• ThorrJo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Nah, just trying to get you to introspect. Its hard to do, ask me how I know.

    You should probably have a good long think about this right now.

    • Fedegenerate@fedinsfw.app
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Twice you’ve replied with nothing to say? Make a point or not.

      Every one has agreed dude is a gendered term in every context[1] but this one. We have learned this lesson before with he/him in instruction manuals[2].

      This was precisely the introspection I already did to come to this conclusion. So far a bunch of people have gotten upset at having their own point reflected back at them, like I said they would.

      Dude is gender neutral? You’d call a trans woman dude? Well no. It’s used in a gender neutral context so it’s gender neutral? So was he/him you really think he/him is gender neutral? Well no.

      I’ll make it real easy: in the before times we used he/him as a default term to reference people, then we realised he/him is a gendered term and not suitable as a default way to reference people [2]. Fast forward to the now time: some people use dude as a default term, but now people are learning dude is a gendered term[1]…

      Some people anyway, my dad is still stuck heading every letter with “dear sir” and gets real upset when you point out how dated it is. Then again, he unironically quoted a nazi pedophile so I’m quite happy being at odds with him.

      The introspection is used to understand the source for he/him being the default is the same as dude.

      I beg of you, go touch grass and introspect…