LogFAQs > #923482958

Kyuubi4269 posted...

You are proposing intentionally adding more words to muddy the waters for no reason.

At worst, we're talking about one or two monosyllabic words that will only ever be used to refer to a tiny handful of people when they specifically request it (and even then, most non-binary folks are fine with "they," which is already used in circumstances where somebody's gender is unknown). That's really not "muddying the waters," nor is it for no reason (most decent people would consider making people happy to be an adequate reason to do something if the cost doesn't outweigh that happiness). I'm sure you can manage to remember a new word on the off chance somebody specifically asks you to use it to describe them. That's really not that complicated. You already do it every time you meet somebody with a name you haven't heard before.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

The sense in adding this BS to English would be like if somebody said "You know how German has masculine and feminine words? Why don't we change a third of each to third pansexual spelling to accommodate the 12 people who identify with it?"

Surely you're not equivocating the addition of one or two new words to modifying a third of an entire language and creating brand new conjugation rules. I know you struggle with making comparable analogies sometimes, but that'd be ridiculous even for you.