YES - the wonderful crossdresser Eddie Izzard !!
I am sure he wouldn't use women bathroom -- he/she ran 15 marathons in 15 days - among many accomplishments....
Well, you just used "she" to refer to him so why wouldn't he, being he/him/his/hee/haw/zer/zir/zircon/zzzzzzzzzz (can't find any "laster" letter in the alphabet)?
Interesting how they exclusively address him as "she" on his wikipedia entry. And on his page pronouns are avoided altogether. It's always "Eddie".
What not having a family and kids does to a person.
Unfortunately, "it" applied to a person is an insult. People seem to have settled on "they", instead, which bugs me because it creates confusion. I wish they'd at least tried to introduce a new word; there are a number of candidates, but none have taken hold.
Why, exactly is it an insult? The etymology wouldn't suggest so. That some people feel less-than when being called one ungendered pronoun over another isn't the speaker's fault, it's the listener's. After all, as progressive icon Eleanor Roosevelt once said, "Nobody can make you feel inferior without your consent."
Ah, but see, that would have not come up as being intelligent, having applied oneself, exerted an effort, given it thought, etc. In fact, it would have been utterly un-American.
Also, people around the world might not have taken it seriously enough.
YES - the wonderful crossdresser Eddie Izzard !!
I am sure he wouldn't use women bathroom -- he/she ran 15 marathons in 15 days - among many accomplishments....
Well, you just used "she" to refer to him so why wouldn't he, being he/him/his/hee/haw/zer/zir/zircon/zzzzzzzzzz (can't find any "laster" letter in the alphabet)?
Interesting how they exclusively address him as "she" on his wikipedia entry. And on his page pronouns are avoided altogether. It's always "Eddie".
What not having a family and kids does to a person.
OK - you are correct. I think I should have called him he...
There is already a singular "gender neutral" pronoun. I use it.
Unfortunately, "it" applied to a person is an insult. People seem to have settled on "they", instead, which bugs me because it creates confusion. I wish they'd at least tried to introduce a new word; there are a number of candidates, but none have taken hold.
Why, exactly is it an insult? The etymology wouldn't suggest so. That some people feel less-than when being called one ungendered pronoun over another isn't the speaker's fault, it's the listener's. After all, as progressive icon Eleanor Roosevelt once said, "Nobody can make you feel inferior without your consent."
Ah, but see, that would have not come up as being intelligent, having applied oneself, exerted an effort, given it thought, etc. In fact, it would have been utterly un-American.
Also, people around the world might not have taken it seriously enough.
Just trying to normalize something not considered normal. Sure, it's idiotic, but what they are trying to do is pretty much impossible.