/lit/ - Literature

>>16071340
I like that song "Europe is lost". It's got a good beat and you can dance the acceleration of the decay into existence with it.

>>16071340
>creatives being sexual deviants
nothing new

>>16071340
upon hearing the news the entire readership of the guardian all came at once

>>16071340
The "they" just doesn't work. It makes it sound like they are royalty or something (in intersectional feminist theory they(plural, referring to non-binary people as a whole) sort of are) and there are some obvious issues with usage

>>16071397
>Kate Tempest announces it is non-binary
>The greatest poet of our generation is non-binary. Isn't it brave! I loved its poem about how evil da toriez are.
Fixed.

>>16071340
>The greatest poet of our generation is non-binary
Nael isn't non-binary.

>>16071340
>The greatest poet of our generation
>some wh*toid
Umm, try again sweetie

>>16071397
It‘s good. In german there‘s no pronoun they could use that doesn‘t reduce them to an object. So they have to use english „they“, which is hilarious.

>>16071468
How do you know?

>>16071508
Because in his media coverage he presents as a boy (what an absurd thing to need to clarify. Modernity has made assholes of us all).

>Nael, whose last name is being withheld upon request, is taking *his* newfound notoriety in stride. The D.C.-based third grader said *he* wrote about tigers at the time because they made *him* happy. “Super happy” is the feeling *he* describes knowing that *his* poem has reached so many readers around the world.
>As for Nael’s next move, the promising author has confirmed *he* is working on a story about a magic tree house. No word yet on when it’s expected to hit shelves — or social media.
>https://wtop.com/lifestyle/2018/03/6-year-olds-tiger-poem-takes-twitter-by-storm/

>>16071397
Isn't "they" only used when someone is not present? As in the case of someone asking where your friend is, 'they went to the store.' I think it's interesting in that context (not in a positive way).
Otherwise it's obviously a multiple. The amount of delusion to try and accept this shit...

>>16071533
In this context it's as if the person is with us but not, which is also how we relate to thinking of the dead.

BUMBACLARTS

>>16071340
>they
Is Kate Tempest a collective or what? I thought it was just a person's name

>>16072730
This shit is getting out of hand-- we need genocide back

>>16071340
>Tried to be what I thought other wanted me to be so as not to risk rejection.
I think she's actually still doing it.
>>16071397
Equality means everyone is royalty.

>>16072798
>Equality means everyone is royalty.
If everyone is royalty, noone is royalty.

>>16071533
It's the nominative third person plural and singular, that is, it refers to one or more subjects that are neither the speaker nor the listener. "They went to the store" implies one or more things that aren't the speaker or listener went to the store.

Which sort of goes back to the fundamental problem of Liberalism as a whole, as while the idea of having special pronouns is completely stupid, it's fundamentally not totally unworkable. You just add in extra linguistic genders. He/him, she/her, xim/xem, zye/zyer, nigger/nigger, que/quem, whatever, fundamentally it still works. But, as you're accurately pointing out, we're reaching levels of #WOKE that are eradicating fundamental aspects of language like linguistic personhood. They/them is thus both a second and third person plural.

As such, I give this idea: we brook Anglish, thereby cleaving the tongue in twain. Let the #WOKE brook this foul and sickly tongue, and we use a more wholesome and soulful well of speech. Cringe? For the first kith and kin to brook such, yes. But not nearly as cringe as losing tonguemask. What's next, losing tonguetime, like Blacks?

>>16071384
>creatives

>>16072814
>As such, I give this idea: we brook Anglish, thereby cleaving the tongue in twain. Let the #WOKE brook this foul and sickly tongue, and we use a more wholesome and soulful well of speech. Cringe? For the first kith and kin to brook such, yes. But not nearly as cringe as losing tonguemask. What's next, losing tonguetime, like Blacks?
based on a level i did not think was even possible

AS THEY SHOULD

>>16071508
>So they have to use english „they“, which is hilarious.
Zitat gebracht

>>16071340
At first glance, I would've never imagined

BREXIT INNIT

>>16071340
who is they, why did they make her mispell her name? a non-binary what?

Is this just being a dyke but being a dyke isnt special enough

>>16071396
a lot of liberal feminists in the uk, who all read the guardian, don't like trans people

>>16071340
I'm fully on board with trans fxlk (y'all) but is nonbinary real? seems kinda fake and gay to me

>>16074632
they love that nonbinary bulldyke/tomboy shit though, to the point where it’s an acceptable twenties larp for their kids. what they hate is the mtf gargoyle who so shamelessly dares to venture into the women’s realm

>>16075665
kek

>>16075203
Fuck it tell me i'm pretty

>>16072814
Anglish actually sounds good the way you use it. I might take it more seriously.

>>16075203
another ugly ass nigga trying to cope with estrogen

>>16072752
A literal grammar nazi

>>16071340
Okay, does it matter in the slightest what some fuck a world over wants to be called? Have any of you guys read her poetry? Who cares