The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
In the New Yorker...
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on February 28, 2018, 06:47:24 pm ---I just realized this directly contradicts my statement above it that I had heard Levitt's theory. I mean, I haven't heard anybody in recent years (since I've been covering aging and generational stuff) discuss abortion as a factor in the smaller size of Gen X.
One reason it's smaller is that the arbitrary lines they draw to distinguish "generations" encompass fewer years for Gen X, for some reason. But they would still be smaller anyway.
The only "real" generational distinction is baby boomers, who were created by an actual boom. Otherwise, the idea that people from one year have drastically different outlooks and behavior than people born the year after that is silly. It's really just a media invention. Fake news! Sad! :laugh:
--- End quote ---
:laugh:
Jeff Wrangler:
I recently finished the March 5 article about Jordan Peterson. I'm completely with him in objecting to using a plural pronoun ('they") as if it were singular. but I was really interested in the article because we are beginning to grapple with that issue in my job, because it is felt (rightly, in my opinion) that future physicians need to be trained to care for patients of many different sexual orientations/identities. The issue isn't just limited to pronouns. The issue is also noun usage, e.g., does the patient identify as transgender, transsexual, bisexual, asexual, non-binary, and so forth and so on.
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on March 03, 2018, 02:46:18 pm ---I recently finished the March 5 article about Jordan Peterson. I'm completely with him in objecting to using a plural pronoun ('they") as if it were singular. but I was really interested in the article because we are beginning to grapple with that issue in my job, because it is felt (rightly, in my opinion) that future physicians need to be trained to care for patients of many different sexual orientations/identities. The issue isn't just limited to pronouns. The issue is also noun usage, e.g., does the patient identify as transgender, transsexual, bisexual, asexual, non-binary, and so forth and so on.
--- End quote ---
I haven't read the article yet, but I'm in favor of "they." Not just for the sake of non-binary people but for the sake of non-gendered pronouns in reference to non-specific people, i.e., "If a doctor told you to exercise, you should take their advice." I like it because most people do it in speech already. The Associated Press Style Guide (used throughout newspapers but other places, too) has approved its use, and up until a year or two ago they were still capitalizing "internet"!!
I've probably used it a time or two in casual writing for publication. I probably wouldn't use it in formal writing. And in any situation, I would try to get around it by using a plural noun, when that's possible. But"he or she" is awkward and I'm not a big fan of jumping back and forth. And I long ago stopped using default male pronouns in those situations. I think those reinforce the idea that men are people and women are women.
So as far as I'm concerned, the sooner everybody gets used to "they," the better. Somewhere along the way people stopped saying thee and thy, and nowadays everybody is comfortable with that. Language evolves.
I do think physicians, not just future but now, need to be aware of those distinctions and be sensitive to them. But unless it involves transgender people and has something directly to do with either transitioning or gender-specific ailments (a transgender woman with prostate cancer, for example), I don't see why a physician would care, especially not if the person is bisexual or asexual. I've never gone to, say, a dermatologist and been asked whom I prefer to sleep with.
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on March 04, 2018, 11:35:20 am ---I haven't read the article yet, but I'm in favor of "they." Not just for the sake of non-binary people but for the sake of non-gendered pronouns in reference to non-specific people, i.e., "If a doctor told you to exercise, you should take their advice." I like it because most people do it in speech already. The Associated Press Style Guide (used throughout newspapers but other places, too) has approved its use, and up until a year or two ago they were still capitalizing "internet"!!
--- End quote ---
The AP has approved it? God, not only are the barbarians at the gate, they've broken down the gate. ;D
There are still work-arounds: "if a doctor told you to exercise, you should take that advice."
--- Quote ---But"he or she" is awkward.
--- End quote ---
I agree. Yes, it is.
--- Quote ---I long ago stopped using default male pronouns in those situations. I think those reinforce the idea that men are people and women are women.
--- End quote ---
I'm sure many people agree with you.
--- Quote ---So as far as I'm concerned, the sooner everybody gets used to "they," the better.
--- End quote ---
I can't believe you're saying that, but let be, let be.
--- Quote --- Language evolves.
--- End quote ---
Not all changes are for the better.
I think in spoken language the use of "they" as singular sounds ignorant, and in written language it will continue to be confusing without the explanation "who prefers 'they.'"
--- Quote ---I do think physicians, not just future but now, need to be aware of those distinctions and be sensitive to them. But unless it involves transgender people and has something directly to do with either transitioning or gender-specific ailments (a transgender woman with prostate cancer, for example), I don't see why a physician would care, especially not if the person is bisexual or asexual. I've never gone to, say, a dermatologist and been asked whom I prefer to sleep with.
--- End quote ---
Am I missing your point, or are you missing mine?
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on March 04, 2018, 03:28:11 pm ---There are still work-arounds: "if a doctor told you to exercise, you should take that advice."
--- End quote ---
You're right. But you know what I mean. That's just the first one I could think of, and there aren't always handy work-arounds.
--- Quote ---I can't believe you're saying that, but let be, let be.
Not all changes are for the better.
--- End quote ---
Of course not! Take the change of U.S. president in January 2017, for example.
But changing language (especially a pronoun!) is neither inherently better nor worse. After all, you have to change words all the time when you go from one country to the next -- even between regions or communities or professions in the same country. Language is not set in stone, there's no intrinsic moral superiority to one set of rules versus the other. The English language could easily have evolved to use "they" or "it" instead of "he" centuries ago and you probably wouldn't wishing it would become gender-specific because that's "better." The reason male pronouns became "standard" (though frankly they look extremely dated at this point, in almost any context) is because sexism has existed as long as the English language has.
In a lot of languages, people would disapprove of gender-neutral nouns, for Pete's sake. So glad we don't have to deal with that issue.
In this case "they" serves a useful function and merely echoes a change the language has already undergone in most people's speech. When someone is talking, they usually say "they." :laugh: ;D
There were probably people clutching their pearls when we went from "thy" to "your." And of course you know the background of "ain't," right?
--- Quote ---Am I missing your point, or are you missing mine?
--- End quote ---
I probably missed yours. I didn't understand why you were listing that jumble of things, some of which didn't seem to have anything to do with doctors.
--- Quote ---future physicians need to be trained to care for patients of many different sexual orientations/identities. The issue isn't just limited to pronouns. The issue is also noun usage, e.g., does the patient identify as transgender, transsexual, bisexual, asexual, non-binary, and so forth and so on.
--- End quote ---
Why in the future as opposed to now? Also, I have been treated by countless physicians who had no idea whether I was bisexual or asexual or gay. Why would they need to? On the other hand, whether the patient is transgender is hugely important in treating some conditions, and from what I've heard it's a controversy because of how you're identified on insurance or something like that. Like, if you identify as a man you shouldn't be getting uterine cancer, so does insurance not have to cover your treatment?
But I wouldn't think sexual orientation would be an issue in medical treatment unless the doctor is a psychiatrist, in which case they ;) might need to know.
Well, I guess the one area I can think of where it would matter is in bedside manner. Like, a doctor shouldn't automatically assume that if a patient is married, their ;) spouse is of the opposite sex.
BTW, according to GLAAD, transsexual is the old-fashioned term for transgender and is usually considered dated. But sometimes people use it to distinguish people who've had gender-transition surgery.
One thing everybody should become more sensitive about is to offer more than two choices on forms (applications and things like that, where you're forced to pick female or male). I get annoyed when I see that now, especially from organizations that should know better, such as the government.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version