24
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by belluck@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/books@lemmy.world

It just seems incredibly odd for there to be so many lines in a book about gender insisting that there is no way to refer to someone (in the English language, at least) without implying gender. She even mentions the possibility of using „it“ at one point!

I’m liking the book otherwise, but every time the narrators ponder about pronouns without even considering „they“ I have to ask myself if there is any point in ignoring it or if she genuinely just forgot. I don’t think it’s possible for her to have not known about it considering how well-read she was and how long it’s been in use.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] CombatWombat@feddit.online 3 points 6 days ago

I agree with Le Guin here, though only in hindsight. The singular they does imply gender, specifically a particular kind of nonbinary gender -- it makes perfect sense for someone to say "I don't use they/them pronouns; I prefer xe/xir." It's surprising she felt that at the time, though, since I don't think it had as wide adoption at that point. I wonder if she felt the singular they did imply gender, but specifically an indeterminate or unknown gender, since that was its primary use at the time.

this post was submitted on 27 May 2026
24 points (75.0% liked)

Books

8071 readers
4 users here now

A community for all things related to Books.

Rules

  1. Be Nice. No personal attacks or hate speech.
  2. No spam. All posts should be related to discussion or reviews related to books. (Please avoid posts that are just a link to the book and a generic summary)
  3. No self promotion.

Official Bingo Posts:

Related Communities

Community icon by IconsBox (from freepik.com)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS