have you used the gender-neutral title Mx.?

[M_K_Babalon]

I had never heard of "mx", but all my characters have genders, anyway.

 

[BobbyLaker]

A trend just started here in Australia, in business correspondence and email signature blocks, is to put "Name Name (he/him) (she/her) (they/them)".

It's not mandated. Yet.

... it's rife here in the UK.
Almost like folk/business trying to out-pronoun each other.

 

[BobbyLaker]

Mx reads a bit 'techie'. I could see a use for it in the Sci-Fi/Fantasy arena.

 

[nice90sguy]

nx, I hvnt

 

[Fagg0t_in_da_haus]

I have had nonbinary characters, but never used Mx. I don't know, I just never felt the need to address them by their title. In fact, I think I've rarely addressed any character by their title. Might just be a 'me' thing.

 

[Euphony]

nx, I hvnt

 

[KachinaDoll]

No, and I don't use they/them or any other non-grammatical nonsense either.

 

[Rob_Royale]

I'm fine with a gender neutral pronoun, but they/them confuses me. They are plural terms.

 

[Winter_Fare]

I would happily use it if I needed to, but it hasn't come up. I think if you need to use it do, it's easily understood and it's unlikely to confuse people anymore than the singular "they" does. If a person can't work it out what it means, they're probably too thick to count as your target audience anyway X

 

[Trionyx]

I'm fine with a gender neutral pronoun, but they/them confuses me. They are plural terms.

I agree. Society has fairly quickly accepted Ms. and multiple other new terms over the years and I wish the nonbinary community could make up and agree to a new set of pronouns. I believe people would be far more accepting of a new pronoun than modifying an old one. But I am a lonely voice in the wilderness.

 

[SimonDoom]

The use of "Ms." makes a lot of sense to me as a basic matter of equality and fairness. There's no good reason in a modern society why a woman's marital status should be more important than a man's. I remember a teacher of mine in middle school in the 1970s who made a point of wanting to be referred to as "Ms." rather than "Miss." Little things like that acclimate one to change. In my profession over several decades I've always referred to women as "Ms." No big deal. Seems logical and fair.

But I don't see how the use of "Mx" advances anything. How is society improved by being gender neutral? It strikes me as a contrived ideology. I think most people are comfortable with gender differences, and a small but vocal minority wants to eliminate them. I don't see how that small minority has any superior moral standing to insist upon its view. "Mx" seems contrived and silly to me.

And I definitely would not use "Mx" in an erotic story, because in an erotic story the heightening, rather than the diminishing, of gender differences makes the story more erotic to most readers, and certainly to this reader/author.

 

[Winter_Fare]

But I don't see how the use of "Mx" advances anything. How is society improved by being gender neutral? It strikes me as a contrived ideology. I think most people are comfortable with gender differences, and a small but vocal minority wants to eliminate them. I don't see how that small minority has any superior moral standing to insist upon its view. "Mx" seems contrived and silly to me.

The use is obvious. It gives people who are gender neutral a title to use in a formal setting, they're not forcing anyone else to use it for themselves?

 

[ronde]

The use of "Ms." makes a lot of sense to me as a basic matter of equality and fairness. There's no good reason in a modern society why a woman's marital status should be more important than a man's. I remember a teacher of mine in middle school in the 1970s who made a point of wanting to be referred to as "Ms." rather than "Miss." Little things like that acclimate one to change. In my profession over several decades I've always referred to women as "Ms." No big deal. Seems logical and fair.

But I don't see how the use of "Mx" advances anything. How is society improved by being gender neutral? It strikes me as a contrived ideology. I think most people are comfortable with gender differences, and a small but vocal minority wants to eliminate them. I don't see how that small minority has any superior moral standing to insist upon its view. "Mx" seems contrived and silly to me.

And I definitely would not use "Mx" in an erotic story, because in an erotic story the heightening, rather than the diminishing, of gender differences makes the story more erotic to most readers, and certainly to this reader/author.

I've used "Ms" upon occasion, usually for a woman who is unmarried but older than her twenties. To me, "Miss" implies youth and used to also imply virginity, while "Ms." just says not married. I think that was part of the appeal of the title "Ms." to women's lib in the 70's. They were older than their teens and "Miss" didn't sound mature enough.

I'm also not a fan of the seemingly never ending invention of new words in the quest to be inclusive. I don't really care what you want to call yourself, but don't keep inventing words just because they sound different than the old words and make you feel like you've accomplished something. "Latinx" didn't work. Will we try "Axian" next to include the Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, and other people from South East Asia?" How about "Europeax" to include all of what we call Europe instead of just using Engish, French, German, etc."

As I said before, the gender thing doesn't really concern me. As far as I'm concerned, you can be any sexuality you want and I don't care. Needing an urban dictionary to figure out which of the 52 (at my last reading) sexualities you identify as does concern me. Most are not intuitive and many overlap to some extent or another.

Language was invented in order for humans to communicate in a more definitive way than using grunts and hand signals. It's bad enough that there are so many different languages that people from different areas can't communicate. Confusing English with a bunch of made-up words with no etmology behind them only makes communication more difficult for most of us.

 

[Britva415]

Mx reads a bit 'techie'

It's the title for Elon Musk's first child with Ms. Grimes.

Mx X Æ-X12 Musk

 

[samhasstories]

I've never personally used Mx. They/them I find grammatically awkward. But it is interesting how gender binary our language is. Or even my own automatic subconscious reactions when I see or meet someone. In real life as well as fiction. Somewhere in my mind there's a male/female switch, and I feel a need to choose one or the other.

But that doesn't really reflect the world we live in. There are people that don't identify within the standard heteronormative framework, and I believe they should be treated with respect. So I try to break the automatic binary identification. But the language is not intuitive. How, for example, do you pronounce Mx.?

 

[Winter_Fare]

Mx (usually pronounced /mɪks/ MIKS or /məks/ MəKS

How, for example, do you pronounce Mx.?

The only problem I see is that it isn't short form for a longer title, that's why it seems forced. Even Ms sounds forced the way some people say it. I wish there was a more widely accepted alternative.

I'm not trans, but I have to say, as a woman with a gender neutral name, I've noticed that people use different language and different tone when they assume I'm a man. I find it equal parts horrible and amusing.

 

[Gamblnluck]

I don't see how that small minority has any superior moral standing to insist upon its view. "Mx" seems contrived and silly to me.

Like they/them referring to single individual. Your 'sex' is what is between your legs. How or even IF you chose to use it is up to you.
Orientation is really nobody else's business. I don't really define anybody by that anybody. I figure it is like their politics or their religion. Unless foisted on me, it is not really going to effect my day to day life.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I'm fine with a gender neutral pronoun, but they/them confuses me. They are plural terms.

Singular "they" has been around in English since the 14th century.

Singular "you" was still controversial up to the 18th century. For instance, see this rant from Thomas Elwood (1714):

"Again, The Corrupt and Unfound Form of Speaking in the Plural Number to a Single Person (YOU to One, instead of THOU contrary to the Pure, Plain and Single Language of TRUTH THOU to One, and YOU to more than One) which had always been used, by GOD to Men, and Men to GOD, as well as one to another, from the oldest Record of Time, till Corrupt Men, for Corrupt Ends, in later and Corrupt Times, to Flatter, Fawn, and work upon the Corrupt Nature in Men, brought in that false and senseless Way of Speaking, YOU to One ; which hath since corrupted the Modern Languages, and hath greatly debased the Spirits, and depraved the Manners of Men."

"Latinx" didn't work. Will we try "Axian" next to include the Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, and other people from South East Asia?" How about "Europeax" to include all of what we call Europe instead of just using Engish, French, German, etc."

No, because that completely misses the point of why "Latinx" was coined.

ICYMI, the intention behind "Latinx" was to create a gender-neutral option where none existed. (Spanish is a heavily gendered language; "Latino" is masculine, "Latina" is feminine.) But "Asian" and "European" are already gender-neutral, so the issue doesn't apply there.

As I said before, the gender thing doesn't really concern me. As far as I'm concerned, you can be any sexuality you want and I don't care. Needing an urban dictionary to figure out which of the 52 (at my last reading) sexualities you identify as does concern me. Most are not intuitive and many overlap to some extent or another.

Sex is complicated. Sexuality is complicated. This site would be much less interesting if it weren't.

Language was invented in order for humans to communicate in a more definitive way than using grunts and hand signals. It's bad enough that there are so many different languages that people from different areas can't communicate. Confusing English with a bunch of made-up words with no etmology behind them only makes communication more difficult for most of us.

"Invented" and "made-up" are the same thing.

Nobody actually opposes new words on principle; y'all are happy to use "computer", "television", "cellphone", and use the singular "you" rather than "thou". In the end it's never about the invention of words but about who has license to invent them.

I agree. Society has fairly quickly accepted Ms. and multiple other new terms over the years and I wish the nonbinary community could make up and agree to a new set of pronouns. I believe people would be far more accepting of a new pronoun than modifying an old one. But I am a lonely voice in the wilderness.

This has been done many times. There have been various proposals for nonbinary/gender-neutral neopronouns going back to the 18th century, and some like "ze" still see use today. But they've never managed to expand beyond a small niche, and IME people are if anything much less accepting of such neopronouns than even of "they"/"them".

edit: also, there's not really a single homogenous "nonbinary community" to go to there; "nonbinary" covers a lot of different stuff.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Like they/them referring to single individual.

It was good enough for these people:

"There's not a man I meet but doth salute me
As if I were their well-acquainted friend"
- William Shakespeare, A Comedy of Errors, Act IV, Scene 3. First published 1623, believed to have been written around 1594.

"I always delight in overthrowing those kind of schemes, and cheating a person of their premeditated contempt..."
"But to expose the former faults of any person, without knowing what their present feelings were, seemed unjustifiable."
- Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice, 1816. Many more Austen examples here.

"Every one must judge according to their own feelings."
- George Gordon, Lord Byron, Manfred, 1823.

"Hastely hiȝed eche . . . þei neyȝþed so neiȝh . . . þere william & his worþi lef were liand i-fere."
- William and the Werewolf, ca. 1350 translation of the French poem Guillaume de Palerme.

(The "þ" is a thorn, an old letter that corresponds to "th"; "ȝ" is yogh, which is a "y" sound.)

And apparently it's also good enough for this guy:

"Somebody could still get inside if they wanted but would have to work at it."
"In Louisiana at least one party had to know they were being recorded."
- Gamblnluck, Baby Challenge - New Version, 2021

"Somebody is gonna see it and target you. They will get it. How bad you get hurt when they do is the problem."
- Gamblnluck, Bonnie's Story, 2020

"I intuitively picked up on subtle signs that a patient was having problems long before they began to slide down the tubes."
- Gamblnluck, Cajuns Stick Together, 2020

"And that includes if you let one of your lovers into the house and they do the damage."
- Gamblnluck, Chance Discovery, 2021

Seriously, dude. I pulled up the first five stories on your author page, and four out of five are using "they" to refer to a single individual. Guess it's only a problem when other people do it?

 

[Gamblnluck]

Seriously, dude. I pulled up the first five stories on your author page, and four out of five are using "they" to refer to a single individual. Guess it's only a problem when other people do it?

YOu are full of crap. If, like your examples above, I used 'they' it is the euphemistic general they, not the they/them a transsexual expects to be addressed.

 

[Winter_Fare]

euphemistic

 

[Fagg0t_in_da_haus]

YOu are full of crap. If, like your examples above, I used 'they' it is the euphemistic general they, not the they/them a transsexual expects to be addressed.

What are you saying? I genuinely do not understand what you mean at all.

 

[alohadave]

What are you saying? I genuinely do not understand what you mean at all.

Using 'they' as the indeterminate pronoun, instead of as a preferred personal pronoun.

 

[Gamblnluck]

What are you saying? I genuinely do not understand what you mean at all.

Bramblethorn showed examples of Shakespeare using the word they. He says I use it in my stories. Yes, as in a plural they. In my original comment I was referring to the they/them nomenclature some trans want to be called.

Like alohadave said only he used proper grammar..LOL

 

[Winter_Fare]

Bramblethorn showed examples of Shakespeare using the word they. He says I use it in my stories. Yes, as in a plural they. In my original comment I was referring to the they/them nomenclature some trans want to be called.

Like alohadave said only he used proper grammar..LOL

Like they/them referring to single individual.

There you are, moving the goalposts again.

You specifically said that "they" can't be singular.

Bramblethorn demonstrated that it can be, and it is, and it has been for centuries, then you're all "oh, I only meant trans people can't use it..."

You're punching above your weight mate, and your malice is showing.