For the record I was posting in support of inclusive language, but pointing out that context and convention matter.
They seem to have even scrubbed my comment from their instance, lol.
For the record I was posting in support of inclusive language, but pointing out that context and convention matter.
They seem to have even scrubbed my comment from their instance, lol.
dude is masculine in every definition i’ve found (looked it up) except for a city slicker new to a ranch…
i’ve always known it to be gender neutral… but i have a female friend that gets offended every time someone calls her that.
but the fact that it keeps happening means that it’s gender neutral to all of those people too (she’s a fairly feminine female).
that said, it’s best to just call people terms that they are comfortable with, not ones that you’re comfortable calling them.
personally, i find calling a single person they/them a little obtuse, but it’s not really that hard. (slightly confusing when there’s a question of whether im referring to them or a group of people).
Except when it comes to cultural/generational uses of words. Every generation has words they use in a altered way. Dude was one such word when I was young. It was used by my generation in a way that didn’t exactly match the definition. Just like all the other generations use words out context with their written definitions. Its why I laugh when the younger generations get mad because they think they invented the concept.
yeah, it’s almost as if language is an evolving thing….
but fuck that noise, i only accept definitions from the 1876 edition of Merrium-Webster… all other usages are wrong.
(i do seriously had when the nounify a verb like “cringe” or making “sus” mean anything at all bad…