this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2023
30 points (84.1% liked)
Controversial - the place to discuss controversial topics
430 readers
4 users here now
Controversial - the community to discuss controversial topics.
Challenge others opinions and be challenged on your own.
This is not a safe space nor an echo-chamber, you come here to discuss in a civilized way, no flaming, no insults!
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, "trust me bro" is not a valid argument.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In an extremely blunt way, it's correct. It obviously extends beyond grammar, and I have an entirely different stance on how 3rd person pronouns should be handled in English that described, but the premise is solid. Take where you would typically use gender, and, like, don't. Obviously you would still have biological sex for things like medical records, but it wouldn't be tied to who you are as a person, it would just be a letter on a paper somewhere.
Okay, thanks for explaining.
If I understand correctly, you're saying that a person's sex should only be referenced when it is relevant, which is only in a narrow set of situations. Any reference in speech to a person should not invoke his sex.
Sure. Though I'm genuinely curious where you're located that the start and end of gender is planted firmly in linguistics. Because in my experience, there's a whole lot more stuff in society that's intertwined with gender.
Reality.