What I’d find convenient would be gender-neutral pronouns for general use with the option of gendered ones when the subject’s actually relevant, which would be rarely; singular and plural second person, either by adding back in thee/thou/thy or by adding in you’all; and inclusionary and exclusionary third person – a different word for “we” etc. if it means ‘all of us in this room/school/country whatever’ than if it means ‘only this group as opposed to this other group’. It wouldn’t vary with the group but with the sense – ‘we’re all going to work together to fix the infrastructure of the USA!’ would be inclusionary, while ‘we’re going to win this trade war with Other Country’ would be exclusionary. If we also had that distinction in second person, it would solve the ‘who gets the access codes’ problem – exclusionary if ony Pat gets them, inclusionary if everybody in the group gets them.
And it would mean politicians trying to pull divide-and-conquer would have to do so blatantly. Not that they sometimes don’t anyway.
But I’m not expecting to see all of that in the English language any time soon.
I’m not sure they always present as female, though I agree they would generally be read as female. Looking at a number of pictures, it seems to me that they may be more gender fluid, or identify in more than one way. But, more importantly, it’s not for me to judge. I’ll use the pronouns that the person prefers. That may not always match up with presentation, and that’s part of the point of specifying.
I just don’t see the big deal about singular they. I feel like so many people here are trying to invent some complicated new word when what we already have works perfectly fine.
Oh, I should add one. Because they are genderfluid, and some days are she days and some days are they days. Only jerks expect you to guess correctly which is which - but on female presenting days they might prefer she - where other days the misogyny of society or the issues living in their own bodies pisses them off enough that they don’t even want to be associated with she.
The shopkeepers in Manila say “mamser” (i.e., ma’am + sir) as a generic honorific for everyone, male, female, whatever. For example, “Would you like a free sample, mamser?” or “Welcome to Jollibee, mamser! May I take your order?” I think this should be adapted everywhere.
I usually leave it blank. When I created a set of pronoun choices on a virtual shared space, I included he/she/they/other pronouns/any pronouns. If anyone selects “other”, I will reach out to them and ask what pronouns they want me to add to the list. I, personally, selected “any pronouns”
I think pronouns matter more to some people than to others. I endorse using the pronouns people prefer, but I have no strong preference. I identify as a woman, but I’m pretty sure that if I were 20, I would identify as nonbinary. (And my kids think I’m a transman in denial.) My phone voice is deep enough to be ambiguous. So I have been called, in decreasing order of frequency, she, he, they, and xi. I am fine with any of those so long as they are used in good faith, and aren’t meant to be insulting. Bundled in a coat, I’ve been called “sir”, too, and I’m fine with that. I am old enough and stuck enough in the grammar of my youth that I am more comfortable with “xi” or “e” than we “they”, when I am the known subject of the pronoun. But “they” is fine if that’s what you are comfortable calling me.
When in doubt, use the person’s name. That’s pretty much always safe, both in terms of being understood and in avoiding offense.
I endorse this post SO MUCH
This came up on the Facebook page of a nonbinary friend. The useful options are “excuse me!”, “sir”, and “ma’am”. The situation given was that their wallet had fallen from their pocket and a stranger was trying to attract their attention. They endorsed the stranger guessing, and calling out “ma’am” despite generally being uncomfortable being gendered that way. (that’s assuming that “excuse me!” and “hey!” didn’t work.)
Yeah, this is where I miss the Quaker generic form of address “Friend” that I sometimes encountered in my Quaker-adjacent childhood. Other historical examples such as “comrade” and “citizen” are a bit too esoteric and/or politically loaded for modern use.
I generally find that the “just keep talking to them” strategy works best, rather than trying to find a specific vocative form of address. “Excuse me! I think you dropped your wallet! Excuse me! Sorry to bother you, but could you check to see if you lost your wallet, because I think I saw you drop this?” And so on. Very few people can remain oblivious to somebody continually addressing situation-specific remarks to them. And then once they turn around and notice you, there’s no need for any form of address other than “you” anyway.
The main character in two of David Eddings’ fantasy novel series, Sparhawk the knight, addresses people he doesn’t know as “neighbor.” There’s a passage in one of the books, in which one of Sparhawk’s allies asks him why he uses “neighbor” rather than “friend.” Sparhawk’s (paraphrased) reply is, “I don’t know that person well enough yet to know if they’re a friend.”
Sorry to drag this back to the top of the page, but I just noticed this thread.
Regarding the “xo” bit, which I had never seen before, googling tells me that in gender situations this means male, having only one x chromosome. Did she previously identify as male or was it just a hugs and kisses jokey thing?
I’ll also take the time to say she so should use her real name, Ashley Nicolette Frangipane. How awesome is that name?
Well, if I understood Colibri correctly, it was listed as a preference on her twitter account, where it is now changed to she/they.
Maybe I misunderstood that. I wasn’t thinking medical terminology but a shorthand on gender use. Now that I think on it, male would be wrong either way.
I mean, I just went and looked at her Twitter profile and “xo” is still there (in a different spot than “she/they”), and there’s no indication it was or is intended to be a pronoun or chromosomal descriptor. The far more cromulent explanation is that it just means “kiss and hug”.
I guess we are talking across each other. I know everything you said about what her page is currently. I’m talking about @Colibri s post where it sounded like the xo was in the she/they spot, and wondered if that was correct.
Sorry about that. I have no idea whether Colibri looked at her profile and was confused about what “xo” meant or if the information came to Colibri second-hand.
I strongly doubt she had listed “xo” as her pronoun preference, still had it there as of March 14, and no longer does as of today, but anything’s possible I guess.
