About right..
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (39)
sorted by:
Well, I half expected the first part. Just didn't think if you said it, you'd also have the intellectual honesty to apply it to your own comment. So props for that.
But now the problem is, what is the basis for your claim on "they" if not the dictionary?
Maybe do like Q said and use old reference books
What did the old reference books say was the correct pronoun to use for a singular, unknown person when avoiding assumptions?
Old books say to use “he”. You could consider the default gender to be an assumption, but people knew the additional usage of “he” for a person of undisclosed gender, like you’re saying that post-modern people know of a “singular” use of “they”. When hearing “he”, users of the earlier, less bastardized version of English wouldn’t assume that the unknown person is a biological male. They would reserve the possibility that the “he” could turn out to be female. No one’s feelings were really hurt, but feminists still got in a twist about it just because they like to complain. Like I said earlier, assuming gender is less of a big deal than assuming plurality.
You keep on with your inaccurate count of the number of people in order to appease the feminists. It doesn’t matter, you boomer jellyfish aren’t going to be able to right the ship at this point. It will be up to us reactionaries.
My feelings aren't hurt, I just prefer accuracy.
For fairness, I'll concede that assuming plurality at the very least CAN BE more of a big deal than assuming gender. However, assuming anything is a significant deal if accuracy is your concern, as it is mine. So the question remains: What word do I use if I want accuracy? I'll stop using 'they', as I agree it'd be nice to have something completely separate from the tranny and feminist nuts, the moment you present a valid alternative. Until then, I will continue to use the singular 'they', which virtually everyone understands the meaning of.
Also, I do sometimes make use of 'he' as an assumption when it seems more appropriate for the situation. Even if you insist on both 'he' and 'they' being assumptions, when striving for accuracy I hardly care which I use and generally prefer 'they'. Particularly considering it's never a problem in most cases and no one assumes you mean more than one person, so it's not like I'm trading clarity for accuracy. At that point, the clarity and accuracy are there for 99% of the people reading,
It's trivial to make up a singular pronoun. So again, if you don't like 'they', present an alternative. While I personally think most changes in language have been "devolution" in recent history, language can evolve and having a pronoun that is singular but nondescript is absolutely that.
P.S. I'm probably younger than you ;)
And I didn't go to a public indoctrination center for school or ever consider the MSM worth watching, so all your junk assumptions about my reasoning for word choice or anything else about me are very likely void of any sort of correctness. They only exist to appease your ego over not being able to accept a differing opinion on the subject. There's a reason I was a conservative by 18, and more and more of a hardliner from then on, and the reason certainly is NOT because I have an interest in appeasing a movement that is more focused on hating men (i.e. me) than on anything to do with women. If this one single thing I do appeases them, good for them, I give zero fucks. The other shit that I do that makes their brains implode on a recurring basis more than makes up for it.
Regardless, one thing our would-be overlords certainly do love, aside from feminists, is the divisive "muh boomer" rhetoric. They love when we focus on each other instead of on them. So good luck getting your new ship afloat when you're too busy sinking your ally's ships for not catering to your view of how things should be.