There is actually stunningly little input lag for the mode. That's really quite surprising to be honest. Still annoying, but surprising.
I'm stunned you can get through so many words with so little content.
Hilarious!
1. You state that English is a fluid language that can change, then demand it doesn't (that is, you reject the singular they), utterly bizarre
Of course, I literally don't "demand" this. If you could comprehend what I'm actually writing instead of clearly skimming through in order to write an ineffectual rebuttal, you would have seen this. I even have a note to represent how it's changing. I am, however, accurately representing what people actually teach in actual writing classes.
I even pointed how in my previous post how I don't make a value judgment on using it.
2. No, 'e is actually a proposed written neutral pronoun, ze is a different concept
Citation, bro. I literally tried to track this down, because it's something I've never heard of. "Ze" and the related pronouns, of course, are actual things that have been actually used in writing, so the balls in your court.
3. There was no assumption, if people are using 'he' in a general sense, they are using it in the general sense
Yes. This hinges on "if" they are using it that way. Hence why I called it an
assumption on your part, homie.
4. You talk about assumptions, but are assuming that anyone using 'he' must be using it to mean only men
In the common vernacular circa 2014, in writing, people using "he" are generally talking about men. Why? Oh, I don't know, because it's discouraged in popular and professional writing and has been for years to the point where most people under 20 get confused when they open a King James Bible (that parts a joke. See, we can laugh about this!)
5. You reject the idea of a cultural background
Where? Quote me saying this. You are literally making this up and it's completely absurd.
6. You don't seem to understand that people are educated different, where I am from, the gender neutral 'he' is actually taught as correct
Where is that, exactly? In most English speaking countries, it's not, or rather not taught as acceptable for professional writing, so I'm legitimately curious.
7. The 'singular they' is actually very old in English, the only reason people avoid using it is because of a bizarre 19th century ideal that sticks around in so called "proper English" (a linguistically outdated concept)
So, which is it? Your original argument was that since "he" has a long history of gender-neutrality, it's good to go. Now, suddenly, "proper English" is linguistically outdated?
8. I at no point said that people should use 'he' or said anything about it being good, I simply stated that people can use it that way
Okay. You understand that that hasn't been the standard in most Western vernaculars - or writing - for years. You were giving the benefit of the doubt to someone who you don't know, about their intentions, which you also don't know. All we have is their writing, which, in this case, I am most likely to be correct about. Unless, English is their second language, and hopefully they now understand how most English speakers now could misconstrue their intended meaning for something else!
You seem determined to correct people, then try to go for the opposite, I don't get how you think this makes any sense. Yes, you are a person, but there are others. All I ever said is that people of a different cultural background to you may use 'he' as a gender neutral pronoun. I never said it should be used, only that it can be used, and you have no right to tell them how they can and cannot speak.
EDIT: I just noticed you are replying to my really over-the-top parody of what you were saying. Sorry, bro...
Anyway, yeah. Nice straw-man fallacy. Where did I tell people how they can and cannot speak? I'm guessing you are literally not understanding what I am writing, or your have some preconceived notion of what I am saying and running from there.
It's also worth noting that the point was that 'he/she' was lunky to me, and I would not use it (again, I use the 'singular they'), not that I felt that nobody could use it.
Cool. I'd actually prefer to use a singular "they," but it doesn't fly in professional or academic writing, so I never get the chance to use it. So, are we on the same page here?
Awesome. Let's shake on it and chill out.
PS. "lunky" is not in any dictionary besides a passing reference to John Updike and some old-timey slang. I'm guessing you meant "clunky", which would make sense in context, but don't want to look like you made a typo. It's cool.
Now we can shake on it.
I hate it when I win 7 games in a row against someone in for glory and they win once and leave.
Ohhh, this is good. I can't blame them, they need some shred of dignity. And statistically, in this case, they have a 12.5% chance of actually beating you. Those aren't good odds.
I fought against a dude, and went one-to-one on him before steam-rolling him with Ike for 10 matches. He tried a variety of characters, and finally went back to the Little Mac that he had originally got me on. Needless to say, it didn't quite work, and with his bag of tricks empty, he left.
