Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

We/our/ours pronouns

25 replies

EmiliaAirheart · 07/12/2022 08:40

Apparently this is a thing… and seemingly even people using this can’t keep their own (sorry, our own 🙄) pronouns straight. Wtaf of language butchery is this? I think twisting words with actual meaning is even worse than the nonsensical invented ones.

We/our/ours pronouns
We/our/ours pronouns
OP posts:
Chattycathydoll · 07/12/2022 08:41

Does he have dissociative identity disorder (used to be multiple personality disorder)? That’s the only time I imagine that would make sense.

nauticant · 07/12/2022 08:44

Perhaps that should be "does they ..."?

ArabellaScott · 07/12/2022 08:47

'star tups'? Sheep breeder, is he? Pronouns aren't going to be much use if they're not clear in that field.

BatCheeseIsFine · 07/12/2022 08:51

I can’t even be bothered to roll my eyes any more.

If you indulge in pronoun-wielding and trying to make other people feel on edge and under pressure by having to remember and use your increasingly demanding pronouns, or else cause offence, you are not inclusive or nice. Why isn’t that obvious to these solipsistic numpties?

Is the “we/our” to do with DID/multiple personalities as an “identity”? - that’s become a trend too.

I just do not understand why Rik off the Young Ones-style wanky self-aggrandisement has become a thing people are supposed to take seriously.

Circumferences · 07/12/2022 09:24

It's just a total stitch up isn't it.

"I demand something ridiculous from you"

<You don't do it/get it wrong because their demands are so ridiculous>

"You're a bigot and oppressing me by not using the pronouns I demanded, so now I can send you death and rape threats with impunity"

It's not hard to see why pronoun demands are so popular with certain people.

ArabellaScott · 07/12/2022 10:05

solipsistic numpties

Grin
DaughterOfPsychiatrist · 07/12/2022 10:27

If the writer had used the person’s preferred pronoun instead of the highlighted ‘his’ the writer would’ve appeared to have been taking shared credit for this fruit loops work!

‘ours’ cannot be used as a replacement for ‘his’ even if the genderunspecifieddude believes we IS intended to indicated that we is a ‘system’ of multiple entities

If the writer wanted to respect a multiple identity they would need to use plural ‘they’ but singular they (the writer) can’t because ‘they’ isn’t one of genderunspecifieddude‘s personal pronouns.

This article is a perfect illustration of how ‘personal pronouns’ destroy effective and meaningful communication.

(From the context of the article I actually suspect that we/us/ours was chosen with the intent to virtue signal collective thinking/socialist ideals rather than DID but clearly we didn’t think that through)

Signalbox · 07/12/2022 10:35

😂🤣

Tuvala · 07/12/2022 10:38

From personal experience, in some Buddhist and Native communities people consider themselves as part of a wider whole rather than as separate beings. Not saying in this case but just another perspective.

ArabellaScott · 07/12/2022 10:45

That would be a rather clunky and partial way of understanding interconnectedness, tbh. It doesn't mean we are borg!

tricycle.org/article/interconnected-maybe-not/

TheYummyPatler · 07/12/2022 10:49

How can someone insist that their pronouns are we/ours?

You can’t force the speaker to be subsumed within your own identity. We always includes the speaker. It like insisting that everyone else refers to you using I/me.

BatCheeseIsFine · 07/12/2022 11:02

From personal experience, in some Buddhist and Native communities people consider themselves as part of a wider whole rather than as separate beings.

And I imagine anyone who really takes that stance would take a dim view of commanding others to respect their identity and pronouns.

DMDCAGM · 07/12/2022 11:07

Apologies as my head has just exploded but I thought the pronouns thing was a request for how that person wanted to be addressed by others. So if talking about this individual, I would need to say "our"? Thus making it sound like anything he thinks I also think?

Obvs we think this is bullshit.

This can't actually be a thing, can it?

DaughterOfPsychiatrist · 07/12/2022 11:44

Tuvala · 07/12/2022 10:38

From personal experience, in some Buddhist and Native communities people consider themselves as part of a wider whole rather than as separate beings. Not saying in this case but just another perspective.

And those people (when speaking English) use ‘we’ when talking about the collective that includes the speaker (same as customer service employees use ‘we’ when talking about the company they work for or when insufferable couples use ‘we’ when talking about being pregnant 🙊)

All of the above is the widely-understood, normal usage of ‘we’.

What isn’t normal is expecting others to use we in place of he.

When other people refer to collective that doesn’t include them (a family, a business, a native people, a religious order etc) they (singular, indicating a completely unknown, hypothetical person of either sex and any personality) use ‘they’ (to indicate a plural of other people).

If a writer uses ‘we’ to refer to a religious or indigenous community the reader would (understandably) expect the writer to be a member of said community.

if the community demands that ‘we’ be used by non members when referring to that community it is demanding that the individual non-member linguistically join that community.

Which seems to me to fit into the category of ‘forced teaming’!

Vague recollection of one of the smaller Christian offshoots that ‘convert’ deceased people (who obviously can’t consent!) to help them get to Heaven?

Anyway, no Buddhist or Indigenous Community that I know of would linguistically force-team people into joining their group!

MajorieEks · 07/12/2022 13:14

I have never been asked for my pronouns but have thought I’d offer up “you/you” or “I/me” just to see what would happen.

ErrolTheDragon · 07/12/2022 13:18

Does this person identify as the British monarch?Confused

Remember the hilarity when Thatcher used 'we' once?

ErrolTheDragon · 07/12/2022 13:23

I mean, 'we' is validly one of 'my' pronouns, along with 'I' but for when I'm referring to a group including me. It can't be used by me as a third person pronoun. 'We/us/ours' is meaningless without the context of the relevant group.

ErrolTheDragon · 07/12/2022 13:25

How is it supposed to work? "Davion, we're going to stop this silly pronoun-announcing business'

Thelnebriati · 07/12/2022 13:28

Criminy; I guess they haven't heard of forced teaming.

BedTaker · 07/12/2022 13:32

I read this as this man taking the piss. Well, not taking the piss as such, but declaring that pronouns are over and no longer important, that we are all united together blah blah blah.

This is due to happen any time now tbf, pronouns and the importance placed on then have been around for a good few years now, it's time to move onto the next.

I don't think it's real, it doesn't make any sense.

TheYummyPatler · 07/12/2022 14:56

I don't think it's real, it doesn't make any sense.

The last few years have been a series of realisations that what I might have assumed to be parody is, in fact, supposed to be taken absolutely seriously.

With added accusations of bigotry for not being wildly enthusiastic about them.

Which is to say, it not making any sense doesn’t mean he isn’t seriously insisting that other people refer to him as ‘we’.

ErrolTheDragon · 07/12/2022 15:34

Poe's Law in action.

MillyMollyManky · 07/12/2022 15:40

I’m confused- does it mean Davion uses “we” (as in “we are called Davion”) or that the rest of us have to say “we” when referring to Davion (so I have to say “we are called Davion” when I mean “Davion is called Davion”).

That is going to get very confusing very quickly.

TheYummyPatler · 07/12/2022 16:13

ErrolTheDragon · 07/12/2022 15:34

Poe's Law in action.

If only it were Poe’s law. It’s kind of the inverse of it.

The views are so outlandish that I want to view them as parody. But the people advancing them are, in fact, totally serious.

I keep hoping it’s a big, mass participation joke and people are going to break cover and say ‘wow, we really got you!’. But it seems they’re serious and other people take them seriously too. 😮‍💨

EmiliaAirheart · 07/12/2022 21:27

Reading all this is so heartening! I know I’d come up against a chorus of “be kind!!!” from the wokerati in real life. It’s so tedious and offensive.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page