yup, struggle session time
edit: no one is right, everyone is wrong :^)
edit 2: this post is actually dedicated to Amy Goodman, please stop trying to sound cool grandma
yup, struggle session time
edit: no one is right, everyone is wrong :^)
edit 2: this post is actually dedicated to Amy Goodman, please stop trying to sound cool grandma
I've been following the discussions and tbh I don't think there's a consensus yet. Same with non-binary people in Russian - a non-binary person I follow on Twitter uses он/а [s/he], I've seen someone else use оно [it], which yes comes across as dehumanising to me as well but if that's what they prefer I can't yell NO YOU CAN'T!! at them. I think some people just continue using he/she, or prefer people to switch within a conversation. I don't really wanna do a struggle session about it because I'm not non-binary lmao, again I'll just defer to them. I'm sure as acceptance spreads, one form will win out eventually, as it always is with language.
My point is simply that these conversations are taking place in non-Anglo communities - it's not like every non-binary person has given up on German/Russian and decided that being non-binary is an Anglo imposition.
I've seen struggle sessions that we shouldn't use it to refer to plants/animals as they have rights or whatever, and so there should be another separate new pronoun for non-human flora and fauna
Animate/inanimate noun class distinctions aren't unheard of in language, but I don't think they'll manage that one haha. Afaik flora typically fall on the inanimate side too. Maybe if they advocate for it as part of a push for veganism, anti climate change, animal rights.
It still wouldn't be the weirdest thing in the history of English pronouns. I'll never be over English borrowing they/them from the Norse. It's extremely uncommon for languages to borrow function words (pronouns, prepositions, etc), it's very interesting that they/them stuck.