Oxford Students Encouraged to Now Use "Ze" Instead of "He or She" To Avoid Offen

Keyzer

I identify as an attack helicopter. No one cares about how I feel.

buried

Keyzer wrote: »

I identify as an attack helicopter. No one cares about how I feel.

You think that's bad. I identify as a camo net. At least people can see you.

Junkyard Tom

I identify as a pair of curtains.

People keep telling me to pull myself together.

funkykoval

What should a man do if someone called him ze?

buried

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I identify as a pair of curtains.

People keep telling me to pull myself together.

What you ought to do is hire a blind apprentice. Then you can retire on the sidelines and live off the interest

darkpagandeath

funkykoval wrote: »

What should a man do if someone called him ze?

Correct them immediately on labelling you.

machiavellianme

Generation Ze - I guess I'm no longer down with the kids?

Jimmy Garlic

languagenerd

From a linguistics point of view, I don't think Ze and its equivalents for him/her will catch on, unless it gets used widely in the media and on social media. It takes a very long time for grammar to change (as opposed to vocabulary - a new word can enter usage overnight if it's used on a big enough platform) and considering how prevalent words like she and he are in our language, it would be difficult for us to get used to not saying them. To have its intended effect, it would have to completely replace both he and she, something that is quite unlikely.

Generally, a language change needs the support of most speakers of that language to catch on (either concious or unconcious support) and I don't think this will. It sounds too un-English - some accents would really struggle with it - and it also has the connotations of mocking a German and/or French accent to boot. It's also not a pressing issue for most English speakers as most people are not transgender and don't even think about the pronouns they use, especially if they've never knowingly met a transgender person. That's not at all to say that this isn't a cause of huge stress for some transgender people, just it won't become widespread if only they and people who know them use it. It would have the opposite effect: becoming a word used only to describe trans people, some of whom surely want to be called by a gendered pronoun anyway.

If Ze was suddenly introduced to all school textbooks, all media and all government uses, then maybe it would catch on within a generation or two. But there's no one English-language body that could enforce such a rule and English is spoken in so many different places now that it wouldn't be uniform. I think it's more likely that the singular "they" or generic "you" would eventually replace "he" and "she" - but not for a long time.

machiavellianme

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Yeah, Can't see that going down to well. Bit like saying "You" people.

That's why we've got the word ye

Irish Guitarist

What about male to female connectors (the kind used in plumbing and electrics)?

Lego have the right attitude.

For example, the canonical LEGO plastic blocks have "female" indentations on the lower surface, and "male" bosses or protrusions on the upper surfaces. Meccano and Erector have many gendered connections, starting with the nut-and-bolt fasteners they use frequently.

The term Erector must have been thought up by white cis scum who need to check their privilege.

darkpagandeath

machiavellianme wrote: »

That's why we've got the word ye

It's the same, Still a remark over a designation. You/ye people. Language evolves on the need of the communicators not the few. Why Ireland took up English was easier to speak to the trade network. Same everywhere the most common language gets spoken. Just like in Rome it was Greek.

GreenFolder2

English is already far more gender neutral than most languages. Things like job titles no longer have gender attached whereas they still do in most European languages.

There isn't any concept of gender agreements in grammar either.
You'd be adding e's all over the place when talking about a female in French for example.

You can easily avoid writing condensing 1950s style texts by just using they or nouns.

When a student enters the building they should sign in.

That's how most things are written.

We already have a gender neutral pronoun : they.

If you absolutely can't avoid he/she just write both with a slash or s/he.

It's not that complicated.

I've seen some odd documents, mostly from educational institutions or departments where they've used him (old text)or her (seen this in recent texts and it's just as ridiculous) throughout which just reads absolutely weirdly and is totally unnecessary and archaic.

You can easily avoid being gender biased in English without any new pronouns.

Also if you're going to introduce a new pronoun, it needs to actually work in English phonetics. Ze simply doesn't sound like English and doesn't fit into English pronunciation systems at all.

Or, take the Star Trek approach and just gender neutralise things like Yes Sir. No reason why you can't say that to a woman captain etc etc. It sounds like you're talking about your mammy when you say Yes Mam, especially if you're Irish.

Modern English also doesn't tend to get carried away with Mr Ms Mrs and all that stuff ... First names increasingly work just fine and fancy titles like Dr, Professor, Judge, Justice etc are usually completely gender neutral anyway.

I think this may well be a solution in search of a problem.

funkykoval

funkykoval wrote: »

What should a man do if someone called him ze?

Tell them "Did you just assume my gender" and start screaming hysterically and set up a tumblr account

darkpagandeath

GreenFolder2 wrote: »

English is already far more gender neutral than most languages. Things like job titles no longer have gender attached whereas they still do in most European languages.

There isn't any concept of gender agreements in grammar either.
You'd be adding e's all over the place when talking about a female in French for example.

You can easily avoid writing condensing 1950s style texts by just using they or nouns.

When a student enters the building they should sign in.

That's how most things are written.

We already have a gender neutral pronoun : they.

If you absolutely can't avoid he/she just write both with a slash or s/he.

It's not that complicated.

I've seen some odd documents, mostly from educational institutions or departments where they've used him (old text)or her (seen this in recent texts and it's just as ridiculous) throughout which just reads absolutely weirdly and is totally unnecessary and archaic.

You can easily avoid being gender biased in English without any new pronouns.

Also if you're going to introduce a new pronoun, it needs to actually work in English phonetics. Ze simply doesn't sound like English and doesn't fit into English pronunciation systems at all.

Or, take the Star Trek approach and just gender neutralise things like Yes Sir. No reason why you can't say that to a woman captain etc etc. It sounds like you're talking about your mammy when you say Yes Mam, especially if you're Irish.

Modern English also doesn't tend to get carried away with Mr Ms Mrs and all that stuff ... First names increasingly work just fine and fancy titles like Dr, Professor, Judge, Justice etc are usually completely gender neutral anyway.

Exactly just take away the man from the use. Sir = person in charge. Like captain. It's out understanding that would need to change not the words. Does you saying sir to a man mean the same as a woman ? To me it's neutral it's a command structure.

riffmongous

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Exactly just take away the man from the use. Sir = person in charge. Like captain. It's out understanding that would need to change not the words. Does you saying sir to a man mean the same as a woman ? To me it's neutral it's a command structure.

Saying sir to a woman will sound ridiculous to anyone who ever had a female teacher in school, it's a gendered word (unlike captain)

Lucy8080

Is there anything to be said in favour of the greeting "Howiya Horse"?

It's gender neutral and fits all occasions and stations in life.

We solved this problem a long time ago.It's not for nothing that we are known as the Island of saints and scholars.

prinzeugen

LordSutch wrote: »

You can use Ghee if you like

That's a butter or something..

https://guideimg.alibaba.com/images/shop/2015/09/24/41/grassfed-organic-ghee-7.8-oz-pure-indian-foods-r-brand-6-pack_9851241.jpeg

Gary is taken as well..

http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/sainsburys-forced-rename-cheese-gary-8970461

What about "twat".. For example

Shop worker - "Do you need a bag sir?"
Bloke - "Please dont call me sir.. I am gender neutral"
Shop worker - "OK, Do you need a bag Twat?"

diograis

Love the people calling oxford students snowflakes with no sense of irony whatsoever :P

It's a pamphlet, suggesting people do something to make a small amount of people more comfortable. It's not mandatory, no one is a SJW, and if you choose not to the world will go on.

Political correctness has not gone mad in this instance it seems.

Special Circumstances

diograis wrote: »

Love the people calling oxford students snowflakes with no sense of irony whatsoever :P

It's a pamphlet, suggesting people do something to make a small amount of people more comfortable. It's not mandatory, no one is a SJW, and if you choose not to the world will go on.

Political correctness has not gone mad in this instance it seems.

You're saying that people haven't got into trouble in Canada, new York etc for resisting this?

shedweller

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

You've never heard of intergender?

I've read the wiki and i'm none the wiser. Is it like a bisexual person? Or have i incurred the wrath of a million....er....people?

Phoebas

benjamin d wrote: »

There is one - they.

This crap is a huge factor in people turning against left leaning ideologies in general. It's so hard to side with progressives when you automatically get associated wth this type of sh1te along with their more sensible ideas.

A suggestion in a student union leaflet shouldn't really become 'a huge factor' in anything.

A lot of snowflakes getting overly animated about very little here.

Special Circumstances

Phoebas wrote: »

A suggestion in a student union leaflet shouldn't really become 'a huge factor' in anything.

A lot of snowflakes getting overly animated about very little here.

Are you for or against it?

uck51js9zml2yt

The world has gone mad!

benjamin d

Phoebas wrote: »

A suggestion in a student union leaflet shouldn't really become 'a huge factor' in anything.

A lot of snowflakes getting overly animated about very little here.

A ridiculous suggestion that's made headline news precisely because of how ridiculous it is.
The media propagate these stories because people lap them up and say "aren't those left wingers awful eegits". Then when a genuine issue that the left advocate for, like abortion rights or other social issues, are pushed by the same left wing cohort people tend to be critical from the off because of how bloody stupid some of the guff they spout is. I've seen it first hand and I've had difficulty myself with taking them seriously for that reason.

An example is a few of the abortion rights pages I follow on Facebook insist on publishing all sorts of completely unrelated bullsh*t that honestly makes me sick of hearing from them when it comes to the actual issue they're there for.

Believe it or not I am strongly left wing on social issues, but this crap is slowly pushing me right as time goes on, and I know I'm not alone.

Phoebas

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Are you for or against it?

Like 99.9% of people, I'll be ignoring this suggestion.

I won't be getting my knickers/y-fronts/gender neutral underwear in a twist over it.

Dravokivich

coolbeans wrote: »

I don't think so. There's a genuine need for a gender neutral singular/plural pronoun like 'on' in French or 'sie' in German.

It's been a while since I learned French in school, but masculine forms, where the broad pro-nouns being used back in the day.

Special Circumstances

Phoebas wrote: »

Like 99.9% of people, I'll be ignoring this suggestion.

I won't be getting my knickers/y-fronts/gender neutral underwear in a twist over it.

You wouldn't be concerned that it would be given legal standing as it has been in other jurisdictions, with consequences for those who ignore it?

conorhal

diograis wrote: »

Love the people calling oxford students snowflakes with no sense of irony whatsoever :P

It's a pamphlet, suggesting people do something to make a small amount of people more comfortable. It's not mandatory, no one is a SJW, and if you choose not to the world will go on.

Political correctness has not gone mad in this instance it seems.

That's how it starts. I used to just roll my eyes and think 'bloody students', I used to think, 'give them a few years in the real world and they'll grow up'.
That's not how I feel any more. These loons never grow up, and worse, this crap is their career, they go from university into highly paid jobs in well funded quangos which have the ear of government.
That's how you laugh today at their stupidity, and end up jailed for discrimination under Orwellian equality legislation tomorrow.
Don't think it will happen? Well it already is part of proposed equality legislation in Canada to prosecute people for failing to use the 'correct pronoun' of a persons preference.
Sorry, but we're not inventing a new pronoun to suit a miniscule number of people most of whom have no problem with gendered pronouns.

This 'simple request on a pamphlet' has started costing university professors their jobs for failing to comply with such suggestions.

I think Dr. Jordan B. Peterson very eloquently explains how he came a cropper of this and why we absolutely need to stand up and fight against the demolition merchants of reality.
It is a long interview, but easily the smartest analysis of the SJW warping of language and it's consequences I've come across.

RayCun

Special Circumstances wrote: »

You're saying that people haven't got into trouble in Canada, new York etc for resisting this?

Let's see the evidence that someone got in trouble for not saying "ze"

And by trouble I mean legal trouble, censured at work, etc, not criticism.

And just for not saying "ze" - not for being a prick in general, or going off on a rant. Simply not saying "ze".

And if you can find a source that isn't the Daily Mail or Breitbart, that'd be brilliant.

Phoebas

RayCun wrote: »

Let's see the evidence that someone got in trouble for not saying "ze"

I failed to say 'ze' earlier, but I think I got away with it.

conorhal

RayCun wrote: »

Let's see the evidence that someone got in trouble for not saying "ze"

And by trouble I mean legal trouble, censured at work, etc, not criticism.

And just for not saying "ze" - not for being a prick in general, or going off on a rant. Simply not saying "ze".

And if you can find a source that isn't the Daily Mail or Breitbart, that'd be brilliant.

You can try the excellent interview I just posted with tenured professor and clinical psychologist Jordan B. Peterson for a start.

RayCun

conorhal wrote: »

You can try the excellent interview I just posted with tenured professor and clinical psychologist Jordan B. Peterson for a start.

Is he an ex-professor? Was he fired for not saying "ze"?

conorhal

RayCun wrote: »

Is he an ex-professor? Was he fired for not saying "ze"?

He's job is currently under threat for refusing to use words like ze, so you should give him a watch and decide if he's some nasty bigot or a rational human being refusing to succumb to the rather insidious agenda of some pretty sketchy individuals from whom the university are inexplicably is running scared.
This suggests a climate of 'campus McCarthyism' created the far-left that extends way beyond a simple pamphlet.

20Cent

conorhal wrote: »

He's job is currently under threat for refusing to use words like ze, so you should give him a watch and decide if he's some nasty bigot or a rational human being refusing to succumb to the rather insidious agenda of some pretty sketchy individuals from whom the university are inexplicably is running scared.
This suggests a climate of 'campus McCarthyism' created the far-left that extends way beyond a simple pamphlet.

It's an hour long can you give us the short synopsis version?

RayCun

conorhal wrote: »

He's job is currently under threat for refusing to use words like ze, so you should give him a watch and decide if he's some nasty bigot or a rational human being refusing to succumb to the rather insidious agenda of some pretty sketchy individuals from whom the university are inexplicably is running scared.

Is his job really under threat? Can you link to any independent reporting on the subject? Is there a disciplinary process under way? Link to the college statements if so.

Is it just for refusing to say "ze"?

SterlingArcher

RayCun wrote: »

Let's see the evidence that someone got in trouble for not saying "ze"

And by trouble I mean legal trouble, censured at work, etc, not criticism.

And just for not saying "ze" - not for being a prick in general, or going off on a rant. Simply not saying "ze".

Professor Jordan Petersons refused to use the Ze.

"His employers have warned that, while they support his right to academic freedom and free speech, he could run afoul of the Ontario Human Rights code and his faculty responsibilities should he refuse to use alternative pronouns when requested".

He did an interesting pod cast about it.

dav3

Where would people be these days without daily mailesque stories winding them up.

SterlingArcher

20Cent wrote: »

It's an hour long can you give us the short synopsis version?

Why bother?

RayCun

SterlingArcher wrote: »

Professor Jordan Petersons refused to use the Ze.

"His employers have warned that, while they support his right to academic freedom and free speech, he could run afoul of the Ontario Human Rights code and his faculty responsibilities should he refuse to use alternative pronouns when requested".

So he has not been fired, and he has not been subject to any disciplinary procedures.

I asked -

RayCun wrote: »

Let's see the evidence that someone got in trouble for not saying "ze"

So, any examples of people who have got into trouble? Not hypothetical future events, but real things that have actually happened?

conorhal

RayCun wrote: »

So he has not been fired, and he has not been subject to any disciplinary procedures.

I asked -



So, any examples of people who have got into trouble? Not hypothetical future events, but real things that have actually happened?

As pointed out in the video, it is about to be put into law in Canada.
Just watch some of the video, a professor of psychology can explain far better then I what happened, why and the consequences of it. Give it 10 mins.

pumpkin4life

dav3 wrote: »

Where would people be these days without daily mailesque stories winding them up.

I'm only out of the university system a couple of years and this kind of madness is happening in Irish campuses. It's gotten worse since then.

Wibbs

Grayson wrote: »

in one case mentally ill (every single one of you that clicked like on that comment should be disgusted with yourselves).

I suppose it depends on how one defines a disorder or illness and more, how one views disorders or illnesses as good/bad/neutral. EG body dysmorphia is seen as a medical disorder and/or illness. One where the observable reality of a person's physicality is at odds with how they view themselves. In extremis such disorders can prove fatal and regularly do. Gender dysmorphia was classified as a disorder until quite recently and for good and obvious and very similar reasons. That said they are cold medical reasons which affected real people in the real world and if it helps individuals I agree with the condition being removed from the list. However to suggest that Transexuality is not a specific condition, even yes, seen clinically as a medical disorder is a bit silly.

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

You're the dinosaurs that we'll all judge sternly in 20 years time.

Or this top down social engineering push will result in a backlash that will reset societies back to a place we really shouldn't want them to go. There is evidence of such a backlash already. We've gone from most feeling "yep that's equitable and makes sense alright" to "WTF? How far down the rabbit hole do you want us to go?" and worse it;s getting.

SterlingArcher

RayCun wrote: »

So he has not been fired, and he has not been subject to any disciplinary procedures.

I asked -



So, any examples of people who have got into trouble? Not hypothetical future events, but real things that have actually happened?

You also asked has anyone bein in trouble. Your words.

Well His tenure is up in January. Guess you'll know then. how do you define trouble??

You know in your job, getting called into the head office surrounded by a legal team and asked to drop it and in refusing to do so being warned of the possible consequences .

Now what exactly would you consider trouble?? If this happened to you in your job would it fall under being in trouble.

20Cent

pumpkin4life wrote: »

I'm only out of the university system a couple of years and this kind of madness is happening in Irish campuses. It's gotten worse since then.

What is the evidence of this?

RayCun

conorhal wrote: »

As pointed out in the video, it is about to be put into law in Canada.

What is about to be put into law is the addition of "gender identity or expression" to the set of things which it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of. You can't refuse to serve black people, you can't refuse to hire women... marital status, disability, creed, etc are also covered, and gender identity is about to be added to that list.

That is not the same as a law making it legally required for everyone to say "ze".

I asked for examples of people who had gotten into trouble for not saying "ze".

There are no examples.

Special Circumstances

RayCun wrote: »

So he has not been fired, and he has not been subject to any disciplinary procedures.

I asked -



So, any examples of people who have got into trouble? Not hypothetical future events, but real things that have actually happened?

What other anti discrimination rules and regulations are people free to pick and choose from?

Are you saying that people who want people to use ze are not as equal as other groups protected by legislation or policies?

SterlingArcher

20Cent wrote: »

What is the evidence of this?

Evidence? He expressed his own personal experience? Where is your evidence on it not being so?

RayCun

SterlingArcher wrote: »

You also asked has anyone bein in trouble. Your words.

Well His tenure is up in January. Guess you'll know then. how do you define trouble??

You know in your job, getting called into the head office surrounded by a legal team and asked to drop it and in refusing to do so being warned of the possible consequences .

The letter from the college is here
https://www.scribd.com/document/328664490/Letter-to-J-Peterson-18Oct2016#from_embed

You can read the whole thing.
They say that they support his right to freedom of expression, and his right to criticise the law and university policies, but they also expect him to uphold the law.
If, in future, a student asks to be addressed as "ze" and he doesn't, then he could be in trouble

The law of Ontario, specifically the Ontario Human Rights Code, protects against discrimination based on gender expression and gender identity. Depending on the context, if personal pronouns are being used, the refusal by a teacher or colleague to use the personal pronoun that is an expression of the person’s gender identity can constitute discrimination. In many situations it is not necessary to use personal pronouns at all, but where it is, the personal pronoun that is chosen as the person’s gender identity-related and gender expression-related identifier should be used.
Your statements that you will refuse to refer to transgendered persons using gender neutral pronouns if they ask you to do so are contrary to the rights of those persons to equal treatment without discrimination based on their "gender identity" and "gender expression"

That seems pretty clear. He is not in trouble now. He may be in trouble in future if he does what he says he plans to do, but he is not yet.

RayCun

Special Circumstances wrote: »

What other anti discrimination rules and regulations are people free to pick and choose from?

Are you saying that people who want people to use ze are not as equal as other groups protected by legislation or policies?

Try restating.
In a form that makes sense.