plural individuals
Sun Mar 27 17:34:43 EDT 2016
I don't accept using they/them/their for individuals of undetermined gender. I know there's a movement pushing for this, and it's common practice for most people, but I don't accept it.
On NPR a few moments ago I heard this applied to an artificial intelligence product. A piece of experimental software does not have gender. It is an "it". There is no reason to call it "they". There is no question to its gender.
Sat Apr 9 04:33:03 EDT 2016
This was in my email today:One of our clients, for whom we are putting together a performance experience on April 16, 2016, is in need of a FEMALE Queen Elizabeth Impersonator.
We are seeking a current or former student of yours, over the age of 40, who can portray the current Queen Elizabeth, in character, with accent, around the streets of New York in some amusing situations (feeding ducks, meeting people on the subway, supervising a medieval jousting contest, etc). They would be a part of a team of talent along with three of our male actors, and would be led around by our client from scene to scene.
This would take place for a block of hours sometime between 10:30AM-4PM on SATURDAY APRIL 16th, and pay around $125 per hour as compensation.
***The actor would have to provide their own outfit similar to the photo I have attached, including accessories such as a tiara, scepter, sash, jewelry, glasses, etc.***
Given that the requests specifies "FEMALE", what possible justification is there for "They" and "their"? (Applying the majestic plural to the actor?)
[I must also wonder how many male Queen Elizabeth Impersonators are out there, given the requestor's need to specify, with emphasis.
Seems to me it's more of a parody if the gender does not (appear to) match the subject.]
Mon Apr 25 15:35:31 EDT 2016This e-mail message cannot be delivered to: Doe, John X. Their mailbox is full.
John Doe is not plural; his mailbox does not belong to multiple people. And this one would have been so easy to sidestep: "The mailbox is full." No need to assume/deduce/guess a gender.
If there had been multiple recipients with full mailboxes, "Their mailbox is full" still would not have worked because there would be more than one mailbox.
[This entry was originally posted as https://syntonic-comma.dreamwidth.org/805059.html on Dreamwidth (where there are
comments).]
I don't accept using they/them/their for individuals of undetermined gender. I know there's a movement pushing for this, and it's common practice for most people, but I don't accept it.
On NPR a few moments ago I heard this applied to an artificial intelligence product. A piece of experimental software does not have gender. It is an "it". There is no reason to call it "they". There is no question to its gender.
Sat Apr 9 04:33:03 EDT 2016
This was in my email today:One of our clients, for whom we are putting together a performance experience on April 16, 2016, is in need of a FEMALE Queen Elizabeth Impersonator.
We are seeking a current or former student of yours, over the age of 40, who can portray the current Queen Elizabeth, in character, with accent, around the streets of New York in some amusing situations (feeding ducks, meeting people on the subway, supervising a medieval jousting contest, etc). They would be a part of a team of talent along with three of our male actors, and would be led around by our client from scene to scene.
This would take place for a block of hours sometime between 10:30AM-4PM on SATURDAY APRIL 16th, and pay around $125 per hour as compensation.
***The actor would have to provide their own outfit similar to the photo I have attached, including accessories such as a tiara, scepter, sash, jewelry, glasses, etc.***
Given that the requests specifies "FEMALE", what possible justification is there for "They" and "their"? (Applying the majestic plural to the actor?)
[I must also wonder how many male Queen Elizabeth Impersonators are out there, given the requestor's need to specify, with emphasis.
Seems to me it's more of a parody if the gender does not (appear to) match the subject.]
Mon Apr 25 15:35:31 EDT 2016This e-mail message cannot be delivered to: Doe, John X. Their mailbox is full.
John Doe is not plural; his mailbox does not belong to multiple people. And this one would have been so easy to sidestep: "The mailbox is full." No need to assume/deduce/guess a gender.
If there had been multiple recipients with full mailboxes, "Their mailbox is full" still would not have worked because there would be more than one mailbox.
[This entry was originally posted as https://syntonic-comma.dreamwidth.org/805059.html on Dreamwidth (where there are
comments).]