Hello from SF Bay Area

[garrethdsouza]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderqueer
"Some genderqueer people prefer to use gender-neutral pronouns such as one, ze, sie, hir, co, ey or singular "they", "their" and "them", "

More on singular they https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

[brimstoneSalad]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderqueer
"Some genderqueer people prefer to use gender-neutral pronouns such as one, ze, sie, hir, co, ey or singular "they", "their" and "them", "

More on singular they https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

I know it's popular, but popularity doesn't make something right. That's blind descriptivism run wild.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

Nor does being in a dictionary make something right.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

99% of the time, descriptivism is right, because it's the most useful usage. Until people muddle language and misuse words creating more ambiguity and difficulty understanding, or define a word unreasonably or irrationally such that it loses its practical meaning.

Either "it" or "one" are both excellent choices.
Ze, sie, hir, co, or ey might be too, but I don't know as much about those. It's perfectly fine to coin new words when a need arises.

Though singular they has a long history of usage and is common in everyday English, its use has been criticized since the late nineteenth century, and acceptance varies.

There's no reason to use such a controversial grammatical construct when there are other perfectly lovely options.

[Thewhovianathogwarts]

Hey all! I'm an 18 year old college student living in the San Francisco Bay Area. Vegan, atheist, gender nonbinary.

HEY DUDE! I'm Marie and I live in the Bay Area, too! I'm 15 and looking to go to Stanford. What college do you go to? Do you follow basketball? Warriors got Kevon Looney! Do you follow baseball? Giants lost 0-4 to the Pirates today. That was quite sad. But hey, it's an odd year. We can wait till 2016! Sorry am I rambling? Based on my luck you probably don't even like sports. You like Doctor Who? Or Disney, what about Disney? I'm counting down the days till the new season of Doctor Who and until Moana comes out. Whatever, let's talk about things that are relevant to the forum. How did you become atheist and vegan? And how was your experience coming out as non-binary?

[garrethdsouza]

I don't see the point of pedantics about it. Grammar is constantly evolving (there was opposition to use of Ms.from linguists when it was first coined) and if someone self identifies with a particular pronoun then who does it harm? They have reasons for self identifying with a particular pronoun (over alternatives others may prefer) that may not be apparent to a cis gendered person and they are already cognizant of grammar so its not like this is inapparent to them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyl ... story.html

http://letsqueerthingsup.com/2014/09/15 ... -pronouns/

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WXWmv1-4xFg

Ita on a similar footing with people who don't want to call caitlyn by her preferred pronoun, albeit here the reason is puritanical grammar rules.

[Jebus]

I don't see the point of pedantics about it. Grammar is constantly evolving

Yes, but it's time for the academics to put their foot down when it evolves into something that doesn't make grammatical sense. Take, for example, the expression "I am better than him". It was always grammatically wrong but people kept using it for so long that the academics gave in. Hence, English became a little bit more difficult for someone trying to learn it as a second language.

[brimstoneSalad]

http://letsqueerthingsup.com/2014/09/15 ... -pronouns/

When someone states their pronouns (he, she, ze, they, etc), they are asking for your respect.

When people ask me to use certain pronouns, like he, she, or it, they are asking me for my respect; and I will give it.
When they ask me to use a pronoun like "singular they", for individuals, they are asking me to change the way I use language against my grammatical ethic, and they may not realize it.

"Hey, I'd call you 'they' if you asked me to, why won't you show me the respect of calling me 'they'?"

Is much like a carnist saying:

"Hey, if you came to my house I'd make sure you had something vegan to eat, so when I come to your house why won't you respect my diet and make sure I have some meat to eat?"

It's a complete misunderstanding of my attitude toward the ethics of meat, or linguistics.

If I actually used "they" as a singular pronoun (much like if I actually bought, prepared, or served meat to others), then anybody would be totally justified in requesting that. But I don't. I consciously don't, and I don't do it for a reason. At least I try very hard to never use it in that way (similarly, as I try very hard to not eat or purchase animal products).
If you find that I have used it that way anywhere on this forum, I'd jump to edit my post and fix it, and be embarrassed about the mistake.

The way I see it: When you ask me to use "singular they", and won't give me other options that comply with my grammatical ethic, you aren't respecting me. Like a carnist coming to dinner who demands a veal steak, or nothing at all. You have to be reasonable and provide people with options that are within their vocabularies.

I respect lgbtq(etc.) as much as I respect anybody; often quite a bit more, due to the courage it takes to come out. And I will call you by whatever pronoun you want, provided that word is within my vocabulary/grammatical usage.
I'm even willing to consider adding new words to my vocabulary, provided they aren't confusing.

What if I asked you to refer to me with the plural third person pronoun "I".
Don't say "he/she is arguing with an apologist", say, "I are arguing with an apologist".
If you don't do it, you don't respect me.

Sorry, no. That's incredibly confusing, and appears very grammatically incorrect. There are limits. I wouldn't do that for anybody. It doesn't mean I don't respect you, it means I have my own personal ethics surrounding word usage, and I will do my best to accommodate you.

I'll even refer to a single body with the plural pronoun "they" if they consider themselves multiple people. Not the "singular they" though. Please respect my grammatical ethic, and give me more options.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WXWmv1-4xFg

A popular rebuttal for this is that "they" is not grammatically correct when referring to a single person. Which is silly, because we use it that way all the time.

That's the thing: I do not.
I frame my sentences so that the subjects are plural, or otherwise say "he or she" if I'm stuck in a bad sentence structure, or specify with a noun "the person", "the student" etc.

I understand the arguments, I just don't agree with them in this limited ("singular they") case.

I'll just use Uni's name, or a shortened version of Uni's name, when referring to Uni.

[Lightningman_42]

Perhaps a discussion about grammar deserves its own discussion thread, but for now I'll leave this here: is it a good idea for me to insist on using correct grammar even in instances where grammatically incorrect versions have become popular? I'll leave an example below.

Grammatically correct, but unpopular usage: "You was going to create a new discussion thread."

Grammatically incorrect, but popular usage: "You were going to create a new discussion thread."

"You was" is correct. "You were" is incorrect but commonly accepted.

[brimstoneSalad]

is it a good idea for me to insist on using correct grammar even in instances where grammatically incorrect versions have become popular?

Yes, provided the correct version is seen as correct, and the incorrect version is seen as incorrect.

Grammatically correct, but unpopular usage: "You was going to create a new discussion thread."

That version is seen as incorrect. A very large part of grammar is perception. I wouldn't want to say "You was" because I don't want people reading my posts to think I'm an idiot.
I want the ideas I convey to be seen and taken seriously, and a big part of that is trying to use perceptually correct grammar.

Grammatically incorrect, but popular usage: "You were going to create a new discussion thread."

It's grammatically inconsistent, and it probably should be fixed. But, it's seen as correct, so this is the version that should be used in accordance with formal style guides, and grammar teachers.

I'd be supportive of a grammatical overhaul of English to make it more consistent and easier to learn/use. Things like this are not very useful.

In the case of "singular their", however, it's both inconsistent, AND seen as incorrect. A double whammy.

Note, it's also: "Were he to post a new thread, we would be excited to read it."
English is so broken.
I try to do my best, though. Not always perfect, but I hope I come across as coherent most of the time.