TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

chat finally recognizing that defaulting to she her is discriminatory to males

Mandelor_the_Great

August 30, 2024
65 upvotes
/r/MensRights

chat finally recognizing that defaulting to she her is discriminatory to males

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title chat finally recognizing that defaulting to she her is discriminatory to males
Author

Mandelor_the_Great

Upvotes 65
Comments 33
Date August 30, 2024 9:51 PM UTC
(1 year ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1f578op/chat_finally_recognizing_that_defaulting_to_she/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/chat-finally-recognizing-that-defaulting-to-she.1528896
https://theredarchive.com/post/1528896

Comments

[–]SarcasticallyCandour 11 points12 points13 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No context.

[+]SidewaysGiraffe -9 points-8 points-7 points 1 year ago (32 children) | Copy Link

Fairness, now; if that's discriminatory to males, wouldn't defaulting to male pronouns (like English has done for centuries) be discriminatory to females?

[–]SnooBeans6591 23 points24 points25 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I would say it does. We shouldn't default to male pronouns either.

[–]SidewaysGiraffe 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fair enough.

[–]deep-impact-ai 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Perhaps, but we (you and I) had no control over what happened a few centuries ago.. Fixing it is not done by defaulting to female pronouns. The hypocrisy is quite rich.

[–]ConsiderationSea1347 12 points13 points14 points 1 year ago (18 children) | Copy Link

I disagree. I believe intent is almost everything when it comes to offensive speech and I don’t think the default to he/him was to belittle women or esteem men but just a natural consequence of English lacking gender neutral pronouns for people. The default to she/her often, though definitely not always, is done to esteem women. It is too bad that there is a massive linguistic hole in English like gender neutral pronouns for a person.

[–]LolnothingmattersXD 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (17 children) | Copy Link

There literally is they/them specifically for that purpose

[–]ConsiderationSea1347 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Historically that is not true. They/them was exclusively for plural pronouns. It wasn’t until the early 2000s or maybe 2010 when they/them became either plural or gender neutral. Here we are talking about historical use of language, so, before 2000 there really wasn’t a gender neutral word for a single person. 

[–]LolnothingmattersXD 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Are we talking about historical use? I thought we were talking in the present tense. At least that's how the discussion started.

[–]ConsiderationSea1347 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago (9 children) | Copy Link

“ Fairness, now; if that's discriminatory to males, wouldn't defaulting to male pronouns (like English has done for centuries) be discriminatory to females?”   

That is the thread I am replying to. “Like English has done for centuries.” Though the question in the thread is about present tense.

[–]LolnothingmattersXD 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Oh, I missed the part in the brackets. Well, it was normal then, but now we have better options and it's annoying when they're not used.

[–]ConsiderationSea1347 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Language takes time to adapt. I find they/them for singular to be really clunky, but I am in my mid forties with a obscene amount of years in college where I was told to never use they/them in the singular. I have no doubt in a few more decades when people like me have died off they/them as a gender neutral pronoun will be much more common. 

Edit: and to be really clear - I think this is a good evolution of language. English has needed a gender neutral singular pronoun. I just have A LOT of conditioning that makes it feel like nails on a chalk board.

[+]EstablishmentWaste23 -10 points-9 points-8 points 1 year ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Your mysoginy is showing

[–]ConsiderationSea1347 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago (5 children) | Copy Link

How is it misogynistic to know the that they/them wasn’t used in the singular until the early 2000s? Or is it misogynistic to believe intent matters in speech? 

[+]EstablishmentWaste23 -9 points-8 points-7 points 1 year ago (4 children) | Copy Link

You're defending the patriarchal aspects of pronouns and how they're used, you're literally using an appeal to tradition fallacy to justify the legacy of the use.

When it comes to intent, it's a complex discussion but yes intent matters and doesn't depending on the context.

Intent matters for a comedian making a joke for example but that intent wouldn't matter if they called someone in the audience a bitch or a racial slur as a joke. So much of language has inherent meaning etched into it by the culture, society and history.

[–]ConsiderationSea1347 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I am not “defending” anything except maybe giving grace to people who used he/him as a gender neutral singular pronoun in the past and people who still do it today. Intent matters. There was no linguistic tool in English so most people used he/him without an iota of malice or misogyny. Appeal to tradition fallacy would be me saying “since we have always used he/him for gender neutral singular pronouns, but I said no such thing. There is another comment thread where I even say it is a natural and good evolution of language to using they/them in the singular, even if it sounds awkward to someone like me who spent two and a half decades in school learning to never do that. 

Touch some grass. Slow down. Give people the benefit of the doubt before you go on the attack. I am progressive and deeply value diversity, and I suspect you are too, but diversity is only valuable if you listen and pay attention to what people who are different from you are saying. Truly I hope you find some peace.

[–]EstablishmentWaste231 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They/them used as gender neutral have be seen in writings as early as the 10th century. The pronouns "he/him" have never been used to refer to gender neutrality.

Nor do I give a damn tbh even if it was, the patriarchy needs to be uplifted and done with from it's deep roots that have been growing since the dawn of time so at the end of the day. It don't matter cause we know those people were extremely mysoginstic and patriarchal so was their language.

Touch some grass.

I just did today actually, thank you.

[–]ConsiderationSea13472 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How old are you? He/him and man/men have been used as gender neutral and gendered terms in my lifetime. When I was an undergraduate some of the most brilliant feminists I know were grading my papers and telling me to not use they/them as a singular form. They weren’t correcting me to protect the patriarchy, they were correcting me because as recent as 2010, in academic settings, it was still being taught to never use they/them in the singular. Language evolves, the return to they/them as a singular is a positive one, but don’t for a moment think that when you see “man” or “he” in even classical or modern texts that you can discern the intended gender without context.

[–]SidewaysGiraffe -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Shakespeare used the singular "they"; unless he had a time machine, it LONG predates the 2000s. I'll give you that it wasn't COMMON until then, though.

[–]northseaview -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've been using they or them in this context since childhood and I am much older than 20

[–]TheFamBroski -4 points-3 points-2 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

“look at that monarch, they are uncontrollable” wouldn’t have been a valid sentence pre 1800s ?

[–]ConsiderationSea1347 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Oddly pre1800s that sentence was more acceptable than 1800-2000. The Victorians overhauled much of language, including prohibiting they/them as a singular pronoun. From the eighteenth to the twentieth centuries using they/them in the singular was incorrect. When I was in school in the 90s English teachers would dock points for doing it, I had English professors in the 2000s do the same. Language evolves. 

[–]TheFamBroski 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

is there records of specific overhaul on they/them, like an academic standard set in those centuries or something?

[–]Yourmumisahedgehog 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Well, gender neutral singular pronouns do exist.

[–]SidewaysGiraffe 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Not in third person in English.

[–]Yourmumisahedgehog 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Yes they do,

[–]TenuousOgre 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Such as?

[–]Yourmumisahedgehog -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

they/them

[–]TenuousOgre 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah, those are for plural use. Not a fan of changing a definition of perfectly good words to. I fuse meaning. That some adopted those words doesn’t mean they actually work.

[–]Yourmumisahedgehog 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They always have been singular, at least in my experience.

[–]Dangerous_Public1597 -4 points-3 points-2 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Look at the downvotes on a perfectly logical statement, and then these people say they don't hate women.

[–]SidewaysGiraffe -3 points-2 points-1 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's hard, some days. Far too many people letting their anger become hate.

[+]Dangerous_Public1597 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

People on this subreddit are way too emotional. They downvote anything that challenges their views in any way.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter