Gender-neutral. What in the world is gender neutral? Does that mean you have no gender at all? Nope. What it means is a mixing of male and female individuals in the same areas such as locker rooms, public restroom facilities and the like. For some odd reason, this “gender-neutral” insanity movement may contemplate use of “gender-neutral” pronouns, instead of he or she.
Spencer Kassimir, in an article for the Washington Times, indicated he is all for “inclusive pronouns” as a way to evolve the English language. Spencer has his ideas reversed. This is not “evolving” the English language, but “devolving” it. Isn’t it enough that Ebonics, slang and ghetto speak butchered the English language? Apparently not, for Kassimir calls for further butchering of the language through the introduction of “gender-neutral” pronouns.
According to Spencer:
Years ago, I toyed with the concept of gender-neutral pronouns for both gender and practical reasons. Frankly, I cannot think of a single person who enjoys the flow of saying or writing “he or she” instead of utilizing a single word. This is not an entirely new concept since the English language already has gender-neutral plural pronouns; we just lack the singular form.
I suggest that we embrace a modified common form of commonly used incorrect grammar.
Spencer, honey, please. There is almost an entire nation full of people who cannot read the Constitution and understand its meaning because these individuals do not know the correct definition of words. Some of these same individuals cannot even spell without using the “spell check” feature on the computer. Certainly, these same individuals cannot write a letter, email or text without butchering words, much less use appropriate punctuation and avoiding “text speak” where words turn into abbreviations of unreadable gibberish. Case in point is this text “M L8.” What in the world is that? Supposedly, it translates to “I’m late.” Personally, who wants to carry around a translation sheet? Write it out for goodness sake!
There is not a thing wrong with using informal grammar when speaking. At times, individuals use it in writing as a tool. However, schools ceased teaching English, grammar, vocabulary, writing skills and spelling some time back, shoving it all into “language arts.” Without a complete grasp of “English,” words and grammar, gender-neutral pronouns will not serve to solve a problem but create more confusion.
Continuing on, he states:
Many people already use “they” incorrectly as a gender-ambiguous singular pronoun even though it is plural. For example, “If anyone is interested, they can call me.” Sounds better than “If anyone is interested, he or she can call me,” but it is still grammatically wrong.
Therefore, to make it distinct, an easy transition would be to spell the singular version as “thay.” It would be pronounced the same as “they,” making it easier to adopt, but spelled differently to serve the intended purpose of having a gender-neutral singular pronoun.
Moreover, there are other applications such as “thair” and “thay’re.”
Well now, that solves everything, doesn’t it? Spencer, dear, people have enough difficulty with “there,” “their,” and “they’re.” Now you want to add two more versions to confuse these individuals further. Yes, that solves everything. It gives people more of a conundrum than knowing the difference of use in “then” and “than” and confusing “your” and “you’re” along with “its” and “it’s.” Let’s not forget “further” and “farther.”
In your example, why not say, “If interested, call me” or “If anyone is interested, please call me.” The sentence makes the same point and is grammatically correct while avoiding using the utterly confusing “thay” or any other pronoun.
The biggest failure of “gender-neutral” pronouns is his suggestion of “thaim” instead of “them.”
Language is one area where evolution is not for the better. When someone declares something as “bad,” who knows if he or she means it is “good” or if it truly is “bad.” Of course, there is the infamous use of “happening.” What does it mean when someone tells you, “Your shoes are happening.” One needs a book of translation to understand what an entire generation or several generations are trying to say.
Who can leave out the singular declaration of “word.” For example, I say, “Her apple pie is the best I have eaten” and the reply is “word.” Moreover, to hear “awesomesauce” is making an entry into the dictionary confirms how far the English language has “devolved.” As a further example, individuals who do not know the word “niggardly” or its definition take offense, claiming its use as disparaging to blacks. And, no, it will not be defined — go look it up.
A better suggestion is for schools to return to “teaching English” instead of language arts in a Common Core curriculum. Our children need to learn the actual definitions of words, how to use them properly and construct sentences. Instead of using the “modern” dictionary with its inclusion of slang and modern meaning, return to using the 1828 Noah Webster’s Dictionary where “gay” meant “happy, jovial, or brightly colored.” Children need to learn effective communications techniques — written and verbal. Reintroduce vocabulary, spelling and reading comprehension as those certainly are lacking in these modern times. The answer is not devolving language by further butchering it using “gender-neutral” pronouns, which will cause more confusion. The answer is education.
In Spencer Kassimer gender-neutral pronoun supporting fashion — “Thay needs to get thais head out of thais backside.”