zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. noneth+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-02-19 02:22:25
Or, you know, ladies and gentleman
replies(2): >>egonsc+97 >>gedy+0j
◧
2. egonsc+97[view] [source] 2023-02-19 03:26:11
>>noneth+(OP)
I would guess the change was made because they felt ladies and gentlemen does not account for non-binary genders
replies(2): >>Quarre+L9 >>type0+3l9
◧◩
3. Quarre+L9[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 03:50:16
>>egonsc+97
does that matter when there don't appear to be any non-binary people in any of Roald Dahls works?
replies(1): >>tohnji+Hb
◧◩◪
4. tohnji+Hb[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 04:07:57
>>Quarre+L9
Oh my goodness how dare he!
replies(1): >>salawa+2E
◧
5. gedy+0j[view] [source] 2023-02-19 05:14:54
>>noneth+(OP)
Goodness how could he assume that before asking their personal pronouns? /s
◧◩◪◨
6. salawa+2E[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-19 09:52:26
>>tohnji+Hb
Did you just assume their gender?

(I'll see myself out.)

◧◩
7. type0+3l9[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-02-21 23:46:42
>>egonsc+97
they forgot the queers so it should have been "folx" in double-non-binary
[go to top]