Posted On: Monday - April 28th 2025 7:50PM MST
In Topics: Websites Political Correctness Media Stupidity
It was a tweet on Instapundit, by Alex Berenson (he of anti-Corona-Panic fame) critiquing a NY Times article on this past January's fatal mid-air crash of Army "Pat-25" and PSA, dba American 5342, that got me back into this story yesterday. The CVR from the helo (along with from PSA's CRJ-700) with excellent sound quality, per the NTSB, is out somewhere, such that the NY Times could get to it.
I'd noted early on that the pilots of the Army Blackhawk helicopter were completely at fault for the crash. There are always contributing factors, but this doesn't change the basic blame. Peak Stupidity asked Did D.I.E. cause 67 people to die? and then discussed the D.I.E. social factors in The pilots of Pat-25 about a week after the crash. In addition to bringing up D.I.E. as a root cause,in that tweet, Mr. Berenson objected to the way this "Newspaper of Record" only got to the real story of the mistakes of the diversity helo pilot* at the end. Does he read Steve Sailer, because I'm pretty sure pundit Steve Sailer has been first in being all over those writers for putting the important stuff in paragraph 18 or 25
Perhaps Peak Stupidity may have been first in noticing this were we prone to READING the NY Times. We won't, generally, but this story was interesting enough to where I tried to get to the original article, especially to see how and where the writers got that CVR transcript. Alas, tweets suck! I spend=t time going to twitter, back and forth, gave up, and then figured I'd go on 2 go-to websites for the story.
That's where this post turns into a story of Media grammatical stupidity - we'll get to the real story soon. OK, Gateway Pundit (review there**) is full of ads and hype. I got sick of it about a year ago. However, I can usually find news on a timely story that would interest Conservatives there. Yeah, I found their story.
As I'd expected, the writer Christina Laila knows nothing about aviation. That wasn't the problem. The problem was the confusing pronoun usage that truly impeded intelligent conveyance of a story. Let me get this straight. D.I.E. hire or not, it's possibly Army Captain Rebecca Lobach did get into the weird Woke pronoun business. However, the politically erroneous pronoun problem here, and worse to be described later hearken back to Feminism. This is the use of "they", "them", and "their" for 3rd-person SINGULAR when the sex of said person is not known. We discussed this way back in First post on Feminism - starting off at a low stupidity level. The deal was, we can't use standard English male pronouns for unknown sex. It'd be "sexist".
Yeah, that's a pretty low stupidity level compared to today's, but it's, after half a century, still damned annoying and confusing. What I didn't get to in that post (because they used to be short!) is that these pronouns will be used even if we DO know the sex, and even if the sex is female! I thought at least Feminist would like us to use "she", "her", "hers"...
So, I'm there trying to quickly get the gist of things on GP, and I see the following (reproduced as best I could because the site fixed it since yesterday.)
On Sunday, The New York Times released new details about the fatal crash and it revealed Rebecca Lobach repeatedly ignored warnings from their right seat about altitude.Well, enough of that - I went over to ZeroHedge to read this:
Lobachโs male co-pilot, an Army flight instructor, directly told them to turn away, and they flew straight into a passenger jet.
It was worse there!
Let me spell out what the Times buried deep in their article: The Black Hawk pilot received clear, explicit warnings about altitude from their co-pilot.You couldn't tell who's doing what and who's telling what to whom, were you not already familiar with the story. No, the blameless unfortunate crew chief is NOT one of the plural people here. There are only 2! In aviation, if ANYWHERE, you want clear communication, which is, in fact part of the very story of the crash.
The co-pilot explicitly instructed them to turn away from the passenger jet. And what did they do? They ignored those warnings and flew straight into the path of an American Airlines flight carrying 64 innocent people.
Yet, this gobbledygook is written all because of a bunch of bitching by some Feminists 50 years ago. If we're (and Trump sure is trying!) going to shut down D.I.E. and wokeness, the least we can do for starters is to reverse this old-timey pronoun stupidity. Maybe, then, we - talking Peak Stupidity here - can get to the additional information on the Pat-25 helo pilots in that fatal crash.
PS: As you can see, it was not "Tyler Durden" who wrote the ZeroHedge article, but, rather, one Matt Margolis of Conservative PJ Media. Still, Tyler Durden is Blogger-in-Command of ZeroHedge, so he should have taken control of the pixels, just as Warrant Officer and Instructor Pilot Andrew Eaves should have taken the stick from them, you know, them, I mean the one(s?) flying that Blackhawk. See?
PPS: The GP commenters are an OK lot, but not as bright and fun, IMO, as the ZH guys. The ZH guys gave the writer appropriate criticism for this confusing pronoun stupidity.
* Blame can be put on her instructor too, but we'll get to that in the REAL POSTS on this story.
** See also our Addendum to that. Also, a bit later, I got pissed off and wrote about Gateway Pundit Spanish-language "outreach". That was about the time I quit reading regularly.
Comments:
Moderator
Thursday - May 1st 2025 2:45PM MST
PS: Thank, Dieter, and good to hear from you!
Yes, our English grammar doesn't HAVE to be confusing, although we do have the problem with no distinction between 2nd person singular vs plural - both "you". Some Americans have fixed this - Southerners with "y'all" for the plural and some of those specific New Yorkers or New Jersians like TV show Queens-dwelling Archie Bunker and possibly Donald Trump in private with "youse" or "youse guys".
That guy writing your excerpt likely hasn't read here but sounds like he understands the big decrease in competence - manifested as an increase in stupidity - that we've been discussing here for some years. He's concentrating only on the political flavor of stupidity, while we cover it all.
Nice rant by this Eugyppius. I'll look him up to find out what the 4 areas are and to read the subsequent posts.
Yes, our English grammar doesn't HAVE to be confusing, although we do have the problem with no distinction between 2nd person singular vs plural - both "you". Some Americans have fixed this - Southerners with "y'all" for the plural and some of those specific New Yorkers or New Jersians like TV show Queens-dwelling Archie Bunker and possibly Donald Trump in private with "youse" or "youse guys".
That guy writing your excerpt likely hasn't read here but sounds like he understands the big decrease in competence - manifested as an increase in stupidity - that we've been discussing here for some years. He's concentrating only on the political flavor of stupidity, while we cover it all.
Nice rant by this Eugyppius. I'll look him up to find out what the 4 areas are and to read the subsequent posts.
Moderator
Thursday - May 1st 2025 2:38PM MST
PS: Thanks for the links, Adam. I was about to say that that Gemini AI was not about to go off its woke programming, but then I got to the last part in which you fed it some other terminology to look up and chew on. That finally worked! I'm glad I read through the end of that.
From your 2nd link with that tweet, going backwards here:
"Her impressive achievements qualified her as one of our top and most deserving applicants in our military pathway to medical school, who would have been a great asset to our school and the entire medical profession ... if she hadn't negligently rammed a $50 million helicopter into an airplane and killed 67 people." FIFT
"A dedicated service member and aspiring physician, Captain Lobach embodied the values of compassion and resilience. Her legacy continues to inspire ... a whole lot of NTSB recommendations." Again, FIFT
From your 2nd link with that tweet, going backwards here:
"Her impressive achievements qualified her as one of our top and most deserving applicants in our military pathway to medical school, who would have been a great asset to our school and the entire medical profession ... if she hadn't negligently rammed a $50 million helicopter into an airplane and killed 67 people." FIFT
"A dedicated service member and aspiring physician, Captain Lobach embodied the values of compassion and resilience. Her legacy continues to inspire ... a whole lot of NTSB recommendations." Again, FIFT
Dieter Kief
Wednesday - April 30th 2025 10:17AM MST
PS
Hi mod - - -grammar is usually underestimated.
As are girl-boss attitudes. I agree, I agree.
German right wing blogger eugyppius just began writing a series of articles about - - stupidity - - and I copied the beginning of it -
Towards a Theory of Political Stupidity
eugyppius
Apr. 30
Every time โ literally every single time โ I write a post about a stupid thing that our rulers have done, people appear in my comments to explain why our rulers have in fact not done any stupid things. In fact, these commenters tell me, our rulers are merely being super malicious, or hyperclever, or both super malicious and hyperclever at the same time. Their actions only appear to be stupid because they are a pretence for something else, or because I am simply too naive to understand their actual intent, or for some other reason.
eugyppius: a plague chronicle is a reader-supported publication. maybe you subscribe?
Upgrade to paid
I donโt claim that I have always been correct in calling stupidity, or that there can never be any other, more precise explanation for the idiocies of the modern nation-state. I make analytical mistakes like everyone else, and many things have gone wrong with our politics; stupidity is merely one of them. Nevertheless, stupidity is the one thesis that, in my experience, invariably provokes critique. A lot of people really, really donโt want to believe that their states can be stupid, and this despite overwhelming evidence โ accumulating for decades now โ of their unceasing and escalating failure across many domains. Perhaps it is simply more comforting to believe that we are ruled by intelligent systems and intelligent people, even if they also happen to be malign enemies. Perhaps it also helps to believe that there is a plan, particularly in an era wherein the state seems to have lost almost all of its capacity for strategic action. Maybe that is why so many are so opposed to seeing the plain stupidity of our rulers for what it is.
In this and subsequent posts, I want to explore the burgeoning phenomenon of political stupidity more thoroughly, because I believe it is very important. Along the way I will rework and update some older posts that I wrote long ago, and I will write various new pieces to fill in the gaps and create a cohesive collection of miniature of studies on this problem. If readers like these posts, perhaps I will even fashion them into a booklet of some kind.
My thesis is simple: Political stupidity has become a very dangerous and potent force, and this relatively recently, in the past two or three decades. What is worse, this stupidity seems to be increasing in both depth and extent. Those areas of state action that were already stupid are getting even stupider, while other areas (such as local government) that seemed at first to have escaped the great stupid are now rapidly succumbing to the same general stupidity that is afflicting everything else.
This phenomenon has gone almost wholly unnoticed, and it inspires a wide range of questions for which we must urgently seek answers: What is causing the stupid and why does the stupid keep growing? Are its roots ideological or social? If political outsiders were to seize power and chase out our present elite, would they become stupid too, and if so how long would that take? Stupid individuals are generally easy to manipulate, and yet our political systems remain robust and determined in their stupidity. Why is that, and how does it work exactly? Is there a point at which the stupidity will stop advancing, or will it literally consume entire economies and societies before burning itself out? Dare we even hope that there is a cure for this stupidity?
I hope to address all of these questions and more. In this introductory post, I want to explain precisely what I mean by political stupidity, and delineate the Four Areas of Primary Stupid. This is the first step towards understanding where this terrible stupidity comes from and what it means. ...
Hi mod - - -grammar is usually underestimated.
As are girl-boss attitudes. I agree, I agree.
German right wing blogger eugyppius just began writing a series of articles about - - stupidity - - and I copied the beginning of it -
Towards a Theory of Political Stupidity
eugyppius
Apr. 30
Every time โ literally every single time โ I write a post about a stupid thing that our rulers have done, people appear in my comments to explain why our rulers have in fact not done any stupid things. In fact, these commenters tell me, our rulers are merely being super malicious, or hyperclever, or both super malicious and hyperclever at the same time. Their actions only appear to be stupid because they are a pretence for something else, or because I am simply too naive to understand their actual intent, or for some other reason.
eugyppius: a plague chronicle is a reader-supported publication. maybe you subscribe?
Upgrade to paid
I donโt claim that I have always been correct in calling stupidity, or that there can never be any other, more precise explanation for the idiocies of the modern nation-state. I make analytical mistakes like everyone else, and many things have gone wrong with our politics; stupidity is merely one of them. Nevertheless, stupidity is the one thesis that, in my experience, invariably provokes critique. A lot of people really, really donโt want to believe that their states can be stupid, and this despite overwhelming evidence โ accumulating for decades now โ of their unceasing and escalating failure across many domains. Perhaps it is simply more comforting to believe that we are ruled by intelligent systems and intelligent people, even if they also happen to be malign enemies. Perhaps it also helps to believe that there is a plan, particularly in an era wherein the state seems to have lost almost all of its capacity for strategic action. Maybe that is why so many are so opposed to seeing the plain stupidity of our rulers for what it is.
In this and subsequent posts, I want to explore the burgeoning phenomenon of political stupidity more thoroughly, because I believe it is very important. Along the way I will rework and update some older posts that I wrote long ago, and I will write various new pieces to fill in the gaps and create a cohesive collection of miniature of studies on this problem. If readers like these posts, perhaps I will even fashion them into a booklet of some kind.
My thesis is simple: Political stupidity has become a very dangerous and potent force, and this relatively recently, in the past two or three decades. What is worse, this stupidity seems to be increasing in both depth and extent. Those areas of state action that were already stupid are getting even stupider, while other areas (such as local government) that seemed at first to have escaped the great stupid are now rapidly succumbing to the same general stupidity that is afflicting everything else.
This phenomenon has gone almost wholly unnoticed, and it inspires a wide range of questions for which we must urgently seek answers: What is causing the stupid and why does the stupid keep growing? Are its roots ideological or social? If political outsiders were to seize power and chase out our present elite, would they become stupid too, and if so how long would that take? Stupid individuals are generally easy to manipulate, and yet our political systems remain robust and determined in their stupidity. Why is that, and how does it work exactly? Is there a point at which the stupidity will stop advancing, or will it literally consume entire economies and societies before burning itself out? Dare we even hope that there is a cure for this stupidity?
I hope to address all of these questions and more. In this introductory post, I want to explain precisely what I mean by political stupidity, and delineate the Four Areas of Primary Stupid. This is the first step towards understanding where this terrible stupidity comes from and what it means. ...
Adam Smith
Wednesday - April 30th 2025 9:33AM MST
PS: Greetings, everyone!
The tragic circumstances surrounding her death only serve to reinforce the perception of her as a brilliant and fearless individual. Her story is a reminder of the dedication and bravery of those who serve in the military.
https://i.ibb.co/0pLTr8w2/Brilliant-and-Fearless.jpg
https://x.com/IcahnMountSinai/status/1896632698518515818
๐ผ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐ ๐๐๐๐ก ๐คโ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ข๐ก "๐๐ฆ ๐ด๐๐๐๐๐๐ก" ๐๐๐ ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ก ๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐.
๐ผ ๐๐ข๐๐ ๐ ๐ฆ๐๐ข ๐๐๐'๐ก ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ข๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐-๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐ ๐๐๐ค ๐๐ ๐ด๐๐๐ฆ.
https://gemini.google.com/share/1554a562d6f2
โฎ๏ธ
The tragic circumstances surrounding her death only serve to reinforce the perception of her as a brilliant and fearless individual. Her story is a reminder of the dedication and bravery of those who serve in the military.
https://i.ibb.co/0pLTr8w2/Brilliant-and-Fearless.jpg
https://x.com/IcahnMountSinai/status/1896632698518515818
๐ผ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐ ๐๐๐๐ก ๐คโ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ข๐ก "๐๐ฆ ๐ด๐๐๐๐๐๐ก" ๐๐๐ ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ก ๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐.
๐ผ ๐๐ข๐๐ ๐ ๐ฆ๐๐ข ๐๐๐'๐ก ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ข๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐-๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐ ๐๐๐ค ๐๐ ๐ด๐๐๐ฆ.
https://gemini.google.com/share/1554a562d6f2
โฎ๏ธ
Moderator
Tuesday - April 29th 2025 6:08PM MST
PS: Well, Alarmist, what you wrote would have been THIS post were I not to have run into this grammar stupidity first. That's it succinctly.
Moderator
Tuesday - April 29th 2025 6:06PM MST
PS: Yes, that's the quote I've thought of many times, Adam, that I have in mind when I write "humiliation." Freebreed men, haha! Yes, there should be a law about the availability of tampons for EVERYONE - I wrote a post on something like this - we'll call it "Carrie's Law". I think new commenter CHLR might get this one, but you'd have to know some famous 1970s movies.
I will check out the NY Times articles - thanks for that! I mostly want to read the CVR transcript of from the helicopter myself, if I (we) ever can.
Right, I should have mentioned that for fairness, based on the comments on ZH and maybe GP too - it wasn't the NY Times doing this stuff, so I'll give them that.
I will check out the NY Times articles - thanks for that! I mostly want to read the CVR transcript of from the helicopter myself, if I (we) ever can.
Right, I should have mentioned that for fairness, based on the comments on ZH and maybe GP too - it wasn't the NY Times doing this stuff, so I'll give them that.
The Alarmist
Tuesday - April 29th 2025 11:59AM MST
PS
I missed the part where he called out "My Aicraft" and took control to avert disaster.
I guess you don't interrupt girl-bosses in the New US Army.
๐๏ธ
I missed the part where he called out "My Aicraft" and took control to avert disaster.
I guess you don't interrupt girl-bosses in the New US Army.
๐๏ธ
Adam Smith
Tuesday - April 29th 2025 10:41AM MST
PS: Good afternoon, gentlemen!
๐๐, ๐ค๐'๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ฆ๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ก ๐กโ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ก โ๐ข๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ข๐ก ๐กโ๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐ "๐ ๐๐๐๐ข๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ฆ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐๐" ๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐คโ๐๐ ๐กโ๐ ๐ ๐๐ฅ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ฆ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก๐๐ ๐๐๐กโ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ค๐๐๐๐ ? ๐โ๐ฆ ๐ค๐๐ข๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ฆ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ก?
Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. Oneโs standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.
โTheodore Dalrymple
-------
๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ โ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐คโ๐ ๐๐๐๐ค๐ ๐คโ๐๐ก ๐๐๐ ๐ (๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ?)...
(I know I've shared this before, but here goes...)
https://people.com/health/transgender-activist-freebleed-men-can-menstruate/
Cervical screening is for everyone with a cervix!
https://www.cancervic.org.au/cancer-information/screening/cervical-screening/everyone-with-a-cervix
--------
https://i.ibb.co/bMKq301D/Odd-Thing-to-Say.jpg
So, I found the New York Times article(s) in question...
This is the one mentioned by Zero Hedge...
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/27/business/dc-plane-crash-reagan-airport.html
https://archive.ph/iofth
And this looks like a companion article that was written shortly before the other...
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/27/us/politics/takeaways-investigation-airport-collision.html
https://archive.ph/EWNAR
For what it is (or isn't) worth, the authors of the New York Times articles did not use they/them/their pronouns for little miss Rebecca. They clearly refer to her as her. (Did the Times authors misgender her? Misgender they? Misgender them?)
โฎ๏ธ
๐๐, ๐ค๐'๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ฆ๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ก ๐กโ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ก โ๐ข๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ข๐ก ๐กโ๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐ "๐ ๐๐๐๐ข๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ฆ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐๐" ๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐คโ๐๐ ๐กโ๐ ๐ ๐๐ฅ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ฆ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก๐๐ ๐๐๐กโ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ค๐๐๐๐ ? ๐โ๐ฆ ๐ค๐๐ข๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ฆ ๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ก?
Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. Oneโs standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.
โTheodore Dalrymple
-------
๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ โ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐คโ๐ ๐๐๐๐ค๐ ๐คโ๐๐ก ๐๐๐ ๐ (๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ?)...
(I know I've shared this before, but here goes...)
https://people.com/health/transgender-activist-freebleed-men-can-menstruate/
Cervical screening is for everyone with a cervix!
https://www.cancervic.org.au/cancer-information/screening/cervical-screening/everyone-with-a-cervix
--------
https://i.ibb.co/bMKq301D/Odd-Thing-to-Say.jpg
So, I found the New York Times article(s) in question...
This is the one mentioned by Zero Hedge...
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/27/business/dc-plane-crash-reagan-airport.html
https://archive.ph/iofth
And this looks like a companion article that was written shortly before the other...
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/27/us/politics/takeaways-investigation-airport-collision.html
https://archive.ph/EWNAR
For what it is (or isn't) worth, the authors of the New York Times articles did not use they/them/their pronouns for little miss Rebecca. They clearly refer to her as her. (Did the Times authors misgender her? Misgender they? Misgender them?)
โฎ๏ธ
Moderator
Tuesday - April 29th 2025 6:09AM MST
PS: Re your 2nd paragraph, oh yeah, I've seen it. It might be taken for the really stupid woke business about men being able to have babies and who knows what else (periods?), but I have seen writing like "When someone. has their menstrual cramps, they tend to ...." Remember, this was before the bit about trying to market tampons to men and putting dispensers in the boy's bathrooms in school. (Thank you, Tim Walz, for you efforts!)
So, yes, there are humans out there inflicting that, but sentient ones? Not so sure. I don't know why they would do that. That's what I wondered. If you're anti-male, you can use the female pronouns, you'd think. Maybe it was leading up to the modern woke business, but I'd seen this before it.
So, yes, there are humans out there inflicting that, but sentient ones? Not so sure. I don't know why they would do that. That's what I wondered. If you're anti-male, you can use the female pronouns, you'd think. Maybe it was leading up to the modern woke business, but I'd seen this before it.
Moderator
Tuesday - April 29th 2025 6:05AM MST
PS: Good morning, Coulda Had. Yeah, it's almost better with the new extremely stupid pronouns, humiliating to be any part of the stupidity, but less confusing, I suppose. You already know that you can't make heads or tails of the pronouns so just use the nouns instead (names or "Warrant Officer" or whatever.
You last paragraph has a good point. If someone writes it this way, at least he (oops) is sticking to basic principles of both grammar and feminism - there's no confusion on the meaning. Maybe Ebonics has something to be said for it. It don't be so confusin'.
You last paragraph has a good point. If someone writes it this way, at least he (oops) is sticking to basic principles of both grammar and feminism - there's no confusion on the meaning. Maybe Ebonics has something to be said for it. It don't be so confusin'.
Coulda Had Lee Rille
Monday - April 28th 2025 9:01PM MST
PS I'll never get used to plural terms being used in a singular setting. I used to bitch about seeing he/she and his/her, but from a grammatical standpoint, even that is preferred to the downright incorrect grammar that the left now advocates.
Regarding your point about singular usage of they/them/their when the sex is clearly known, I guess I have seen that a few times, but I tended to blow it off as a mistake (mistake on top of an already lousy practice). So, we're saying that there are sentient humans out there that inflict a "singular they or their" even when the sex is clearly indicated either before or afterwards? Why would they do that?
I would have a tad more respect for such SUT (singular use of they/their) offenders if they conjugated it as singular for those verbs where it differs (namely, to be and has). Maybe they could say "They is extremely shook up by the events, and they has no comment for us". or "They has no intention of filing charges". That way, you could at least know that we're talking about ONE person (or, it's someone speaking with an American black stereotypical dialect).
Regarding your point about singular usage of they/them/their when the sex is clearly known, I guess I have seen that a few times, but I tended to blow it off as a mistake (mistake on top of an already lousy practice). So, we're saying that there are sentient humans out there that inflict a "singular they or their" even when the sex is clearly indicated either before or afterwards? Why would they do that?
I would have a tad more respect for such SUT (singular use of they/their) offenders if they conjugated it as singular for those verbs where it differs (namely, to be and has). Maybe they could say "They is extremely shook up by the events, and they has no comment for us". or "They has no intention of filing charges". That way, you could at least know that we're talking about ONE person (or, it's someone speaking with an American black stereotypical dialect).
Achmed,
Yeah. Gemini was pretty stubborn in its defense of Captain Rebecca and didn't seem likely to stray from its stance. I probably should have applied the ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐/๐ด๐ ๐โ/๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐/๐๐๐ค๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ข๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ a little sooner as it got a little wordy. Pretty wild that it starts making more sense when we ask it to apply the ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐/๐ด๐ ๐โ/๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐/๐๐๐ค๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ข๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ in a "discussion".
I read your exchange with Ron Unz the other day and I downloaded the McCarthy books that he suggested. I'll get you some links after I upload them.
Hope you enjoy your evening!
Dieter!,
How have you been? It's been a while. I hope you're doing well.
I don't know how to circumvent a substack paywall. (I can often find a way on most paywalled pages.) I've tried a few times to no avail. I'm getting pretty close to just buying a $6 subscription to get the article. (It may come to that.?)
Anyway... Wishing you well. Good to see you!
Happy Thursday! โฎ๏ธ