Forum: Author Hangout

That's a bit sexist

No more sexist than a female author stating "her style." I don't see either as sexist; more along the lines of self identification than sexist.

That's a bit sexist :P Wouldn't "author writes, THEIR style" be a bit more gender friendly :)

Possibly more 'gender friendly' but definitely less correct. 'He/his' is the correct pronoun for 'gender indeterminate/unknown' in the English language. You want to talk about 'sexist' pronouns? 'Elles' is plural female only. If every man alive died, except one, the pronoun to describe the Earth's population would be 'Ils'. One man plus billions of females means the male plural is used. But to the original point, 'they/their' is plural, not singular. One can always use the pronoun 'one' to avoid gendered pronouns, but that gets awkward to use in certain structures.

Btw, how come actresses refer to themselves as actors?

Because the profession ('actor') is what they're discussing. The existence of a specific term to describe the female subset of the larger set doesn't change the larger set.

I don't think that's correct. I think that's why people use "they" in English because English nouns aren't gender specific.

Actually, it's correct English. Lots of people use incorrect English because they worry too much about hurt feelings rather than revealing their lack of knowledge.

I don't think that's correct. I think that's why people use "they" in English because English nouns aren't gender specific.

Some people use "they" as a singular gender neutral. It's old, going back to the days of Shakespeare. However it is not today, and never has been broadly accepted enough to be considered the rule.

On the other hand, the singular "they" is popular enough that the converse of gender neutral use of the traditional singular pronouns can't be considered the rule either.

Quite frankly people will probably still be arguing over this in another 300 years unless someone comes up with a separate gender neutrals singular pronoun for people that manages to gain some traction.

Quite frankly people will probably still be arguing over this in another 300 years unless someone comes up with a separate gender neutrals singular pronoun for people that manages to gain some traction.

Even that wouldn't be enough, what with the fifteen different genders certain types want us to all recognize and treat as equally valid and typical.

note to self: upon becoming evil overlord, make sure that new official language has no genders for any words, including pronouns.

She got upset, and said that boats are female

1. Ships, not boats.
2. ISTR the captain of Bismark insisting on the masculine be used to describe Bismark. (Possibly there was some sort of compensation issue there...)

note to self: upon becoming evil overlord, make sure that new official language has no genders for any words, including pronouns.

When we see a bug, lizard, or snake, we refer to it as "it".

That's because it is difficult and/or dangerous to attempt a physical examination of these creatures, and they don't have the intelligence to make a rational decision regarding a "gender preference".

The same may be true of the creatures who inhabit Evergreen College...

Evergreen College

"The Evergreen State College
Liberal arts college in Olympia, Washington
The Evergreen State College is a public liberal arts and sciences college in Olympia, Washington. Founded in 1967, it offers a non-traditional undergraduate curriculum in which students have the option to design their own study toward a degree or follow a pre-determined path of study. Wikipedia"

Any degree that ends in "studies" = a highly motivated frying machine operator. Motivated due to the need to eat and pay off the massive student loans.

There are thousands employed by the government and 'charities' who exist to service the poor, often in the same manner that the farmer's bull services a cow.

That's going in my quotes file!

ETA: there it is, just under

It's like pouring water into a bucket and telling it to make sure it fills in the corners

(Bill'n'Hailey)

There are thousands employed by the government and 'charities' who exist to service the poor, often in t he same manner that the farmer's bull services a cow.

Often sans any form of lubricant.

There are thousands employed by the government and 'charities' who exist to service the poor,

If you ever want to be really disillusioned and disappointed in people in general, volunteer at one of those "charities which serve the poor".

If you ever want to be really disillusioned and disappointed in people in general, volunteer at one of those "charities which serve the poor".

Hmm... Whom do you refer to as the source of disappointment? The people who run those "charities", or the people they claim to be "helping"?

Hmm... Whom do you refer to as the source of disappointment? The people who run those "charities", or the people they claim to be "helping"?

Both.

If you ever want to be really disillusioned and disappointed in people in general, volunteer at one of those "charities which serve the poor".

In my past, I've done just that. There are some good people in some of those organizations, but the organizations themselves were so straddled with incompetence, and sometimes malfeasance, that the poor people were not helped much, if at all.

But writing isn't as much fun either. More rewarding, satisfying, but not as much fun. I used to simply write for the enjoyment. Now I take into account many things I've learned over the years. It's more work now. But, as I said, more rewarding.

Back a couple of decades ago, I used to write for enjoyment. However, as my career advanced, I had to write more and more technical dry reports/findings.

This last year, I've tried to start up writing for enjoyment again. I've started and stopped several stories. On read back, I realized the stories sucked. If I can see it, any reader would as well.

I've come to realize every effort was being hampered by my back brain checking and rechecking the technical elements to the point of distraction. By technical I don't mean grammar and structure, but rather physics, math, engineering and the like.

I've shelved any writing until I can get through reading multiple stories without my back brain screaming for a correction. Effectively I am deprogramming a couple of decades of habit.

As such, I can clearly see where it would be far more difficult for someone that writes professionally to back off of issues they are programmed to flag.

It's my opinion that some authors get a bit to anal about the technical end of writing, which ends up as a detriment to the story.

By "the technical end," are you talking about rules of writing (commas, spelling, etc.) or about that the writer includes too many details of technical subject matter? Or something else I haven't thought of?

In that context, Commas, spelling, sentence structure, adherence to style guides ad nauseam. All the things a professor would gig you on in a Lit etc class.

Okay, I'll be the one to ask: What was the name of that book?

Ernest Bywater
11/27/2020, 12:01:22 AM

@PotomacBob

Okay, I'll be the one to ask: What was the name of that book?

It was probably 'Washington Confidential.'

You may be right. But Mushroom described the book as having 27 authors, and Washington Confidential seems to have only two.

That sounds like a good experiment for SOL.