>the controversy continues as to whether or not it is sexist

File: 1436989071061.jpg (79KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 960x720px

Ugh, who fucking cares

>>9305891

>>9305891

>>9305882
"they" is obviously the best compromise

>>9305891

>>9305898
>>9305903
>>9305990

>>9305882
When a persons first arrives in a new country, one has many adjustments to make.

>>9305891

>>9306001
This one

In Sweden we formed a third word, combining "hon" (her) and "han" (him) = "hen".
/pol/ tried to make this into some "Sweden is a crazy radical feminist country"-story, but it was really just out of convenience. And it is so convenient! Once you get used to it, you love it, text flows so much better.

Maybe try that, Anglo-friends.

>>9306067

We have "they/them" you retarded cuck.

>>9306074
"hen" isn't "they/them"...
See:
>Him or her was saying that...
Becomes:
>"Hen" was saying that...

It's not implying there's both a him or her, just that the gender is undetermined, and that it may be either way.

File: 1232145.png (375KB, 485x581px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 485x581px

>>9306101

>Him or her was saying that...
>"Hen" was saying that...

I hate you, Sweden.

This is a non issue in european languages where the pronoun simply takes the gender of a noun 'person' and everyonr is happy.
This is what you get for being so PC, anglocucks

>>9306116
We can live with that.

>>9306125
It's sexist that "poeta" and "nauta", both first declension nouns that are usually feminine, are masculine in Latin.
We're the Romans saying that women can't be poets or sailors? Sexist.

>>9306151
>using sexist unironically
back to ______

File: 1357454398267.jpg (2MB, 3000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x3000px

>>9305882

>mfw when your textbook refers to "person-made disasters" instead of "man-made disasters"

Why is this allowed?

>>9305882
>every noun in your language has an inherent sex assigned to it
>you can't argue over what pronoun is best because there is a single grammatically corect option
>feminists propose introducing a female counterpart for each male noun through adding a suffix
>new words sound fucking ridiculous

>>9306101
>It's not implying there's both a him or her
"they" doesn't do that either (necessarily). In OPs example it doesn't.

"They" is fine.

>>9306151
It isn't because pretty much every noun's basic form is masculine, so by your standards it implies women can't be anything.

>>9306001
When first arriving in a new country, one has many adjustments to make.

>>9306101
>>Him or her was saying that...
that's not even a proper sentence
it would be
>he or she was saying that...
which gets replaced by
>they were saying that...

I can't think of any instance in which it does not work

>>9305882
I use the masculine form whenever the gender is unknown. It sounds better.

>>9306067
>/pol/ tried to make this into some "Sweden is a crazy radical feminist country"-story

You're literally reworking grammar to appease people who are uncomfortable with the dominant masculine singular form, if it was a matter of convenience you'd just stick to 'he/him'

>>9305882
I'm not a /Pol/tard, but forcefully modifying language because of petty reasons has always sounded kinda silly to me, since:
-It does not actually help anyone: sexism, if there is any, is not gonna decrease because you invented a new neutral pronoun.
-The new words they come up with sound horrible most of the time.