Reference: Shawn Mendes Apologizes To Sam Smith For Misgendering Them (buzzfeed.com)
Not that we have the slightest idea who Shawn Mendes or Sam Smith are, but they apparently had a little contretemps about Mendes “misgendering” Smith. Both are biological males, by the way, but Smith apparently is confused about his gender and has adopted “they/them” pronouns in reference to “them”self (“himself” to normal people). At some music industry get-together Mendes introduced Smith as “him”, which led to Mendes apologizing to Smith for “misgendering” him (or them, or they, whatever). And Smith’s response was “We’re all learning together.” Smith, of course, is now a hero for being gracious about the “misgendering.”
OMG! We’re not sure what we’re supposed to be learning together, but it certainly seems quite fashionable these days among a certain crowd to pretend you aren’t what you are and that you are what you aren’t. In our experience that’s generally called “acting” and belongs on the stage or the set, not incorporating it into your real life.
But this nonsense is becoming insidious, along with being idiotic. It’s now potentially an insult to refer to a him as a “him,” or to a her as a “her”, as if we’re all supposed to keep track of the phony gendering that these morons think is so cool these days (not to mention it apparently gets your name in the media, as in “there’s no such thing as bad publicity”).
So now how do we ever know who is referring to whom? Using the plural to refer to the singular is just silly. “And now let me introduce Joe Schmoe, we’re happy to have them with us tonight.” OK, so where’s the other one, or two, or three? And we all are expected to cater to these foolish whims as if it’s normal. The media, of course, is all over it like white on rice, and is happy to refer to people by whatever they want to be called. Much of it seems to have started with Prince deciding he wanted to be referred to as some unpronounceable symbol – you remember, “the artist formerly known as Prince.” Yikes. Now the “gender non-conforming” crowd as apparently adopted that approach, and we fear we haven’t seen the last of it.
But if we’re going to go down this road, our suggestion is that anyone who claims some sort of gendering issue and doesn’t want to be referred to as a “him” or a “her” simply be called an “it.” Like references to a baby still in the womb when the gender isn’t known. That should be the rule going forward and forget letting these clowns determine and try to impose every goofy thing they want to be called. That should satisfy them (would be “it” in the singular, but in this formulation plural and singular still matter) since their gender is still a mystery, and it keeps the normal singular/plural of the language intact.
So next time, let’s have it be “”And now let me introduce Joe Schmoe, we’re happy to have it with us tonight.” Let that be the rule and perhaps this foolishness will abate.