Pronoun Hell...

Nope. Ever read Shakespeare? Did Shakespeare use language incorrectly?

It's really actually not. Epicenes (look it up) are completely formal.

This discussion you inserted yourself into is entirely revolving around epicene pronouns!

You didn't even bother to look that up, did you?

Yeah, he's really not. But based on your posts here, you could learn too.

I can't tell if you misunderstood that on purpose, I mean, you think they is incorrect as a singular pronoun; anything is possible.
To clarify, I was laughing at you thinking you were capable of teaching anything.

It's not incorrect, singular they is older than plural they.

"Technically speaking "they went to the store" is incorrect.

False. Like you just pointed out, it dates at least from the 14th century. That information comes originally from Beowulf, not "liberal Wikipedia".

"The Oxford English Dictionary traces singular they back to 1375".

I meant to say singular they is older than singular you; so yeah, well done, have a sticker 🌟 or a point or something.

Klk, answer this for me.

I just met a friendly grocery store cashier. I've not yet specified the gender of my new acquaintance.

Ask me what that person's name was using a pronoun.

"What's ______ name?"

....so, going back to answering the question, what is the TECHNICAL, CORRECT pronoun to use?

"What's ______ name?"

As grammatically technical as your heart desires, but you still need a pronoun to fill in the blank with.

You're wasting your time. This person is a lying troll. Yesterday they kept insisting that abortion was defined as murder, and when I asked them which dictionary said that, they refused to say (because they know there isn't one)

Hell no it's not a waste of my time, it's one of the funniest responses I've gotten from anyone. There just straight up isn't a correct answer for them! That's how committed they are to their premise. They hate transgenders so much that they straight up can't put a pronoun in that sentence at all. That's the level of hate they've achieved.

Factually, I didn't refuse. I pointed out that I've already shown it to you many times, but you (the actual troll here), refuse to accept truth and on each thread deny reality with your fingers in your ears/eyes to pretend you're making a valid point. It's been shown to you repeatedly over the years that the dictionary definition of murder covers abortion. End of discussion.

thon?

Never mind me, couldn't resist.

I started using "they" in later hs in the 80s simply because writing "he or she" or "he/she" seemed awkward and a tad constipated. A strict school about proper grammar and formalities, I was kinda surprised no teacher ever said anything to me about doing it.

""it" is for inanimate objects, not people."

As I stated... but it's as correct as using they. "It" is for things, but singular. "They" is for people but Plural. So equally wrong as evidenced.

"Can I suggest some Sesame Street videos on this topic that would be at about your level?"

They don't make them. Sesame Street videos would be beneath my level of education, but it's good that you're aware of them and perhaps one day you'll mature enough to grasp their teaching. Since you clearly don't now.

Wow... you're cranky.

"What do you mean there's no technically correct pronoun to use????? You're telling me that English grammar literally gives up on the entire sentence just because I didn't mention whether a person is a man or a woman?! You're trying to tell me that our language is just that easy to break??????"

First off yes, our language is pretty easily broken. Look at all the redefining of words for nonsensical reasons we've seen in the last few years. Yes, our language doesn't NOT have a non-gender specific singular pronoun. End of discussion. So we accept the misapplication of a plural one is a specific instance. Does not make it correct, but tolerated.

There, clear as a bell AGAIN!

"What absolute nonsense. Epicene pronouns are absolutely a thing and we're not going to erase then from existence, rewriting Shakespeare, REWRITING THE BIBLE, just because you hate transgender people!!! That is pure desperation on your part."

I do not hate transgender people and defy you to show anywhere that I've made that claim (hint, you cannot because I do not)

Epicene is a thing yes. Non gender specific pronouns are a thing, but there is none for singular, unless you want to use "it" which is more correct (being singular) than "they" (being plural). But I can see how "it" would and has been perceived as dehumanizing, so the exception for "they" for a singular unknown gender.

For people who are acting against their gender (what epicene means, did you look it up), then their gender is determined by DNA and we do in fact have he and she pronouns for those genetically male and female respectively.

So now, this thread is done. You have a lot to learn, it's been clearly explained, but I'm sure you'll remain wallowing in your ignorance.

So good day to you.

"it" is for inanimate objects, not people.

Can I suggest some Sesame Street videos on this topic that would be at about your level?

There is no technically correct pronoun to use (I've made that very clear). There is an acceptable albeit incorrect pronoun in a narrow use case (unknown gender of the subject). But it's simply allowed out of necessity, in spite of being technically incorrect (plural pronoun for singular person).

Clear as a bell.

What do you mean there's no technically correct pronoun to use????? You're telling me that English grammar literally gives up on the entire sentence just because I didn't mention whether a person is a man or a woman?! You're trying to tell me that our language is just that easy to break??????

What absolute nonsense. Epicene pronouns are absolutely a thing and we're not going to erase then from existence, rewriting Shakespeare, REWRITING THE BIBLE, just because you hate transgender people!!! That is pure desperation on your part.

"There's NO possible way you could EVER convince me that you scan the DNA of everyone you ever talk about!!!!! OBVIOUSLY you must be basing it on something else."

Nope... never said I would... Most people go by his or her obvious pronouns. There might be times when someone has their costume so well done that they actually look like what they are not... but most are such obvious frauds (man pretending to be woman, etc) that you can still tell their actual gender.

So normal people might ACCIDENTALLY mispronoun someone, meh. But doing it intentionally would just be wrong.

But really, you're just arguing to think you have a point... you've been discredited on this so many times already it's not funny, so this thread is done.

Yes you did! You said right there that the correct pronouns you use are based on genetics, which is OBVIOUSLY not true because you do not scan the DNA of everyone you talk about. You don't even HAVE the DNA of everyone you talk about.

"Hell no it's not a waste of my time, it's one of the funniest responses I've gotten from anyone. There just straight up isn't a correct answer for them! That's how committed they are to their premise. They hate transgenders so much that they straight up can't put a pronoun in that sentence at all. That's the level of hate they've achieved."

Again, the ball is in your court. Cite where I've claimed to hate so-called "Transgenders". Again, you cannot.

As for not using incorrect chosen pronouns, that's nothing to do with hate. In the real world I will correctly use the gender pronouns that correspond with the person's DNA (as everyone should).

In situations where there could be penalties for using correct pronouns (work, etc.) then the only right solution for someone of conscience would be to use no pronouns at all, rather than lie and call a man a she or a woman a he.

You two clowns are funny. And completely ignorant on reality.

There's NO possible way you could EVER convince me that you scan the DNA of everyone you ever talk about!!!!! OBVIOUSLY you must be basing it on something else.

DNA doesn't define gender

Yep. Science shows it does.

No it doesn't. Gender is nonphysical attributes like behavior and expression. DNA doesn't determine that

Incorrect as always.

Then prove your claim

DNA defines sex. Sex defines gender.

Sex doesn't define gender

Wrong.

I'm sorry if the facts don't agree with you

“ Octavia_Melody: I'm sorry if the facts don't agree with you”

No worries. Facts and science are 100% on my side. Liberals are the ones who hate science.

And we’re done here.

"Facts and science are 100% on my side"

They aren't, and you look really foolish when you deny basic facts

"Liberals are the ones who hate science"

Again, not remotely true