Gender-neutral pronouns have always seemed awkward and artificial: sie, hir, zie, ze, etc.
But I really like the look of Mx. Jones. Itâs classy and smart looking, and somehow flows naturally.
As a unilingual English speakerâŚ
Canât we just put the language out of its misery already, instead of adding kludges to keep it relevant?
Every language on earth has evolved, changed, and added âkludgesâ for thousands of years. Some transform completely or add an entirely new writing system to adapt (see: Japanese katakana and romaji). I think continuing to adapt English is a lot more interesting than killing it off.
It certainly looks classy in print, but I canât see very many people saying it in spoken language. Mix Jones sounds like a rapper from the 80âs.
Itâs all beautiful kludges.
Does help. I remember when I was IRC names there were no indication on the personâs gender. So I did a lot of rewording to avoid using pronouns.
Agreed, but I think that in common use it wouldnât be as pronounced as that. The same way that âMsâ and âMissâ sound nearly identical in conversation, I think itâd just sound like a quickly pronounced âMksâ.
Mix Jones sounds like an awesome rapper from the 80âs!
Whatâs the downside here?
Interesting! I wonder at the future of honorifics in general. Do we need them? There are professional titles, like Dr, Prof, Rev, and the wonderful Right Rev. But something to say that weâre a man or a woman or other, married or unmarried? Who cares? Why not an honorific for whether weâre tall or short? Why is it important?
One of my favorite online adventures is when I have to fill out a form, and the honorific drop-down box has not been edited down to US normal, but has every conceivable title in the world. Iâm so tempted to use âLordâ, âRabbiâ, or âGeneralâ. Who would argue with me?
?Whatâs awkward and artificial about Sie? Sie and Du, and the English equivalents you and thou are already gender neutral. The odd thing is that we continue to use gendered pronouns for 3rd person singular only in English.
In many languages the gender of nouns is more to do with derivation and spelling rules - le soldat becomes la sentinelle when the soldier is on sentry duty, and mon livre et ma plume tell me nothing about the gender of the speaker. Male dogs in Russian are as feminine as female ones, while cats can be male or female. And so on.
The real problem, in fact, is not so much pronouns as titles. The Quakers had a good idea a long time ago; abolish them altogether.
I would argue we donât need them. Not even Very Reverend, the title of someone I know. As an example I would adduce the bizarre example of the British health system, in which junior doctors who are not MDs are called âdoctorâ while senior doctors who usually are MDs are called âMr.â
Whatâs wrong with just âMâ ? I think I first saw it in Hyperion by Dan Simmons, and it seemed quite sensible. (In that particular case it is used in conjunction with âAâ, which designates androids.)
meaningless honorifics. âMasterâ and âMistressâ/âMatronâ which became âmisterâ and âmissusâ are obsolete titular references, in the same way that just about no-one uses âesquireâ or âLord/Ladyâ (would that become âLx.â as well?) time to move on. When a telemarketer calls theyâll not be saying âCan I please speak to mux Johnson please?â It ainât gonna happen⌠what WILL they do instead? Iâm sure marketing departments everywhere are already working on that⌠or will be soon.
Iâve always thought that using different honorifics for people to denote their marital status was super weird: âThis teacher is Miss Smith, because sheâs single, and this one is Mrs. Jones, because sheâs marriedâ. What the? Why should I care!? I actually thought it was fascinating to find out that âMrsâ isnât short for anything â itâs never really spelled out. What a weird word.
I think weâll always have honorifics of some sort if just to avoid the awkwardness and informality of calling people just âDoctorowâ or âJardinâ while introducing them.
It sounds odd to say and seems like a very artificially constructed pronoun to me, and has never been a very good gender-neutral option, unfortunately. Just my opinion.
Well now youâre just being snarky, Mx Wordy-word. 
I love that non-gender-specific pronouns are being squeezed into English. I just have no idea how to pronounce âLatinxâ, although in my imagination itâs âlatinexâ or âlatinixâ (similar to the Mx in the original post. Anyone got any pointers?
Really Iâve found sticking with singular they unless you know for sure the other personâs gender tends to work well at not angering anyone but weird grammar pedants who think singular they isnât valid Because Reasons
Said reasons being:
"some asshole in the 19th century decided English had to be like latin and gender EVERYTHING and his book had sorta-widespread acceptance so those are the rules, fuck future changes to the language or the fact even Shakespeare used singular they"
sometimes mixed with a little:
âI donât like transgender people who donât âpick a sideâ/gender nonconforming people in general so Iâm going to hypercorrect their grammar.â
I read it âLatinexâ in my head.
Though that does make it sound like some sort of prescription drug brand name.
Thank you. Same! Sounds almost like a laxative brand name, I reckon. Or uncomfortably close to âlaminexâ if weâre talking non-drugs.
Just want to point out an interesting item in Fowlerâs Modern English Usage, in which he defends feminine honorifics and titles such as Doctress. Itâs on p175, âFeminine Designations.â Rather charming and quaint, even though I disagree with practically everything he says on the subject.
