Originally posted by Nordlysmmmhhh... the second use makes sense, I see, unless you speak a language like Spanish, were the respectful 'usted' (you for elders, superiors or strangers) is neutral in itself.
It is used for intersexed people, but it's also useful when you don't know the gender of a person (instead of the awful "they" when referring to just one person).
But I don't get the intersexed people thing.
I mean, if a person changes sex, then we refer to that person according to the new gender. If it is a andro person, then you refer by the gender they ask you to.
1 edit
Originally posted by SeitseNot all intersexed people want to change to male or female, but prefer to be (and be referred to) as they were born. That's how I came across the term in the first place.
mmmhhh... the second use makes sense, I see, unless you speak a language like Spanish, were the respectful 'usted' (you for elders, superiors or strangers) is neutral in itself.
But I don't get the intersexed people thing.
I mean, if a person changes sex, then we refer to that person according to the new gender. If it is a andro person, then you refer by the gender they ask you to.
Originally posted by NordlysI'll wiki it a little bit. It is a new concept for me, since my mother tongue is 100% gendered, even things.
Not all intersexed people want to change to male or female, but prefer to be (and be referred to) as they were born. That's how I came across the term in the first place.
Originally posted by HandyAndy"None of them make" gets a lot more google results than "none of them makes". 😉 The Merriam-Webster says about none: "Function:
Usually, as here, none is equivalent to "no one" or "not one," though use as a plural is not necessarily wrong.. for example, "None but my best friends [b]know my secret."[/b]
pronoun, singular or plural in construction". I guess you can use both. "Makes" still sounds strange to me in this specific context.
Originally posted by NordlysIntended, though clumsily communicated, meaning was an enjoyable rhp chess game between two human beings, without respect to gender.
The gender-neutral pronouns I use are "xe" (subjective), "xyr" (possessive) and "xym" (objective). Neither of them makes sense in this context, though.
Appreciate the review. Wondering, though, why the simple word used by our parents, grandparents and earlier ancestors is no longer useful.
Ed... "it"
😉
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyI see. I would take that as a given, though.
Intended, though clumsily communicated, meaning was an enjoyable rhp chess game between two human beings, without respect to gender.
Appreciate the review. Wondering, though, why the simple word used by our parents, grandparents and earlier ancestors is no longer useful.
Ed... "it"
😉
Would you like to be referred to as "it"? I wouldn't.