He/She... or the One?

[Immoren]

Zathras says not the one.

High five for anyone who gets that reference.

In Valen's Name!

[New Benian Republic]

For a minute I thought this was a Chessmistress thread.

Why?

The stuff that comes frolicking out of her mind is insane.

[Frenline Delpha]

Putting restrictions on the way a person can talk is unfair and oppressive.

Is it though? Many jurisdiction have laws against Holocaust denial or laws restricting hate speech for example.

And I think that's utter bollocks. I believe that even the most racist, most backwater southern, most despicable comments deserve to be said. I think blocking any speech, no matter how putrid or vile, is wrong.

[Ifreann]

Why?

The stuff that comes frolicking out of her mind is insane.

But this thread isn't especially insane. It's a bad attempt to solve an already solved problem.

[New Benian Republic]

The stuff that comes frolicking out of her mind is insane.

But this thread isn't especially insane. It's a bad attempt to solve an already solved problem.

I dorm even see what the problem is in all honesty.

[Herargon]

Just use a new pronoun, something like 'hyn', 'shyn', 'shin' or 'hin'.

The same grammar rules as 'he' and 'she' would apply.

Herargon

[Gurori]

To be honest if everything that lives had to use the same pronoun, I'd choose "That Maggot".

For Example:

"Did you hear about what Johnny did the other day?"

"Yeah, apparently that maggot stole a potato!"

[Frenline Delpha]

Holocaust denial is only banned in some countries (Not sure why it is at all) and this is nothing even remotely close to hate speech.

If one gets offended by someone using a binary pronoun, then the person in question just doesn't understand one of the most basic principles of society: It doesn't revolve around you.

it revolves around everyone, and everyone has an obligation to refrain from perpetuating harmful labels and discrimination

No. Society doesn't give two shit cupcakes about anybody. You could die today and society would still function. We saw an example recently. A prominent figure here died, but the forums still continued like normal. I don't want to disrespect said person, but it's the fact of life. Life doesn't care. It doesn't care if you find something offensive. It just doesn't fucking give a shit. It's harsh, but it's true. I revolves around works, not people. It revolves around actions, not feelings. And is you consider using "he" harmful when speaking about an anonymous person, then I just don't know what to say...

[Neo Bretonnia]

How Orwellian.

[Herargon]

Is it though? Many jurisdiction have laws against Holocaust denial or laws restricting hate speech for example.

And I think that's utter bollocks. I believe that even the most racist, most backwater southern, most despicable comments deserve to be said. I think blocking any speech, no matter how putrid or vile, is wrong.

Really? So, according to you, a person would be allowed to insult another for nothing - in the name of 'free speech', and to reject facts?

That would be a little bit strange, to say, at the very least.

[Ifreann]

But this thread isn't especially insane. It's a bad attempt to solve an already solved problem.

I dorm even see what the problem is in all honesty.

The problem is that not everyone is a 'he', so it doesn't make sense to say 'he' when we're talking about someone whose gender we don't know, or if we're talking about a generic person of any gender. And we have a gender neutral pronoun we can use instead.

---

Just use a new pronoun, something like 'hyn', 'shyn', 'shin' or 'hin'.

The same grammar rules as 'he' and 'she' would apply.

Herargon

We already have a gender neutral pronoun, we don't need to invent a new one. Besides, ask people on the internet to use a non-standard pronoun and they'll totally lose their shit as often as not.

[Gurori]

I dorm even see what the problem is in all honesty.

The problem is that not everyone is a 'he', so it doesn't make sense to say 'he' when we're talking about someone whose gender we don't know, or if we're talking about a generic person of any gender. And we have a gender neutral pronoun we can use instead.

---

Just use a new pronoun, something like 'hyn', 'shyn', 'shin' or 'hin'.

The same grammar rules as 'he' and 'she' would apply.

Herargon

We already have a gender neutral pronoun, we don't need to invent a new one. Besides, ask people on the internet to use a non-standard pronoun and they'll totally lose their shit as often as not.

Exactly, I don't see why people can't just say "They" instead of accidentally offending someone and ending up in a 50 page long flame war.

[Ifreann]

The problem is that not everyone is a 'he', so it doesn't make sense to say 'he' when we're talking about someone whose gender we don't know, or if we're talking about a generic person of any gender. And we have a gender neutral pronoun we can use instead.

---

We already have a gender neutral pronoun, we don't need to invent a new one. Besides, ask people on the internet to use a non-standard pronoun and they'll totally lose their shit as often as not.

Exactly, I don't see why people can't just say "They" instead of accidentally offending someone and ending up in a 50 page long flame war.

The impression I get is that some people hate the idea of respecting other people's feelings.

[Frenline Delpha]

And I think that's utter bollocks. I believe that even the most racist, most backwater southern, most despicable comments deserve to be said. I think blocking any speech, no matter how putrid or vile, is wrong.

Really? So, according to you, a person would be allowed to insult another for nothing - in the name of 'free speech', and to reject facts?

That would be a little bit strange, to say, at the very least.

Hold on. Where did I say denying facts was a good idea? All I said is that I believe in freedom of speech. I said I don't care if someone denies the Holocaust. If someone believe that, then good for them. That person is probably an idiot, but they can say what they want. Their words will denounce them.

[Nerotysia]

Really? So, according to you, a person would be allowed to insult another for nothing - in the name of 'free speech', and to reject facts?

Yes.

That would be a little bit strange, to say, at the very least.

Not really.

Exactly, I don't see why people can't just say "They" instead of accidentally offending someone and ending up in a 50 page long flame war.

Well, accidentally offending someone isn't something to be ashamed about. Just correct your pronoun as the person wishes and move on.

[Charmera]

I'd say they were pretty good. Personally, I will continue to use he as a gender nuetral term. To me, when used towards an anonymous person, he means human in genral.

You could always alternate too.
By which I mean, use he for one nonspecific person and then she for the next you happen to talk about. If anyone calls you out on not representing the other gender, simply cite the example you used he instead of she or vise versa.

I feel like this ^ could solve a lot of problems people are having.

Really? So, according to you, a person would be allowed to insult another for nothing - in the name of 'free speech', and to reject facts?

Yes.

That would be a little bit strange, to say, at the very least.

Not really.

Exactly, I don't see why people can't just say "They" instead of accidentally offending someone and ending up in a 50 page long flame war.

Well, accidentally offending someone isn't something to be ashamed about. Just correct your pronoun as the person wishes and move on.

That too.

[Gurori]

Really? So, according to you, a person would be allowed to insult another for nothing - in the name of 'free speech', and to reject facts?

Yes.

That would be a little bit strange, to say, at the very least.

Not really.

Exactly, I don't see why people can't just say "They" instead of accidentally offending someone and ending up in a 50 page long flame war.

Well, accidentally offending someone isn't something to be ashamed about. Just correct your pronoun as the person wishes and move on.

That would work in real life but on most internet sites you'd be in for a ride.

[New Benian Republic]

This once again brings up wether or not some people identify others by their Sex or their gender.

[Gurori]

This once again brings up whether or not some people identify others by their Sex or their gender.

Sex and Gender are the same thing unless you're talking about the gender that the person defines themself as (E.g: A Man who is yet to have an operation to become a woman referring themselves ad female).

[Herargon]

Really? So, according to you, a person would be allowed to insult another for nothing - in the name of 'free speech', and to reject facts?

Yes.

That would be a little bit strange, to say, at the very least.

Not really.

Exactly, I don't see why people can't just say "They" instead of accidentally offending someone and ending up in a 50 page long flame war.

Well, accidentally offending someone isn't something to be ashamed about. Just correct your pronoun as the person wishes and move on.

Hm. It would appear that our views are possibly irreconcilable then.

Another question. What should freedom of opinion be limited to, according to you? Are there no limits, in your view?

[Justin States 3]

Nope, they is stupid.

[Ifreann]

Nope, they is stupid.

No it's not.

[Charmera]

Yes.


Not really.


Well, accidentally offending someone isn't something to be ashamed about. Just correct your pronoun as the person wishes and move on.

That would work in real life but on most internet sites you'd be in for a ride.

Well in that case you could just shrug and get on with your life.
I mean, if someone is that upset about it beyond the point where you've apologized and corrected your perceived mistake, there's not a whole lot you can do.

[Nerotysia]

That would work in real life but on most internet sites you'd be in for a ride.

That's when you whip out your weapon of not-care. Or you can join the eternal flame war that powers the internet.

Another question. What should freedom of opinion be limited to, according to you? Are there no limits, in your view?

Well there's no way to regulate opinion, so no, there aren't any limits.

[New Benian Republic]

This once again brings up whether or not some people identify others by their Sex or their gender.

Sex and Gender are the same thing unless you're talking about the gender that the person defines themself as (E.g: A Man who is yet to have an operation to become a woman referring themselves ad female).

They aren't though.
Sex is genetalia wise whereas gender is what they identify as, for example a transgender may identify their gender as female but they still are of the male sex. Not a discriminatory thing though nesecarilly.