Clothing, for most people
Matt Smith has been praised by fans for correcting Sue Perkins on his House of the Dragon co-star’s pro-nouns during an interview.
The word is “pronouns”; not “pro-nouns”. Illiterate hacks.
The former Doctor Who and The Crown star was chatting to the TV presenter about season two of the prequel to the Game of Thrones franchise when Sue mislabelled actor Emma D’Arcy as a ‘she’. Emma identifies as non-binary and goes by the pronouns they/them – something Matt was quick to effortlessly point out as the interview with former The Great British Bake Off host Sue continued.
Blah blah blah. There’s no such thing as “non-binary.” Nobody has time or energy or inclination to memorize all the luxury pronouns out there, and nobody needs to be corrected for referring to an Emma with a “she.” Just shut up.
Emma, 31, recently opened up on how clothes play a part in their non-binary identity during an interview with HighSnobiety magazine and said: “Clothing, for most people, is central to who they are and how they express themselves. But for gender-fluid or trans people, clothes play an even more fundamental role.”
Oh dear god just stop talking.
Superficiality is the foundation of gender identity. You nonbinaries must wear your nonbinary uniforms lest someone >gasp< uses the "wrong" pronouns. Reinforce those clothing stereotypes, people — and by all means, if someone "misgenders" you, have a meltdown.
He ‘effortlessly’ corrected her. Why does this need an adverb? I can see that it contrasts with ‘took great pains to correct her’ but still…just write already. Don’t try to put a layer of faux gold on your writing; it’s as fake sounding as the gold in Trump’s toilet is fake looking.
Seriously. I too found that absurd “effortlessly” a teeth-grinder. It takes NO effort to bully people for referring to a woman as “she.”
The hyphenation of pro-nouns might have been an artifact of copy-pasting from one platform to another. The screen for typing texts or other messages on a phone could be narrower than when using a word processor, which is formatted to 8-1/2×11 paper. The narrower composition platform might have had a syllable hyphen break that copied over to whatever the journalist/author was using. I’ve seen that kind of thing happen by accident, and just not caught in editing.
What’s this “Sue” and “Emma” and “Matt” business? Shouldn’t it be “Perkins” and “D’Arcy” and “Smith”?
WTF, he “was quick to effortlessly point out” that Perkins used the correct — but personally disfavored — non-luxury pronouns applicable to a woman like D’Arcy. I disagree that it’s at all “effortless.” To the contrary, it takes considerable vigilance and mental capital — effort — to keep track of which people claim special, luxury pronouns, and which particular ones they demand others keep track of. What’s “effortless” is using the inherent structure of language to refer to a woman as “she.” One of the points of the “Pronouns Are Rohypnol” article is that it’s not easy at all to try to, or to have to, use wrong-sex or luxury pronouns demanded by narcissistic gender babies. It keeps you off balance; it’s intended to do that. Now, members and fans of Team Gender might be eager and primed to react to ordinary people’s usage of correct but non-favored pronouns, but I wouldn’t say that that’s “effortless.” In my view, it takes considerable effort and practice to quickly interject (rudely interrupt) a normal conversation to chastise someone for things that aren’t even wrong. I’d even say that it takes considerable effort — they certainly expend a LOT of energy doing it! — to bully people for calling a woman “she.” The misogyny may be so wholly ingrained that the bullying response is instinctive or habitual, but it’s their favorite sport, and they do put a lot of effort into it.
Really? One of the nicest things, to me, about living in this day and age is that people can disregard clothing as “central to who they are” or to “how they express themselves.” People don’t have to care about what their clothes look like, and the can express themselves more centrally and fundamentally through far more central and fundamental means, such as ideas, work, language, artistic expression, and so on. Many more people than ever before have the chance to say that clothing is NOT fundamental or central to their person hood or values.
Pardon me, but my clothing is central to who I am: a slob.
Exactly, nonconformity wasn’t always accepted. However, I’ve observed, that books demanding to be judged *solely* by their covers are of dubious content.
“So may the outward shows be least themselves; The world is still deceived with ornament.”
Hey, you can’t blame a standard-issue straight white man for pouncing on an opportunity to casually (effortlessly, even) fight for the rights of the LGBTQetc community. Bonus points for the enemy being one of those overprivileged lesbian women.
“They/Them?
Emma and tapeworm?
I have come to the conclusion that the nonbinary are the *only* ones who should be heeded on pronouns, albeit in a way most of them won’t like because it erases their specialness. English has been, if not exactly headed that direction, then making nods that it’s willing to go in the direction of collapsing he/she/it to they. It’s the easiest solution, the fairest solution, and one that requires less cognitive effort than remembering anyone’s personal insistence. Many other languages do this with ease — gendered pronouns aren’t required.
Mya, I take it “insistence” was a spoonerism for identity? And yet it fits…
Oh, I meant insistence. That’s what it is, after all, an act of will rather than a mere request for a common courtesy. The sheer arrogance of the demands for a *personal* personal pronoun always astound me. But I did loudly second the motion to update the town bylaws from the proposed “he or she” to “they” at Town Meeting. (I was beaten to making the motion.)
Yep, it does fit. Stet!