Re:Is there a gender neutral substitute for his or her

[zeprider1]

@Deborah Cameron points out, the sentence "The man went berserk and killed his neighbor's wife" is unobjectionable on its surface. But stop to think: why "his neighbor's wife"
instead of "one of his neighbors"?

~~Can you come up with a different way to express an age range, a gender, proximity to the man's house, and a wee' bit of inference in three other words or less?
Writing "Dear Sir /Madam" or such drives me nuts too.
But, Dear Debbie, that was a stupid comment.

[cochrane]

I'm going to repost the link here for convenience's sake. Links in thread titles aren't clickable.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...for-his-or-her

[Mangetout]

Originally Posted by zeprider1

@Deborah Cameron points out, the sentence "The man went berserk and killed his neighbor's wife" is unobjectionable on its surface. But stop to think: why "his neighbor's wife"
instead of "one of his neighbors"?

I would read such a sentence to imply that the killer knew the man, but (for some reason) was not so familiar with the woman.

That's probably normal - friendships outside of a marriage tend to be same-sex, and therefore if a person goes berserk and kills the spouse of a friend, that spouse is likely to be the opposite sex to the killer (so it could just as easily be "woman goes berserk and kills neighbour's husband".

[Alley Dweller]

Originally Posted by zeprider1

@Deborah Cameron points out, the sentence "The man went berserk and killed his neighbor's wife" is unobjectionable on its surface. But stop to think: why "his neighbor's wife"
instead of "one of his neighbors"?

His neighbor and his neighbor's wife did not live together? Maybe they were going through a rough patch in their marriage?
Maybe his neighbor moved for a new job and left his family behind in their old house until the end of the school year? It happens.

[C K Dexter Haven]

MOD COMMENT: I've edited the thread title to be more readable.

[joubaur]

I propose 'Shit,' a contraction of She/he/it, which is also about what this whole conversation is worth.

[MikeBB]

Another point in favor of "his neighbor's wife" is that it lightly echoes the tenth commandment.

[Irishman]

Originally Posted by zeprider1

~~Can you come up with a different way to express an age range, a gender, proximity to the man's house, and a wee' bit of inference in three other words or less?

"his neighbor lady", or if you prefer a little more formal, "his female neighbor".

Originally Posted by Alley Dweller

His neighbor and his neighbor's wife did not live together? Maybe they were going through a rough patch in their marriage?
Maybe his neighbor moved for a new job and left his family behind in their old house until the end of the school year? It happens.

You're proposing specific examples of why that description might be valid, but failing to justify why it should be the preferred generic description for the event.

"Guy just went crazy and killed the lady next door" reads different than "Guy just went crazy and killed his neighbor's wife". Which is more appopriate to the individual circumstances varies, but one refers to the males on equal footing and puts the female at more distant status. The other puts the victim on equal status with the accused assailant.

And I'm sure someone is going to argue that the victim should be put on a higher status than the accused killer. Note that neither version does that.

[squidfood]

Originally Posted by MikeBB

Another point in favor of "his neighbor's wife" is that it lightly echoes the tenth commandment.

I think it's this. Using "neighbor's wife" brings to mind all sorts of possibilities of sordid goings-on and sinning; even if the "sinning" is not part of the story it sells newspapers. It also brings greater tragedy into the story ("the dead woman had a husband who's grieving").

If I wanted to specify gender more neutrally and leave out the emotion, I'd go with "murdered his neighbor, Mrs. [or Ms.] Jones".

[Wheelz]

It's the most economical way to put forth the most information. "Neighbor's wife" tells you the gender, marital status, and geographic proximity of the victim in just two words.

[Powers]

Originally Posted by Wheelz

It's the most economical way to put forth the most information. "Neighbor's wife" tells you the gender, marital status, and geographic proximity of the victim in just two words.

But would anyone write "He killed his neighbor's husband"?

(That said, it seems a bit contrived; I don't know that either construction is particularly common.)


Powers &8^]

[Chronos]

It would also depend on context. Maybe he's friends with one member of the couple specifically, or one of them lived there first and the other moved in when they got married, or the like. In that case, it might be perfectly natural to refer to them as "the neighbor" and "the neighbor's spouse".

For a non-gender-related comparison, at my high school, one of the math teachers and one of the bus drivers were brothers. We students referred to them as "Mr. D_____" and "Mr. D_____'s brother", even though either of them were equally entitled to either of those. It was just a matter of which one we had the closer contact with.

[Jragon]

To me, "killed his neighbor's [son | wife | husband | daughter | whatever ]" seems more natural. It conveys more information (as Wheelz mentioned), but it also places focus on the living person, which seems correct to me.

[Irishman]

Why is it more natural to focus on the living, instead of the victim?

"A 22 year old woman was shot and killed on the way to work."
vs
"A man's 22 year old wife was shot and killed on the way to work."

[Jragon]

Originally Posted by Irishman

Why is it more natural to focus on the living, instead of the victim?

"A 22 year old woman was shot and killed on the way to work."
vs
"A man's 22 year old wife was shot and killed on the way to work."

No idea, the latter still seems more natural to me. Maybe not in formal writing, but in news or casual speech at least.

[elfkin477]

Originally Posted by zeprider1

@Deborah Cameron points out, the sentence "The man went berserk and killed his neighbor's wife" is unobjectionable on its surface. But stop to think: why "his neighbor's wife"
instead of "one of his neighbors"?

~~Can you come up with a different way to express an age range, a gender, proximity to the man's house, and a wee' bit of inference in three other words or less?
Writing "Dear Sir /Madam" or such drives me nuts too.
But, Dear Debbie, that was a stupid comment.

I'd personally go with something more along the lines of "The man went berserk and killed his neighbor, Ilene Dover." And if you wanted the age in there, The man went berserk and killed his neighbor, Ilene Dover, 47."

Saying the victim was someone's wife...it's not exactly demeaning, but it seems very old-fashioned and oddly focused on the husband, like how one might have spoken about a woman before we got the right to vote.

[Anise]

Um, I don't know about the entire "neighbor's wife" conundrum... but my transgendered sibling really, really doesn't like the terms "zhe" and "zher". So TG folks-- who have more authority than anybody else to comment on this issue, IMHO-- tend to really prefer the pronoun referring to the gender that they feel they should have been born to.

[Chronos]

In that case, Anise, shouldn't you have said "brother" or "sister", as appropriate, instead of the neutral "sibling"?

And they're pretty rare, but there are some people who don't regard themselves as having a gender at all. Surely they'd have even more stake in the matter than transgendered people?

[Anise]

I have currently decided on "sibling" whenever possible. Said sibling actually is thinking about genderqueer identity, so there you go. Although I don't think that everyone in line at Starbuck's PARTICULARLY needed to know.

[Cheryl44]

In English the masculine forms are also neuter. He/him/his can refer to a person even if the gender of the person is unknown.

[Powers]

Originally Posted by Cheryl44

In English the masculine forms are also neuter. He/him/his can refer to a person even if the gender of the person is unknown.

That hasn't been true for practical purposes for about forty years. (And I have a suspicion that it wasn't true before WWI either, making it a fairly short-lived phenomenon in the history of the language.) Good try though!


Powers &8^]

[John W. Kennedy]

It’s not particularly difficult to find examples of epicene he going back to Middle English.

(For what it’s worth, man is definitely neutral. Most languages have two separate words for man-as-opposed-to-beast and man-as-opposed-to-woman (Latin homo and vir, for example, or Greek ἄνθρωπος and ἀνήρ), but, for unclear reasons, the English word for man-as-opposed-to-woman, wer, fell out of use, except as fossilized in werewolf and weregild, and man got stuck with double duty.)

[leehenmd]

Does anyone else remember the short-lived word "s/he"? I thought it was elegant for its brevity.

[tumbleddown]

Originally Posted by Chronos

And they're pretty rare, but there are some people who don't regard themselves as having a gender at all. Surely they'd have even more stake in the matter than transgendered people?

It depends. Transgender (no -ed, please, it's not a verb) folks can fall anywhere on the gender spectrum though most (not all) do identify with one of the binary genders, that is, male or female, and therefore he/him, she/her is appropriate.

Then some transgender folks are genderqueer, agender, bigender or gender liminal and prefer neutral pronouns, which could be zie (or ze)/hir or ey/eir or they/their, and I know one person who prefers ou.

If you're not sure, the best thing to do is ask.

As for a blanket substitute, there is really, really nothing wrong with the singular they. Absolutely nothing.

And as for the example in the OP, if you really can't see why it's problematic to center a woman's identity not on herself but on her relationship with someone else, especially a man, I'm not sure what to tell you.

[Polerius]

I've always thought that

• 'se' for she/he (pronounced 'see')
• 'herm' for her/him (pronounced like it's spelled, rhymes with 'perm')
• 'hirs' for hers/his (pronounced like 'hears' but with a short 'i' like in 'bit')

would work well, and be quite easy to transition to

Sample sentence: "Se went to the house and polished hirs shoes. That's when I saw herm"

It does look a bit strange when you see it written It should become less strange the more it is used, I assume.

[Powers]

Originally Posted by tumbleddown

Transgender (no -ed, please, it's not a verb)

What does not being a verb have to do with anything? "Gender" isn't a verb, yet the correct adjectival form is "gendered". Perhaps you meant "it's already an adjective".

As for a blanket substitute, there is really, really nothing wrong with the singular they. Absolutely nothing.

I realize the second-person plural has already been adapted to singular use (requiring the subsequent invention of new plural forms, sadly), but we maintain the singular/plural distinction in the first and third persons for quite good reasons.


Powers &8^]

[Powers]

Originally Posted by Polerius

Sample sentence: "Se went to the house and polished hirs shoes. That's when I saw herm"

The problem with your proposed possessive and objective pronouns is that certain adjacent words will make them sound like the feminine form ("her shoes" versus "hirs shoes" will not be distinguishable in most American accents).


Powers &8^]

[John W. Kennedy]

Originally Posted by tumbleddown

Transgender (no -ed, please, it's not a verb)

“Gender” is indeed a verb. Next time, look it up.

[Irishman]

The most commonly cited definitions of "gender" make it a noun.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gender

Only one def makes it a verb, "to engender". The definition of "engender" does not mention "gender". This seems to be a misappropriation because the word seems like part of the second word, therefore it means the same thing.

Regardless, "transgender" is the word cited by tumbleddown, and it is not a verb.

[John W. Kennedy]

Oh, thefreedictionary.com doesn’t list a word, well, that’s certainly crushed my argument. I mean, thefreedictionary.com, what greater authority could possibly be named?

[Powers]

Originally Posted by John W. Kennedy

Oh, thefreedictionary.com doesn’t list a word, well, that’s certainly crushed my argument. I mean, thefreedictionary.com, what greater authority could possibly be named?

Merriam-Wesbter agrees. How many more dictionaries do you want us to check?

Regardless, my point stands. The word "gendered" is derived from the noun "gender", since it means "possessing a gender". It's a perfectly valid adjectival form, so the objection to "transgendered" strikes me as spurious, as it a parallel construction.


Powers &8^]

[Gagundathar]

Sometimes really intelligent people get bogged down in the meaning of words.
I wonder if this is an inbuilt weakness of intelligent conversation.
It happens when I interact with my 'meatspace' friends as well as here.

[Irishman]

Originally Posted by John W. Kennedy

Oh, thefreedictionary.com doesn’t list a word, well, that’s certainly crushed my argument. I mean, thefreedictionary.com, what greater authority could possibly be named?

I did a google search, and picked one. How many should I list?

Perhaps you should provide justification that "gender" is a verb, instead. It is your claim.

[John W. Kennedy]

Originally Posted by Powers

Merriam-Wesbter agrees. How many more dictionaries do you want us to check?

If you want to argue that a lexeme does not exist in English, there is only the Oxford English Dictionary—but the staff of the OED expressly call it an abuse to do so. One can prove that a word does exist, but not that it does not, apart from the handful of words positively known to be spurious. (And even that is risky; *pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis is, and obviously is, complete rubbish, but, like normalcy, has acquired a Frankenstein-like life of its own.)

Originally Posted by Powers

Regardless, my point stands. The word "gendered" is derived from the noun "gender", since it means "possessing a gender". It's a perfectly valid adjectival form, so the objection to "transgendered" strikes me as spurious, as it a parallel construction.

That's quite true. “Gender” doesn’t need to be a verb for “gendered” and “transgendered” to be valid. Nonetheless, “gender” is a verb.

[Kenm]

Originally Posted by Irishman

. . . or if you prefer a little more formal, "his female neighbor".

That would be OK if he had only one female neighbour.

[Irishman]

"His neighbor's wife..."

What if he has more than one married neighbor?

Why is it assumed a man's neighbor is a male?

I disagree it is more natural to focus on the family of the victim and not the victim.

[Elendil's Heir]

I visited my uber-P.C. alma mater, Oberlin College, over the weekend and noticed that the student newspaper intermittently used "ze" for he/she, and "zir" for his/her.