@SOVIETAESTHETIC @chaosprime *shrugs* I don't mind them personally. There may be that many different genders out there.
-
-
Replying to @DurrutiOvercloc
@DurrutiOvercloc @SOVIETAESTHETIC i'd say in a significant sense there's n*k genders where n is number of people and k > 1.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
@DurrutiOvercloc @SOVIETAESTHETIC gender-neutral pronouns seem like a more sensible response to that than a plug-in slot in language, though1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
@chaosprime @SOVIETAESTHETIC *Shrugs* New words get coined all the time.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DurrutiOvercloc
@DurrutiOvercloc @SOVIETAESTHETIC yeeeah, but i think common-usage coinages are kind of less relevant.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
@DurrutiOvercloc @SOVIETAESTHETIC naming seems to be the extensible principle here. we don't object to somebody's name being a fill-in slot2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@DurrutiOvercloc @SOVIETAESTHETIC if i say my name is <arbitrary thing>, it damn well is. not much of a reach to extent that to pronouns.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.