False Linguistics
Hello everyone! I know it's been months since I've updated, but before I do a typical event update, I have a bone to pick. This is a touchy issue, so watch out, and remember, we all are entitled to our opinions. What I'm trying to say is whether you agree with me or disagree with me, make any responses intelligible and passive. I won't have my journal become a war zone for philosophical debate.
A friend of mine was telling me about English pronouns a few days ago, and after hearing what she told me, I did some reading on the topic. Honestly, I think it's all ridiculous. The topic: gender-neutral pronouns. The most common of these are "ze" and "hir" (nominative/accusative and possessive, respectively). My bone picking begins here. Given my conservatism on most political and social views, I consider myself relatively moderate when it comes to GLBT-type issues. I'm not bothered by or opposed to anyone who wishes to be or is GLBT. My friends will attest to this, because I have many friends who fall into this category. But this pronoun nonsense is proposterous. Some transgender individuals feel strongly that the pronouns "ze" and "hir" should be adopted for people wishing to be referred to with gender-neutral pronouns. I'm all for self-identity, but the last time I checked, expressing onesself didn't include adding made-up words to the dictionary. First, I cite that "ze," "hir," and any of the other most common gender-neutral pronouns (there are a few sets) proposed for use by some transgender individuals are NOT English words. These words do not appear in the Oxford English Dictionary, and they certainly don't show up in Merriam-Webster. Maybe it's just me, but when words don't belong to a language (especially when they don't belong to any language), most people steer clear of using them either in speech or writing. My second argument is a counter-argument for one made by supporters of the new pronouns. Much of their argument lies in the fact that English divides the personal pronoun into genders, and that is wrong. The gender dividing, they say, is the source of all this trouble in the first place. I took Latin for four years, and most of you I'm sure have taken a Romance, Germanic, or other written language as well. English, among all languages, is in the minority. The personal pronoun is one of very few noun forms that English declines into genders. Latin, on the other hand (and Spanish, French, German, Italian, etc.), divides nearly all nouns into genders. Although many of these match typical gender associations to nouns, some fly in the face of those assumptions. More than a few famous Roman men had feminine names, and one of the words for specific male or female genitalia (I can't remember which) was swapped with what one would expect its gender to be. Although with pronouns, gender is often indicative of a specific anatomical sex, this isn't always the case. "He," "him," and "his" have always been gender-neutral unless specified as not. Typically, these pronouns can refer to people in general, regardless of gender (or lack of gender). This issue is nearly as comical and ridiculous as those who get upset when the words "man" and "mankind" are used when referring to the entire population. The last thing I'd like to point out is the hypocrisy of the entire situation. Those most avid in supporting these new pronouns are individuals who do not identify themselves with a specific gender. I have a message for you: If you want to argue that gender shouldn't play a role in identifying people, and that male and female are no longer applicable, then why on earth are you making such a big deal about gender-pronouns?! You're making gender an issue by proposing a "gender-neutral" pronoun to supplement the obsolete "he" and "she," which in itself is ridiculous. If gender doesn't matter, then you shouldn't be too stressed or upset when someone calls you "he" or "she," and you most certainly shouldn't be arguing against gender in language, which is minimal in English to begin with. That may be a bit decontructionist for me to say, but it seems blatantly obvious to me.
Again, I want to emphasize that I am a tolerant person, and that I am fully supportive of self-expression of any kind. However, this nonsense about gender-neutral pronouns is just over the line. Give me (and the literary world) a break. I don't see campaigning against the use of Spanish and French because they classify nouns based partially on gender. And one last thing: if you're going to campaign for new pronouns, at least make them somewhat asthetic. "Ze" and "hir" aren't exactly appealing, even by the standards of English. The last time I heard "ze" was in a bad French impersonation (think The Pink Panther). I'd be just slightly less opposed to all this if better words were chosen as proposals. But until they show up in the OED, I don't intend to use them. If gender isn't an issue, then why is it being made an issue? And with that, the bone has been picked. Think badly of me if you want, or go with me on it, but remember, I am tolerant of expression - I just don't like ridiculous suggestions about changing the English language and pushing society in general to adopt a completely new set of words.
Goodnight everyone. Remember to comment rationally.
Daniel/Teasley
A friend of mine was telling me about English pronouns a few days ago, and after hearing what she told me, I did some reading on the topic. Honestly, I think it's all ridiculous. The topic: gender-neutral pronouns. The most common of these are "ze" and "hir" (nominative/accusative and possessive, respectively). My bone picking begins here. Given my conservatism on most political and social views, I consider myself relatively moderate when it comes to GLBT-type issues. I'm not bothered by or opposed to anyone who wishes to be or is GLBT. My friends will attest to this, because I have many friends who fall into this category. But this pronoun nonsense is proposterous. Some transgender individuals feel strongly that the pronouns "ze" and "hir" should be adopted for people wishing to be referred to with gender-neutral pronouns. I'm all for self-identity, but the last time I checked, expressing onesself didn't include adding made-up words to the dictionary. First, I cite that "ze," "hir," and any of the other most common gender-neutral pronouns (there are a few sets) proposed for use by some transgender individuals are NOT English words. These words do not appear in the Oxford English Dictionary, and they certainly don't show up in Merriam-Webster. Maybe it's just me, but when words don't belong to a language (especially when they don't belong to any language), most people steer clear of using them either in speech or writing. My second argument is a counter-argument for one made by supporters of the new pronouns. Much of their argument lies in the fact that English divides the personal pronoun into genders, and that is wrong. The gender dividing, they say, is the source of all this trouble in the first place. I took Latin for four years, and most of you I'm sure have taken a Romance, Germanic, or other written language as well. English, among all languages, is in the minority. The personal pronoun is one of very few noun forms that English declines into genders. Latin, on the other hand (and Spanish, French, German, Italian, etc.), divides nearly all nouns into genders. Although many of these match typical gender associations to nouns, some fly in the face of those assumptions. More than a few famous Roman men had feminine names, and one of the words for specific male or female genitalia (I can't remember which) was swapped with what one would expect its gender to be. Although with pronouns, gender is often indicative of a specific anatomical sex, this isn't always the case. "He," "him," and "his" have always been gender-neutral unless specified as not. Typically, these pronouns can refer to people in general, regardless of gender (or lack of gender). This issue is nearly as comical and ridiculous as those who get upset when the words "man" and "mankind" are used when referring to the entire population. The last thing I'd like to point out is the hypocrisy of the entire situation. Those most avid in supporting these new pronouns are individuals who do not identify themselves with a specific gender. I have a message for you: If you want to argue that gender shouldn't play a role in identifying people, and that male and female are no longer applicable, then why on earth are you making such a big deal about gender-pronouns?! You're making gender an issue by proposing a "gender-neutral" pronoun to supplement the obsolete "he" and "she," which in itself is ridiculous. If gender doesn't matter, then you shouldn't be too stressed or upset when someone calls you "he" or "she," and you most certainly shouldn't be arguing against gender in language, which is minimal in English to begin with. That may be a bit decontructionist for me to say, but it seems blatantly obvious to me.
Again, I want to emphasize that I am a tolerant person, and that I am fully supportive of self-expression of any kind. However, this nonsense about gender-neutral pronouns is just over the line. Give me (and the literary world) a break. I don't see campaigning against the use of Spanish and French because they classify nouns based partially on gender. And one last thing: if you're going to campaign for new pronouns, at least make them somewhat asthetic. "Ze" and "hir" aren't exactly appealing, even by the standards of English. The last time I heard "ze" was in a bad French impersonation (think The Pink Panther). I'd be just slightly less opposed to all this if better words were chosen as proposals. But until they show up in the OED, I don't intend to use them. If gender isn't an issue, then why is it being made an issue? And with that, the bone has been picked. Think badly of me if you want, or go with me on it, but remember, I am tolerant of expression - I just don't like ridiculous suggestions about changing the English language and pushing society in general to adopt a completely new set of words.
Goodnight everyone. Remember to comment rationally.
Daniel/Teasley