Stupid pronoun agreement

[elaby]

I have decided that it would be much easier on everyone if the English language went back to using "his" as a non-gender-specific pronoun. Because, as I've recently learned (to my annoyance), it is ungrammatical to say something like "An American should show their passport to the customs officer". You have to say "An American should show his or her passport to the customs officer". And that sounds idiotic in most situations when you're trying to write smoothly. So I propose that in the case that gender isn't specified, it become acceptable to say "his". It used to be that "his" was the gender-neutral pronoun, but now it's just for boys, and people throw a FIT if you don't include both genders. Bah, I say.

... Yes, I'll go back to writing my paper now.

Comments

[redatt.livejournal.com]

I have decided that it would be much easier on everyone if the English language went back to using "his" as a non-gender-specific pronoun.

I never stopped (well, maybe informally on LJ). Anyone who feels this to be a scandal can go boil his head. Even if he is a she.

[elaby.livejournal.com]

HEE, exactly! I've decided to do so in papers, especially when talking about an era when women were completely ignored in the historiography, which is what I'm working with now.

[elaby.livejournal.com]

This also might be an American thing, the idea that you can't use "his" in that situation.

[redatt.livejournal.com]

Golly, no. People here come out with the most convoluted ways of not offending, whilst trying to remain grammatically correct. Though, I'm perfectly happy for Americans to take the blame for starting it! :oD

One that amuses me, is the replacing of mankind with humankind. There's no difficult grammar with that, of course, but I still think it's an unnecessary PCism. It's one that's currently part of church service reform--I'm waiting for the day when His heavenliness has to be refereed to as Him or Her, the Lord or Lady, thy God.

[elaby.livejournal.com]

Hehehe, I'm happy to know it isn't just us!

Dude, at the UCC churches over here, they have started taking out all of the Him and soforth in order to accommodate those who think of God as being genderless. Seriously. My mom used to work at a UCC church, and she thought it was hysterical.

[coastal-spirit.livejournal.com]

Sometimes they took turns. They used the genderless term "God" rather than "Lord" or "Father" whenever possible, but sometimes used "Mother", or "she" in readings regarding "God". An Episcopal prayer also actually starts "Mother/Father God ...".

I'm old enough to remember when women truly, seriously faced discrimination in the workplace and just in general life, so I understand and sympathize with where this language change is coming from, even if it does make me roll my eyes a lot of the time.

[elaby.livejournal.com]

Weirdly enough, we talked about this issue in Grammar class today, and apparently it's unarguable now. You just CAN'T use "he", "him", or "his" to refer to a non-gender-specific word like "anyone" or "whoever". I guess since it never would have occurred to me to be offended by this, so that's why it annoys me... but I can see where they were coming from in the change. And this is the ONLY thing my incredibly conservative professor actually advocates, which he said in class today: "Don't expect to ever hear me praising progressive things again". I hope he was kidding just a little, but I don't know ^^;;

[terse-scribe.livejournal.com]

I think prefered practice these days is to alternate masculine and feminine singular pronouns - though I've been told that using "they" and "their" as an indefinite sigular pronoun is ok from a high school English teacher, when I confessed to using them that way.

Of course you could do the '90s internet thing and use "sie" and "hir" for indeterminate gender, asexual androgynous persons.

Then there's Melissa Scott's SF novel "Shadow Man" which had 5 sexes and all manner of sexual orientations - with a glossary full of pronouns to go along with them.

[elaby.livejournal.com]

I need to read that ^_^ I've heard of it, and it sounds fascinating.

The problem that grammar types have with using "their" is that it's the plural and that doesn't fit with singular subjects, etc. However, though I know it's not "correct", it doesn't at all bother me when people use "their" or "they", because "him or her" and "him/her" sounds incredibly awkward in persuasive writing. But my Grammar professor would be very upset with us if WE ever used "they" ^^;;