Re-really? 🥹

For those who aren't directly from Spain, the Spanish language is one of colonialism so I really don't care if we want to re-adapt it which most lands that were colonized by the Spanish already do.

Just be careful, because the person can be the noun, then the adjective takes on the person's desired gender.

It might be, you know, hear me out, that "grammatical gender" is a historical misnomer caused by linguistics initially practically only looking at Indo-European languages, which tend to have three noun classes with the word for "woman", "man", and "thing" all being in a different category so they became known as feminine, masculine, and neuter, with words assigned to them pseudo-randomly via phonetics. But really noun classes are a much more general thing, Bantu languages have up to 20. Persons, fruits, plants, locations, such things.

At least in Indo-European languages it's mostly about ease of reference: "I see a cup and a table. She is broken". Assuming that cup is female and table male (as in German) that is a very clear and concise statement.

plurals defaulting to male.

Except when referring to a group of women. Like “Dos profesoras”

As someone currently learning, this is really useful to know

I think the default or mixed gender plural is the masculine io ending. Them's the rules of Spanish, as I was taught.

The current proposal is to use an “e” ending. “mi amigue Charlie es no binarie”.

As a native straight Spanish speaker, I'd like to thank you for so eloquently explaining many of my problems with this way of referring to people's genders. There's no way the language would survive if we were to adapt to these gender neutral modifiers. Spanish is a gendered language and if we were to adapt to these non binary gender terms, we'd also have to apply it for about half our vocabulary. We'd all have to agree a washing machine for example is now no longer a female lavadora, but rather a lavadore or lavadorx. It'd be impossible to gather the entire Spanish speaking community across dozens of countries to agree on the general way standardize this.

You people are going to confuse the LLM training.

wackier pronouns I’ve seen

I made a point out of being able to fluently use "any/all" pronouns in language. As in "Any is here, wearing all green scarf".

The fact that not seeming silly is more important to your sense of right and wrong than accepting someone's chosen identity on their terms and potentially saving their life by doing so, is why nobody wants to listen to your opinions on queer people. Jerk.

That's a lot of text trying to justify not just calling people what they tell you they want to be called.

Also, "settler colonialism" just taking us back to that whole "recognizing queer rights is just white people shit" angle, you just fucking troyed yourself. "In your soul." "That's racist." "In your body?" "That's gay?" "That's homophobic." "That's Black." "That's Racist!"

Talking about it erasing blackness also flying dangerously close to that boundary, and "femicide" looks suspiciously like all the TERF Island rumblings about "erasing womanhood".

If someone goes out of their way to specifically tell you how they want to be referred to, just fucking do that instead of being a little crying bitch baby about it. It's some letters, you can ask them for a pronunciation if it's really that hard to sight read.

Every second you spend on trying to justify intentionally putting down how someone wants to be referred to is infinitely more effort than was ever necessary for anything, and continuing to try and justify this childish tantrum throwing is exponentially more effort than that.

Just respect how people want you to refer to them. Just do that. It's not nearly as hard as you're trying to excuse it as. Just be a decent person already.

Love the clinging for dear life to "n-n-no! Inclusivity is "gRiNgO sHiT!" narrative.

To such an extent that you've nearly set up layered positions to move the goalpost to that'll eventually allow you to try and claim anyone who isn't a Zapatista is basically just a white english only american anyways.

This. No self respecting Latin American tolerates our language being appropriated

Don't worry. At least you tried. Met some English speaking folks who expect everyone to talk in their language... In a country of Spanish speakers. To be fsir, here in Argentina we hsve mandatpry English classes in High School. Its a subject on its own right. So we have some people who can speak English pretty well.

Yeah it's dumb. But maybe hating on it is wrong. The latinx enby who came up with it tried their best. (And I'm calling them latinx because that's the word they invented for themself). It didn't work as good as latine, but so what? Who cares? We found a better option and most people use it, so there's no need to keep being mean. Only people who benefit if you keep being mean are the transphobic assholes. What do you want to help them for?

So you're one opinion. There is room for the other.

Missing almost the entire ass point. You're being that person who says "yeah but games journalism is actually pretty unethical tho..." in a gamergate discussion.

The practicality wasn't the reason it got targeted, the attempt at inclusivity from within the community is what got it targeted, the practicality is just the excuse they used to seem like they were being completely reasonable while terrorizing the early queer community that originally came up with it into silence.

You can disagree the letter worked while still not trying to shoehorn that point into a discussion about how that was not even remotely what drew so much hate to it when it was at peak attention.

The thing is they, colonizers, need it. That's the only way they can justify in their heads how they see us all as uneducated inferiors

Bro, just borrow from Nahuatl, Latin-"ehe", or Latin-esh, you know, like the ways they pronounce the oh so unpronounceable, oh so unbearable to the spanish speaking tongue X that sits in the middle of the name of the largest Spanish speaking country in the fucking world?

It really isn't the tongue obliterating challenge all los machismos are fitting and moaning over it being.

Anyways this isn't even about how people should be using it anymore, it's about recognizing the true reasons behind why there was a fight to begin with. Nobody, has fought so hard to resist a linguistic change, as the bigots do to resist a change that accommodates trans/NB identity.

You know what came closest to this kind of resistance in a widely adopted change in English? Singular They/Them, it's been around since literally before America and yet we still have the armchair grammar nazis insisting they/them can only be a plural pronoun, with I am sure zero ulterior motive aside from just hating trans people.

The backlash to the X was rooted fundamentally in transphobia, and understanding and expecting better than that queerphobic undercurrent in Latine culture is nothing wrong or neocolonial or whatever the fuck other excuse someone trying to excuse the hate out of their ass tries to pull to dogwhistle the "gringo shit" narrative.

You're not entitled to people just forgetting how you wronged them just because you were able to bully them into "moving on" from it.

That's sort of exactly why i as an individual don't understand why they don't do it, because I'm a native english speaker and there's a lot i would like to change about it. Like imo in spelling, almost all the silent letters that don't effect pronunciation should be eliminated. Debt should be spelled det, night should be spelled nite

Genus isnt sexus. The chair isnt female in Spanish because ancient Spaniard thought it might have titties, its feminine because of its phonology. La silla ends with an a, so it gets the la article.

Why does English still use actor and actress? why do you use definite articles instead of marking definiteness with prefixes? Why do i have to "i saw Mike steal your bike" instead of included something inside of the verb "see" to mark that i witnessed it?

Language is just that. An evolution of changes that happened throughout millenia and rarely was any pressure applird to that change.

it doesnt sound like that at all and latrine isnt even a spanisch word? Thats like complaining about the korean 니가 (sounds like neega) being to similar to the n-word. Or the eveb funnier discussion of american youth discovering the German "Digga" and immediately coming to the conclusion that this must be the n-word in disguise.

So in Spanish you have a word like Oaxaca or México, where the x is in the middle of the word and is pronounced like the h in ha.

When x is at the end of a word its pronounced like k+s.

Or when it is the first letter of a word, its basically an s sound.

So, we get three possible pronunciations rooted in Spanish:

la-tin h (i don't think this really works at all unless you just trail 'tin' with some kind of soft ... consonant only sound?)

la-tinks (arguably this is the most correct pronunciation strictly following the rules of Spanish)

la-tins (works but only if you do not follow Spanish rules for how x is pronounced)

é or e is a vowel pronounced like eh, tbus:

la-tin-EH or la-tin-eh

which is different from latino (OH) and latina (AH).

If latinx and latine are pronounced the same, then that would indicate that a word has been made up which breaks the otherwise quite strict pronunciation rules governing Spanish, introducing an English style 'exception' where this particular word is pronounced this particular way for no apparent reason.

This is a big reason why many (but not all) do not like this term. It either only works when written or to a person familiar with English, who usually pronounce it la - tin - ecks.

I'm Latino, latine seems more plausible based on how I grew up. I just hate how it's a single letter off from latrine.

Do we jump the rules for something really new to our society? Maybe. I personally think a lot of this is rooted in people's limited understanding of how postfixes work in Spanish, American education for example explains that anything ending with a = feminine, o = masculine, but that ignores context and etymology which I won't go into here.

I'd equate it to our initial minor discomfort with referring to humanity as 'mankind', anyone with more than trivial education understands the word to be non-gendered.