<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>fbomb &#187; Peter Facinelli</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thefbomb.org/tag/peter-facinelli/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thefbomb.org</link>
	<description>A blog/community created for teenage girls who care about their rights as women and want to be heard.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 15:00:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Twitter and gendered language</title>
		<link>http://thefbomb.org/2009/07/twitter-and-gendered-language/</link>
		<comments>http://thefbomb.org/2009/07/twitter-and-gendered-language/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:25:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Julie Z</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feminism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pop-Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chuck Norris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gender neutral language]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lance Armstrong]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peter Facinelli]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thefbomb.org/?p=1070</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.gslp.gi/images/twitter_logo.gif"><img class="aligncenter" src="http://www.gslp.gi/images/twitter_logo.gif" alt="" width="286" height="120" /></a></p>
<p>Of all the things to spark a debate over the lack of gender neutrality in language, I really hadn&#8217;t expected Twitter.</p>
<p>Twitter seems to get a lot of flack. Upon telling people that <a href="http://twitter.com/the_fbomb">I have a twitter</a>, they usually roll their eyes or laugh in my face.</p>
<p>They tell me it&#8217;s Twitter promotes the death of language and creative thought.</p>
<p>They tell me that it&#8217;s weird to update people on everything you do (nobody cares) [OH BUT THEY DO] and it only promotes stalking.<br />
<img class="alignright" src="http://www.gambling911.com/files/publisher/Twitter.jpg" alt="" width="277" height="317" /></p>
<p>But Facebook, which not only has a status update feature, but allows users to take stalking to a truly comprehensive level, by letting them read your conversations with others, view photos of you, and learn about your &#8220;interests and activities&#8221; &#8212; no that&#8217;s fine. &#8230;</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.gslp.gi/images/twitter_logo.gif"><img class="aligncenter" src="http://www.gslp.gi/images/twitter_logo.gif" alt="" width="286" height="120" /></a></p>
<p>Of all the things to spark a debate over the lack of gender neutrality in language, I really hadn&#8217;t expected Twitter.</p>
<p>Twitter seems to get a lot of flack. Upon telling people that <a href="http://twitter.com/the_fbomb">I have a twitter</a>, they usually roll their eyes or laugh in my face.</p>
<p>They tell me it&#8217;s Twitter promotes the death of language and creative thought.</p>
<p>They tell me that it&#8217;s weird to update people on everything you do (nobody cares) [OH BUT THEY DO] and it only promotes stalking.<br />
<img class="alignright" src="http://www.gambling911.com/files/publisher/Twitter.jpg" alt="" width="277" height="317" /></p>
<p>But Facebook, which not only has a status update feature, but allows users to take stalking to a truly comprehensive level, by letting them read your conversations with others, view photos of you, and learn about your &#8220;interests and activities&#8221; &#8212; no that&#8217;s fine. Because it&#8217;s <em>facebook</em>, duh.</p>
<p>They make fun of the verb &#8220;to tweet.&#8221; I honestly fail to see the hilarity in the word &#8220;tweet.&#8221; The word &#8220;moist&#8221; is way funnier, and hardly anybody makes fun of that, they just casually throw it around when referring to baked goods.</p>
<p>The one criticism of Twitter I&#8217;ve gotten almost entirely from guys, the one that made me sure Twitter could never lead any kind of gender revolution was, &#8220;Straight guys don&#8217;t Twitter.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry&#8230;what&#8217;s that now? I didn&#8217;t know that a type of social networking could be deemed as restricted to certain sexualities. News to me! Especially since there are plenty of hetero guys on Twitter. I mean, <a href="http://twitter.com/lancearmstrong">Lance Armstrong </a>is on twitter. So is <a href="http://twitter.com/peterfacinelli">Peter Facinelli </a>(Dr. Cullen). I think Chuck Norris might be, but it&#8217;s not certified and the tweets are kind of sketch. Last I checked, none of them identify as gay. Apparently, if you update your status on twitter you&#8217;re gay, but if you do so on Facebook you&#8217;re straight as an arrow. Seriously, who comes up with this shit?</p>
<p>But I guess I was wrong, as apparently there&#8217;s a big <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/magazine/26FOB-onlanguage-t.html?_r=2">twitter debate </a>about finding a new, gender neutral pronoun. Because to have to clarify gender in 140 characters or less is challenging, not to mention that we shouldn&#8217;t have to clarify gender in the first place.</p>
<p>Some gender neutral pronoun suggestions are: s/he, he/she, shhe, hiser, heer, ha, thon, ne. And then there is the ever dreaded use of &#8220;they&#8221; as a singular pronoun.</p>
<p>OHHHHHHHHHHH NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! YOU CAN&#8217;T USE A PLURAL PRONOUN TO REFER TO ONE PERSON. THE WORLD WILL BE CONSUMED BY THE WRATH OF THE GRAMMAR GODS IF YOU COMMIT SUCH AN ATROCITY AGAINST MANKIND!</p>
<p>My question is this: is it worse to continue using gendered pronouns (language matters, as fbomb commenters themselves have pointed out on numerous occasions) or to use a neutral plural pronoun as a singular pronoun?</p>
<p>Also, which one would you rather say in casual conversation: &#8220;they&#8221; or &#8220;thon&#8221; / &#8220;ne&#8221; / &#8220;ha&#8221; ? Yeah, that&#8217;s what I thought. It&#8217;s clear which word would make the transition easier.</p>
<p>So, thank you, Twitter, for sparking this debate. I&#8217;m glad that people are starting to talk about language as it applies to gender.</p>
<p>Now we just need to branch out from English. I&#8217;m going into Spanish 3 in school, and for those not in the know, Spanish is also pretty gendered. I also am learning Hindi, and that has a heck of a lot of gendered words. I&#8217;m sure there are many other gendered languages too.</p>
<p>I know I slip up a lot with my use of language, and a lot of well-meaning people do, too. It&#8217;s really hard to transition away from using such common words. But in the end, we all have to try.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://thefbomb.org/2009/07/twitter-and-gendered-language/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

