• DrDr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is nothing but a distraction from lecterngate. Sarah Huckabee Sanders used taxpayer funds to pay for a personal trip, then had the Republican party expense a $20k podium from a company that has never sold a podium before to try to hide the embezzlement.

  • xkforce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    It costs people nothing to use someones’ preferred pronouns and yet here we are.

    • superguy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      1 year ago

      What if they think men and women should be referred to by different pronouns?

      • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think you mean “what if the men and women think men and women should be referred to by different pronouns”. Can’t use “they” any more, remember.

        But everyone is free to think whatever they want, so long as they don’t go around telling other people how to live their lives when it’s not hurting anyone.

        • superguy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, you can still use they when referring to multiple people or those of unknown sex.

          Might want to brush up on your English if this is news to you.

          • Shea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They is grammatically correct for a single person so I’m not even kind of sure what you mean here

            • superguy@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              18
              ·
              1 year ago

              I never said it was incorrect. The problem is forcing people to use ‘they’ when they’d rather use he or she.

              • LucyLastic@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The poster above me here is absolutely right, she shouldn’t be forced to use the wrong pronouns. It might make her uncomfortable.

                • superguy@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah, nah. I grew out of that phase in elementary school.

                  You can call me whatever you want, I’m not some child who lets it affect me.

  • edgemaster72@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Am I so out of touch? No, it’s the people who fail to fit into my narrow, regressive worldview who are wrong.”

  • Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So… The Party of “small government” once again banning using language that’s inclusive of all people. Disgusting…

  • PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    NASA changed its nomenclature to say human space flight (as opposed to just “manned” space flight) in the 90’s, you transphobic Christian nationalist.

  • Silverseren@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    So instead of using they like a normal person would, they have to use something like s/he throughout entire documents? How clunky and ugly that must be.

  • Ibex0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    What were they thinking?

    Oh shit, I just used the gender-neutral pronoun “they.”

      • Ibex0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        In this case yes, but “they” can also be all men, all women, or a single person of unknown gender.

        For example: somebody called. What did they say?

  • Xatolos@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This sounds great, so they can no longer use the Bible as reasons for enacting laws as the Bible uses gender-neutral language.

    A win for religious freedom.

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Old Testament literally doesn’t contain gender neutral language, which is a large part of why this all is so messed up in the first place.

      Hebrew didn’t have a neutral gender.

      There was no ‘parent’ just ‘mother’ or ‘father.’

      So a number of passages ended up super weird as a result, including the “he made them male and female” in Genesis 1 where a plural God makes humans male and female in ‘his’ image.

      Which was the key line that’s been used for millennia now to prejudice against gender nonconformity, including its being cited in the NT regarding marriage in works written just a few years after the emperor of Rome married two different men.

      • Xatolos@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The New Testament (which is what these types of groups typically point towards) was written originally in Koine Greek, which uses its version of “he” for “individual” regardless of the individual making it more “gender neutral”.

        You must also understand you are looking at something old and wanting to only project today’s meanings on it. Take the English word “man”. It is reality a gender neutral word meaning “adult”, and “girl” is also a gender neutral word, meaning “child”.

        So you can’t look at something and declare “well today it means this, so it must have always meant this” because this is false. So just because something today means X, you must look into it’s history to truely understand what it really meant. And when you do, you realize that the Bible really is gender neutral and trying to make it not is to alter the true mean of the Bible.

        https://interestingliterature.com/2023/08/woman-word-origin-etymology/

        • kromem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy

          Edit: Expanding on this as some people seem to be confused…

          The article is only about the etymology of the word:

          But the question of where the word woman comes from is also of interest, since, as is so often the case with everyday words whose etymologies we take for granted, the origins of the term ‘woman’ contains several surprising details.

          The etymological fallacy is thinking that the etymology relates to the contemporary definition, which is what the commenter was doing in confusing the etymology of woman or man as being somehow connected to its meaning.

          In general, the commenter was mistaken, as while it is true that a number of stories in the OT were likely based on earlier concepts of neutral or multiple genders (such as the example I originally gave), from the earliest Hebrew onwards there was literally no way of representing it.

          So you ended up with later reinterpretation of passages with binary gender like the Genesis 1 example as having related to a hermaphroditic original man (Philio and the later Naassenes) given it was in the image of what was supposedly a singular God but rendered male and female both. Whereas what’s more likely was this passage dated back to the days of a divine power couple of Yahweh and his wife which was later reworked into a monotheistic form without updating the creation of men and women in their images.

          But the topic of binary gender representation in the language is fairly broadly discussed and is distinct from what the commenter is trying to represent as being similar in languages with neutral gender representations with some bizarre appeal to etymology.

          I suspect it was even the driving concept in the 1st century behind the comments about “make the male and female into a single one” in the Gospel of Thomas saying 22, which ironically still elsewhere referred to the ‘Father’ as opposed to ‘Parent.’ (Aramaic was also a binary gendered language.)

  • callouscomic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Reminds me of when North Carolinas own oceanic and atmospheric agency published a study on the negative effects climate change will have on their coastal towns, and what they need to do in response to that.

    So their state government responded by banning the use of terms like climate change.

  • Happenchance@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    So what they are saying is that it’s perfectly fine to address every man as “her, she” incorrectly, every time. Perfect.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    To conservatives, cultural war is a real issue. It’s not like they care about anything else, as far as their concerned they’re going to heaven one way or another. Why plan for today when you can be happy about imaginary tomorrows.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      If they don’t keep people fighting about who can marry who or who should have control over medical decisions, people might start fighting about things that will threaten their wealth and power.