Glinner V: The Dream(ed up) Child (molestors): A New Carbon-era

[ImmaculateClump]

I remember that collage Glinner posted where he'd clearly done a search for the terms "JK Rowling" and "choke" and started cobbling the results together in paint, wanking, or fuming or whatever he does.
He must have moments of clarity at times like this where he catches himself and thinks "what the actual fuck am I doing here?"

Ze/zie, hir, hir, hirs, and hirself
Xe, xem, xyr, xyrs, and xemself
Ve, ver, vis, vis, and verself

Are all those terms gender neutral? have they just not decided on which one to use yet?
I like it when teachers at school were called ms because they weren't happy with nosey pricks knowing their marital status. Mzzzzzzzzzz, used to like saying that a bit too long. Don't really see that any more. I suppose I just say peoples names now that I'm an adult.

[Ambient Sheep]

(Wrote this before I'd read those last posts from Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse and Jumblegraws and will address them shortly.)

I just looked up the Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they) and although it's fascinating to learn that it's been around since the 14th century, and that it's only 18th century prescriptivists that started clamping down on it, the article still says:

Its continued use in modern standard English has become more common and formally accepted with the change toward gender-neutral language, though many style guides continue to describe it as colloquial and less appropriate in formal writing.

Also:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q="his+or+her"+site%3Acookdandbombd.co.uk
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q="he+or+she"+site%3Acookdandbombd.co.uk


I should make it clear (as hopefully should be clear from the rest of my writings here), I'm all for "they", "their", "theirs".  As far as I can remember, I was the first amongst my gang of friends / colleagues to use them 30 years ago, and sometimes got pulled up on it for my troubles.  I'm not arguing against their use or, heaven forfend, for the transphobes.  I'm pleased the language has changed.

But I can't let the contention stand that they were in common everyday use since forever.  It simply isn't true.  Sorry.  Also sorry for (probably) repeating myself, but I don't want anyone thinking that I'm on the side of those arseholes.

[DrGreggles]

Writer doesn't understand how words work...

[Zetetic]

But I can't let the contention stand that they were in common everyday use since forever.  It simply isn't true.  Sorry.  Also sorry for (probably) repeating myself, but I don't want anyone thinking that I'm on the side of those arseholes.

For what it's worth I don't think you're coming across as unpleasant (and it's interesting that relatively formal British English went through a brief period of rejecting a gender-neutral singular pronoun and that this became a marker of register).

[Ambient Sheep]

wow it's a good thing I'm not talking about technical writing, am I? I'm talking about vernacular, spoken English.

But so was I:

Just using "he" in conversation about a person of unknown sex[nb]Not a transgender issue, just a feminist one at that point.[/nb] always felt uncomfortable to me though, and I started to use "they" occasionally in casual speech at work.  More than once this was queried by colleagues, them saying "isn't that a plural word?" and I admitted that yes it was, but it was easier than saying "he or she" all the time.  I got a few strange looks.

Yes, I talked about writing manuals as well, but I made it very clear above that this was about the vernacular too.

It's a shame you felt the need to be sarcastic with me.

Or maybe it's just something we did with this language that was foisted on us to make it better.

Yes, and as indicated above and acknowledged by you below, I was part of that change, 30-35 years ago.

You even admitted yourself that you started using "they" instead of "he or she", back in the 90s. Which, as mindbending as it is, is 21-30 years ago now.

Yes!  Exactly!  Although why you say I "admitted" it as if it were a terrible thing is mystifying to me.  Didn't you realise, even before my previous post, that I'm PROUD of it?!

I take your point Ambient Sheep, I'm a millennial so maybe I'm just showing my age...

Thank you for the gracious reply. :-)

...all the same I think it's an incredible reach to say that use of the singular they is a sign of our mad, TRA-propitiating times, but that's Glinner for you.

Well of course it's an incredible reach!  That's cos Glinner is an idiotic cunt!

FFS, I just point out a historic fact (from my point of view anyway) about the changing usage of words, and everybody thinks I'm on Glinner's side!!  Jesus.

ETA: I'd go further and say it's plain wrong, even from a prescriptivist perspective, to say that the plural they is the only "grammatically correct" way to use the word, but I'm not terribly invested in this.

And I'd happily agree with you.  I wrote my last manual twenty years ago but if I wrote another today I'd use it quite happily.

All I'm saying is that that wasn't the case thirty years ago.

[Ambient Sheep]

*Phone rings and someone other than you answers"

You say to them:

"Who is it?" "Who are they?"

Good point, maybe even a great one!  Don't ever remember that not being the case... except that I don't really remember anyone saying anything but "Who is it?"  But still, food for thought!

[Ambient Sheep]

Writer doesn't understand how words work...

Please expand on that rather mean-spirited observation.

I genuinely don't know what you mean, unless you're referring to the fact that language changes, which I obviously know about and in many cases, this included, fully accept.

Also, I've never claimed to be a writer.  I was a software engineer who was always the guy who seemed to get press-ganged into writing (at first) technical bulletins, then technical manuals, and then finally user manuals.
This was because nobody else liked doing it, the company didn't want to employ a full-time writer, and I didn't mind doing it as a change from bashing out code.

I ended up writing a lot over the years, and by the end felt I was fairly good at it, but I'd never claim to be a proper writer.

[Jumblegraws]

And I'd happily agree with you.  I wrote my last manual twenty years ago but if I wrote another today I'd use it quite happily.

All I'm saying is that that wasn't the case thirty years ago.

No problem with that whatsoever, sorry if it came across like I had you down as a Glinner ally, think a few of us have inadvertently started talking past one another when we're actually in agreement on the main point (that Glinner stinks of rat shit).

[chveik]

Please expand on that rather mean-spirited observation.

I genuinely don't know what you mean, unless you're referring to the fact that language changes, which I obviously know about and in many cases, this included, fully accept.

Also, I've never claimed to be a writer.  I was a software engineer who was always the guy who seemed to get press-ganged into writing (at first) technical bulletins, then technical manuals, and then finally user manuals.
This was because nobody else liked doing it, the company didn't want to employ a full-time writer, and I didn't mind doing it as a change from bashing out code.

I ended up writing a lot over the years, and by the end felt I was fairly good at it, but I'd never claim to be a proper writer.

pretty sure the writer in this context is Glinner.

[here4glinner]

I get paid for writing, I also have a related degree. I've written an awful lot of technical documents since about 2010.

In my experience, 'he or she' is never used these days. The reason not to use it would be for brevity and clarity, and it's a norm. If I read a formal document that said 'he or she' in it, I would believe it was written by a yahoo that wanted to sound smart.

In spoken English, I doubt anyone ever used 'he or she' to mean 'they' - even in the 70s or 80s - unless someone was transcribing their language, they were in a formal setting, or they were somewhat affected. It's one of those instances where spoken English diverts from written English.

[Ferris]

*Phone rings and someone other than you answers"

You say to them:

"Who is it?" "Who are they?"

"It's someone selling insurance"

"Well tell them to go away"

"They say they want to speak to the owner of the house"

"Not until they finish validating my point about "they" being used in vernacular English to refer to an unknown singular person regardless of gender as I do it all the time in my professional life because I try to be thoughtful about the person reading my copy"

"...they hung up"

"That is entirely fair"

[idunnosomename]

singular they rules. love it

[Ambient Sheep]

For what it's worth I don't think you're coming across as unpleasant (and it's interesting that relatively formal British English went through a brief period of rejecting a gender-neutral singular pronoun and that this became a marker of register).

Thank you.  And yes, it is interesting.

I think the problem here is that I simply raised a "point of information" in the middle of an emotional debate about Glinner's latest cuntery, which unintentionally put me on the side of the cunts.

Would now be the time to repeat the anecdote of how I played a gig for someone's birthday at a gay club in the early 90s, and when I went into work on the Monday morning and talked enthusiastically about it and the trans person I'd got talking to, I got the whole "backs against the wall, lads!" treatment?  Oh, I just did.  Off to do me dinner now.



Post-Preview EDIT:

No problem with that whatsoever, sorry if it came across like I had you down as a Glinner ally, think a few of us have inadvertently started talking past one another when we're actually in agreement on the main point (that Glinner stinks of rat shit).

Indeed, although I never really felt you'd accused me of that, unlike Poirot (whom I've had a lot of time for over these threads).

I guess it's partly my fault, I should have made it clear in my original post that I'm not a Glinner ally, but I mistakenly thought that (a) my lengthy anti-discriminatory stance here was well-known, and (b) that the bit in the middle about how I was starting to change the language myself back in the 90s would have made my stance obvious.  But no!  A case of "burying the lead" myself...

pretty sure the writer in this context is Glinner.

Oopsie!  Apologies to DrGreggles if so (which it probably is).

[buttgammon]

Another millennial here, for context. In academic writing, singular they seems to be the standard - it's more inclusive but it's also a clear and concise way of expressing someone's gender is unknown. I can't remember ever having to change the way I write or talk about these things, it's always seemed the most reasonable way to do it.

[chveik]

singular they rules. love it

yep. it's not easy to not be sexist in romance languages

[DrGreggles]

pretty sure the writer in this context is Glinner.

Yep

[Dusty Substance]

On a lighter note, I was in a long line for the toilets at a club years ago (around the time of series 3 of Father Ted) and a woman came into the men's, parted the que, hopped up onto the counter and pissed in a sink with a cheeky smile! 

Series three of Father Ted was 1998, the height of my clubbing years and I remember that sort of thing happening all the time - It was the era of the lad and ladette.  And you're absolutely right, it was always treated as a laugh and there didn't seem to be any sense of danger.



Good work, btw, to Ambient Sheep for taking the time to put all those threads together in one place.

[Ambient Sheep]

I get paid for writing, I also have a related degree. I've written an awful lot of technical documents.

In my experience, 'he or she' is never used these days.

Did I say it was?

I'm glad it isn't.  It felt wrong and clunky even in the 80s, but it was either that or be sexist, as my bosses would not have accepted "they" back then.  I once flirted with "she" etc. throughout, having seen an American manual that did that, and got the piss taken out of me.

The reason not to use it would be for brevity and clarity, and it's a norm. If I read a formal document that said 'he or she' in it, I would believe it was written by a yahoo that wanted to sound smart.

I quite agree and I'm thrilled to hear it's now the norm.

In spoken English, I doubt anyone ever used 'he or she' to mean 'they' - even in the 70s or 80s - unless someone was transcribing their language, they were in a formal setting, or they were somewhat affected. It's one of those instances where spoken English diverts from written English.

No, very few did.  They'd just say "he" and forget about 50% of the population.

I'm sorry if you find it difficult to believe, but where I first worked (an average office near Stansted Airport, 85-93, filled with normal people in their 20s & 30s, not yahoos[nb]We had one once, he got let go at the end of his probation period because he didn't fit in at all.[/nb]), nobody used singular they in conversation until I started doing so (quite off my own bat, I wasn't conscious of having read it elsewhere, it just felt like the right thing to do).

I suppose it's possible that some people did use it, but if they did so then I didn't notice... and as already mentioned, when *I* did, people would pull me up on it, e.g. "Why are you saying 'they'?  There was only one person, yeah?"

[Famous Mortimer]

I like it when teachers at school were called ms because they weren't happy with nosey pricks knowing their marital status. Mzzzzzzzzzz, used to like saying that a bit too long. Don't really see that any more. I suppose I just say peoples names now that I'm an adult.

I know several married women who use Ms because "it's nobody's business whether I'm married or not, besides, men don't change Mr when they get married" (approximate paraphrase.

"They" sounds a bit weird the first time you use it, but you get used to it. Imagine getting annoyed by it, though.

[here4glinner]

hey I'm not arguing! One love <3

It makes sense that the singular 'they' was once 'he'. I guess a few decades back, if you were talking about an unnamed police officer, it'd be 'he', and an unnamed nurse would be 'she', and your brain would already have categorised different categories of unknown third person singulars into masculine and feminine categories.

[Ambient Sheep]

Shit I'm getting tired of this (and hungry), but...

"It's someone selling insurance"

"Well tell them to go away"

pre-late-80s:

"It's someone selling insurance"

"Well tell him to go away"

"It's a her, actually."

"Well her, then.  Tell her to go away"

"They say they want to speak to the owner of the house"

Is referring to a company (British English usage).

And so on.  I'm tired, can I stop now?

[Ferris]

Sorry!

It wasn't meant as a criticism or anything, that is just how I'd expect the conversation to go. It'd sound really odd to me to gender the mystery insurance person in that conversation. Maybe I'm just tone deaf

[Ambient Sheep]

hey I'm not arguing! One love <3

Great. :-)

It makes sense that the singular 'they' was once 'he'. I guess a few decades back, if you were talking about an unnamed police officer, it'd be 'he', and an unnamed nurse would be 'she', and your brain would already have categorised different categories of unknown third person singulars into masculine and feminine categories.

Ah yes, spot on!  I'd quite forgotten that.  Yeah, that happened all the time.  Hence all the "humour" in old comedies by playing with those expectations, e.g. "Actually Sarge, I'll think you'll find he's a she" and "Your new nurse is actually a 'he', Mr. Bottomley" etc.  Oh, what larks they had!

And on that happy note, I think I'm out for the night.  Sorry for any confusion or unhappiness caused.  Back tomorrow...


...almost.  Post-Preview EDIT:

Sorry!

It wasn't meant as a criticism or anything, that is just how I'd expect the conversation to go. It'd sound really odd to me to gender the mystery insurance person in that conversation. Maybe I'm just tone deaf

No, not at all, that's what most people say these days.  Just not back thenzzzzzzzz. :-)

*looks into getting a flashing sign saying "I'm talking about 30+ years ago, not now!" installed.* :-)

Thanks for the (probably unnecessary) apology, btw.


Byeeeeeeeeeee *shuts browser tab, terribly fast*

[idunnosomename]

normal one being had

[Dr Rock]

Maybe it's a regional thing cos I'm from Kent and I'm in my fucking fifties now, and people would always say stuff like 'she said what? And then what did they say?' all the time.

[Jumblegraws]

normal one being had

The irony is that that slavering bit of self-importance is hilarious, and it's thanks to Aido.

[GoblinAhFuckScary]

I don't mean to bang on about this, but I've just put on the Third Man and

[Ferris]

normal one being had

Sian's reply to that mangled Joseph Welch quote ("have you left no sense of decency") made me laugh, to be fair.

[madhair60]

Yeah good one on this. Nice to see the people I recognise using their head, and interesting to see some others I recognise less being a bit fash.

I'm embarrassed by my posts in that thread. I did a lot of learning in a short time. Sorry.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

Indeed, although I never really felt you'd accused me of that, unlike Poirot (whom I've had a lot of time for over these threads).

I wasn't accusing you of being transphobic. When I said "we", I meant Irish people. Was fresh off trolling someone else.

normal one being had

Fucking LOL.

And fucking throwing "women's sports" in there at the end. As if he's ever, ever, watched any women's sport that wasn't sexy mud-wrestling before the TERFs started screeching that a filthy intersex was the best "woman" runner in the world. Hey Glinner where are all your posts about how there should be more professional women's team sports? Did you comment at all when Ireland's women's soccer team complained that they had to share tracksuits with the under 18s team? When they refused to play matches because they wanted just a little more than the few euro they get for each match before they go back to their real jobs on Monday? NO?! Then shut your fucking mouth and stop VIRTUE SIGNALLING.