Red Mosquito

https://www.wsj.com/articles/take-two-a ... 1568325291

If this country needs more gun control and climate change activists, medical schools are not the right place to produce them.

I get why pronouns are important to a person and their well-being, but I cannot for the life of me figure out they/them for a single person. I've seen it (lol jokes) twice in interviews in the past week and both times it gave me pause as to what that conversation sounds like out loud. Especially if you have a typically masculine/feminine name which is where a lot of the confusion could start as far as assuming gender goes.

I semi-wish that article looked well thought out enough to be worth subscribing to the WSJ.

For what it’s worth, and only because it appears in the link provided (I don’t know how the topic fits into the article), all of the major health record tools in America now support chosen pronouns and gender self-identification documentation, and they do so specifically because their clients (hospitals) have been demanding it. Among the most insistent requesters of this functionality have been pediatric institutions. This is a patient care-centered choice, especially because these institutions see first hand and in measurable terms the impact of not incorporating this basic demographic information into the arc of care, and have charted the positive results of health care institutions being responsive. There’s mounds of research demonstrating the decreased risk of suicide and self-harm in teens who receive hospital care that is responsive to their chosen gender. They’re less likely to avoid medical care when it’s needed in the future. They’re less likely to become drug abusers. And, in purely human terms, every pediatric oncologist wants the ability to at least speak to the child whose life they may not be able to save in the terms that make that child most comfortable.

It’s a poor title, the article doesn’t address pronouns at all, just the infusion of social justice classes into med school curriculum

bune wrote:I get why pronouns are important to a person and their well-being, but I cannot for the life of me figure out they/them for a single person. I've seen it (lol jokes) twice in interviews in the past week and both times it gave me pause as to what that conversation sounds like out loud. Especially if you have a typically masculine/feminine name which is where a lot of the confusion could start as far as assuming gender goes.

Prepare to have your mind blown:

https://apnews.com/07045bc80e9c4acc895c4185515058e5


After the third paragraph it gets very... tricky to understand

Does it though

theplatypus wrote:Does it though

Yes?


“Smith said they remain a work in progress.”

If you were not explicitly told that was Smith’s chosen pronoun, how would you read that sentence?

Not at all

Bi_3 wrote:

theplatypus wrote:Does it though

Yes?


“Smith said they remain a work in progress.”

If you were not explicitly told that was Smith’s chosen pronoun, how would you read that sentence?

This would maybe make a bit of sense if this article wasn't explicitly about Smith's chosen pronoun.

Beyond that, I dunno man, context clues?

Yeah, it's really not that complicated/confusing.

Anyone griping about they pronouns in 2019 is just admitting they don't have any nb/trans/3rd gender friends. It's pretty fucking easy.

To be clear I understand that there is an adjustment period if this is a brand new concept for you and you bump into it without any context but that article isn't a good example of it because, again, it is very specifically about the singular "they." What's most interesting to me about that article is the correction footer because it seems to indicate that whoever drafted the first version of it was like "bahaha they, nope"

Mickey wrote:Anyone griping about they pronouns in 2019 is just admitting they don't have any nb/trans/3rd gender friends.

What a humiliating thing

.

theplatypus wrote:To be clear I understand that there is an adjustment period if this is a brand new concept for you and you bump into it without any context but that article isn't a good example of it because, again, it is very specifically about the singular "they." What's most interesting to me about that article is the correction footer because it seems to indicate that whoever drafted the first version of it was like "bahaha they, nope"

Or it’s just simply so uncommon in the language that people, even journalists, struggle with when and where to make the switch. I am in no way bothered by a person requesting a particular pronoun be used for them. It’s the right thing to do to respect that wish. But “they” is a confusing choice given it is nearly always a plural and causal reading can lead to misunderstanding the intent of entire paragraphs of text.

Sam Smith: my pronoun is they. Please call me they.
Journalist: ok
Journalist: "He has asked that people refer to him as they"
Sam Smith: wtf
Journalist: SORRY I DIDNT KNOW WHEN TO MAKE THE SWITCH, IT DEFINITELY WASNT INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS

Lefties can stick their goddamn heads in the sand and act like Pronoun Change isn’t real or doesn’t matter, but they’ll be the first ones asking for help when the crops start dying from lack of antecedent agreement

.

Bi_3 wrote:

bune wrote:I get why pronouns are important to a person and their well-being, but I cannot for the life of me figure out they/them for a single person. I've seen it (lol jokes) twice in interviews in the past week and both times it gave me pause as to what that conversation sounds like out loud. Especially if you have a typically masculine/feminine name which is where a lot of the confusion could start as far as assuming gender goes.

Prepare to have your mind blown:

https://apnews.com/07045bc80e9c4acc895c4185515058e5


After the third paragraph it gets very... tricky to understand

that's the article that made me think about it, yeah.

tragabigzanda wrote:I agree that "they" is clumsy terminology that everyone is obligated to use. And it's fine. I've enjoyed the status of an able-bodied, cis-gendered white guy of modest-yet-capable means; I embrace the poor grammar of the oppressed.

Basically this...I think. I spent several years as an editor with the hard-coded knowledge that they/them are plural pronouns so that part of me is the one having issue with it.

theplatypus wrote:To be clear I understand that there is an adjustment period if this is a brand new concept for you and you bump into it without any context but that article isn't a good example of it because, again, it is very specifically about the singular "they." What's most interesting to me about that article is the correction footer because it seems to indicate that whoever drafted the first version of it was like "bahaha they, nope"

Which is apparently the same thing the person who wrote the article did.

How about "the person formally known as he"?