Using "she" and "he" would be hurtful in reference to a non-binary individual. Non-binary are more common than you think.
"they" is useful when you don't know someone's pronouns, and it's better to form a habit of using "they" for everyone (not just non-trans imo), than to accidentally use the wrong gendered pronoun, which may trigger their dysphoria more strongly.
I'm not getting the notion from this policy that it is intended to get individuals to deliberately use the wrong pronoun, because they're uncomfortable with using the correct pronoun for them. But, if you think it is ambiguous, then it could certainly be reworded.
The footnote of that policy allows you to persistently call a trans man "they", even if his preferred pronoun is he. That is, the policy endorses you misgendering.
Calling a he/him person a "they" is a way of saying that you don't think they're a real man. It's really not much better than calling a trans man "her".
Finally, the previous version of the said guidelines used to reject singular they. Singular they is a great way to refer to somebody whose pronouns you don't know. Moreover, it's the preferred pronoun for many non-binary people.
> My usual reaction when people refuse to use pronouns such as "they" is that they (hah) don't want to acknowledge gender identities outside of the male/female binary.
This is probably different. I for one don't think there are enough non-binaries out there to warrant a generalised pronoun, let alone its generalised used. I believe even most trans people identify as either "he" or "she".
On the other hand, I like to maintain uncertainty whenever someone's gender is either unknown or undisclosed. When talking about a hypothetical individual for instance, being able to refer to them neutrally is convenient. On the other hand, I hate to use "they" whenever there might be a number ambiguity. In those cases, I'll use "he" or "she", or find another phrasing.
Finally, gender-full pronouns are pretty good at disambiguating roles without having to repeat people's names all the time. Crypto examples with Alice and Bob for instance benefit from saying "he" and "she", so the audience (or student) readily understand whether we are talking about the initiator or the recipient.
The author of the article believes that their gender cannot be categorised as either male or female (hence a "non-binary" gender), so they prefer for others to refer to them using "they" and its inflected forms, rather than "he" or "she".
The singular "they" is already commonly used when the gender of a person is not known, so its extension into non-binary genders is quite sensible, in my opinion. Some others who regard themselves as a non-binary gender prefer invented pronouns such as "xe" or "ze", but I think expecting others to remember and use these is rather unrealistic, whereas "they" has the advantage of already having mainstream use in similar contexts.
The guideline argues "they" is gender neutral, so it does not conflict with anybody's gender identity. This misses the point.
"they" is indeed gender neutral. But when we talk about specific individuals, we almost always use gendered pronouns.
Hence, as I said, persistently using "they" for a binary trans person is a veiled insult. Again, it's like saying 'You're not a real man, but I am not allowed to call you she, so I will call you they'.
I think in this case, it's raised that we know the subject's gender identity, so the use of gender-ambiguous "they" isn't necessary. Not out of any sense of pronoun policing or bullying - I suspect more because it scans weirdly when you have the information that it would normally abstract.
Until very recently, using "he" in an article was considered sexist because it assumed the subject was a men. So the recommendation was to use "he/she".
Today, using "he/she" is considered transphobic, as in this SE case, since it assumes the subject is binary. So the present recommendation is to use "they".
Is this an accurate representation of the current state of affairs?
What's the proper pronoun to use today, if you don't know the actual gender of the subject, for example because you talk about a hypothetical situation?
Aren't people who identify as other pronouns (xe, zer, ve, aer...) upset by the use of "they"? Is "they" truly generic and can be used in all situations?
As a person who is 100% supportive of trans choosing he/she pronouns to fit their identity, and someone who hates the idea of "non-binary" people demanding a "they" pronoun, - I can kind of see a point, depending on how singular they is used. If it is always used regardless(as the demodded person claimed they do), then I see no problem with it. If it is only used to avoid someone's preferred pronoun, then I can see it being discriminatory behavior. E.g. every cis female in a class is referred to as she or they, every cismale is referred to as he or they, but every trans male or female is only referred to as they.
>> "It was historically used to either refer to a person of unknown gender, or to optionally refer to a person of a known gender. so your options for singular pronouns might be either he or they, or she or they."
That's the thing though. Enbies don't generally know their gender. If you would use they without anger for an unknown person of unknown gender, it makes no sense to be mad about using it for a known person of unknown gender. You still don't know their gender. Neither of you do. He/him, she/her, man and woman, and sir and ma'am can cause tremendous dysphoria. That's often part of how they know they're not binary.
>Bit pedantic but you should use they instead of he/she. People can have other pronouns.
One of those other pronouns is literally "they", so you're still risking using the wrong pronoun by using "they" for someone who prefers to be referred to as "he".
Was anyone else taught the rule that when writing about a third-party whose gender is unknown, use your own pronouns?
Not according to all the grammar I ever learned. It’s not a trans/gender thing. It’s lazy and unclear writing. It would be much better to have declared a new singular gender neutral pronoun than having to disambiguate “they” every time it is used.
I see what you mean, but I think it's slightly the wrong analysis on a linguistic level. 'They' doesn't generally introduce a presupposition of non-binarity (either semantically or via pragmatic inference). If it did, it would be hard to account for the innumerable examples of 'they' being used with unambiguously masculine and feminine quantificational antecedents.
For this reason I think that people who are offended by being referred to by 'they' are wrong to be offended. I think they're wrong in a way that, say, a trans woman is not wrong to be offended if someone insists on using 'he'. In the former case, the person may feel that they are being misgendered – but only on the basis of a dodgy linguistic analysis. Of course, we should accommodate people's pronoun preferences, regardless of whether we agree with their underlying logic in any given case.
The story about your neighbor doesn't really make sense to me. Surely it occurred to her that the other forum poster might not have cared much what her gender was, or have paid much attention to her photo, or simply didn't care to take a guess even if she appeared clearly female. To interpret this as intentional misgendering seems a bit nuts. If she was simply worried about whether she appeared clearly feminine in the photo, then that's an understandable anxiety, but one that has little to do with singular they. (If singular they were off limits then I guess the poster might have used 'he' instead, which hardly seems better.)
> If a person uses “she” or “he,” do not use “they” instead. Likewise, if a person uses “they,” do not switch to “he” or “she.” Use the pronouns the person uses.
This matches my own understanding; I have no idea why you are referring to this article as if it supports your bizarre crusade to misgender people.
> Aren't people who identify as other pronouns (xe, zer, ve, aer...) upset by the use of "they"? Is "they" truly generic and can be used in all situations?
I think that’s the case here. They are upset because they would like to be called by the specific pronoun they pick. Using ”they” erases their identity and contributes to discrimination.
Now in hypothetical situation I don’t see how “they“ could be problematic.
I have seen authors default to “she” but mostly in positive and neutral contexts. Then to “he“ for negative contexts. What I mean is if the hypothetical context is a about an astronaut flying to Mars it might be a “she” but if it is a criminal robbing a bank it would be a “he”.
Is using "they" as third-person pronoun across the board potentially problematic on SE?
I can get that a person identifying as "she" shouldn't be referred to as "he" and vice-versa, but if somebody's having issues with the only all-inclusive alternative, it's not something anyone should be expected to accommodate for.
I seriously hope this is a straw man. Same thing as the few individuals who make a ruckus whenever they're not referred to as "Dr". If I'm forced to keep track of people's gender identities to be able to contribute, I'm out.
It was a conversation in a private setting with several participants, some of whom were trans. It started as a broad conversation about which pronouns should be properly used when. When we got to "they", one of the participants brought up a common pattern whereby people will use "he" or "she" consistently to refer to cis people whose gender they know, but "they" when they need to refer to trans people (with known more specific pronouns) in the context where they can't get away with misgendering. We all agreed that this is rude, but then I asked whether it would be problematic if the person used "they" consistently, without discriminating. That's when it blew up.
It's only new, as I understand it, as a non-binary singular pronoun. Many of those contexts have also been used for a very long time as singular pronoun where gender isn't at present relevant, was clarified elsewhere or in person. An example.
I might send out a mail about Dave, the new hire, and introduce him in my opening sentence. I might write every subsequent sentence and paragraph with they where gender is neither stated nor implied. This is a form we're perfectly comfortable with, used to and doesn't break any grammatical law. They will be starting on Monday. Their desk will be the free one by Alice. etc. There are one or two contexts where we're not used to seeing it, so its use may seem contrived or unnatural.
The only difference as I see it, thanks to the recent rise of non-binary identity, is a wish for some not to ever have someone use he or she in their context. i.e. They always prefer "This is Bob, they started this morning and they will be taking the desk next to you" over "This is Bob, he..."
That, I suspect, is why some might dislike they. It's already natural in many contexts, but it's also natural to drop to he/she in a few other contexts. So it may inadvertently encourage accidental use of a non-preferred pronoun in a way that an impersonal it, or per would not.
Tangential remark to author if they’re reading: favoring “she” isn’t more inclusive for an unknown pronoun. You probably already use a non-gendered singular “they” in normal speech and you could use that where the gender/preference isn’t known. Just a suggestion from an NB who passes as male and thinks binary gender substitution doesn’t help, even though I appreciate the effort.
I am a native English speaker and they/them being used in this way has become more accepted and recommended over time. I was taught explicitly not to do this when I was in school, but that was a few decades ago. Using he/him when gender is unknown or unimportant is regarded as exclusionary. Usually, it'a not an issue, but I find it does sometimes make things more difficult to parse or understand without additional context. In this case, there aren't really any drawbacks.
But this is in a case where the pronouns are (presumably?) known. If you were obviously doing it with regards to one person, it could be very offensive. That is, if you insist on referring to a transgender person as "they", when you know their pronouns but refer to cis-gender people using gendered pronouns.... then you're just refusing to gender a trans person correctly as opposed to trying to take pronouns out of your language.
We did just have the whole contrapoints fiasco regarding pronouns, which shows that... the community is not dealing with some of these things very well at all. (FWIW, I'm a transgender woman and I totally agree with the concept she was expressing)
"they" is useful when you don't know someone's pronouns, and it's better to form a habit of using "they" for everyone (not just non-trans imo), than to accidentally use the wrong gendered pronoun, which may trigger their dysphoria more strongly.
I'm not getting the notion from this policy that it is intended to get individuals to deliberately use the wrong pronoun, because they're uncomfortable with using the correct pronoun for them. But, if you think it is ambiguous, then it could certainly be reworded.
reply