British TV Presenter Refuses To Use Guest's Preferred Pronouns

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Halfswede
Not only is it incorrect, . .

It's actually not incorrect or a new fad.

From as early as the 14th century to the modern era, singular they/them pronouns have signified a gender-neutral identity that defies gender stereotyping.

The commonly used nonbinary pronoun, singular “they,” could likely be the English language’s oldest gender-neutral pronoun. With constant references throughout history, literature and spoken English, the use of they/them pronouns is far from new.

reporter.rit.edu...

Whoever wrote that is being willfully obtuse. Of course the word "They" has been used in the singular for eons.
Ex: "I was watching this person blow glass, and they made a really cool vase." etc. etc.,

but the use of "They" to mean trans or non-binary or whatever is entirely new. Them citing Canterbury tales as proof just shows how little grasp they (see totally organic) have of the language. Not one case in Canterbury tales is referring to nonbinary use.

You should not be so easily duped. It is incorrect.

originally posted by: Halfswede

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Halfswede
Not only is it incorrect, . .

It's actually not incorrect or a new fad.

From as early as the 14th century to the modern era, singular they/them pronouns have signified a gender-neutral identity that defies gender stereotyping.

The commonly used nonbinary pronoun, singular “they,” could likely be the English language’s oldest gender-neutral pronoun. With constant references throughout history, literature and spoken English, the use of they/them pronouns is far from new.

reporter.rit.edu...

Whoever wrote that is being willfully obtuse. Of course the word "They" has been used in the singular for eons.
Ex: "I was watching this person blow glass, and they made a really cool vase." etc. etc.,

but the use of "They" to mean trans or non-binary or whatever is entirely new. Them citing Canterbury tales as proof just shows how little grasp they (see totally organic) have of the language. Not one case in Canterbury tales is referring to nonbinary use.

You should not be so easily duped. It is incorrect.

I'm not duped.

There's a lot more history on gender-pronouns.

And transgenders/gender variants are not new.

They just can't be arrested and put in jail anymore.

a reply to: Consvoli

AAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Girls have vagivas, boys have the peens!

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Halfswede

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Halfswede
Not only is it incorrect, . .

It's actually not incorrect or a new fad.

From as early as the 14th century to the modern era, singular they/them pronouns have signified a gender-neutral identity that defies gender stereotyping.

The commonly used nonbinary pronoun, singular “they,” could likely be the English language’s oldest gender-neutral pronoun. With constant references throughout history, literature and spoken English, the use of they/them pronouns is far from new.

reporter.rit.edu...

Whoever wrote that is being willfully obtuse. Of course the word "They" has been used in the singular for eons.
Ex: "I was watching this person blow glass, and they made a really cool vase." etc. etc.,

but the use of "They" to mean trans or non-binary or whatever is entirely new. Them citing Canterbury tales as proof just shows how little grasp they (see totally organic) have of the language. Not one case in Canterbury tales is referring to nonbinary use.

You should not be so easily duped. It is incorrect.

I'm not duped.

There's a lot more history on gender-pronouns.

And transgenders/gender variants are not new.

They just can't be arrested and put in jail anymore.

No there isn't.
They/them is completely new and wasn't used this way before. It's like vocabulary and words are hijacked by some new ideology.

a reply to: Consvoli

Yep. If you think you are anything other than what your biology tells you then you have a mental health issue. Should we start going around and saying that skinny people are fat because they have body dysmorphia and start telling themthey're right for thinking the way they do about themselves? No we shouldn't, it's considered a mental health issue for a reason. Why are people trying to normalize mental illness? It should be treated not encouraged.

has nothing or little to do with politics

a reply to: malte86
Sure seems like a lot of politicians are talking about it. Making laws about it. California went so far as to, enter into a conspiracy with children, to conceal their actions at school, from their parents. California's rationale for such a perverted idea is. All parents are child abusers. Therefor we must lie to them about their children, in order to protect them.

a reply to: ImagoDei

If you think you are anything other than what your biology tells you then you have a mental health issue.

Most likely caused by this. Plastic

So the pharmaceutical, medical industry and politicians, have come to the rescue. The funny thing is. Most all woke people believe in global warming. Banning as much plastic as possible, would not only help stop us from turning into plastic people. It would put a hefty dent in Co2 emissions.

a reply to: Unknownparadox

I think we're way past the point of no return when it comes to plastic, unfortunately. I don't have any doubt it plays a role in the continuing degradation of human society. It's in our blood streams and has been found in the deepest parts of the ocean. The only thing that will get rid of plastic is time, a LOT of time. And the healing can only start once human civilization has nuked itself into oblivion or some natural disaster knocks us out. We're definitely not going to change ourselves, we've already proven that we're not capable of it, we're too shortsighted and selfish as a whole. A person is smart but people are stupid.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Consvoli

TalkTV is a Right Wing TV channel and Julia Hartley-Brewer is notoriously outspoken on these issues , no problem with that but it's hardly surprising that she refused to call the guest "they/them" , I doubt any TalkTV viewers were surprised by that either unless they thought they were watching the BBC.

So if we have an agreed upon language and people are changing that its ok? Notice I didn't use 1 of the hundreds plus pronouns... Why? because as a pronoun me as an author or a questioner gets to put those into play during my question you don't get to choose that is how English works.

originally posted by:Annee
They just can't be arrested and put in jail anymore.

What you identify as, is your own business.
. . . but you don't get a 'get out of jail card'
if you break any laws, by hiding behind a skirt . . either.

_______________

As far as I'm concerned, pronouns are how I refer to people, more often than not when they aren't present, so what the hell should they care? As far as I know my pronoun is asshole.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Halfswede
Not only is it incorrect, . .

It's actually not incorrect or a new fad.

From as early as the 14th century to the modern era, singular they/them pronouns have signified a gender-neutral identity that defies gender stereotyping.

The commonly used nonbinary pronoun, singular “they,” could likely be the English language’s oldest gender-neutral pronoun. With constant references throughout history, literature and spoken English, the use of they/them pronouns is far from new.

reporter.rit.edu...

That’s a nice example of re-writing history.

I have to ask the age old ATS question. Who’s they?

originally posted by: malte86

originally posted by: nugget1
The whole LGBTQWERTY movement is a politically motivated load of crap. My son is trans; he and every one of his 'other than' friends absolutely loathe the entire agenda. They just want to live their lives peacefully, without a bunch of controversial attention that all too often ends in violence.

Take a look back on the last few presidencies. Promoting issues to get people focused on fighting each other has only benefitted the government and swamp critters that feed off of our division. You can see which administrations have gone out of their way to split the population into hate-filled groups, and actually create and fund many of them.

Keep in mind nothing political happens by accident; it was all planned well in advance. Woe be to any non-career politician that trys to break the cycle and free the people.

This movement exists solely because the Internet exists. Its Zeitgeist, has nothing or little to do with politics, its more a society thing i guess.

The internet just took it to another level. People were far more docile before the internet because very few realized they were being played. The internet created a wakening that required counter-measures by our overlords, who have always used division to continue their subversion and control.

originally posted by: nugget1

originally posted by: malte86

originally posted by: nugget1
The whole LGBTQWERTY movement is a politically motivated load of crap. My son is trans; he and every one of his 'other than' friends absolutely loathe the entire agenda. They just want to live their lives peacefully, without a bunch of controversial attention that all too often ends in violence.

Take a look back on the last few presidencies. Promoting issues to get people focused on fighting each other has only benefitted the government and swamp critters that feed off of our division. You can see which administrations have gone out of their way to split the population into hate-filled groups, and actually create and fund many of them.

Keep in mind nothing political happens by accident; it was all planned well in advance. Woe be to any non-career politician that trys to break the cycle and free the people.

This movement exists solely because the Internet exists. Its Zeitgeist, has nothing or little to do with politics, its more a society thing i guess.

The internet just took it to another level. People were far more docile before the internet because very few realized they were being played. The internet created a wakening that required counter-measures by our overlords, who have always used division to continue their subversion and control.

And who are our overlords?

a reply to: Therealbeverage

So if we have an agreed upon language and people are changing that its ok?

The English language has evolved over the Centuries and continues to evolve , the problem here isn't language changing but people having their paradigms challenged.

Words of the Prophet David Bowie.
"I watch the ripples change their size
But never leave the stream
Of warm impermanence
And so the days float through my eyes
But still the days seem the same
And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations
They're quite aware of what they're goin' through"

Change will happen whether we like it or not.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Therealbeverage

So if we have an agreed upon language and people are changing that its ok?

The English language has evolved over the Centuries and continues to evolve , the problem here isn't language changing but people having their paradigms challenged.

Words of the Prophet David Bowie.
"I watch the ripples change their size
But never leave the stream
Of warm impermanence
And so the days float through my eyes
But still the days seem the same
And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations
They're quite aware of what they're goin' through"

Change will happen whether we like it or not.

Language is not evolving in this case but rather hijacked by a number of activists who want to enforce their ideology to others and the rest of us who don't accept the pronouns nonsense and the self identification of someone's gender.

The OP's point was there is push back, it doesn't matter if it comes from a known source.

originally posted by: 320MPH
The OP's point was there is push back, it doesn't matter if it comes from a known source.

Correct!

originally posted by: Halfswede

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Halfswede
Not only is it incorrect, . .

It's actually not incorrect or a new fad.

From as early as the 14th century to the modern era, singular they/them pronouns have signified a gender-neutral identity that defies gender stereotyping.

The commonly used nonbinary pronoun, singular “they,” could likely be the English language’s oldest gender-neutral pronoun. With constant references throughout history, literature and spoken English, the use of they/them pronouns is far from new.

reporter.rit.edu...

Whoever wrote that is being willfully obtuse. Of course the word "They" has been used in the singular for eons.
Ex: "I was watching this person blow glass, and they made a really cool vase." etc. etc.,

but the use of "They" to mean trans or non-binary or whatever is entirely new. Them citing Canterbury tales as proof just shows how little grasp they (see totally organic) have of the language. Not one case in Canterbury tales is referring to nonbinary use.

You should not be so easily duped. It is incorrect.

Wow, yep, what a pile of wet steamy 💩. Anyone that believes that crap has serious mental issues of their own. All part of the brainwashing and dumbing down of society I suppose. I feel dumber for having read it.

originally posted by: KrustyKrab

originally posted by: Halfswede

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Halfswede
Not only is it incorrect, . .

It's actually not incorrect or a new fad.

From as early as the 14th century to the modern era, singular they/them pronouns have signified a gender-neutral identity that defies gender stereotyping.

The commonly used nonbinary pronoun, singular “they,” could likely be the English language’s oldest gender-neutral pronoun. With constant references throughout history, literature and spoken English, the use of they/them pronouns is far from new.

reporter.rit.edu...

Whoever wrote that is being willfully obtuse. Of course the word "They" has been used in the singular for eons.
Ex: "I was watching this person blow glass, and they made a really cool vase." etc. etc.,

but the use of "They" to mean trans or non-binary or whatever is entirely new. Them citing Canterbury tales as proof just shows how little grasp they (see totally organic) have of the language. Not one case in Canterbury tales is referring to nonbinary use.

You should not be so easily duped. It is incorrect.

Wow, yep, what a pile of wet steamy 💩. Anyone that believes that crap has serious mental issues of their own. All part of the brainwashing and dumbing down of society I suppose. I feel dumber for having read it.

Didn't you know that by the term they/them we mean trans or non-binary? What did you learn in school?

🤡