this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
1545 points (92.4% liked)

Microblog Memes

6017 readers
3187 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 130 points 7 months ago (18 children)

My boomer parents will die on the hill that it sounds "wrong" to use "they" to refer to a singular entity. And whenever they bring that up, I always remind them that the word "they" has been used in that way for AGES.

Example: "Whose umbrella is this? Did they already leave?"

It doesn't seem to make a difference.

[–] [email protected] 56 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Watched a video that addressed this in good faith, because it is a tad awkward. They brought up and old term (because this isn't new), "thone", short for "the one". And I'mma be real with you, "THE ONE, DIRK MCCALLAHAN" does ring kinda hard.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There's a few things from history we should start using again, and this is one of them

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Bring back Victorian era slang!! and I always say that!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Capes/cloaks are both stylish and warm.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It doesn’t seem to make a difference.

Most people arguing about this are coming from an emotional place, so facts and truths don't really matter. If gender in language is important to your in-group, that's what matters. Not the history of language. Not the dictionary. The group believes this. If you reject your group, you'll die alone. Or that's what the brain would have you believe. We're all a little susceptible to social influence on belief. Some people are just unwilling or unable to overcome it.

Belief is social.

For many people, emotion is the only truth.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

What's craziest to me is that people so often adopt beliefs as to belong to some sort of in group, right, but won't necessarily adopt the set of beliefs that actually immediately benefits them, ingratiates them to their immediate surrounding environment, gives them a more functional outlook. No, it's way simpler, people just adopt the beliefs of what they perceive in their immediate surroundings. Oftentimes this manifests more as people locking themselves into increasingly insular media environments, rather than, say, having productive conversations with their kids, or allowing themselves to be convinced by their friends, or being able to even really talk on a surface level with their co-workers. Their immediate environment, their "in-group", can supercede physical reality.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago (3 children)

"He or she" sounds and looks so cumbersome. "They" is the superior pronoun on style/conciseness alone.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (18 children)

It was beaten into me in school that this is incorrect. “They” is to be used as a plural pronoun only. It’s commonly used in the singular, but it’s wrong according to the English teachers I had. In referring to a person, you must choose either he or she under those grammar rules.

With that said, maybe it’s time for me to move into the future and accept that the meaning of the word has changed. I am confident those English teachers weren’t concerned about actual gender issues. Now, I think those issues are more important than the technical grammatical issues of English.

I’ve offended people in a social setting by insisting that this is the correct usage, when truly it was just me being autistic and informal rather than political.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Perhaps it was the English teachers who were wrong.

Correct or not, people have been using it like that for a while.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Fascinating! I didn’t know there was an article about this.

This use of singular they had emerged by the 14th century, about a century after the plural they.

That’s more than official enough for me!

[–] sukhmel 3 points 7 months ago

Singular they has been criticised since the mid-18th century by prescriptive commentators who consider it an error.

  1. Hey, it's prescriptivists again, ruining everyone's day
  2. Look what's actually recent (if three centuries count as recent, but definitely more recent than seven centuries ago)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

My child dresses itself.

"Ma, I'm a boy!"

I adore how callous that sentence sounds.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago

It used to be correct APA/MLA formatting to use “he/she” when the gender of a subject was unknown. That was changed back in the mid 00’s I think. The preferred format is now “they” over “he/she”.

That being said, people use singular they/them all the time in casual conversation. We just aren’t used to using it when we know or think we know the gender of the person. But let’s be honest, there have always been people that have been hurt by being misgendered. Hell, it was common for some racists to use they/them with black women in an attempt to dehumanize them. So this idea that the singular they is new is absolutely ridiculous.

[–] tastysnacks 11 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Ok, even there we have bigger issues. How can literally mean figuratively?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Oh yeah, that one is absolutely terrible and I will die on that hill. Figuratively speaking.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago

"literally" being used to mean "figuratively" dates back to 3 years after the word "literally" began meaning "actually". If this is a hill to die on, you need to use "literally" exclusively to mean "as written in the texts". Common usage of "literally" to mean "actually" and "figuratively" both date to the 1590s

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No one uses literally to mean figuratively. They use it to emphasize regardless of if what they're emphasizing includes figurative language. Nearly every word that means something similar to "in actual fact" undergoes this semantic drift (actually, really, etc).

"She literally exploded at me." is similar in meaning to "She totally exploded at me." Not so much to "She figuratively exploded at me."

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Nearly every word that means something similar to "in actual fact" undergoes this semantic drift (actually, really, etc).

I looked into this for 3 minutes and found examples in multiple languages.

Neat.

New expression-insight remix into the human condition connected; We literally really actually feel the need to be sure we're understood, no matter the hyperbolic lengths gone to, huh?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Colloquialization. Get enough people using a new word, or existing word in a new way, and it will eventually be added to the dictionary.

I accepted the inevitable downfall of mankind when “unfriend” was added in 2009.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

But fetch still hasn't happened. :(

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

Gretchen, stop trying to make fetch happen. It’s not going to happen.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I'm curious when and where "singular they" was taught as incorrect. Coming from the Midwest in the 80s (not exactly a liberal or forward thinking place), I was taught in no uncertain terms that singular they was appropriate in many circumstances. And my teacher was old as hell, so her education on the matter probably dated to around WW2.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago

It must not be specifically gated on time. My instruction was rural East Coast. I’ve learned however just from the article posted in this thread that a singular third person has been in use for centuries, even recognized as such an official contexts.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Someone higher up this thread linked an article that singular they has been in use since the 14th century

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

It's not correct though, it's a style choice. Just like it's not incorrect to avoid the Oxford comma.

I know a lot of people have a hard on for Strunk & White, myself included, but this is one stylistic choice that is now outdated.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think of that like I think of the anti ain’t and anti Oxford comma stances. They weren’t entirely correct, they were enforcing the style of the time for educated use of English. Today educated use of English still doesn’t include ain’t, but it does use the singular they for people of unknown or nonbinary gender, and it uses the Oxford comma.

The language keeps evolving and stuff like this is part of that. Hell at one point the singular they was far less controversial than the singular you

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Yeah I told exactly one friend it wasn’t proper English and they were so offended. They were. So, so offended.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It's funny to me how easy English has it. All you have to do is use "they", and if people think that's awkward, they should see how difficult it is to navigate it in a language with complex verb conjugations with gendered nouns and verbs. It's complicated to the point that non-binary people will still use their assigned-at-birth (if that's the term?) pronouns, to save everyone - including themselves - a headache. There's of course a movement to change the language, but it's difficult.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

They went with them and then they decided to take off and took them with them, so we met up with some friends and then got together with them even though they didn't join because they ultimately wanted to go home.

It's less precise. That's just a problem with English though. That said, just using people's names more often isn't that big of a deal and using gender neutral pronouns otherwise is, similarly, not hard and not a big deal. Nevertheless, I was referring to seven different distinct individuals in the above.

He went with her, but then she decided to take off and took him with her, so we met up with some friends and then got together with him though she didn't want to join because he ultimately wanted to go home.

It's still confusing, and the sentence is absurd, but you can get a better sense of how many people are involved with gendered pronouns. But no one talks that way, contextual clues would make it more obvious, and we'd use proper names in many of those instances by habit for clarification. That said, it would be easier if we just used a number-word in place of a pronoun. Thone, thwo, theree, thour, etc or something. Then we could refer to whom we mean with a numbered-pronoun to indicate agents. That would be the clearest way to differentiate agents in a sentence.

And to be very clear, I have no problem using non-gendered pronouns, but the idea that it isn't slightly less precise is facile. But, again, only slightly. And who cares if it makes people more comfort and seen?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

yet the word you literally is about multiple entities

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

When my brain interpreted 'they' singular to refer to a unspecified so-far unnamed person or an already mentioned group, it was definitely confusing to have it suddenly used to refer to someone who had just been referred to by name. This was definitely a novel use of 'they' for me at the time and I don't understand why no-one else ever seems to have this kind of confusion. I did get used to it but I don't think it's as universal as some of y'all realise.

Edit: I just learnt the term 'indeterminate antecedent' from the Wikipedia article someone else linked. Thanks to them, I just got a little bit smarter. ;-)

load more comments (10 replies)