At the risk of resorting to an 'ad hominem' argument, after a statement like "For example, refusing to call Brandon "Madam" because he imagines that he can decide to be a woman and that he should be called Brenda and be referred to as a woman ?" there is precisely zero chance any subsequent arguments on this topic from the same source are even remotely adjacent to 'good faith'.

I don't necessarily think people are coming at this from a bad faith perspective, I believe the "American traditionalist grammar" types believe what they say. I think it's more so that this an discussion where people are going to make every argument for their points and against everyone else's. I'm not above that or anything, I've fallen right into this discourse. And probably going to try and just stop engaging after this post. If somebody like directly calls me out, sure, but I think we're at the point where anybody who is good faith or bad is too set in stone in their opinion to change in the moment.
I hope this is something people, myself included, will look back on a month after this is done and think "huh maybe I was being a little silly here, or that makes more sense now that I'm thinking clearly." I'm not saying everyone's going to do that, or that those who do that will change their mind, but that I can hope there's at least some reflection.

I think at this point I'd also like to draw a line in my involvement (let's see how successful I am!) because we're not getting anywhere. A brief summary of where I think we are.

A fairly simple proposition was made - that to increase inclusiveness (and/or avoid miscommunication) "they" should be used on global chat or forums when talking about someone if unknown gender.

There has been opposition to this, which as far as I can see boils down to two arguments:
- it is a 'woke' thing to propose. Therefore it is bad. This is clearly nonsensical.
- it is incorrect grammar. I've shown that not to be true in a previous post, and that "he" is now more commonly regarded as incorrect in this context.

No further arguments have been offered, not has my analysis of my above two points been refuted. Instead Rettilion relies on focusing on irrelevant or tangential details. I can't decide whether Rettilion is stubborn or simply trolling. Either way I'm not going to engage further until arguments relevant to the point at hand are made.

Until then I think those arguing in favour of "they" can rest assured that they've achieved two things:
- simply by raising the issue and fighting its corner we show that we care. That in itself improves inclusivity
- we have raised awareness of the issue, and hopefully some people who were not previously aware of the issue will consider this and make a change in the future.

I would also like to add that an issue I have is that some people seem focused on “winning the argument” as opposed to finding some common ground between two opinions. On the one hand, it’s clear the singular they is at least acceptable (if it’s preferable is up for debate) in modern English. On the other hand, I wouldn’t want to see the singular they mandated as the only singular pronoun we can use under threat of sanction of some kind. We have definitely reached the “agree to disagree” point. A small marker of some kind (blue for M, pink for F, and grey for unknown/other/not given) next to a user name would be a reasonable solution (if it’s viable). If another user chooses to use that information when choosing how to refer to that player, that should be up to them, or as some users will say, him.

I pretty much agree, Simon.

Though I haven't seen anyone here argue for 'they' to be "mandated as the only singular pronoun we can use under threat of sanction".

Neither have I Tepes, far from it. I only mention that in the assumption it’s the worst case scenario from the view of the side that which has the animosity towards “wokeness”, so as to assure them I’m advocating for nothing of the sort.

@Simon

I will note that our main Developer and Admin of the site (Oli) has been away from the site for quite some time due to personal reasons. Any changes to the site (like new maps being added, or I believe a small marker like you noted) I'm pretty sure need to be cycled though him in order to be added. So I think "official" recognition is DOA, even if the community was in full agreement, which clearly it is not.

Therefore I'd go back to previous statements made by people and say that if people want it, the profile page is probably the best thing available right now.

Thanks for the feedback Drano019, I appreciate it.

"sHEit"
it has she, he and it. it covers everyone. maybe heshit is better.
problem solved.

or we can call everyone a bastard or a son of a bitch..... (a seinfeld episode now comes to thought)

@ SimonPeterWatson :

Your user name contains two masculine first names : Simon and
Peter. That tends to indicate that you are a man, or a boy, and that you do not seek anonymity regarding your sex.

Nonetheless, you wrote the pronouns "It/Its/Itself" in your profile.

Would you explain why ? Don't you consider that you are a man or a boy ?

@Simon - don't mine Retillion, she's just a bit tetchy that the only actual argument she can make is "I'm a transphobe and as such I believe inclusivity is bad"

*takes deep breath*

Where to start. I think one of the biggest fears of the "anti-woke" people is not the things they are faced with (such as singular they) but rather a fear (misguided or not) of what might come if they budge on that thing. They might argue, if we let them use they as singular, whats next? *insert some terrible tangentially related eventuality here*

This imo is slightly more reasonable than just saying, I don't like wokeness. I don't think it's correct in very many cases. But it's something.

Also, I always thought it was funny that the Christian adage "do one to others as you would have them do unto you" is ignored by those who insist calling someone something they don't wish to be called is surperior

damn it, not finished yet.

@mouse :

It is rather strange that you, who seem to advocate the use of neutral pronouns supposedly in order to not hurt the feelings of people, have made use twice of the feminine pronoun "she" while referring to me, while nothing allows you to think that I would be a woman, which I am not since I am a man.
Were you purposedly trying to be unpleasant ?
You seem to confirm the idea that those who extol inclusivity want to include everyone equally in the society, except those who disagree with them.

Also, nothing allows you to think that I would be "tetchy" or "transphobe", a specious word since people who do not approve transsexualism do not necessarily fear transsexuals.

I wonder why you wrote such an unadvised comment : is my question to SimonPeterWatson so disturbing ?

Anyway, the golden rule applies in this situation.

In addition, those that complain the most about people being offended seem to be the ones who are the most offended.

Retillion, if you wish to be a respectable person and engage in a useful discourse I suggest you cease this one-up-manship and last-word syndrome and instead focus on something of actual substance. If you continue this way (your response to this post should be rather enlightening) you reveal yourself as a fraud and a dumbass. If you are reading this and think I am insulting you, simply respond in a way that is not ridiculous and make my insults moot. If you respond in a similar fashion to that of your last few posts you will have merely proved my points.

@ ubercacher16 :

Yes, you are insulting.

I will not write any more in this conversation.

There is nothing wrong in my question to SimonPeterWatson. I am curious to read his answer.

I also think that those who have espoused pro-grammar (joke) stances have done little to further their case in an effective way. They have merely made themselves into fools by trotting out defenses to arguments unmade. They claim this discussion is political, while they are the ones who make it so. To what end? A misguided sense of superiority? A desire to impose their worldview? A wrongful fear that their worldview is under attack? A good faith desire to defend grammar? A supposed fear of trans people? I doubt we shall ever truly know.

Are you intentionally not understanding what is a joke and what isn't?

I know I said I wasn't going to engage in this conversation, likewise Retillion said he won't, but this is entirely unrelated to the conversation before, and I'm confused on how it transferred to what it is now.

Anyways I would like to say, if you clearly know someone's pronouns you should use them. To do so otherwise is just kinda weird. Like you think you know more about someone then they do. Now I understand basic joke rules, if someone misgenders someone else and acts like it doesn't matter, then people misgender that person until they react. But it's just a bit childish. Please don't turn this conversation into just a bunch of below-the-belt insults and a discussion unto whether or not trans people are real. This is just about decency at this point. Respect what people can do with themselves, and inherently apart of that is respecting pronouns. Maybe it's just where I grew up, but you don't tell people how to be themselves. You judge it when your by yourself, sure, everybody has the privacy of their home. I love talking to myself and would hate any proposition of taking that away. But you don't tell other people how to live their lives.

Asking someone to explain their identity in a public forum with tens of people seeing it is just pedantic and unnecessary, and forces a weird situation into SimonPeter where in which it has to answer a personal question where the arguments made have to be good enough to satisfy everyone's own personal agenda of whether or not it's own identity is valid. Which is besides the point of this thread.

This isn't a personal attack on anyone, It's obviously directed at the one person who asked "Don't you consider that you are a man or a boy ?" I'm not trying to say it's not. I'm saying it's simply a post of remember how public these forums are, and please respect that. There's no moral judgements here. Or at least none I want to give off. I'm not accusing anybody of being anything.
I also understand that posting anything even slightly argumentative against someone is going to make them feel like they need to respond, that's normal. And I'm well aware I'll probably be replied to. Just don't make this topic about the validity of other people's lives and I won't mentally wormhole myself into talking again.

Surely SimonPeter was joking about the "it" thing. Like, the rest of their profile states "Enigmatic god-like entity. Enjoys Anon Gunboat. Accepting prayers to increase my paltry worldly powers."

Human
Enjoys doing human things like breathe “oxygen”, consume nutrients and play diplomacy.

Retillion - sorry, I didn't see any pronouns in your profile, so I had to make an assumption. You've been very opposed to 'they' pronouns thus far in the thread, so it was a 50/50 call that I apparently got wrong. I apologise.

On the plus side, by those remarks you acknowledge that being misgendered can be hurtful, so, progress!

...oh, oops, that should have been 'thou have' and 'thou acknowledge'. After all, the language cannot possible have changed in the last couple of hundred years for a plural pronoun to be accepted as a singular, so 'you' would be manifestly inappropriate to use when referring to a single person.

(sorry uber for bringing grammar up again)

I’m of the opinion that anyone who opposed the use of they on the basis of grammar is an idiot. I leave room for those who speak Spanish, French, Italian or another language with gendered nouns who simply have a different standard. It’s really hard for some of those people to break the habit. Or a language like Chinese where all the pronouns are the same (he,she,it). In English we’ve decided that they can be singular. That’s how language works. It’s a fascinating and beautiful thing that languages can develop like that. It’s not some elite conspiracy orchestrated by China and bill gates to destroy the suburbs and turn the world into a socialist hell scape.

@mouse It's "thou hast," not "thou have."

"Political Correctness" is sometimes silly and sometimes just common decency.

Being kind and reasonable with each other would really resolve 90% of these issues.