Pronouns in profiles is at least four years old is some mainstream contexts [0]. I'm unsure that it is a fad because on the internet there can be very little other signaling of someone's gender.
Keep in mind that many languages are inherently gendered and to ask someone "what did you today?" for example in Polish, you need to use the right gender. Answering anything will also reveal you gender.
Well, in the internet no one knows you're a dog. Some women used to answer using masculine conjugation as a default, to avoid their gender to distract from the things they did or had to say. Some men did the opposite to get attention or more eager responses.
I know it's inconvenient and to some may be considered even insulting as a suggestion, and I don't think it should be the norm. However, it's still a choice you're free to make.
This seems like the ultimate manifestation of old adage "there are no girls on the internet." I suspect that females (especially those not in the tech industry) tend to overwhelmingly hold accounts in their real name, whereas the vast majority of pseudonymous posters are men. It makes a lot of sense from a social conditioning perspective of communication: that females tend to be more relationship-focused whereas males tend to be more object-focused.
As a result, for girls, getting misgendered under a pseudonymous account is seen as danger that comes with the territory. And of course they take it in stride, because that's just what women do all the time.
Only if you declare yourself masculine or feminine, doesn't go any further. Someone could be non-binary and declare themselves more feminine than masculine
well, luckily most languages are modernizing to accommodate marginalized people! Historical patterns are no excuse to deliberately misgender or genderify language. E.g. for Spanish a lot of people use an X or @ instead of -o -a, same in German. In Scandinavia hön as a pronoun.
In mean eyes what is most important: grammatical correctness or kindness?
Truthful description of relevant info is most important. The constructed profile of the person I'm talking to online is uninteresting to me. You might actually be a dog for all I know. If you want me to play along so you're never confronted with being identified as a dog... then I'm not sure I'm really doing you a favor. Maybe the kindest thing is not to play along with your language game.
> Maybe the kindest thing is not to play along with your language game.
My comment was in response to someone indicating that certain European languages forced you to know the gender of the person you were speaking to. So, the "language game" is already ongoing. This is why people have constructed careful expansions to the grammar, to make language non-genderized.
What is the alternative? To assume everyone identifies as a male?
To understand that terms like mankind already refer to all humanity is a small part of it. Another part is that communication serves us in finding suitable mates and manipulation of language towards social goals is likely to have outcomes that are eventually counter to what is meaningful to us as individuals.
I'd also disagree that expanding a language carefully is what is being done here. It is unlikely towards the goal of expressing ourselves more clearly.
This is exactly why people are aiming to change this forced behavior. Language reflects society and the only reason why male terms are considered "general" by some parts of the population is because men for centuries repressed the female populations and the non-binary.
this is unfortunately one of those times where "I have no opinion" is an opinion
What I am saying is that taking a stance of assuming people identifying as male is an opinion - which is quickly become a minority stance for good reasons.
Misgendering is a huge trigger for a lot of people, and considered a "micro agression" if you are familiar with that term. This is why most people go out of their way, just like if an ethnicity says that a certain word is a slur (i.e. c-word for Asians, or even worse for Black or African Americans) then people stop using that term.
Just like a racial minority, we must in my opinion - and most other people in the US - sit down a listen to their concerns. A male dominated society has for centuries built stigma and downplayed the significance of females and non-binary folks, such that it has even spread into the language itself.
Why does language matter to you? Is it a tool to entrenching your identity and present the world as a battleground between your groups? Or does language serve you as an individual to have dialog and develop? If you choose resentment then don't pull others along with you. What meaning does language have?
In the USA, one of the world's most populous spanish-speaking countries, Spanish communication is often conducted using -x ending, even by the president.
I wrote the following reply to the person adjacent to your comment, and I will paste it hear as I feel your comment had the same spirit:
Some languages have unfortunate misogynistic and transphobic/monogendered built-ins. This is problematic for a large minority of the LGBTQ+ population and many Native/Indigenous/First nations with different linguistic cultures. The USA is one of, if not the, most diverse country in the world with people from all over.
It is to me beautiful that the country can embrace both the latinx/hispanic population and at the same time say to these marginalized groups "we hear you, we listen to you, and we understand you."
To me the fact that the WH and President Biden use these important ungenderizations is a very important step, just like the federal desegregation of schools. It demonstrates how far we have come in just two generations. I have though met many latinx people who prefer latin@ instead, while others say that it reduces the language for non-binary folks.
I don't know if your first paragraph is sarcastic or not, but I do not think that you consider Indians or Africans "inferior" in truth, and therefore I am going to reply to your comment as if it was ironic or exaggerated for dramatic purpose.
Just like the USA has been a front runner for racial equality and LBGTQ+ rights throughout the world, some people use the argument that "homosexuality is not allowed in Saudi Arabia, but that is THEIR culture" a good one. It is a universal human right!
Unfortunately, there are many places (which correlate with Spanish speaking or non-English) where non-binary and female presenting people are marginalized and do not dare speak up, while the Hispanic population of the USA does - the young generation at least. 10 years ago people used "gay" or "f*g" as an insult, but now-a-days they surely do not!
We have quickly changed as a society, and I hope that while today some people use the same arguments for the gendered language, I think in 10 years time the young generations in many Spanish speaking countries will help their friends to ungenderify - REALLY means to remove the patriarchic heritage of the lingo - Spanish and all other non-indigenous languages.
What would you propose other than latinx or latin@?
Some languages have unfortunate misogynistic and transphobic/monogendered built-ins. This is problematic for a large minority of the LGBTQ+ population and many Native/Indigenous/First nations with different linguistic cultures. The USA is one of, if not the, most diverse country in the world with people from all over.
It is to me beautiful that the country can embrace both the latinx/hispanic population and at the same time say to these marginalized groups "we hear you, we listen to you, and we understand you."
To me the fact that the WH and President Biden use these important ungenderizations is a very important step, just like the federal desegregation of schools. It demonstrates how far we have come in just two generations. I have though met many latinx people who prefer latin@ instead, while others say that it reduces the language for non-binary folks.
I pray that someday everybody can see how horribly arrogant and culturally imperialist it is for English-speakers to condemn other languages as "problematic" and demand they fundamentally change based on their limited outsider understanding. It's one of those few things which screams woke white supremacy.
I am just saying that this exact response is made when people say that LGBTQ+ people deserve equal rights in Saudi Arabia or Russia. That is also cultural, and so is language.
Please educate me I would like to know your opinion.
This is ultimately about telling a diverse group of people that the essence of their human experience is wrong, that their sense of identity and thought patterns are invalid, that they must fundamentally change to conform to the linguistic perception of reality of English speakers - the vast majority of whom neither understand nor respect other languages. See the hypocrisy here?
"Latino" is a gender-neutral word. Gendered languages do not involve all of what "gender" per se means in the English sense. English speakers not understanding or accepting these basic facts is not reflective of the Spanish language; it is reflective of the lack of understanding and acceptance of some English speakers.
And misunderstandings are fine, as is the case with Joe Biden and the Democrats who said something which offends 40% of Latino Americans. But preaching from the pulpit of ignorance is not.
I don’t think people expressing their identity markers online is going to stop happening anytime soon. Gender is a pretty fundamental part of most people’s identity.
The fad in question doesn't concern how closely people identify with their gender in real, normal life. It concerns their aptitude to announce their gender prior to any online interaction whatsoever.
> ...[N]etworks like Friendster, MySpace, YouTube, and, later, Facebook and Twitter were dissolving the boundaries between social groups that had long shaped personal relations and identities. Before social media, you spoke to different “audiences” — family members, friends, colleagues, and so forth — in different ways. You modulated your tone of voice, your words, your behavior, and even your appearance to suit whatever social “context” you were in (workplace, home, school, nightclub, etc.) and then readjusted the presentation of yourself when you moved into another context.
> On a social network ... all those different contexts collapsed into a single context. Whenever you posted a message or a photograph or a video, it could be seen by your friends, your parents, your coworkers, your bosses, and your teachers, not to mention the amorphous mass known as the general public. And, because the post was recorded, it could be seen by future audiences as well as the immediate one. When people realized they could no longer present versions of themselves geared to different audiences — it was all one audience now — they had to grapple with a new sort of identity crisis.
[0] https://blog.asana.com/2018/05/new-profile-setting-pronouns-...