Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are kind of comparing apples and oranges with this example. Because comparing ellos and ellas to them and they isnt entirely accurate. In english we have men and women which is the english pronoun for multiple people which would serve as the equivalent of ellos and ellas. The gender specific version of them or they is those men. Or those women. Its just not the same. We also already have a gender specific and non gender specific way to refer to men and women.
From a pronoun standpoint, though (men and women aren't pronouns), she's right. French is the same.
Ellos (or eux in French) means they. You can only use ellas if the entire group is female. 99 women are ellas, but you add one man and you have to use ellos. Like English, the default gender is male.
From a pronoun standpoint, though (men and women aren't pronouns), she's right. French is the same.
Ellos (or eux in French) means they. You can only use ellas if the entire group is female. 99 women are ellas, but you add one man and you have to use ellos. Like English, the default gender is male.
i stand corrected but i do still stand by my point that we have gender specific plural nouns. a man is a man a group of them is men. a child is a child. A group of them is children. This whole discussion is strange because in America we already have a million ways to describe people of any gender or sex. (as pointed out by jj, gender is cultural) We can call them kids, children, students, classmates, boys, girls. Adults are men and women, and coworkers.
You can be male, female, agender, asexual, transgender, hermaphrodite. Him, her, they, them, us, you.
Should we get rid of Aunt Uncle mom dad gmom gpop? They are all gender specific. But we also have cousins which isnt, and parents which doesnt delineate.
The point is that we need to make a more gender EQUAL society, not a gender neutral society.
JJCat, I think both the OP and I agree to putting a gender neutral pronoun in the dictionary, but not automatically referring to a boy in a classroom who is clearly a boy as anything but.
It isn't the intermittent presence of a gender neutral noun or pronoun that can subtract from a child's awareness of the freedom to choose a gender (without social judgment). It's the act of actually taking gender specific nouns and pronouns away.
How so? No sexual discrimination? Because that's the problem we're looking to solve. And on top of that, better to compare different people within a culture than to compare different cultures (too many variables are different to blame just one). Practically every American has uttered and/or heard the words "him" and "her". Yet, where else are these ideas of letting girls play football or guys wearing dresses coming from? So, short answer: "I DO use gender specific pronouns, every day. And I get along just fine, too."
You may be arguing one thing, but I think others are arguing others, or the separate debates are getting entangled. (and I'm as much at fault for that as anyone).
I guess the next question would be...how do you know a child is 'clearly a boy'?
You get along just fine with gendered pronouns because you're gendered. Using a term like hen to describe a person whose gender you don't know (and you don't know unless you ask), doesn't remove their gender. It just doesn't make assumptions about it.
I would agree that gendered terms should not disappear entirely.
It would be very interesting to see in a few generations how children are doing from Sweden's gender neutral classrooms. The assumption is that gender neutral classrooms create confused children, etc., etc., but we have no evidence either way.
I guess the next question would be...how do you know a child is 'clearly a boy'?
You get along just fine with gendered pronouns because you're gendered. Using a term like hen to describe a person whose gender you don't know (and you don't know unless you ask), doesn't remove their gender. It just doesn't make assumptions about it.
If you don't mind, let's back up a little. Would "hen" or an American English equivalent mean "a person of no gender" or "a person you can't tell the gender of"? I see a lot of new offenses to be taken with this sort of term if it can mean both, don't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParallelJJCat
I would agree that gendered terms should not disappear entirely.
It would be very interesting to see in a few generations how children are doing from Sweden's gender neutral classrooms. The assumption is that gender neutral classrooms create confused children, etc., etc., but we have no evidence either way.
If you don't mind, let's back up a little. Would "hen" or an American English equivalent mean "a person of no gender" or "a person you can't tell the gender of"? I see a lot of new offenses to be taken with this sort of term if it can mean both, don't you?
Agreed.
I think actually after more research (and this goes against some of my earlier statements), that the Swedish hen means 'person whose gender is not determined', but not in the way you are phrasing it. It isn't a term for someone who is agendered (though it may cross over into that). It also doesn't mean you can't determine the person's gender. Rather, it's a term that doesn't make assumptions about the gender, which is rather different.
If you were to look at me, you would assume I was biologically female and that I was gendered a woman. I don't try to disguise or hide that biologically I'm female. I typically wear 'girl' clothes and well, there's no hiding certain assets without some pretty uncomfortable bindings.
So you would very likely in reference to me use the pronoun 'she' because you've made certain assumptions (and I wouldn't blame you for them). Hen would be used instead until I have made it clear that my preferred pronoun is 'she'. It doesn't presume I'm gendered boy, girl, OR agendered. Rather, it's a blank...a kind of placeholder, if you will. A person may well be offended, but it would be because they don't understand how the term is being used or they don't understand that differently gendered people exist.
Again, this is actually pretty common online. Many communities consider it presumptuous to assume gender without clear indication. This usually takes the form of seeing how the person in question refers to themself (And see how themself here is being used to avoid presumption? Though it frankly feels awkward to use.) If there's no clear indication, gendered terms are just avoided.
This probably makes sense to even gendered people, because if you're a guy online and people call you a girl, you can get offended or feel upset...even if you know there's no real reason to. It feels wrong somehow and like an attack. Being online takes away the biological signal clues. So it's pretty much taking this courtesy of not presuming into the RL, if that makes sense.
I think overall I like the idea of raising gender neutral children and not making assumptions, but I agree that it may be either impractical or taken to an extreme. I think that children can group themselves in a gender a very young age, and if they do so this should be respected. I'm thinking of the Swedish school that does not allow 'free playtime' to avoid children falling into gendered activities. That to me is taking it to a far extreme. My vision would be to use terms like 'hen' that don't make assumptions until the child declares a gender. Ideally they would be exposed to people of all genders...male, female, and variants in-between or none at all. There are more transgendered, agendered, and in-between people around then you'd think, it's just not a good time culturally still to be really open about it.
I think the children would probably declare their gender early on, and their gender would match their biological sex most the time. And that's perfectly fine, and I don't think they should be told they can't make the decision or be forced into using gender neutral terms for themselves. I also think gender is more fluid than people realize, and some children who declare young may well change their minds later on...again, that also should be fine.
I think this would actually help toward sexism because the kids would be exposed to the idea young that gender is a cultural thing and a choice...and because they've grown up with people of many choices, they would see that any choice can be successful.
Just brainstorming, really. I can already see tons of issues that would arise with this system too. I just think people kind of write off the idea of gender-neutral classrooms as more or less a knee jerk reaction (not you...I think you've had some very good points and you've been respectful, so thank you).
Fine then, if a certain group wants to come up with a term for them selves then have at it but don't go making one term for EVERYONE.
I am woman, I want to be called a woman, I don't want some one sized fits all term like hen.
I think it's great if gender neutral people have their own term but don't go trying to force it on everyone else.
If someone wants to be called a male term they should be, same for female.
If someone wants to associate themselves with homosexual, asexual, gender neutral then GREAT, more power to you, if it keeps your boat floating and sailing at full speed lovely but lets not make EVERYONE use gender neutral terms, lets let people use whatever term they want.
I am who I am. I go by the term I think fits me and I don't like to be stereotyped.
I am female but I love sports, I hate frilly crap and most dresses(not all but most) but I LOVE make-up and short shorts, tank tops and flip flops. I love love and romance but please don't hold the door for me, I have arms and they work. I'll wrestle in the dirt with you but if you get a snake or spider anywhere near me I will beat your ass, AFTER I run screaming and you put it down. I like who I am and I shouldn't have to go by some term that encompasses all genders and I shouldn't be stereotyped as being helpless, girlie and pink obsessed because I am female.
I am who I am. I go by the term I think fits me and I don't like to be stereotyped.
I am female but I love sports, I hate frilly crap and most dresses(not all but most) but I LOVE make-up and short shorts, tank tops and flip flops. I love love and romance but please don't hold the door for me, I have arms and they work. I'll wrestle in the dirt with you but if you get a snake or spider anywhere near me I will beat your ass, AFTER I run screaming and you put it down. I like who I am and I shouldn't have to go by some term that encompasses all genders and I shouldn't be stereotyped as being helpless, girlie and pink obsessed because I am female.
And I shouldn't have to go by a term that doesn't describe me either. And hen, as already explained, does not describe all genders. It is a place holder that does not assume gender. There is a difference.
And I shouldn't have to go by a term that doesn't describe me either. And hen, as already explained, does not describe all genders. It is a place holder that does not assume gender. There is a difference.
And in our society it will become "hen until proven otherwise".
And in our society it will become "hen until proven otherwise".
Yes, that's rather of the point of it...or at least depending on what you mean by prove. Hen by its existence removes the connection between gender and biological sex, so the proof would be as simple as saying "my gender is female". Which is not a terrible burden. Those who know you personally would continue calling you 'she', as you've already established that's what you identify with.
BTW...what you're basically saying here is that you would find it upsetting to be calling by a pronoun that you don't feel belongs to you. You want to be called female because its part of your identity, and being called something else would be upsetting. That's how people like myself feel ALL THE TIME. You're just basically getting put in our shoes, but for a different reason. Adding a non-assumptive pronoun doesn't erase your gender, it just doesn't make assumptions about it until you identify. Being agendered means I basically don't exist...I'm not erased, I'm just not there as an option.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
