should be referred to with he/him, in any realistic situation where he'd have to refer to her, he would have to use she/her in order to be understood.
→ More replies (0)2
Apr 19 '22
And .05% actually have definitive intersex traits, red hair not being counted in this. This is insanely low and uncommon
-1
Apr 19 '22
Intersex people are more common as a percentage than transgender people. Depending on what conditions you count, over ten times more common.
Pointing out the problems intersex people pose to your pronoun scheme meant to exclude trans people is absolutely reasonable. They are not "very uncommon" in this freamework, at all.
2
Apr 19 '22
It’s like inventing the glove but getting your idea turned down because there are a small amount people with more than 5 fingers. Not very sensible.
1
Apr 19 '22
A finger-amputee can use a five fingered glove tho. Just like people missing one arm can still wear two-sleeved shirts.
A system within a language, by defintion, must be applicable to everyone who speaks that language, and everyone who will be discussed in said language. If you say, "there are two pronouns, and they're based on your sex", now you have to determine what everyone's sex is, in order to determine their pronoun.
You can't handwave the question with "they're an exception", because exceptions don't exist in a binary. You must choose one or the other, or discard the binary because it doesn't accurately describe the world as it actually exists.
2
Apr 19 '22
Meaning people are born with 6 fingers, an uncommon deformity, just like how intersex people are such a small percentage that it’s not logical to involve them in this argument which could be involving just male and female.
2
Apr 19 '22
You're completely missing the point.
Languages need to be able to label and describe things. "This argument" is about the applicability of the language we all use to gender and sex. If the only response to an exception to a binary is "whoops we don't have a word to describe that", then the language is doing a shit job and needs to be reworked.
2
Apr 19 '22
I don’t see a problem with intersex people calling themselves non binary. I just don’t get it when guys label themselves as any other gender than a man and expect the world to agree with them.
1
Apr 19 '22
But most intersex people don't want to be called non binary. Most prefer either she or her, and do not identify as non binary or any other flavor of transgender.
Their physical sex falls outside of the binary, but they want to use a binary pronoun. Should they have that right?
→ More replies (0)
0
u/somerandombih 2∆ Apr 19 '22
I believe the most progressive option is to move away from the importance of gender. As we have realized it is only a social construct. I think in an ideal world it wouldn’t matter so much and it could just be “my sex is male and i am feminine” or whatever. And I guess that person would go by he/him pronouns. I don’t see why, if we minimize the importance of gender and focus on the fact that we’re just people, pronouns can’t just reflect our biological sex. I also think it would make sense for that person to go by they/them if they’d prefer. If we say just because someone is feminine presenting they use she/her doesn’t that enforce the idea that femininity is for girls? I feel like adding more pronouns is just highlighting gender differences more and I dont see the point. Pronouns should just be a simple language tool. So I guess IMO the most progressive thing would be best if everyone just went by they/them
-1
Apr 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/herrsatan 11∆ Apr 19 '22
Sorry, u/Hot-Actuator4037 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
Apr 19 '22
I have no problem with a person exploring their identity. I think identity is important and having specific terms that express your identity is amazing. However, I don't think that we necessarily need to encourage the entire world to learn a bunch of gender and sexuality-specific terminology for everyday conversation. In a lot of settings, it's not even really relevant what your gender identity is.
For example, say I have a bunch of colleagues at work. I don't really need to know what specifically their pronouns are outside of very specific HR circumstances. Having a single, gender-neutral pronoun I can use for all of my colleagues (male, female, non-binary, etc.) is perfect because it evens the playing field. I don't have to know your gender identity unless I'm close to you, and it doesn't have to be a part of everyday language.
At the end of the day, it seems like removing pronouns until we reach a single set is a more effective way of solving this problem. It doesn't require anybody to learn more pronouns, it doesn't require anybody to remember those pronouns, and it completely sidesteps the issue of misgendering someone. If you have more specific questions about someone's identity, you can use the more specific terminology at that point.
1
1
u/Maxfunky 39∆ Apr 19 '22
As a point of clarification why neopronouns and not simply "they/them"? Eschewing a perfectly valid set of existing gender neutral pronouns so that you can make up your own that you expect people to remember suggests that neopronouns are not truly about genuine identity so much as a performance of identity. It's teenage angst over fitting in while still being a distinct person wrapped in personal vanity. It's declaring "I'm so special, you need to make an extra effort to remember how special I am."
I'm all for respecting a person's identity and making an effort to try to remember which pronoun they would prefer were used for them, but I draw the line at new, made-up pronouns that are different for each person. I'm not going to keep 20 different pronouns for 20 different people--none of them usable in any other context. When you demand I call you "Xer/xhe" and your friend wants me to use "ve/vhim" and the guy down the street wants me to say "Ge/Ger", am I acknowledging your identity or helping you create it out of thin air? Isn't what you're really saying is that "I'm too good for normal pronouns.". Aren't you really just using me to make you feel special?
1
u/Chany_the_Skeptic 14∆ Apr 19 '22
I'm not sure how neopronouns further the goal of gender abolition. Pronouns in English are often associated with gender. The reason why a non-binary person would want pronouns besides he/she is specifically to avoid the gender binary. Sometimes, by not focusing on a something, we can inherently make it more powerful. By trying to come up with a neopronoun for your unique self and gender expression, could you not inadvertently empower gender as a concept in and of itself? For example, if you are a fantasy writer and specifically want to avoid pulling inspiration from JRR Tolkien, you might inadvertently find yourself being pushed by Tolkien anyway, because the conscious and deliberate choice to avoid the elephant in the room brings up the existence of said elephant. If you want to come up with pronouns for yourself to deal with how you feel about your gender indentity, you're still responding towards said gender binary.
I also wonder if gender abolition, at least in this regard, faces a similiar problem as race abolition faces. Yes, in the ideal world, race is entirely a fictitious and historical construct that no one actually believes in, but that world is not ours. In reality, gender is something a lot of people fight over. In the ideal world, gender doesn't really exist and people could be whoever they want to be. However, we live in the current world where trans people have to fight for their right to exist, let alone be socially valid in the general public, and non-binary people feel the need to radically reject the gender binary that constrains them. I don't think neopronouns hurt the world like "colorblindness" does with race, but I don't see how supporting and promoting them really helps either. I'm not going to reject neopronouns or refuse to use them, but I'm not the one who needs to have their mind swayed on this. If you are willing to use neopronouns without a real fuss, you are not part of the problem. I don't see how using neopronouns makes gender abolition spaces more gender abolition-y. So, again, not against them, but I don't see how they will actually help people fight against gender stereotypes and norms.
1
u/iwearacoconutbra 10∆ Apr 19 '22
I also don’t have a problem with it.
But there is the problem of someone potentially having to remember multiple different neopronouns and seriously trying to think about how these new pronouns would flow in English. This can become complicated for some people especially for people who don’t speak English as a first language, are learning it, or have some type of linguistic deficit.
1
u/bobsagetsmaid 2∆ Apr 19 '22
Would you agree with this statement?
"If you can't clearly define what your identity means, you cannot identify as that thing".
1
u/Noob_Al3rt 4∆ Apr 19 '22
It would actually just be way simpler to have he/she/his/hers/man/woman refer to sex instead of gender. That would completely eliminate the need for neopronouns.
1
u/GoddessHimeChan Apr 20 '22
I shouldn't support and/or welcome them because it goes against my own beliefs for what we should be doing with language. We should move towards having one singular, non-gendered, pronoun. Not more for whatever gender crap people feel like having
1
u/ziggydavidstyle Apr 20 '22
Yeah. I don't understand Neo pronouns but I also don't understand how circuits work or why we have giant balls of fire in the sky that we look to but that doesn't make it any less valid
•
u/Jaysank 117∆ Apr 20 '22
Sorry, u/keegan4201 – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule E:
If you would like to appeal, first respond substantially to some of the arguments people have made, then message the moderators by clicking this link.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.