Don't look for me much on the big news sites, I skim through them, but rarely find much that is worth commenting on. As a young son once said "We don't watch TV news, dad won't let us watch violence programs." I still don't.
Interests are religion, marketing theory (that is not an oxymoron,) Advertizing, digital photography, APOD, and historically, rocket science.
The literary version is found at Thinking On the Blue Roads
The raw data for which can be found on The Blue Roads of Thinking.
Back in the mid 20th Century the feminist movement tried with some
success to ban the generic use of "men" and "man" as in "All men are
created equal." In current vernacular they have succeeded quite well.
In some Churches led by UUs they even succeeded in removing male
references to God in large part by eliminating the pronoun altogether,
resulting in some rather weird hymnody with repetitive use of God and
some strangled syntax to eliminate references directly to God. I was frequently involved in God discussions at that time and found the
effort of avoiding the Pronouns for God too much effort and found the
shock of using Hesh and Herm in reference to God a useful result in my
discussions. Typically it generated the assertion that God was male and
that the proper pronouns were He and His. This generally derailed the
discussion into a useful discussion of God's testosterone levels.
of the first things that offended me when I found out that other people
who believed in God believed that God was The Lord (masculine) and
He/His were interchangeable with God. I was still in the scatological
humor stage at the time and gleefully referred to God as Sheheit.
Making myself unpopular in some circles, but most of my friends were at
the most religious agnostics, so I didn't catch much flack. And when I
did I would always correct myself to Hesheit. I outgrew the scatology
but still refused to even think of God as He. When I came to social media I continued the practice and for a long time
linked on the words to a discussion on the Gender and Sexuality
boards. When I began to see "hesh" and "hir" or "herm" in the popular
literature without explanation, (I admit to noticing each time) I quit
linking particularly on atheist and the UU boards as everyone could figure
out what I meant without the link from context although fundamentalist
Christians and language conservatives continue to protest its use in
reference to God. I also eliminated the gender specific pronouns from my vocabulary as a general pronoun and use "hesh" and "herm" as my pronouns of choice whether the gender of the referent is known or not. This is particularly useful in calling attention to gender specific terms like "Actor," Waitress," or "Chairman." Traditionalists be damned. They need their consciousness raised. If it jars their
reading or hearing of the term, they still need the consciousness raising.
More recently I have been using the terms when the referent is of known
gender but the gender is not relevant in context. Reference to the
author of a scientific paper was beat into my head by my then wife whose
papers in a male chauvinist academic profession were referred to as
"HER" papers as if they were therefore less important than "his" papers.
They in fact were less important than "his" papers, even though in
general they were significantly better. It is no accident that women
in science generally publish with initials only. If men are offended by having to think about gender specific nouns, too bad. They need to. Particularly the sexist males. They can be sure I intended to insult them with the gender inclusive pronoun. As for the ESL issue, some languages particularly Asian languages are
non-sexist in that the pronouns are non-specific. I live with Asians
and have become used to hearing "she" and "her" being used as a pronoun
for anybody. I don't bother to correct them as they are on my side. I
suspect Asians would have more trouble with "he" and "she" in writing
and speech than they would be with "hesh" and "herm." Other languages are inherently sexist. I was at the installation of a
new department head who couldn't even introduce his staff because his native
language didn't have a word for a female colleague. He did all right
with the men, but the female who outranked the men caused an
embarrassing for all search for an appropriate honorific.
I invented the gender inclusive pronouns "Hesh" and "Herm" very early in life, and discovered that they helped me think about a supernatural power in a sympathetic way that was impossible with the testosterone poisoned "He." Even trying to insert God in place of the
male pronoun every time didn't work too well. The testosterone is frequently implied by context.
By college I had learned to think of everyone as hesh rather than he or she even when it was important to tell the difference. It was the first step to radical humanism as once I began to think of people as hesh it was hard to create differences along any lines since the major pervasive division on gender
lines carried over from the patriarchal social system we inherited from God was obliterated in my mind. When you can't even think in gender terms, differentiation on other human variables is nearly impossible. Try thinking about that "other" person without gender and note what it does to your mind. For the record, I was a strictly heterosexual male as interested in the hormonal needs only satisfied by a heterosexual female as anybody else. But thinking of a woman as hesh in spite of the obvious delightful differences did change the way I related to women from the first contact in class or on the street to very intense relationships. Even my parenting partner was early on a partner with benefits rather than a sexual person. When reading scientific literature I never noticed the scientist's name, by policy, until it was necessary for reference and even then as a footnote on the back of the index card. Yep, I used them. Any gender related references were automatically changed to hesh/herm mentally and on the card. I learned a lot that way. Some highly recommended papers turned to crap when the DWM was turned into hesh. Or LM for that matter.
I have since changed policy a bit as the cutting edge scientists in my family educated me that for a woman to succeed in any meritocracy they had to be twice as good as the average male. It follows that an accepted paper by a woman has to have twice the chances of being worth reading as one by the average man. Similarly for professional choices. Even though I think of them as hesh in the interview I will give interview preference to a woman given a bunch of equivalent CVs or Resumes.
Applying the same thinking to reading and rereading fiction has been enlightening and fascinating. I mentally reassign a gender ambiguous name to the major characters and thinking of all as hesh. In the mandatory sex scenes some role reversals are needed but it is surprising how often they are not. It is amusing to think of a sex partner as trans occasionally.