makes sense. but "man" is gender neutral in many contexts (and in earlier versions of English was totally neutral) and nobody accepts that.
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
I hold a bit of an issue with this. While I've used it that way in my life, I've stopped. To me, it shows the systemic patriarchalism of our language in that we assume men are the standard/neutral human gender.
This! Has "you guys" been treated as gender neutral in the past? Yes. Is it really? No. It's not at all. Change can be hard and it can be a pain, but we should strive to do better. "You guys" is not something I care to hold on to, we should do better.
-
-
Right? And continued use means we’re perpetuating it.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Except there isn’t an alternative that doesn’t make a Californian sound like they’re making fun of Southerners. We could bring back “thou”.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
It is gender neutral though because it’s used that way
-
No, culturally (historically) it's been used that way does not 'make it that way'. In part its due to our patriarchal society.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Do you not think this whole gender neutrality thing is going a bit too far when you're arguing the phrase 'you guys' is a microaggression.
-
It's often a case of 'death by a thousand cuts'. It's always pretty easy to argue, "This cut here is really minor" and don't get me wrong this is a really minor case. The number of people offended with its use is very low. Still, why not try to improve?
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.