6 reasons the gender critical right and the woke left are both WRONG about pronouns 

alas, there's virtually no difference between English and German with regards to number. it's just that objects are gendered entirely arbitrarily; but that's about it.

@@HxTurtle In German there are 3 grammatical genders.

:)

@@PyroMancer2k lol

@@Merrsharr I think that's about what I said-did I? (German is my first language; so, it's not exactly made up theories outta boredom.)

This sort of stuff was extremely confusing to me when I first learned about it as a Turkish person

@@k.umquat8604 I'm sure! Heck, Turkish people have trouble remembering "he" and "she" at first. :-)

@@sazji As I used to in primary school

@@k.umquat8604 Sadece ilkokulda olduysa tebrik ediyorum. :-)

@@sazji İngilizcem 5.-6. sınıflarda çok gelişti. Ondan beri böyle hataları neredeyse hiç yapmıyorum.

"I was fully prepared..." A succinct example of the problem.

@@crinolynneendymion8755Tbf, the title is very inflammatory. It also uses the right's terms for both sides, rather than using each side's terms for each other, or using each side's terms for themselves.

@@justseffstuff3308 Yeah. For those who don't know, in English-speaking queer online spaces the term "gender critic" is generally understood as a euphemism transphobes use to make themselves look legitimate, and "woke" as a derogatory term for "the people we don't like". So many of us will see this video title and assume it's a video made by a right-wing transphobe apologist trying to pass as a centrist. A more neutral title would just say the left and right without any connotative qualifiers. But I'm willing to bet that as a cis het white man, the maker of this video is simply not at all part of the social circles where these words carry such a connotation. Plus, these words are great for engagement; I clicked the video, didn't I? 😅 So maybe it's fine to keep it like that.

​@@justseffstuff3308If the left doesn't refer to the right as "gender critical" what term do they use? (other than fascist)

​@@DominoPivotI think you are trying to define a term that you did not coin. When the right (as I self-identify) uses the term 'woke' we are usually referring to a person's tendency to enforce compliance on others, rather than to refer to any personal belief the individual may have I person may be trans, but not be woke (in my terms) is they do not attempt to force others to comply with their beliefs. In my mind, 'gender critical' does not imply malice where 'transphobic' does. 'woke' may be used with or without implication of malice, but that's just my opinion

How are "so many" of your friends trans or nonbinary, is it because you work at a trans club or something, or is this an example of the alleged social contagion some people are talking about? Also assuming that many of these people are not going to have heterosexual marriages, is the US going to face a population crunch soon?

@@rexsceleratorum1632 I just happen to run in a lot of very queer spaces hahaha. Online spaces especially (at least the ones I'm active in) tend to have a lot of folks who identify as lgbtq+. My area of study isn't population statistics or anthropology, so I'm not entirely confident on speculating on the USA's population growth, but I do believe it's slowing down, at least compared to the last century or so. I wouldn't ascribe that to the normalization of lgbtq+ necessarily though, but to a whole list of things.

​@rexsceleratorum1632 since the mid-late 20th century the population grew bombastically, plus there is still a small amount of lgbt people in the real world. Population crunches can happen by very specific chains of biological or biologically-involved disasters (droughts, floods, famine, etc.)

@@ktiger32698k Ah. Online "friends".

"a bit more complicated" A BIT MORE ?! Are you kidding ? It's hell... :)

It's also dangerous to push back. You don't know which people are safe and which are violent bigots.

Oh hey, that’s me. Yeah, I don’t share unless there’s already a channel set up for me to do that (socmed bios, etc) OR I’m 110% sure it’ll go over well. Most situations… don’t fall into that.

same, in the art industry. I have a bunch of friends who are gender neutral. But almost all of their friends don't use their preferred pronoun of they/them. She/her just comes naturally, our brains are wired to categorize people as men and women, and I don't think you can just socially engineer society to change that aspect.

It would also be exhausting for the "old professor" or the clerk at Dunkin Donuts... the professor has hundreds of different students each term, it's hard enough to remember all of their names and faces... meanwhile the clerk deals with thousands of people a week, in order to not offend them, they would need to start every interaction with "hello, welcome to ... my I have your pronouns and order please?"

If you are buying something from Dunkin Donuts a pronoun is irrelevant anyway because you don't use someone's pronoun in direct conversation with them.

Classic.

I miss them so much! ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

hahahahahahahahahaha

But although an English pun in a silly cartoon, I think you'll find in reality Calvin and Hobbes both understood Latin so knew what the 'pro' prefix meant, as they grew up in Europe a few hundred years ago with Latin as the common intellectual language, not English. It's funny how stupid people like funny things that make them seem even more stupid when they parrot them!

​@@PrivateSi It's funny how stupid people write long winded, rambling comments that make no sense and think they sound smart.

Opinions. Everyone got one

​@@smalltalk3284 My comment had 0 opinions, it was all factual statements from a Finnish point of view.

ok@@franciswall

Finnish grammar is a beautiful thing. Most speakers of other European languages (excluding Estonian and Hungarian and presumably the Sapmi languages) see Finnish and only think it looks impossibly difficult. They are wrong. It's music.

from a romance language speaker, i also find it weird that romance languages insist on gendering simple statements

Hi, I totally agree with your critique of asking about pronouns, and your statement that your gender as a cis person not being important or relevant in most contexts is highlights something incredibly valuable. I think one aspect that is often overlooked is the level at which personal pronouns and personal gender affects one another. For you, you made it clear that they are innately interlinked, the fact that you identify as a cis woman informs the internal answer to "what are your pronouns?". However, to many people, their gender and their pronouns are not inherently linked, take for example someone that might use they/them but strongly identify as a feminine woman. If they are asked what their pronouns are, it may not activate an internal analysis of their gender, it could be akin to asking what their name is. I think this plurality of the link between gender and terminology is what makes people react quite differently to a deceptively simple question. To a certain extent, we have all faced prejudice/bias based on perceived gender, and I think that is the cause of why this is a difficult subject. I'm interested in your thoughts on all of this, and whether you believe there is a respectful way to approach pronouns for everyone, trans or otherwise. Would it be enough if someone asked you "if you are comfortable, what are your pronouns?", or would that still feel invasive or unnecessary?

@@KazarooniBallooni thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think it would still be invasive and unnecessary because it still carries an implication of questioning someone's gender without a reasonable intent. I actually think it's potentially more harmful in the context of asking a trans person, because maybe they are putting in a lot of effort to pass and could view the experience of being asked this question as a sign that their efforts to pass are not successful. It's much better to just wait for more context clues or wait until the conversation has reached a casual enough level that it would feel more natural. As far as asking a stranger immediately upon meeting them, I can't see a scenario where it would be appropriate. And just to reply to something else in your comment, you gave the example of a person who uses they/them pronouns but identifies as a feminine woman. If I'm being frank, an example like this kind of demonstrates why i dont even really agree with the idea that we each even "have" our own third person pronouns in the first place. I don't see myself as "having" pronouns - when i present as I typically do as female, people refer to me as she, and when I'm in my androgenous work clothes, I wouldnt be surprised or offended if some people referred to me as "he" since it can be understandably hard to tell unless we are up close and chatting. In the English language, people generally passively pick which third person pronouns to use in their speech based on how they percieve a given person's gender presentation. By that logic, it fundamentally doesn't make sense for the person in your example to "not use" female pronouns if they are someone who in fact chooses present as what the average person would describe with female pronouns. I think in the example you gave, this person interprets this entire aspect of English grammar in an unconventional way, and it isn't fair to expect the average people they encounter in the world around them to align with that perspective of gender. The fact of the matter is that third person pronouns do not share the same grammatical function as a name or nickname, and if someone sees it that way then they must understand that their views are unconventional and so most people dont link any personal meaning whatsoever to the third person pronouns that pop out of their mouth when they are describing someone. It is totally valid however if this person chooses to primarily spend time with other people who share their interpretations of how third person pronouns function.

​@@DSS712yeah most cis people don't think about the third person pronouns because people seldom get them wrong, and when they do, the person doesn't double down and INSIST that you ARE a man. Most cis people will never have that experience, and while it might seem easy to ignore that type of incident, it gets harder to be okay after the thirtieth time it happens? When we say you're cis because you have a deep connection with your assigned gender, it's specifically because that connection runs so deep that you don't HAVE to think about it, it's just how things are.

Yeah, trans women here, and I hate whenever people on social media bully people into putting their pronouns in their bio. Not everyone, even in the queer community is comfortable with that and may themselves be closeted and not ready to say one way or another. It was a stupid trend that was going on and I am glad it has been happening less.

@@ArynWellspring honestly, it's such a cluster truck of nonsense (not pronouns themselves, the whole fight/discourse around them and genders & gender identities in general). It's like DSS said above: if someone is talking to me... why would they even use he/she/they in the first place? I'm pretty sure we only use I and You when we're two people speaking. So... asking for pronouns is like asking "what do I call you when I speak about you (to others)." It also cognates in my mind, like DSS said, with the " where are you from *really?* " type question. But even then, it's kind of a "meh" issue (to me). But what really grind my gears, so to speak, are two main things: sex erasure, and the neo/xeno-pronouns craze. The whole "gender" and derived terms are kinda simple to grasp (at least I personally think they are) when you read their definitions: Gender: "includes social, psychological, cultural and behavioral aspects of femininity, masculinity or other gender identity." So far, nothing complicated to me, but (and I know I'm the weirdo here and "normal people" don't read it like this, but) when I read "gender" I'm just automatically brought to its etymology in my head; gender is from "genus", meaning "kind, sort (of)." So "What gender are you?" is basically "What kind/sort (of human) are you?" and the above definition makes it easy to understand it's a sex based (male, female, and nonbinary/neutral) division. Gender identity: "the personal sense of your gender which can correlate with your observed sex or can differ from it." Just that bit does not *not* make sense either... it's simple. It's basically "the personal sense of your social, psychological, cultural and behavioral aspects of femininity, masculinity or other gender identity which can correlate with your observed sex or can differ from it." It is what I understand. And again, the definition reinforces that genders and gender identities are sex based divisions. Gender expression: "the external manifestation of your gender identity through behavior, mannerisms, and appearance that are socially associated with femininity, masculinity or other gender identity." So I understand this as "the external manifestation of your personal sense of your social, psychological, cultural and behavioral aspects of femininity, masculinity or other gender identity which can correlate with your observed sex or can differ from it through behavior, mannerisms, and appearance that are socially associated with femininity, masculinity or other gender identity." It still makes sense (to me), even though replacing "gender" and "gender identity" with their own definitions inside the definition of "gender expression" makes it very clunky to read as is, and somewhat repetitive. But it's still comprehensible (to me), but it again reinforces genders, identities, and expressions as sex based divisions. And here comes my first problem in this whole discourse... sex erasure. I've read, listened to, and watched a lot of the same people who've relentlessly hammered in that "sex and gender are different" things now conflating the two terms, and often having gender just replace entirely sex in discussions and definitions. And that's the whole issue I got: how can sex and gender be two different concepts but be interchangeable? And if you try to erase/replace the concept of "sex" with "gender," what does gender mean? "Sex" is part of gender's definition itself. But if the gender (kind/sort) of Humans is not a sex based division, then it needs another term of reference, or else gender loses all meaning. Like... I don't remember which nation/people, but there's a people whose genders are "Life" based. So "humans, leaves on a tree, feathers, an animal, etc." are not "masculine/feminine" but "alive," and "rocks, trees, house, etc." are "non-alive" or something like that. If we don't want "genders" to be sex based divisions, well, we need to find another concept to base the division... or else "gender" just means nothing! If we want it sex based, life/non-life based, age based, etc. let's go for it! But it still needs a common concept, denominator for the definitions to make sense. Let's take age for example. If genders were age based divisions, then the definition for gender expression would become something like: "the external manifestation of your personal sense of your social, psychological, cultural and behavioral aspects of *youngness, adulthood, seniority or other gender identity* which can correlate with your observed *age* or can differ from it through behavior, mannerisms, and appearance that are socially associated with youngness, adulthood, seniority or other gender identity." See what I mean? And this brings in my second problem with the discourse... the goddamn neo/xenogenders/pronouns. Xir/xer? Fae/faer? Cat/catself? Tree/treeself? God/godself? What the fuuuuuuuuu-- It's completely chaotic! There's no logic, no sense! How can someone's gender/pronoun be "cat" or "fairy" or "god" ??? What's their common denominator? Where is the division? What's the linking coincept between those nonsensical "pronouns?" A defined and shared theme must be the base of gender divisions: for male/female/enby, it's sex; for youngness/adulthood/seniority, it's age/time; and for alive/non-alive, it's life. What is the shared concept linking cat, fairy, xir, and god!? How can your Human gender (kind/sort) be "cat" ? A Human man? Makes sense. A Human senior? Makes sense. A Human alive? Still makes sense! A Human cat? WTF!? Cats are animals... Humans are animals! How can one's gender (kind/sort) be another animal when we are already an animal? It's just wild and nonsensical! Honestly, those "neo/xenogenders/pronouns" really sound like attention-seeking tools, or rather... attempts at some sort of hyper individualization & dehumanization. Forget having to identify as male, female or intersex or nonbinary, it's... it's almost like they just don't want to identify as humans at all! I mean... what the hell are the "social, psychological, cultural and behavioral aspects of a fae? Or a cat? Or a plant? Or god?" That's where I am completely flabbergasted and cannot wrap my mind around the heck those "neo/xenogenders/pronouns" are supposed to convey. Some folks conflate sexes and genders by accident because the definitions are linked by one's birth sex, and it's understandable... but some really, really want and dream of abolishing the concept of "sex" altogether and replace it with gender, but they don't replace "sex" in the definition of gender for another thematic concept; they don't attempt to give a coherent definition at times. And I can't shake off the feeling it's all because the majority of people have drastically bad literary and reading comprehensions. I have the impression lots of people into "xenogenders" are trying to convey... personality traits? Characteristics? Like... if someone says their gender is "cat/catself," it feels like they try to convey "I am feline" and not literally (at least I hope not literally) "I am a cat." I fail to see how any of these can even make sense as "genders," and it really, really gives out vibes of trying to be "personality/character traits" if my vision/explication of it makes sense. I'd very much like your impressions on the topic if you have any, and if you feel like sharing :P Sorry for the novel, but it's just impossible to talk about this stuff in just 4000 characters lol I've echoed a lot of my best friend's fiancée (transwoman too) here, and she's even more critical of everything around transgenderism, pronouns, genders, etc. than any of our group friend. Thanks for taking your time to read/listen 🙇‍♂

people studying the Sapir Whorf theory concluded that if the 'gender' of an object influences the way French/German speakers think of them it does so very minimally.

Yea but it's clear that they're masculine or feminine because people and animals actually ARE male or female. When you assign male or female gender to inanimate objects, it's arbitrary and stupid, but when assigning them to members of a sexually reproducing dimorphic species, through pronouns, it is a direct reference to their biological sex. Gendered pronouns don't refer to identities and never did, they refer to sex.

So I guess if you're a biological male your pronouns would be "he", and if you're a biological female your pronouns would be "she" regardless of how stereotypically feminine or masculine you seem to be ?

My favorite is coño 😌

​@@prenomnom364sí

And he didn't make fun of you for always using gender neutral pronouns?

@@seanbirch oddly, no. This was back in middle school so I’m sure it just didn’t click for him.

​@@seanbirchthe idea that gender neutral pronouns are bad or weird is really really new. Using gender neutral pronouns has only become something people make fun of because gender issues became political issues. I don't think there was a single person who would argue with the use of singular they in english prior to the year 2000

@@thedudeamongmengs2051 Actually, people have been arguing about it almost as long as it's been a thing, which is 700-odd years... *facepalm*

I used to use gender neutral pronouns as a kid when I didn’t know the gender of the person I was talking about it

as I thought, asking for pronounce is outing someone

yeah, its the sad consequence of ppl getting cancelled and losing their jobs, doxxed and hung out to dry online for not doing it 🤷‍♀️

Szx​@@merisav4171

I should caution that it is very rare to see people on the right arguing in good faith. Linguistics is inherently a social subject, or at the very least a science whose fabric is composed of human communication and interaction. I would argue that every science and philosophy is, in some regard, social. Even something so remote as, say, chemistry. It is rendered thus by the role of pedagogy in sharing information, in which every teacher must first be taught. Whether or not you can follow this causal chain back to our first analogous, conscious ancestor - wherein said being is an isolated occurrence, which is an assumption that takes great liberty - this is too great a digression to hold relevance. Then we start asking questions like "can the interplay between a subject's mind and the external environment with which it interacts be considered learning?" and then "if so, does the environment teach or does the subject teach itself?" if so "when teaching is an activity, how can something non-conscious and nebulous like one's external environment be said to teach?" and "is it not circular that a subject can teach itself? Does this not suggest the subject possesses some prior knowledge that would, if possessed, render the process of teaching itself unnecessary?" among other questions like "can there be a society of one?" and "is there such a thing as an individual mind?" at which point we have very much ventured outside the scope of linguistics and I need to stop rambling.

Eh, not really. On the right it's mostly just a complete disregard for people's actual lives. We know that inclusion plays a huge part in reducing things like suicide in trans and other gender non-conforming people. By taking the aggressive "anti-pronoun" space, you just lose any sort of soundness in your argument because the entire foundation is that you do not care if people are excluded from society or even take their own lives. There's just no discourse at all about correct usage, inclusion or how to integrate new language because the right just doesn't care. On the left it's pretty much just disagreements on how to approach inclusion. Some people take rather aggressive "people who push back will see no sympathy" approaches and some others that take a far more passive approach exactly like in the video. Taking an aggressive approach to inclusion I think is perfectly sound stance to take, especially when the alternative is social isolation or even violence towards those who are different. The argument is just on whether that's an effective approach to changing minds. It often isn't, but there are definitely people out there who are complete lost causes, in which case an aggressive "time to troll them with pronouns" approach is pretty much the best you can do. My uncle, for example, still refuses to refer to my cousin (bearded trans man who's jacked as hell and looks nothing like a woman) as a man using he/him pronouns no matter how much people have corrected him (and no matter how absolutely insane he looks referring to him that way) simply because they're trans. It's been something like 7 years now. That person deserves none of my attention and I take pride in pissing him off.

​@@betterbelle29 I totally agree! 💜

​@@sinenomine2681I agree with your first sentence. The rest is um heavy philosophical debates.

It started out in the gay community to refer to a particular type of "queen." :-)

Eeh, it can be seen as emasculating to use it against a male

@@BryantMitchellYes, it's still a gender-loaded term.

@@sazji Which is why, usually, when referring to boys, we'll usually say "Drama King" instead. Which pretty much means, you're a guy, so "King", but you're acting like a drama queen regardless.

@@powerofk Never heard that!

Actually "a gente" means exclusively "we", nothing else. At least that's how we use it in Brazil. And it's not gender-free, you can't really be gender-free in portuguese.

"They" simply has both meanings in English, just as "you" does. Both are singular or plural depending on context. Anyone who says "they" is only plural is just incorrect. Singular they is older than singular you, both of which were originally (hundreds of years ago) solely plural. Especially if an American tells you "they" is only plural, they're somehow more out of date on the English language than the age of their entire country should allow for. We'd have to revert to a form of middle English if we wanted to use a version of the language which didn't allow these uses of they and you. If "they" to refer to one person is an 'English mess,' so is using "you." Not to mention the entire argument is a *semantic distraction* from the actually important discussion of human dignity.

The rule there isn't really what people think. German has genders and most of the time the gender comes from the ending. So, you get the rule that pretty much anything ending in -chein is neuter regardless of what the original word was. Similarly, the feminine word Frau becomes neuter when you attach -lein to the end, so Fräulein is neuter. Without a general rule like that, the language would be an absolute nightmare to speak or write without a computer as you'd have to memorize all the genders of the words rather than just a substantial minority of them. Also, I think it's unfortunate that the term gender was chosen to represent these changes as in very few, if any, languages is there a 1 to 1 match between gender of the word and gender of the object to which it refers.

People who use German to make a point about (third person) personal pronouns don't actually understand German.

@Eichhörnchen Wibbleflup If only Germans wouldn't re-interpret so much nonsense from the US... "das Gendern" with "*innen" is a bastardisation of language if I've ever seen one.

@Eichhörnchen Wibbleflup what if xe/xers tomorrow decide that all their words describing them should be neutral and end in "-ax"... das Täterax hat xer ermordet. How many inclusionary fantasies does one need to indulge before enough is enough b s.

@Eichhörnchen Wibbleflup slippery slope fallacy is about an alleged chain reaction. My argument wasn't a chain, it was simply that the same logic could apply to different scenarios. The underlying question is simple: Where are the limits of language inclusivity? It's not a slippery slope to shine light on a lack of clarity when it comes to the rules we apply. Not every event must have already occurred for us to account for it, otherwise any form of risk management would inherently be a slippery slope fallacy (which it isn't). But even if it were the case that an event must first occur before we consider its implications, then hereby I identify as a xe/xer and demand this language change in the name of inclusivity (I'm The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster of gender).

Honestly the worst when you give pronouns that mark you as trans and people still misgender you, bonus points if it’s by accident

@@lihnsthat’s literally me every fucking day… they literally can’t remember

Just want to say you aren't alone

I've had to force myself to adopt an idgaf attitude to deal with this situation. But it was a conscious decision and the first time I did that I had to psych myself up. Sometimes I get shy about it again and have to rebuild myself emotionally about it. Ugh.

If only it was a little more extensive and sometimes neutral, it would actually be useful

@@elecbaguette Yeah, true! I really do think "I" should be the only pronoun to be categorized, because everything is 1 useless, it doesn't matter and/or 2 is bound to give false information.

lol, that is a false assumption! I know what you're saying though. If someone seems to be trying then give them the benefit of the doubt. But a significant portion of this world has made it very clear that they will not respect anyone different.

Better than assuming everyone's malicious i suppose.

I don't have to try, I'll just describe you as I see you.

​@@EamonWillit's not an assumption set in stone, it's until you get to know the person better. It's simply presumption of innocence. If someone shows malice, obviously you stop giving them the benefit of the doubt. Presumption of innocence is the basic requirement for a civil society. When we let presumption of guilt run things you get chaos.

This is so true, even in broader aspects of life, not just pronouns.

Yeah, and that just sounds ridiculous. I think that people who insist on having their own pronoun are a bit unreasonable, as that is just saying “you aren’t allowed to use any pronouns for me, and here is a second name you can use instead.” We should just as a society pick a whole set of neopronouns and use them when we need to

@Amarok eh, I can also see the usefulness of having xe/xim or something like it, essentially a genderless third person singular pronoun. The usefulness of differentiating it from they is that there wouldn’t be any confusion about referring to multiple people or just one. Or they could work because we already use it in a similar manner. I have a feeling there will eventually be a standard that naturally arises, and we’ll all just go with that

@Amarok I feel uncomfortable when calling people it it just feels so dehumanizing

Generally I'm using pronouns to refer to a person when they aren't there. I'll stick with he, her or they. If the person in referencing wants stomething else, or I don't know their preferred pro nouns and they present in a non gendered or opposite gendered way, I'll use they. To me it's important to also be able to communicate clearly. And sometimes that means using pronouns the person I'm talking to understands, not who the person I'm taking about would prefer and is not present. My partner's sibling views themselves as non binary. I refer to them as they, and the other ways I've just mentioned. If for some reason they come up in a conversation I will try to stick to this unless it's going to cause confusion. People who don't know my partner's sibling will often be confused when I say my partner's sibling. And for an inconsequential conversation about a person that isn't there and will never meet the person I'm taking about, I'll just say sister or she. The conversation doesn't need to be derailed by a person going "huh" or me having to explain they are non binary, what that means and possibly an exchange of opinions on the whole trans thing. Especially if it's just a verbal conversation with a stranger about our familys and having partner's, x number of siblings, etc. Or a person who doesn't agree at all with pronouns and trans issues and has their mind made up and believes their opinion is right. (I'm just not interested in having a debate with a person who has made up their mind that trans people aren't people or don't exist or are trying to control and censor language. Especially when they are talking about my friends and family who I care about. I'm not going to provoke that reaction. Especially over a general question of "does your parter come from a big family?") Personally I think if someone is offended by how I use pronouns well that's a them problem to resolve. I'm being polite by using non gendered language where I can and it's appropriate. I use it also to avoid getting the he/she wrong. To me it is like swearing. Not everyone likes it. If I'm around a person who hates swearing then I won't swear. But when I'm not around them I'll swear as much as it suits me and is appropriate for the context I'm in. Or like calling a person a name they don't like. If the jerk doesn't like being called a jerk then I'm not going to call them that when they are around. I will say they are a jerk when they aren't present. (FYI I'm not claiming trans people are jerks. They aren't. PEOPLE can be jerks and and sometimes it is appropriate to communicate this to other people. Gender identity is irrelevant to how big of a jerk a person is). Yes it is respectful to call people what they want to be called. It's not the only important aspect in communicating. Sometimes clear communication is also important. Context of the situation is important. The audience of the conversation is also important. Or in short, multiple things can be important with different degrees of importance to balance. To me there is no point in telling a story where you have to hash out a list of who has what specific pronoun at the start of the story, to immediately lose your audience's understanding of what the story is all about. And there is doubly no point if the tangent becomes a trans debate instead of about the story you were trying to communicate.

I used to try to do that, and still mostly do it when speaking out loud, but I got layed into over it being annoying and demeaning.

Fleural pronouns… That’s awesome 😂

Pronouns run the gamut from obligatory to infrequently used in language. In English they're mostly obligatory. Same for French and Mandarin. Butb Spanish verbs, for example, show inflections that indicate person and number so pronouns are useful to clarify ambiguity or add emphasis but often not necessary and therefore, omitted. Thai verbs function, for the most part. the same way as Chinese verbs, meaning they're pretty much morphemically inert Despite that. Pronouns are still omitted because context makes it clear, in speech, who's talking about what. But more formal spoken Thai will eschew pronouns in place of titles, nicknames or roles. A customer will be called "customer", for example and to further elevate the respect being shown the pronoun Khun (you) (one of a panoply of 'you' pronouns) can be inserted almost as an honorific. Funny things happen in intergenerational conversations where people call themselves by a childish title when talking to a parent (noo, literally 'mouse') then switch to referring to themselves by a parental role title when talking to a child. One of the ways to disambiguate conversations is to plug in nicknames as pronouns and it's not unusual to hear someone's nickname 2 or 3 times in a complex sentence. A question about the new Spanish pronoun mentioned in the video. Isn't "vosotros" straight from Latin?: There is a new Spanish pronoun, I was told years ago. being used in Colombia, and its environs vos, which is a 2nd person pronoun, used in favor of tu. Vos is also the object pronoun of vosotros so strictly speaking it's an old pronoun that changed its function. First time something like that has ever happened so big surprise, right?😊

@@76rjackson actually, I think the object pronoun for vosotros is “os” (And vos just uses “te”)

@@Muhahahahaz thanks. Your correction made me do some checking. Vosotros is newer than Vos and derived from it. Like it did for a bunch of other words, things changed in Spain but the emigrés weren't keeping up. Vosotros didn't get picked up. But Usted i(from vuestra Merced) may actually be newer than vosotros, I think. As a native English speaker I remember feeling my brain bend a little when required to use 3rd person verbs for the 2nd person pronoun. Learning that Usted derived from vuestra merced made it clear, finally.

@@76rjackson apparently it came from “vos e otros” (vos and others)? Very interesting!

having eunuchs at an indian wedding is considered good luck, isn’t it?

I mean... third gender is a term used in anthropology to talk about overall LGBT+ people without being more specific than that, but since it's called "gender" I can see why people would confuse it. Also some hijra are non-binary.

@@vicentetomas3649 their still not an accept member of society, I mean the world Hijra means traveller/wayfarer and the reason why these people are called that because every community/town that they try to settle in ultimately kicks them out, forcing them to have to travel to a different place. There are some LGBT+ supporters in India but the majority of people in the majority of places aren’t accepting of them at all

@@earinsound no, I’ve never heard that, even if that is the case being castrated doesn’t meant that your trans or of some other gender, most religious parents castrate their children at birth due to their religious beliefs, it doesn’t mean that the child’s gender has now been changed or something

As a detransitioned still nonbinary linguist who wishes English would remove masc/fem and add inclusive/exclusive, same. If you reply to this, tagging me especially, knowingly disagreeing, without asking me questions about what I mean; I look down at you and feel not like an asshole for it. Use your brain, library, elders, and internet more.

Same! I though this was really interesting and made some good points. The only point I took issue with was when stating that he wouldn’t be offended if someone used she when referring to him. Let’s be real, MOST men, maybe not all, would quite unsterstandably take that as a dig against their masculinity and react negatively.

@@AmberPremo you might be right. I will say that at least in my personal circle of people, including me, my cis dude friends don't really have a pronoun preference either.

hey fellow transfem Emily lol

@@AmberPremo don't forget, he was talking about the situation when others are talking about you and you're usually not there at all.

I wish that was always the case but they do hit you with that -chan -kun. Nothing more painful than being called deadname-chan. It does help a lot that you can gender your speech a lot more though. The speech of a woman or a man is pretty identical in English, but in Japanese you can often tell the gender of someone just by seeing what they’ve said written down

I’ve always wanted to refer to myself as 俺 (in casual interactions, not at the office), but I would get some wild looks if I did that. The cognitive dissonance would be too much for people. I’ve always found Japanese 1st-person pronouns a little uncomfortable because none of them feel quite right for me. 🤔

Except kare and kanojo are he and she when the person is not present, it's just that defaulting to names doesn't sound as weird as in English

@@ancalyme Most of the times kare and kanojo are not used though. Usually you put the persons name and then drop the topic like instead of saying “Sarah ate an apple. She thought it was good” they would say “Sarah ate an apple. Thought it was good” where is was implied that I am still talking about Sarah. Kanojo especially is avoided because it can also mean girlfriend so it is usually used in that sense. That is why Koyuki said mostly, because while they do have pronouns they don’t use them nearly as often as we do.

@@Sally-zb4rs Oh that's interesting

Oh don't worry, that's an issue for everyone. It's hard to deal with people with mental issues, which is why parents usually tell children to look away.

That's mostly because people are inventing new ways of doing it that lack any sort of standards. We've had basically 4 pronouns for the 3rd person in English for quite a while now, we have he, she, it and they. (As in the singular they, not the plural they) A lot of it looks suspiciously like an attempt at trolling as one would need to be specifically educated in not just what it means, but also how to pronounce them.

@Chris L As an older person, I struggle using 'it' as a pronoun for a person. 'It' is for inanimate objects, or an insult. I don't even use 'it' for animals.

@@reachandler3655 IKR, but if somebody asks, you're kind of stuck as not making a sincere attempt is even less respectful.

@@reachandler3655 For me, using "it" when referring to someone when I was growing up was considered incredibly rude, hurtful, and hateful. "It" meant that the person in question wasn't considered fit enough to even be referred to as human- you were useless and unwanted. I don't personally know anyone who goes by "it", but if I did, I would feel I was being unkind to them. Edited because that was a syntactical mess. T-T

In case anyone isn't aware - Finnish has just one pronoun which doesn't differentiate between masculine or feminine - 'hän' (she/he) or colloquially 'se' (which actually originally meant 'it' but is used in conversation for he and she too). I believe it's a similar situation in Hungarian and Turkish.

Or Turkish I guess

I knew a Finnish girl in college. She was hot.

Mandarin having 3 different characters for He他 She她 It它, but pronouncing them exactly the same - tā. lol

@@barrysteven5964 ő in Hungarian.

(Apologies for the bad English, I use DeepL. Not all terms will have been translated correctly for me, let us focus on the discourse in a general sense). Personal opinion: I am of the opinion that those who talk about "I identify with" only make things harder for everyone. I am a cisgender male, but I wear my hair long. Several times in my life I have been mistaken for a woman, so much so that I have even been kicked out of a locker room. I don't have a problem with that, other than the discomfort of feeling like I am deceiving those in front of me. (If someone filters with me, I have no idea whether they do so knowing that I am a man or because they have mistaken me for a woman.) The fact that even non-transgender people want to use pronouns other than their own gender leads to the suspicion of the person in front of you that it's just a joke, that it's a game and not that it's a request due to a real need. Like we are surrounded by people in wheelchairs who sit in them just because they are tired, because they don't like the idea of walking. In the presence of a real disabled person in a wheelchair, people will clearly be skeptical of that.

@@anonimo6603 I’d like to question what you said about non-transgender people using pronouns that differ from their presumed gender based on their assigned sex at birth. I personally haven’t met any such people so am wondering if perhaps something was lost in translation and you meant something these. Also, with the wheelchair analogy. I feel the need to inform you that not all disabilities are visible. There is a RU-vidr called Jessica Kellgren-Fozard. She is disabled, but how she is disabled can vary at different times, sometimes parts of her body will be paralysed. If this includes both her legs she may need to use a wheelchair. But sometimes she is perfectly able to walk on two legs. So you might see her walking and then in a wheelchair on another day. And in general, it wouldn’t be good to call her or others out on that just because they have a disability you don’t understand. I probably haven’t explained that well. But if you look up the video she did on Jameela Jamil she can explain it much better than I.

@@gardenshed6043 I mean those who do not suffer from gender dysphoria, in the nonbinary area.

@@anonimo6603 A lot of (most?) nonbinary people do suffer from gender dysphoria, and are typically included under the trans umbrella. Some also talk about gender euphoria, which is a very similar idea, but one which is often more accurate (especially to people early in their transition) and also avoids the narrative that being trans is an exclusively negative experience.

omg thx for being such a great ally!!!

Not a linguist but I think the technical term is "code switching". It can be exhausting. But making the effort is probably appreciated by your cousin.

I feel at home with this comment! I would not intentionally use a pronoun that would hurt who I am talking to, but please if I ever end up doing that, don't jump to the conclusion that I am descriminating you, there are just days where my brain is a representation of a leaky sieve. I too have been exposed to a society that made me associate certain features of a person with a certain gender, and sometimes that understanding is woven into my subconscious. I am trying my best. It's amazing that you were keeping up with the pronouns situation honestly, I don't know if I would do well with that.

Yeah, I'm in a similar position in a couple of situations, the trans people I know are actually pretty easy-going about pronouns but I'm from a generally pretty traditional Christian community and so if they come up in conversation I'm constantly having to make judgment calls about whether it is safe to use people's preferred pronouns out of respect and support for them, or whether doing so would actually bring more trouble their way than it would be worth.

As a trans guy myself, I’m sure your cousin appreciates you immensely. My mother has to do the same thing with me around certain unaccepting family members and it gets exhausting for everyone. I wish we just lived in a world where trans people could just exist without having to hide their transness, but unfortunately that’s not the world we live in. I’m sure your cousin feels the same, he’s lucky to have such supportive family around him who’s willing to put in the effort to show him he’s respected and loved.

In international situations the pronouns can help, because sometimes finding out the gender of a foreign person from the name is impossible. I agree with this, but as a speaker of a language without gendered pronouns, I do see the anglocentric pronoun discussion as a bit annoying.

It's a component of a a subculture - social Marxist gender radicalism, which is not to be confused with LGBT. Transexuals only want the pronouns that correspond to their psychological sense of their gender, and that's how it's always been. Nonstandard pronouns are the product of academic radical leftist social theory, and they are a very recent development. My closest friend uses "they," but doesn't force it on me, however, casually, most of the people I know regard pronouns in the bio as a red flag, i.e., 'this person is probably a woke pain in the ass that I don't want to get involved with.'

@@bayrum9803 its not that serious calm down

@@bayrum9803 social marxist?

@@biglexica7339 It's a little complicated, but basically it's a movement that originally evolved in the US post 1960's that took grievance Marxist ideology and replaced class with identity groups like race, gender, orientation, etc. Convince them that they're horrifically oppressed whether they are or not. Bonus points when you can convince them that they're oppressed for being a member of a minority that doesn't even actually exist like non-binary. The deeper into it you get the more ties to economic Marxism, but basically all things "woke" are rooted in social Marxism. "Equity" is an especially dubious social Marxist concept that boils down to the usual redistribution crap - based on "intersectionality," which is a bigoted matrix of woke stereotypes and assumptions about people based on inalienable traits and identity groups (i.e., racism, sexism, etc.).

this is a good comment

This! I find neopronouns to be very interesting and cool but they just don’t work out due to needless complexity and lack of standardization

One thing which wasn't really discussed in the video because it's sort of an aside to the point being made, is that move towards singular 'they' isn't just due to the desire to be respectful for trans and non binary people, but also the desire for a gender-neutral pronoun in English when the gender is unknown. While "he" is often the default gender which IMO rightfully causes concern by itself but that's arguably not even the worst thing. In reality we tend to use gendered pronouns in s based on stereotypical expectations which yes might be true based on averages but which do have sexist implications in how we think about things. For example, I'm fairly sure it's very common people might say something like "when you see the doctor, tell him" yet "when you see the nurse, tell her", even when the doctor or nurse are unknown to the speaker.

@tetyoonlee4373 Very true! And its use as a singular neuter pronoun has been around for a lot longer than most people think. It is etymologically borrowed from the Norse third person plural demonstrative “þeir” and has been used in English as a third singular neuter pronoun with human reference (as opposed to “it”) since at least the 1300s. As such, I think it should be more than adequate as a third-person singular human-gender pronoun. When talking to some members of my family who are unaware I’m trans, my girlfriend uses “they” when referring to me, and it has never raised questions. While I understand the desire for extra sets of pronouns for gender-non-conforming people, I find that use of singular “they” is probably the best and most easily adaptable for the general public. At the end of the day, and I wish the video had discussed this in greater depth, the constraints are purely linguistic circumstance and based on the structure of the particular language. Indo-European languages have historically developed from either a two-way masculine-feminine split or three-way masc.-fem.-neuter split. As I mentioned in my OP, there are plenty of languages which don’t have this distinction. English has already dropped grammatical gender in its noun classes, pronouns are the only remaining relic. (This is one reason why English speakers often find learning languages like Spanish or Hindi so tedious: how and why are things like “table” or “car” either masculine or feminine?). Anyway, sorry for rambling. I agree that singular “they” is probably the best option and ticks all the boxes for inclusivity and practicality.

It definitely feels like a catch-22.

I'll say this as a trans person: I never force anyone to share pronouns. I will not ask unless it's obvious to me that they want me to ask,. and instead I will rely on others to share or correct if I assume the pronouns wrong. If someone is trans and comes out as trans to me, I will ask them which pronouns they would prefer I use, but that`;s the only time. I do this because I was forced to do exactly that situation at one point by someone who was attempting to be inclusive, and I did *not* like it. So for me, the most important thing is to let others provide to me how they would prefer I refer to them, assuming I didn't figure it out right away.

Contrapoints did and she got canceled for it

I have come across a few LGBTQ persons sharing their discomfort with forced pronouns for this reason, but it's certainly not something very many people are saying.

@@mairoberts1247Came here to say this.

You are not alone. I don’t have autism and it’s exhausting for me too.

im a trans autist... i get confused at MY pronouns... how the f do they expect me to honour theirs?

I don't waste any energy or time on pronouns. I'll just describe someone as I see them.

Do not waste your mental energy on other people's narcissistic delusions.

​@@corinneskitchenbooooo...... Bigot is spamming half the comment section with hate. Come on, youre better than that

You clearly are not in touch with the whole political spectrum. You haven't even reached the centre, much less the Right wing. But keep pretending like you know what you're talking about.

I figured out I was trans because my sociology teacher taught me the definition of gender identity XD

I was so worried lol

TRUTH!

And he's even using the term apolitically! (as apposed to as slang/derogatory/meaningless usage)

@wolfblaide Progressive left would be more accurate, my guess is that it was to draw attention tbf. Far right people are more likely to click and listen if they think it's criticizing "woke people". Lol

@@demcurvs Well yes, but I don't think "progressive" captures the full intent for the video. "Woke" seems to be better, as it come across initially as wrong or potentially offensive, then you realise it isn't. That fits very well with the video.

I think the thing is that you just have to make sure the listener will understand whatever you're picking. Unless it's a more obscure neopronoun, in my experience most people can figure it out if it's clarified for them. It's just nice to not put all the burden of explanation on the person who likely has to do so far too much in their day to day already.

Which is very confusing because in norwegian "de" is only used singular in second person formal. Otherwise it is plural third person. It is the similar in english. Third person plural. Second person they is only used for an unknown subject. It is just as much madness in English.

I'm not a native English speaker, so I don't have English engraved in my brain. So, just like I costantly learn new things about the language and start using them, it could potentially be easier for me to use the singular they to refer to a non-binary person. However that's not the case. This is because I don't have any non-binary person to talk to or about, therefore this special use of the word is so rare that it's impractical. It's like having a very fancy avocado slicer, bought specifically to slice avocado and only avocado. But you don't ever buy avocados, and when you do it occasionally, you forget you had the avocado slicer and use a normal knife instead.

@@thomgizziz "a third gender neutral pronoun was added: "hen"." I don't use that ridiculous term, and neither should anyone else. "in norwegian "de" is only used singular in second person formal." No, Norwegian (capitalised). That would be "De" (capitalised). Though it doesn't affect the pronunciation. But the objective form is "Dem" (as opposed to "dem" for third person plural). .

Facepalm. Your language has what we wish English had, and the teens still went with third person plural 😮‍💨🙄

Yup. 😑@@littlestbroccoli

That's because it's a massive imposition for a tiny group of people who individually may or may not even care. Asking somebody for their pronouns is rude and really needs to stop. It's very much the same basic idea as asking if somebody is gay or lesbian. It's not something that we would generally do except in some pretty specific circumstances and doing so forces people to make an up or down vote as to whether they're out or not. By all means, if somebody gives you a preferred pronoun or a different name from what you were expecting do your best to respect their request, but people shouldn't be rooting around in case there is some other preference. When people say that you shouldn't assume somebody's gender, that's not really what they mean, what they mean is that you should ask if it's not clear, not that you need to personally ask absolutely everybody, including those that are very clearly one gender or another or if it's not even relevant to what's going on.

Yeah, that knife cuts both ways depending on the group/ context you're dealing with. Personally, i tend to default towards preferred because A) I'm an old fuck and it was the first one I learned; B) When describing someone's pronouns to others it feels much more respectful to the one being described to say "They *_prefer_* you say X" than "They *_are_* a X". Keeps the focus on the fact that they're a person capable of making decisions as opposed to an object for everyone else to describe either correctly or incorrectly (I know we do that all the time with cis-folk, race, nationality, etc, but it seems to me like a subject where respect is easier to forget for some folks and I'd rather err on the side of giving them an extra couple straws to grasp at); And C) I have no actual power to force a third-party speaker to do anything. If the discussed person's preference isn't enough to make the third party care, then that third party was never gonna care anyway...

@DBSTKjS I didn't say anything about names. Names are not pronouns, which shouldn't even need to be stated, but here I am. Names are not grammatical tools like pronouns are.

@@SmallSpoonBrigade I think as younger folks are moving away from gender norms, it's completely impossible to know for sure. I know a few people for whom I would have defaulted to he or she quite without hesitation by visual reading if not for them indicating a 'they/them' preference. Now I am in a position (theater/stage management) where we do paperwork that includes names and identifiers (like contact sheets) where we do ask to get ahead of an in person meetup and to properly write about the performers and designers with preferred pronouns on anything written where pronouns might be used. I have noticed a tiny bit of 'whatever's respectful' as well, indicating a complete detachment from a preference.

I refer to everyone as guy or girl non withstanding of their actual gender nor does it matter at all Worst of all a woman can use he pronouns and still be a woman but I would be confused because the pronoun she chose doesn’t describe her actual gender I’ve never seen a guy get angry being called a she nor does it matter, especially since they’re 99% of the time not there to hear it It’s like what

...if it doesn't matter why are you so emotional about it? if someone says "hey can you call me (insert gendered term here)" just do it? since, like you said, it doesn't matter. why would it make you so emotional?

@@fancydeer people are scared of what they don’t understand. hopefully OP gets more knowledge on this subject and gets less emotional about it. people constantly learn and grow.

@@fancydeerYes, but 3rd person pronouns are really only used in the person‘s absence, so there is an automatic fear of denunciation and public shaming that burdens personal relationships, particularly if the preferred pronoun appears unnatural or contrived.

@@fancydeer OP didn't say it doesn't matter. Is reading hard for you or something?

@@fancydeer Because, as stated in the video, it's not as easy as you think. It can be pretty mentally taxing to try to navigate respectfully, and the stress is only compounded when the whole concept seems illogical to you. Because it feels like you need to constantly bend over backwards for something pointless. That can understandably be frustrating and get someone emotional.

Doesnt saying any pronouns are good IMMEDIATELY out you as trans?

@@michaelcherokee8906 i mean it probably depends on the listener; the guy in the video literally said he's fine with any pronouns and he isnt trans

I’d say it potentially outs you as either (1) trans, (2) an anti-trans bigot, (3) a cis ally to trans people, or (4) someone who doesn’t really care, because all four of those groups could have reasons for saying any pronouns are fine. If someone told me that any pronouns are fine, I’d be racking my brain trying to figure out which of those categories they are in.

​@@ericherde1no anti-trans bigot would say this.

@@thechumbucket8986 I've heard that exact statement from anti-trans bigots before, with a strong tone in their voices.

Your friend is lucky you speak english. In portuguese the equivalent of 'the' has 2 genders, and it frequently comes before the name

One of my daughter's friends is trans, but the friend's parent did not know, and I definitely did the pronoun dodge at first when I didn't want to be disrespectful but didn't want to out the kid, either. These days, I follow the audience type advice that not outing the kid is more important, so I use the dead name and wrong gendered pronouns in those cases.

@@tigerofdoom Althought it's not ideal, not outing the kid is definitely more important and they would appreciate you doing so if they knew. They'll do it to themselves all the time, for example.

It reminded me of when churches were trying to move to a more inclusive way of referring to God so there would be sentences like 'May God add God's blessing to my prayer so that God's love is carried through God's creation"... :p

I had to do this for a long time when a long-time family friend transitioned. I don't know why reprogramming my brain with their new pronouns was so much harder than their new name. But it probably took me a year or two and felt really awkward at first.

That’s what Mr. is for; mister obviated the need for expressing “he/him” on written or spoken exchanges.

@@3dorderifyyea

@@3dorderify Except that it's rather strange to include an honorific such as Mr./Mrs./Ms. in one's email signature.

That's very thoughtful of you. I had quite a bit of trouble figuring out whether to use Mr or Ms when referring to someone I've never seen in person... now I'm also wondering how to refer to someone who's pronouns are they/them🤔 are they Mr, Ms or some new variant, I saw Mx once, but since English is my second language I'm not sure

​@@stacykrasnikova7744Mx is a gender neutral equivalent of Mr or Ms that some non-binary people use. It's usually pronounced like the word "mix" or "mucks". It's a relatively new thing but it's becoming more common.

Thanks, I'm glad you liked it! I try (and maybe don't always succeed) to model having these discussions in ways that are a little more calm, while taking people's concerns seriously

@@languagejones6784 the T has got to go LGB without the T now as a real gay man my goal is to get rid of trans activists and help Detrans voices grow.

Indeed. There are definitely exaggerations all around.

Exactly!! I have people misgendering me, even calling me a woman outright, not just "she" but only one single person does it to make a point. Everyone else simply isn't capable of understanding the subject (I'm autistic myself so I'm constantly around people with differently functioning brains) I let them. In fact, I'm the one who told them it's okay. I did ask that they refrain from using any gendered terms other than pronouns, like "woman" since those aren't needed while not using gendered pronouns in German is linguistic heII (it feels too awkward and I respect that, and I can't afford to 'fix' my body so it's difficult to remember I prefer "he") but I get that they just can't remember and I tell the people that do use the correct terms that I greatly appreciate them, but also that there's no need to correct anyone because I know they don't have bad intentions. Even the one who does it to make a point ( and also might be waiting for me to negatively react) is autistic. I know the reason he's so rightist and so severely against trans people is because he whole heartedly believes that biology is all there is and humans aren't anything more than our outer shells

@@rigure I wonder if you can find a way to prompt "the one who does it to make a point" to go on an "autistic special interest" dive into the intricacies of biological sex (the myriad forms of intersexuality in humans, sex in other species, etc.). Might change the outlook, indirectly??? :)

@@DavidLindes Hehe I guess I could try to get him interested ^-^ I do think his aversion to a lot of humans is quite deeply rooted, so I'm not sure he won't just fight any interest he might get, but it may be worth a shot!

Definitely. Offline, politeness tends to win. I don't 'believe' in gender identity or trans and still happily use people's preferred pronouns, because why wouldn't I? They're just trying to live their best life and be comfortable, only an asshole would deliberately undermine that.

The human race has only two Biological sexes. Gender pronouns traditionally just indicated what kind of reproductive capability do you have, eggs or sperm. From there it gender categorizes how you can interact with them. For example a married man is not expected to be close friends with another woman, as his wife would probably get jealous and threatened. This is while the man can have male friends that do not threaten his wife. This largely is not going away, as it is part of monogamy which will always be the dominate behavior. By choosing gender neutral pronouns, do you think you are free of this scenario? Or does it actually make things worse? (Threatening the mans wife my having friends of either sex).

@@Zodtheimmortal Wow, I'm impressed by how many things you got wrong! Biological sex is determined by more than if you have sperm or eggs. Like chromosomes and hormones and such. Those things don't always line up. Have you for example heard of intersex people? My husband has many close female friends and I have many close male friends. It's not threatening at all, because we trust each other. Why would I marry someone I didn't trust? And what does any of this have to do with what @t-shades7148 writes? Are you against them identifying as a nonbinary gender because you think there's only two biological sexes? Didn't you listen to the video? Gender and sex are two different things. And what does jealousy between a husband and wife got to do with anything? Do you think a nonbinary person couldn't befriend anyone because their spouse would get jealous? Or maybe nonbinary people could befriend both men and women since they're neither themselves?

He hardly even said anything really

Same. Personally, I believe there are only two genders that can't be changed but I'm not going out of my way to disrespect others because of my personal beliefs. And no, it does not make one bigoted or hateful simply for having a different *personal* opinion, that is generally only applicable if you hate or are vitriolic to others for some arbitrary reason. I'll try my best to use people's pronouns and however they chose to identify is fine. As long as they are not hurting others, they have the freedom to do so and I feel compelled to give everyone basic respect and dignity.

@@adriant240 Well there's one thing you said that I agree with - I don't personally agree with having lots of new invented pronouns to describe everyone's own interpretation of what gender means, a simple "they" is fine for people who don't feel like they fit the binary. But when you start your comment with "I didn't watch the video but I believe X about it", you don't really give yourself a leg to stand on. Plus insulting people randomly is never gonna make anyone wanna listen to your point. I also automatically put anyone who uses the phrase "woke" in the bin because it's literally only used by bigots to define any aspect of being more accepting to people that they don't personally like. Society has moved on to a point where you're not allowed to say n word or f word or the like, so you just call them "woke" instead because the meaning of that word is ephemeral enough to be publically allowed but everyone still knows you're just using it in place of a slur.

@@Jon0007723 I want to be polite, but we are far past that point. Believe me. Society has gone insane and extremely dumb (people like you) and at this point I'm all out of patience. I apologize but that's just how it is. It just needs to be said, no more sugar coating and being nice.

Why don't you believe there are only 2 genders that cant be changed?@@navijha122

I'm only halfway through an A1 course, but isn't ihr a translation of "they"?

Er nvm I guess ihr doesn't work at all when I took 5 seconds to think about it lol

​@@MrKoalaburger "Sie"/"ihnen" are the third person plural pronouns, so those would be closest translation of "they"/"them". But yes, it doesn't work that well, because the third person feminine pronouns are "sie"/"ihr" (so in the nominative and accusative it would sound like you're referring to a woman/girl) and verbs also have plural inflections, so rather than e.g. "she is tall"/"they are tall" you have "sie _ist_ groß"/"sie _sind_ groß". And "es" is neuter, but it's only really used for inanimate objects, animals and children ("das Kind"/"das Mädchen"), so it's not ideal either... Hope you're enjoying learning German!

@@MrKoalaburger Yeah, the problem is that our "they" is the exact same word as "she": "sie", which is also the current polite way to adress someone, our formal "you". "Ihr" was actually used for that purpose until around 1800 or 1900. We also use "ihr" for saying "her", as in "her book/ihr Buch", and it's also the plural form of "you". So yeah, every immediate alternative is gendered or has unfitting connotations already :/ we kind of just dance around the terms for now. My nonbinary friend knows the struggle better than we do and that we love them the way they are, with or without proper german pronouns. 🥰 Oh and also: good luck, don't give up. We know it's a hard language, respect for learning it!

@@rainghostly yeah... I was thinking ihr as in "plural you" (or they, in a way) would be a workaround, but yeah that's my English brain speaking. Doesn't actually work at all lol.

I like this, to share one's pronouns but don't ask. As he said, we don't ask other kinds of personal information, and that's really sensitive and personal to people oftentimes, for a number of reasons, outing oneself or being socially forced to lie being one. I wish the trans community and allies especially (particularly younger ones who sometimes feel almost aggressive) would not ask. I know cis/het people who are fine with other people identifying with whatever (or no) gender they are who HATE being asked their pronouns. I guess if you are a feminine cishet woman being asked makes you wonder-do I look masculine or something? Or a man--can't you tell I'm a guy? I bet that bugs some (cis-het) men even more than women. Why alienate (even subsconsiously) potential allies?

Well I think that using neutral pronouns until a person tells you is stupid! For one, 99.9-something percent of people will line up with the way they look, and for two, asking many of those people what their pronouns are is going to piss them off. I for sure, if you asked me my pronouns, would without a doubt be slightly offended, as the prior commenter got at. Just assume the pronoun unless youre genuinely confused or until someone tells you otherwise, cause we all need to 1) stop being so afraid of offending someone and 2) stop getting offended. If you misgender someone and they freak out, obviously theyre a nutcase that you dont want to associate with anyway.

@@michaelcherokee8906 Clearly you just said that being misgendered would offend you. As I said in my comment, I don't ask people what their pronouns are. I only give mine and if they respond with their own, I use those pronouns when referring to them. If they don't share their pronouns, I usually default to the neutral they/them, because at worst, it may annoy a handful of cis people (who should probably think about why they're so bothered by it). I think that's an acceptable consequence of respecting differences in gender presentation. Finally, I have no idea where you got your 99.9 statistic. Even if that number is correct (it's not), that's still 8,100,000 people. Maybe assumption works for you, but I'm often surrounded by queer and non-conforming people so I find the neutral method works for me.

If a person misgenders you and it matters, you should correct them. I am misgendered on the phone because of the tone of my voice, it's not a big deal.

what ended up changing your mind? always looking for more info on how to lead people away from the far right narrative about trans / lgbtq people, it feels impossible to talk to anyone who has been "brainwashed" about it like that

This is how I try to do it. I'm honestly shocked and pleasantly surprised that someone mentioned intention at all. It seems like lately people are more interested in arguing than considering the possibility that someone who disagrees with you simply sees things differently from you and doesn't mean any harm. You just keep being you.

What if someone asks you to refrain from using “cis?” Luckily, the prefix can be easily removed without altering the meaning of the word, at least in regard to cismen or ciswomen, (which has now been expanded to cismale & cisfemale). However, when it comes to respect, feelings, or empathy, it’s usually one-sided. Those who demand respect very rarely extends it to others.

@@ommeloise6309 A lot of trans people would rather not be called "trans" but we still do it anyway. I don't see how it's one-sided. Maybe this is a big city/blue state issue I'll never be able to wrap my head around??

@@ommeloise6309 If someone asked me in good faith not to describe them that way, I would absolutely abide! However, most people don't request that because 1) like you mentioned, "cis" is the implied default and is usually only used when specifying that someone is NOT cis; 2) "cis" and "trans" are considered neutral descriptors, like tall, short, fat, thin, blonde, bald, human, or two-legged. Maybe you don't like being called fat, so you might use other terms like chunky/obese/marshmallow bouncy house. We work around the words out of respect to individuals (in the event they even need describing). But none of these adjectives are inherently negative beyond what stigma is around at the time. It's not like calling someone spiteful or violent or even loyal or saintly. Just neutral adjectivity. So, even if you're hairless and don't want to be described as bald, I'll respect that, even though I probably wasn't focused on your hair count in the first place. 💇‍♀💇‍♂💇👱‍♂ Also, I'm sorry you've encountered so many people to whom you've shown respect but didn't feel it back. That's absolutely irritating! My hope for you is that when you encounter this, you continue to be the bigger (read: marshmallow bouncy house) person and keep being respectful anyway. I truly respect your respect thus far and appreciate you reading my blahblahs.🤎

How is cis disrespectful?

oh so there is a culture that will use "bird" as a pronoun when pertaining to people?

@@colleenprinssen according to Wikipedia there are 16 noun classes and when you say a noun you have to preface it with it's class. If English were like this with the preface ta for food nouns we would have Tabread and tachicken and Heoldman and sheoldwoman. They also have separate dialects depending on whether you are male or female and a specific form of speech used when talking to a relative who's father (if the relative is male) or mother (if the relative is female) has died. It fits the conversation despite not being about pronouns because it is a good example how languages can be constructed in vastly different ways and still function.

The cool thing about pronouns being a very open class in Japanese is that this applies to _all_ pronouns, and _especially_ first and second person pronouns. In fact, third person pronouns are pretty rare, because it's more common to use someone's name or drop pronouns entirely and depend on context. It's really a refreshingly different situation from pronouns in English.

Another interesting thing about japanese is how basically all third person pronouns are often not true pronouns at all and just nouns doubling as pronouns for context and reference marking, most out of the intrinsically hierarchical way they in general refer to other people. It would be just extremely odd in english (or spanish, my first language) to _always_ refer to people by their last name, especially when you have them in front and there’s no one else, but the polite system in japanese makes this the norm instead.

​@@raizin4908Yes, I was gonna comment on something about how japanese uses pronouns on this vid, but it would be hard to incorporate the same principals into English. I will say tho, that the thing about relying on context and names instead of pronouns in japanese, as well as the wide variety of first and second person pronouns is very interesting now that I'm learning Japanese. Very different from most (prob all) European languages.

Same. I work in a place that I am using the phone a lot. I generally don’t bother trying to fix assumptions of those I’ll not have to see again. It’s my coworkers that refer to me as the wrong gender that frustrates me.

@@trussell5084 what gender are you?

As I said in my main comment, in my main language (Brazilian Portuguese), we have genders for absolutely all nouns. I see this pronoun fight as unnecessary because "a person", in my language for example, is feminine, but it doesn't offend any men because you use a feminine pronoun or noun to describe both a man and a woman. Pronouns as they are, arose because of the natural development of a language, and there have been efforts to create neutral languages, but they usually fail because the reasons are completely irrational and subjective. This arrived in Brazil and is affecting everyone because mostly emotionally sensitive people think they need to change the grammar of the language to speak to people without offending them. My tip is, don't be offended by a word if the intention is not to offend you. If the goal is to offend, there is no reason to use cute pronouns in place of insults. This is too much effort for a waste of time.

​​@@brunnomenxathere are languages that are already, naturally neutral. for example, in my dad's native language, Swahili, there are no gendered pronouns, and most nouns do not imply what a person's gender/sex is. You can have a whole conversation about someone without ever implying what their gender is. There are 9 noun classes, but it works very differently from the 2 grammatical genders in romance languages.

@@andiiiiiiiiiii, Yes indeed. My point is that non-gender neutral languages don't need to change grammar to satisfy specific people, because the language naturally developed that way. In my language there are words that change meaning with gender. For example: "a caixa" (fem.) means "the box", but "o caixa" (masc.) means "the cashier". Trying to change this is basically killing a language and building an artificial one for an empty cause.

The thing is, everyone makes it about the singular vs plural issue when IMO the issue should be about known vs unknown. We use "they" as a singular all the time - but only when gender is either unknown or intentionally kept ambiguous for confidentiality reasons. Because of this, the reason why "they" sounds weird for a singular pronoun is not because our brains expect it to be plural, but because our brains expect it to be ambiguous. Like if I talk about my nonbinary cousin "They are a good person" it sounds....somewhat impersonal? Like if I know them, and the listener knows them why would I be using such an ambiguous way of referencing them? I guess that's the best way I can explain the weird feeling of using "they" as a known singular.

Why would it be so hard for the caller to say? I agree it would be annoying for the host to keep going on about it though.

@@firenzeval Personally, I resent having words forced into my mouth - especially in deference to a sociopolitical movement I regard as toxic (gender radicalism, which IS NOT to be confused with LGBT). My pronouns can be inferred by my name, appearance and the sound of my voice. Trying to force them out of me is a control game, which is what I consider nonstandard pronouns to be in general.

@@bayrum9803 exactly its all about control. Accept my ultra progressive view point or you are a heathen. Functioning like a religious purity test.

@@bayrum9803 I'm curious as to what parts of gender radicalism you regard as toxic. I'm... not super well versed, this isn't meant to be provocative or anything. I just wanna learn some more perspectives where I can

@@CreativelyJake I have to run to work, so I wish I could give you a better answer than the one I'm about to, but gender radicalism mimics LGBT rights when it's really more like queer supremacy. It came out of the colleges circa 2010s. It's based on an IDEOLOGICAL definition of the word "gender" that is in stark opposition to fact - which is meant to destabilize people sexually, and it does. Right now that ideology is being imprinted on children, much to their detriment - children are being encouraged to question their sexual identites before they have been allowed to naturally develop one, women's identities and spaces are being co-opted by biological men and LGBT identity has been hijacked to support all of this - the abuse of women and children by radicl leftist ideologues. A lot of the rights that are being demanded in the name of LGBT people ARE NOT RIGHTS. I'm gay and I abhor what's being said and done in my name. A hard distinction needs to be drawn between LGBT and Q+ because a lot of us don't support this degenerate insanity.

People have been arguing against they as a singular pronoun for various reasons since the 1700s, however, it stuck pretty well despite that. Still languages change all the time in the 1800s someone suggested Thon (a contraction of "the one or that one ) but it never really caught on. Speaking with a friend, we agreed that it could be because some English speakers have trouble with the initial sound. So maybe don or Zon or something would have worked better. Needless to say selecting an alternative gender neutral singular pronoun should at least consider that it couldn't be mistaken for a slurred version of one of the pronouns already in popular use. Then there is the matter of getting it into popular use. From what I can tell the best way to do this is from the bottom up. It needs to be injected in a widely dispersed community that other English speakers love to imitate. So celebrities, latino, or black people. Then once the general population is more comfortable hearing it and can process it well enough it needs to be accepted as a legitimate word by the ruling class of people as to not be discarded as a trend. At least from what I can tell this is how we got a lot of new words in the last 30 years.

Meanwhile, "it" being ignored while others are forced to do its job.

I kind of hear this a lot, “expecting people to always get it right or risk causing offence”. I think everyone is (should be) allowed to mess up with pronouns. When some of my friends told me they are trans and asked me to refer to them with different pronouns, I would also mess up a lot in the beginning. But they weren’t mad at me. It’s natural, after all you’re changing the way you think about someone. In my experience so far the intention seems really important. There probably are some trans people out there, that do react in a stronger manner. Of course it isn’t fair of them to expect someone else to get it right from the start. But being misgendered can be really painful to some trans people (since some are more sensitive than others), what I think might or could cause such a reaction. What I’m trying to say is, you don’t have to always get it right. Your intention matters most. And if you meet someone more sensitive, I don’t think you can do much else aside from saying that you’re trying and don’t mean to hurt them.

@@wombat1593 Of course. That makes sense, and that seems to be how most people treat the issue. It's still frustrating in those few times when you interact with someone who's a big stickler over pronoun gender. Heck, I've had people get upset that I didn't magically guess their gender correctly over the internet. Intent really is key a lot of the time, and I think people understand that for the most part.

@@lapiswolf2780 It makes sense to have distinct pronouns for animate and inanimate referents, because it makes it easier to parse sentences about animate subjects interacting with inanimate objects.

No such thing as "non-binary". You guys need to realise you've been brainwashed by the woke degenerates, quit the nonsense, the sooner the better, and come back to reality.

Thanks for pointing this out, I had a good friend from the Philippines who I thought was mixing up the English pronouns when he would call his daughter "he". It is amazing the me that when you learn other languages you learn that not every language handles the parts of speech the same way. And how the mistakes we make in languages that are not our native tongue come about.

yup

> I've messed up my own pronouns before, it really does take time. This is so true and isn't talked about enough. Although it's usually because the right likes to weaponize it to be like "see! even trans people don't believe their pronoun nonsense!" which is just such a horribly dishonest take. There was a brief period around 2-4 months after I came out where for some reason my brain had essentially uninstalled my deadname from my head but hadn't fully installed my chosen name as the name I respond to and I got to the point where I just wouldn't respond to *any* name at all lmao. Was a bit funny cause apparently a few times someone would deadname me, realize they deadnamed me (and that I didn't respond), would call me by my name, I still wouldn't respond, and they'd just be like "Uh hello?" which would grab my attention. I love your last paragraph as well. It's such an important point for everyone to remember.

Crazy how you have a degree in English but still call yourself non binary

​@@jacobbaker5442 crazy you think that's a good burn.

@@galaxylynn4434 crazy you think that was an attempt at a burn

@@jacobbaker5442 crazy you think that's a sane take

@@spacegrass6632 crazy how you think that's a sane take

That's because it is a reference to "highness", "lordship" and other feminine nouns. You still inflect everything in the masculine gender when referring formally to a man (e.g., Lei è andato), and only use it as a second person pronoun. Pardon me if I was pedantic.

@@palofrasca1775 Yes, I seem to recall Sua Maestà is used as the equivalent of "Your Majesty", when addressing royalty, even if male. So, it's kind of like saying, "his/her majesty", even though he's right in front of you. I'm sure it's completely natural for a native speaker though. I've only been studying Italian for about 8 months.

@@MichaelPhillipsatGreyOwlStudio Correct! In Italian one could also say Vostra Maestà "your (plural) majesty", that's why "voi" (you plural) can also be used in formal speech. Though I'd argue it's quite rare nowadays. A lot of formal pronouns are born from the necessity of indirectly addressing a person's actions, out of respect. This is very evident in Japanese, for example. Once this sense of indirectness is lost, those fromal pronouns become very impolite. For example, omae was once a formal way of addressing somebody, meaning literally "(the person) in front (of me)". Nowadays if you address somebody by omae you might end up into a fight. :P

@@palofrasca1775 Ah, so the "voi" makes it more similar to French, which is "vous" when being polite. That makes sense. I always wondered why the divergence happened between the languages. That's very interesting about omae. I hadn't heard that before.

In Portuguese, "o senhor" or "a senhora" function as formal pronouns for the second person, but using third person conjugation

Huh, I haven't heard the word "señoría" in ages (and yes, I'm a native speaker). What context are we talking about? Because I'm pretty sure that the most accurate translation for "su señoría" is "his/her excellency" or something on that note.

I am not a native spanish speaker, and have never seen, nor heard "señoría". But I instantly saw the meaning, it's rather hard to explain, but the word makes sense! Mayor - mayoría Señor - señoría Writing these words and trying to compare them probably makes no sense to you, but I think adding the ending implies similar change. Perhaps it's because of my native language that I try to translate connections. My brain sees the ending -ría, in nouns of course, as an ending that sometimes makes thing less exact. Making it more plural too. Idk how to say that even khaha spanish is very logical.

@@darkcreatureinadarkroom1617 Correct. Like when you're addressing a judge. "Sí, su Señoría" = "Yes, your honor". That's what it means (I'm not aware of "señoría" being used in any other context).

@@miauz2929 Ah, "your honor" - I had forgotten about that expression. Thanks for your input!

By "respecting people's preferred pronouns" what you're actually doing is participating in their sexual fetish. A lesbian told me that.

@@jkscout This is why lesbians are my favorite alphabet people, they pretty consistently have no time for bullshit.

@@ijustdocomments6777 not all lesbians are like that. For instance, my best friend of almost 40 years won't talk to me anymore since I became a left-wing gender critical. Many people don't know this, but even the founder of gay pride following the stonewall riots, Fred Sargeant, is gender critical. He's been banned from twitter and assaulted by trans rights activists on numerous occasions. It's sad what the T is doing to society, with women and LGB people as its primary victims.

@@jkscout name checks out

@@dolphinbanana3053 Don't feed it, this one's clearly hungry