Ok, let’s say he’s right only when he talks about software.
That should do it. I hope.
Comment on Google's shocking developer decree struggles to justify the urgent threat to F-Droid
yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks agoI sometimes like to read his political posts:
www.stallman.org/archives/2025-jul-oct.html
And honestly? I mostly agree with them? Like this:
ABC ordered to pay Antoinette Lattouf another $150,000 for unlawful termination over Gaza Instagram post.
But a company faced with enormous threats wielded by fascist officials who demand that certain views be suppressed will treat such penalties as the normal cost of sucking up.
The [Israeli] army says that HAMAS is using apartment buildings for “surveillance”, and has bombed some of those buildings to destroy them. Based on this logic, the army might bomb every tall building in Gaza City with the large bombs that the US is providing
He has some questionable beliefs as well, though for unusual reasons. He accepts non-binary people but refuses to use they/them pronouns because he doesn’t like the ambiguity of singular/plural pronouns. So he has invented the neopronouns per/pers to refer to singular non-binary persons. I genuinely think no other person on this planet could hold this opinion.
kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
I genuinely think no other person on this planet could hold this opinion.
Eh, I’m pretty close to this opinion.
A family member came out as non-binary, and I don’t like to use they/them (for the same reason as Stallman), but I also think creating my own pronouns is more offensive, so I just use their first name, unless I can’t easily avoid it (like this sentence). I’m not trying to be offensive, I just don’t like they/them as angular pronouns. I also don’t like “you” as both singular and plural, but I’m also not ready to use “y’all”, so I refer to second person groups without the pronoun (if feasible).
On a related note, I also think gender is a social construct and not actually “real.” Sex exists because it’s a biological thing, but it shouldn’t be directly tied to your role in society. To change my mind, I need empirical evidence that there’s some unique difference between men and women (brain wave patterns?) that aligns groups of non-binary people or aligns trans people with people of the opposite sex. I personally don’t think this exists, and gender fluidity is more a symptom of a culture that isn’t well equipped to handle people who don’t nicely fit into a bucket. I think gender is a useful metaphor for what’s going on, and I absolutely support people fighting for using it to get the recognition they need, but I don’t think it’s an actual, scientifically proven thing.
The only real difference is that I use first names to refer to non-binary people’s first names more frequently than to binary people. I hope that doesn’t offend anyone, I just really don’t like using the same pronoun for both singular and plural.
UnpledgedCatnapTipper@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Singular they is over 600 years old by the way:
https://www.oed.com/discover/a-brief-history-of-singular-they/?tl=trueAs a trans person, my gender dysphoria is not something caused entirely by social gender roles. Medical transition has greatly alleviated the majority of it. Anecdotally, within the first week of hormone therapy, my dysphoria improved dramatically while only being out of the closet to 2 people outside of my therapist and the medical professionals who prescribed my hormones. It has continued to improve, although I’m still waiting for the surgery that will resolve the remaining things that hormones can’t fix.
Also, there are studies around brain structure differences between men and women, and transgender people tended to have brain structures in line with their gender, not their assigned sex at birth:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_gender_incongruence#Brain_structurePerhaps you should believe people when they tell you who they are, and get past your discomfort drawing arbitrary lines in grammar regarding pronouns, when singular they predates the fall of the Byzantine Empire by 75 years.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Singular they is over 600 years old by the way
Sure, and “you” used to be exclusively plural. Language changes, and now you is exclusively singular in some parts of the world (e.g. the US “South” where “y’all” is the plural).
I want separate singular and plural pronouns. Some languages do this properly and don’t even have gendered pronouns, such as Tagalog:
- he/she/singular they - siya(possessive = niya)
- plural he/she/they - sila (possessive = nila)
- singular you - iyo (possessive = niyo)
- plural you - inyo (possessive = ninyo)
there are studies around brain structure differences between men and wome
Sure, but sample sizes are small and many times they don’t seem to control for hormone therapy.
That said, this one looks interesting:
A 2009 MRI study by Luders et al. found that among 24 trans women not treated with hormone therapy, regional gray matter concentrations were more similar to those of cisgender men than of cisgender women, but there was a significantly greater volume of gray matter in the right putamen compared to cisgender men. Like earlier studies, researchers concluded that transgender identity was associated with a distinct cerebral pattern.
And this one:
Rametti et al. (2011) studied 18 trans men who had not undergone hormone therapy using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), an MRI technique which allows visualizing white matter, the structure of which is sexually dimorphic. Rametti et al. discovered that the trans men’s white matter, compared to 19 cisgender gynephilic females, showed higher fractional anisotropy values in posterior part of the right SLF, the forceps minor and corticospinal tract". Compared to 24 cisgender males, they showed only lower FA values in the corticospinal tract. The white matter patterns in trans men were found to be shifted in the direction of cis men.
And this review of other studies:
A 2021 review of brain studies published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that “although the majority of neuroanatomical, neurophysiological, and neurometabolic features” in transgender people “resemble those of their natal sex rather than those of their experienced gender”, for trans women they found feminine and demasculinized traits, and vice versa for trans men.
This suggests there may be developmental differences between trans and cis individuals, and there seems to be a correlation between trans people and the sex associated with the gender they identify as.
The body of available science certainly indicates more researchis needed and could lead to answers that show exactly what differences exist between cis and trans people. I sincerely hope that happens. But as it stands,the research isn’t conclusive.
Perhaps you should believe people when they tell you who they are
Let’s be extremely clear here, my support for policy will not be impacted whatsoever by the scientific research, regardless of the outcome. If you feel like hormone therapy or gender reassignment surgery or whatever other treatments will help you, you should be able to get them. Full stop. If you want to be treated as a man or a woman, I’ll do that. If you want to be called by different pronouns, I’ll do my best to do it, I just don’t like pronouns that are both singular and plural because they can lead to confusion. That’s it.
If there was a generally accepted gender-neutral set of pronouns (like in my example), I’d use them nearly exclusively. If the scientific evidence was clear cut, I’d admit as much. Neither is the case, so I’m left to find a happy medium that works for my and others in my life.
jaycifer@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
When I consider changes to language, I try to start from a prescriptivist position rather than a descriptivist, which to me means assuming language should stay static to ensure a common understanding rather than fragmented meanings that lead to misunderstandings. If there is a change in language, it should justify itself through simplifying terms or adding a new meaning that other words lack, while avoiding harming the meanings of pre-existing words.
I use they/them pronouns for non-binary people as an example of this mindset in action because I think the benefits far outweigh any cons. With a greater understanding that non-binary people new language was needed, and they/them seems to me a very natural fit as I would already think to use it when asking about a stranger even before I knew of non-binary as a concept (“oh your friend is coming? What’s their name, are they a boy or a girl?). In my experience having a very close non-binary friend I have found that context tells whether I’m using they as a singular/plural pronoun ~90% of the time, and when it fails it adds maybe 20 seconds of clarification to explain I was referring to person’s name.
I think what you’re saying should be taken as inspiration for further evolving how we use those terms to better separate between singular and plural use rather than try backtracking on how it has already evolved in common use, and I think the answer (for me at least) lies in your very comment. Much like “you” vs “you all”, going forward I’ll put a little effort into using they/them in a singular context and use “them all” or “they all” as a plural. Maybe it will catch on and 30 years from now we’ll be saying “theyal” and “theyal’ll” as shorthand for “they all” and “they all will.”
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 2 weeks ago
Also the “gendered brain” stuff you’re saying……wouldn’t that mean that gender isn’t a social construct and isn’t “fluid”, and is in fact a binary?
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 2 weeks ago
“They” as singular was really only made for when you didn’t know the sex of the person you were referring to, not as a pronoun for someone who you do. It had nothing to do with “gender identity” because that wasn’t a thing. Gender and sex were synonyms, 2 words for the same thing.
Eg “can my friend come to the party too?” “Yeah sure, what do they like on their pizza so I can make sure there is one they like?”
Not
“Can John come to the party?” “Yeah sure, what do they like on their pizza?”
In this instance you’d always have used “he” because you know with pretty much absolute certainty that John is male on account of being a male name.
It has only very recently been used as a choice that people tell people they want to be referred to by, because some people now believe in a “gender identity” being a separate thing to sex.
It existing as a singular pronoun doesn’t mean that it was used in the same context as it is now.
sudoer777@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
He accepts non-binary people but refuses to use they/them pronouns because he doesn’t like the ambiguity of singular/plural pronouns.
I agree with this criticism, but the entire English language is full of bullshit so you might as well consider using Esperanto
protogen420@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
as someone who is not a native english speaker when I first encountered people people prefer they/them I also found the same problem of ambiguity, and took quite a while to get used to it
_cnt0@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
I criticized singular they/them for increasing language ambiguity and suggested replacing it with something new like xe/xer multiple times. The reply is usually a shitstorm and downvote tornado. I’ve given up on that front.
UnpledgedCatnapTipper@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Probably because singular “they” predates singular “you” grammatically. Should we go back to using thou and thee instead of the singular you as well?
waddle_dee@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I always found this argument funny because how would you use pronouns for someone whose gender you do not know? They. It’s they. E.g. you are given the sentence: Jordan went to the store to buy apples. And you want to ask a followup question regarding how many, you reply: How many apples did they buy? It’s not that complicated. They has been used for gender ambiguity in everyone’s lives since grammar school. People just have an inherent bias towards trans folks and it’s incredibly depressing and sad.
_cnt0@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
I always found this argument funny because how would you use pronouns for someone whose gender you do not know? They. It’s they. E.g. you are given the sentence: Jordan went to the store to buy apples. And you want to ask a followup question regarding how many, you reply: How many apples did they buy?
And that’s not how English was taught to me or 99℅ of the population (including English as a second or third language) 20+ years ago. Singular they was only used for situations where the gender (read as superficially visible sex) was factually unknown. You see a forgotten umbrella and never saw who forgot it: “Somebody forgot their umbrella.” As soon as you only got a glimpse on the person forgetting it you would make a guess about he/she.
They has been used for gender ambiguity in everyone’s lives since grammar school.
If you’re younger than ~30 and from Great Britain, maybe. GB were the first to formalize and teach it like that less than 2 decades ago (if I recall correctly).
People just have an inherent bias towards trans folks and it’s incredibly depressing and sad.
That’s bullshit projection.
I, a non-native speaker, complain about increased ambiguity of the language because of singular they as a personal pronoun and make a proposal about new pronouns for the purpose.
You: Ah, must be transphobe. Let’s ignore everything he said (which doesn’t relate to transphobia at all).
It’s so frustrating not to be able to have a discussion about stuff making a language harder than it needs to be without people invoking transphobia, like, instantly.
But hey, I called it: can’t have a discussion about it and I’ve given up on it.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 2 weeks ago
It hasn’t been used for “gender” ambiguity, but sex ambiguity, because the separation of sex and gender is only a recent thing and it’s not even unanimously accepted.
_cnt0@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Doesn’t feel like you want to have an honest argument when you ask how far we should go back on a proposal about going forward and don’t address the single motivator ambiguity.
UnpledgedCatnapTipper@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Correct, because there is no argument to be had. Intentionally refusing to use someone’s pronouns is unacceptable, every time, with 0 exceptions. If there’s a dire need to be explicitly clear you’re talking about a single person, you could just use their name in that instance.
primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus 2 weeks ago
Okay that’s all cool or cool-and-stubbornly-autistic. But he has some other opinions that are not, about consent and age.
So the blanket ‘fuck yeah, stallman!’ Doesn’t really fly anymore.
yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
Hasn’t he admitted to changing his opinion after learning about the effects on children? I’m not in the loop about this.
But yeah, you definitely shouldn’t treat his words as gospel. A lot of questionable-at-best stuff in there.