- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
This makes perfect sense if you think about it; I have to read text with neopronouns very slowly because it’s a challenge to comprehend after having been taught traditional pronouns in school many moons ago.
(e.g., Under the old rules, “they” was usually a reference to more than one person.)
Singular “they” has been used since the 1600s at least. Neopronouns are like xim and xer. Which I have never seen anyone use in the wild, honestly. And I’m in the QUILTBAG as well.
I’ve seen e/eir/ey used in old scifi stories from the aughts.
I guess that doesn’t really count as “in the wild” though.
Singular “they” has been used since the 1600s at least.
Which is why I said it’s usually a reference to more than one person.
Neopronouns are like xim and xer. Which I have never seen anyone use in the wild, honestly.
Even though it isn’t a neopronoun, for the most part the same applies to “Latinx”.
Latinx was such a stupid choice. Let’s take gendered words with a vowel at the end and replace the vowel with a hard consonant. It makes it so much harder to say and sounds wrong.
They should have picked a more sensible sound that flows like the original words.
It may have been inspired by “x” representing an unknown variable like you would see in a math equation, so in that context, it kind of makes sense.
Yeah I understand why x looks good on paper. As soon as you try to use in in spoken dialog the flaws become apparent. It’s clearly not going to work.
Latine is much better, -e for neutral gender has some decent traction
It’s common for neopronoun users to not use them “in the wild” because they expect to be disrespected. Often they’ll have a set of standard pronouns that they use normally and only pse neopronouns in spaces they know to be affirming
