Singular They, Plural Nonsense?
As a writer, I’m admonished to play by the rulebook. But I don’t.
►►►WHY read this? This concerns everyone who feels threatened by he, she, they, or anything.◄◄◄
Gender involvement
I used to write (s)he, awkwardly, so I went back to he.
Politically incorrect, humanly correct, of course:
He doesn’t downplay women.
Women can feel downplayed by he because he has been used frequently in order to downplay them.
I get that, although I never would think of doing it so. I also get that avoiding he doesn’t change the downplaying. He doesn’t downplay, but the user does, and in a way, also the receiver.
Women can be stronger than to be bothered by he.
Much better is to put he at a more abstract level.
That way, you don’t let the abuser make you change anything. It’s they who make you use the singular they. It can make you see this even as a double whammy.
I feel personally downplayed by this double change, not as a man but as a human being. I do not want to write under the yoke of singular they. As a woman, I wouldn’t feel more downplayed than now.
Of course, he brings into contact with the downplay, but so does singular they.
I mentioned a more abstract level.
For instance, in French, referring to women and men, they use ‘ils’ and ‘eux.’ This plural they is masculine, without any problem still as far as I know, because it’s more abstract. I hope they keep it so.
At the same time, they don’ nibble out gender.
Let’s keep gender.
I want to be able to be gentle to a woman as a man. Yep, in an old-fashioned way.
I don’t want to be ‘progressive’ if that means losing value. There’s a lot more besides this, that one can be progressive about — new valuable things, customs, emotions even.
Being progressive is not about cutting.
It’s about growing based on what already is.
I have the impression that this plays a huge role in politics, for instance. People don’t want to lose what they already know to gain what they still don’t know. Especially if – deep- value is involved in any which way. This plays a substantial role in many elections.
Plural nonsense
It’s about much more, of course, then merely some grammar.
Eventually, it’s about people’s Inner Strength. Please, don’t take it away.
You might cultivate it instead. Automatically, people will become less vulnerable to mass-manipulators.
The world will be a better place.
Related Posts
Divide and Conquer or Unite and Flow
From ancient times, ‘divide and conquer’ has been the foundation of power dynamics, shaping empires and political strategies. The idea is straightforward: exploit divisions to maintain control. While effective in the short term, this strategy often leads to instability and eventual collapse. In contrast, ‘unite and flow’ offers a compelling alternative — one that fosters Read the full article…
Beyond Post-Truth
‘Getting beyond’ is as much related to meaning as it is to truth. [Please read before this: ‘Post-Truth’] Let’s get beyond it Which, I admit – without POMO-ing myself – may not be completely possible. There is always more ‘between heaven and earth’ [quoting Shakespeare] not to speak about ‘beyond heaven and earth’. But that’s Read the full article…
Why People Choose against Themselves
The paradox is striking: why do people, time and again, make choices that harm their own well-being? This happens across personal, economic, and political domains, leading to frustration, poverty, illness, and even wars. What is going on? Why do people bring this upon themselves, and how can we address it? To understand this, we must Read the full article…