GEICO, the second-largest vehicle insurance underwriter in the US, has decided it will no longer cover Tesla Cybertrucks. The company is terminating current Cybertruck policies and says the truck “doesn’t meet our underwriting guidelines.”

  • lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    “their” is shorter than “his or her”

    (Even if you don’t care about gender inclusiveness, they is just more convenient)

    • digdilem@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The best English literature doesn’t follow the basis of most convenient or shortest. Sometimes there are other reasons to choose a word of phrase.

      The plot of Romeo and Juliet could be rewritten in a paragraph but probably wouldn’t have had the same impact.

      • lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        True, but this isn’t prose or high literature. What reason do you suggest why “his or her” would be preferable to “their” in this context?

        The prescriptivist “It’s grammatically incorrect” argument doesn’t hold much water when it has been used since middle English.

        In a poem, I can see the thought:
        “I tried to fit the cadence of this clause
        Within the measure of this poem’s form
        Which has in past and present be the norm
        By which this poem, too, seeks to adhere.
        This is my authorial choice’s cause
        for my decision not to use a “their”.” But if to find an alternate way to word
        Your writing’s pronouns strikes you as absurd
        I nonetheless opine that you still ought
        To make the token effort to include
        With “their” all people by the same respect
        That you for yourself would from them expect.
        Refusing this, I feel, would be quite rude.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Comments here are a short form of writing, therefore people are allowed to phrase things and say things however they would like to. You won’t know someone’s intent before reading, so the way they write makes a difference.

        • digdilem@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Nice ditty.

          What reason do you suggest why “his or her” would be preferable to “their” in this context?

          Regional dialect, fluidity of language, variety - even habit.

          “It’s grammatically incorrect” argument doesn’t hold much water

          Oh, I do respectfully disagree with that, especially when you cite medieval English but reference an American language dictionary as your source.

          I could just as viably give “his or hers” as equally valid as “theirs”, because it is. We’re not newspaper headline writers, nobody penalises us if we use a few more characters for any reason. And you could switch back and forth between them both for variety.

          • lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 minutes ago

            Nice ditty.

            Thank you :)

            Regional dialect, fluidity of language, variety - even habit.

            Those explain why it might be the first thing people reach to, but I wasn’t trying to demonise that. I was trying to offer an argument for the alternative that I consider both more convenient to write and read and more inclusive. Habits can be changed.

            Oh, I do respectfully disagree with that, especially when you cite medieval English but reference an American language dictionary as your source.

            Does the nature of the source invalidate the content and points it makes? English is still English, and I was looking for a source that wasn’t Wikipedia, but also was publically accessible. I could have just copied all of Wikipedia’s references, but most of them are books or journals that I don’t expect people to have access to and didn’t individually check. We could debate here what burden of proof is to be expected in an online debate, but I didn’t think the matter to be worth serious discussion.

            The point is the same: there are plenty of historical examples of it being used. To be clear, this is a pre-emptive counterargument to a point I’ve occasionally seen made: That the singular they was a new invention and should be rejected on that ground. If past usage has no bearing on your current decision, that argument obviously holds no weight.

            In the latter case, I contend that the increasing spread, particularly in the context of that spread, legitimises its use for that purpose. I fall in with the descriptivists: Rules should describe contemporary usage, not prescribe it.

            Ultimately, I believe using “they” for gender neutrality is more inclusive for identities outside the binary. I consider the difference in usage trivial enough that the difference in respect justifies it.

          • lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            Then the original comment would read

            hose hings are very poorly made and all he most imporan pars are made of cheap plasic ha an average person can lierally rip off wih his or her bare hands