i'm not “a female” / “a male” / “a they/them”
please, just call me by my gender! 🙄
]]>So today I'd like to take a moment to rant about three of the awful things that contributed to that.
In pretty much every movie, book or TV series the heteronormative relationships look the same. The girls is supposed to be submissive, delicate, while the guy is dominant and strong. He's supposed to fight for her, impress her, ask her out, pay for her. She's supposed to play hard to get, innocent… He makes money, she's a hausfrau. Roles are clearly defined and very asymmetrical. Most love stories don't look like love, but rather a conquest.
Seeing same-sex relationships was so fucking refreshing for me! No stupid schemas, expectations, rectum-derived rules!
That's why straight people keep asking gays the iditoic question “who's the man and who's the woman in your relationship?”. They get that a guy might like men instead of women, but still cannot comprehend any other model of the relationship than what popular culture taught them.
And I did the opposite – I knew I don't want a patriarchal relationship, I just didn't realise I can have that with a woman.
As hard as it might be to believe, this outrageously unrealistic porn sceneCW: porn has been released by a studio called “Reality Kings”. How ironic!
Those boobs are fake. Those lips are fake. This voice is fake. The plot is unrealistic. Getting a blowjob while still hanging from a basketball loop is probably not comfortable enough for people to actually do in real life. And don't even get me started on his dick springing out rock hard right away with no mental or physical stimulation whatsoever.
And that's not an exception, the fakeness pretty much a common theme. The strong makeup that's supposed to start dripping with her tears when she gets face-fucked by a colossal dick. The almost absolute lack of interest in the girl's pleasure…
If that's what straight sex is like, I don't want it.
Except porn lied to me! Sex isn't like that.
Well, not monogamy per se, but forcing it as the default, or even the only, option.
When everyone in your life tells you you're supposed to find “the one and only” and “till death tears us apart”, it's easy to fall into the trap of feeling forced to choose. Not just the person to spend your whole life with, but the entire gender.
Finding out that it's possible (and awesome!) to love more than one person at the same time has also opened my eyes to endless other possibilities.
There's way more, but those three things in particular I'm very angry about. The world keeps lying to us about how to be happy. It shows us just one possible way: a patriarchal, monogamous relationship. Or, yeah, whatever those gays are doing.
But turns out that queerness is vastly more colourful than any of that!
]]>Polska gramatyka jest skomplikowana i silnie zgenderyzowana. Nie oznacza to jednak, że niemożliwe jest używanie innych form niż „on” i „ona”.
To narzędzie udostępnia linki do przykładów użycia (w prostych zdaniach oraz w literaturze, prasie, filmach i serialach) zaimków i innych form płciowych – nie tylko normatywnych „on” i „ona”, lecz także form niebinarnych.
Dlaczego należy je respektować? Bo zwracanie się do kogoś tak, jak sobie życzy, jest podstawą relacji społecznych. Nie powiesz do Ani “Franku”, nie powiesz “na ty” do osoby, z którą jesteś “na pan”, itp. A są osoby, które nie chcą, by im mówić “on” ani “ona”. Czy to uszanujesz, świadczy wyłącznie o Tobie.
Warto wrzucić link do swoich zaimków na swoje profile na portalach społecznościowych – nawet jeśli jesteś cis i używasz „on” lub „ona” – ponieważ dzięki temu pokazujesz wsparcie dla społeczności trans i normalizujesz podawanie zaimków przez osoby, których zaimki nie są oczywiste (więcej powodów tutaj).
]]>We all have pronouns. They're those words that we use instead of calling someone by their name every time we mention them. Most people use “he/him” and “she/her”, so we automatically assume which one to call them based on someone's looks. But it's actually not that simple…
Gender is complicated. Some people “don't look like” their gender. Some prefer being called in a different way from what you'd assume. Some people don't fit into the boxes of “male” or “female” and prefer more neutral language.
This tool lets you share a link to your pronouns, with example sentences, so that you can show people how you like to be called.
]]>Here's why:
(Note: If you're trans and not yet ready to come out, don't feel pressured! This post is for the cis allies 😉)
You wouldn't call Ashley “Samantha” just because you like that name more or because “she looks like a Samantha to you”. And even if it does say “Samantha” on her birth certificate, but she absolutely hates that name and prefers “Ashley”, you'd respect that, right?
And it's the exact same story with pronouns – if you don't want to be rude towards someone, please address them properly. The only difference is that we usually know each other's names – but not pronouns. We introduce ourselves with a name, but not with pronouns. Let's change that 😉
There are people who look manly while being women (either cis on trans), there are he/him lesbians, there are nonbinary people using binary pronouns for different reasons, etc. etc. Seing a picture of someone's face doesn't automatically mean you'll be right when you assume their pronouns.
In English, “Carol” is a feminine name, while Polish the name “Karol” is given to boys. In many languages “Alex” can be short for both “Alexandra” and “Alexander”. A person who doesn't speak Arabic probably won't know what gender “Farrah” is associated with. If you introduce yourself with just a name (eg. in an email), for many people it might still not be clear how to address you, because they have no cultural knowledge about what pronouns usually go with that name. It's easier to just be explicit and not expect them to guess.
Sharing their pronouns is very important for trans, nonbinary and gender nonconforming people. Alas, it also exposes us and singles us out. But if cis people do the same, it means the world for us. It makes us feel more confortable, safe and welcome.
Even if your friends or fans know very well that you're a cis man, adding that “he/him” to your profile still gives them a very important information – that you support the trans community.
Your support is important. Especially if you're well known and influential.
Are you talking to someone who looks androgynous and you don't know how to address them without offending them? Normalisation of giving pronouns and asking about pronous comes to rescue!
Seriously, there are only upsides 😉
]]>Oto dlaczego:
(Uwaga: Jeśli jesteś osobą trans i nie jesteś jeszcze gotowx na coming out, nie czuj presji. Ten artykuł jest skierowany do cis sojuszników 😉)
Nie nazywałxbyś Moniki “Martą” tylko dlatego, że bardziej ci się podoba to imię, albo dlatego, że “dla ciebie ona wygląda jak Marta”. Nawet jeśli miałaby “Marta” w papierach, ale szczerze nienawidziła tego imienia i zamiast niego wybrała sobie “Monika”.
Z zaimkami jest podobnie – jeśli nie chcesz być wobec kogoś niegrzecznx, zwracaj się do ludzi tak, jak sobie tego życzą. Jedyną różnicą jest to, że przeważnie znamy imię, lecz nie zaimki. Przestawiamy się iminiem, ale nie zaimkami. Czas to zmienić 😉
Isnieją ludzie wyglądający męsko mimo bycia kobietami (czy to cis czy trans), istnieją he lesbians, istnieją osoby niebinarne używające binarnych zaimków ( zwłaszcza w językach jak polski), itp. itd. To, że widzisz zdjęcie czyjejś twarzy, nie znaczy że będzie w stanie poprawnie zgadnąć ich zaimki.
„Karol” jest imieniem męskim, ale osoba anglojęzyczna nosząca imię „Carol” najprawdopodobniej będzie kobietą. W wielu językach imię „Alex” może być skróconą formą zarówno imienia “Alexandra”, jak i “Alexander”. Osoba nieznająca arabskiej zapewne nie będzie wiedziała, z którą płcią jest kojarzone imię „Farrah”. Jeśli przedstawiasz się wyłącznie imieniem (np. w emailu), wiele osób nie będzie w stanie zgadnąć, jakie zaimki przeważnie idą z tym imieniem w parze w Twoim języku i Twojej kulturze. Prościej jest po prostu przekazać tę informację wprost, zamiast zmuszać rozmówców do zgadywania.
Dzielenie się swoimi zaimkami jest niezmiernie istotne dla osób transpłciowych, niebinarnych i gender nonconforming. Niestety, to również nas eksponuje i wystawia na widok. Lecz jeśli ludzie cis robią to samo, jest to dla nas niezmiernie ważne. Sprawia, że czujemy się bardziej komfortowo i bezpiecznie.
Nawet jeśli twoi znajomi i fani świetnie wiedzą, że jesteś cis facetem, to dodanie “on/jego” w profilu i tak daje im bardzo ważną informację – że wspierasz osoby trans oraz tych, którzy nie są pewni swojej płci.
Twoje wsparcie jest ważne. Zwłaszcza, jeśli jesteś sławnx i wpływowx.
Rozmawiasz z kimś wyglądającym androgynicznie i nie wiesz, jak się do nix zwrócić, by jex nie obrazić? Normalizacja podawania zaimków i pytania o zaimki na pewno w takich sytuacjach pomoże!
Serio, same zalety bez wad. 😉
]]>The most obviously tricky part is the pronunciation. My name, “Andrzej”, is pronunced like this, with the “rz” as /ʐ/. But hardly anyone outside of Poland knows that and has no problems pronouncing it and writing it down. That's why I usually go by “Andre”, as a simplification. And recently also as “Andrea”, to make it gender-neutral.
But dificult pronunciation is almost a given when talking about other languages. What's quite specific to Polish then?
Many languages have diminutives. Many use them also for names (eg. English: Tim → Timmy, Richard → Dick, ...). Some languages even have a concept of double diminutive (Italian: casa → casetta → casettina). But Polish just loooves its diminutives!
According to ksiega-imion.pl, my first name, Andrzej, can be tuned into: Andruszko, Andrzejek, Jędrek, Jędruś, Jędrzejek, Ondrzejek, Ondraszek, or Ondrysz. Diminutives of Katarzyna are: Kacha, Kachna, Kasia, Kasieńka, Kasiunia, Kaśka, Katarzynka, Katka. Of Jan: Janek, Janosik, Jasiek, Jasio, Jaś, Jaśko. And so on, and so forth...
And the thing is: which one to use can depend on so many things... Most are regional forms. Some you can use more like a joke or a nickname rather than a diminutive of a name.
I've noticed that many follow a three-level pattern. For instance:
The first one is very formal. That's what's in your documents. That's what you probably hardly ever use outside of formal situations – at least I wouldn't, if I had one of those names. I've had friends and family members who would always go by “Wojtek” and never “Wojciech”, always “Gosia” and never “Małgorzata”, etc.
It sounds so formal that my sister Małogrzata, upon moving to the UK, wouldn't go by the English version of her name – Margaret - but by an artificial anglicisation of the Polish diminutive “Gosia”: so she's now known as “Gosha”.
The second one is usually what you use informally, what friends call you, what the extended family calls you. The third one is pretty intimate and quite infantile. You might call your romantic partners that, you might call children that.
Usually. It all differs from name to name, it differs from person to person. Sometimes it can get quite tricky to decide which form of one's name to use, in order not to sound too formal, or too familiar, or too childish...
That's why I'm very glad that my name is not one of those “three-level” names. “Andrzej” just doesn't sound so formal that it would be weird to call your friend that. One can form a diminutive of it, if one wants, but “Andrzej” itself is pretty neutral.
And they did, btw. My parish priest, for example, jokingly called be “Jędrek”, because he's from the mountains where this form is popular. And my mother called me “Aduś”, completely ignoring the fact that it's not in the slightest a diminutive of “Andrzej”. It is a male-ified version of a diminutive of a female name “Ada”. But she also called my brother “Maciuś”, even though it's a diminutive of “Maciej”, not “Marcin”, and she called his daughter “Magda” even though her name is “Wiktoria”, so what does she know 🤷
Summing up: the Poles can get pretty inventive with their names, and chosing a proper form can get tricky sometimes.
And then there's surnames. Most are quite straight-forward, but there's one category that behaves a bit unexpectedly. Those surnames, ending in -ski and -cki, are basically adjectives, which means they get declined.
Polish, as a stronly genderised language, distinguishes between male and female way more often than necessary. So for example, my surname is Prusinowski, but my sister's is Prusinowska. The family name is Prusinowscy, but a subset of two or more women would be called Prusinowskie.
Let's look at Lana & Lilly Wachowski, collectively known as “The Wachowskis” or “The Wachowski sisters”.
If they lived and transitioned in Poland (or treated their Polish heritage more to the letter), they would probably change not only their first names, but also surnames. It would be “Lana Wachowska” and “Lilly Wachowska”, and collectively “siostry Wachowskie”. Also, the pronunciation would be vastly different from the anglicised version, just saying...
And finally, something more loosely related to names: people in Poland celebrate name days. It's also popular in some other Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox countries, but not as universal as birthdays, so worth mentioning, I guess...
Basically, if a person died and became a saint, there would be a “memory” day put in the liturgical calendar, usually on the day of their death. That way the priest will know to read a short note about their life before the mass. Eventually, those names ended up in regular calendars, and people bearing those names started celebrating the feast day of their patron saint.
So in Poland you usually have two celebrations of your person every year – a birthday, usually celebrated with family, and a name day, usually celebrated by getting super drunk with your friends. Unless you're a child, then you only get a birthday, sorry.
]]>For me, gender is over.
Not in a sad, “Game Over” way.
In a happy, “Mission accomplished” way.
Because for me gender is just a set of rules and regulations, based on someone's perception of what kind of genitals you might have. If people think that you have this or that in your pants, they'll also expect you to get a specific type of job, wear a specific amount of makup, have specific amount of body hair in specific places, wear specific clothes, behave in a specfic manner, play with specific toys...
We know it's all made up rules, for instance because it differs from culture to culture and from time to time. “Asian woman”, “Western woman”, “Medieval European woman”, etc. etc. are all made to follow different set of rules. Pink used to be a colour associated with boys not girls (because of being close to bloody red).
Dictionaries define gender as “the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex”. But I would go one step further: it's not just the “traits” that are “associated”. It's rules that are enforced.
Be it by getting physically beaten up for “looking like a faggot”, be it by being publicly riddiculed for “being too butch”, or be it by simply being quietly frowned upon – the society has its ways to make people look and behave the way their designated box says they should.
And yes, I know, there's plenty of people being very comfortable in their box. And there's many who know they'll be happy and fitting once they transition to the other box. But wouldn't it be simpler if we just got rid of the boxes?
Just let people be people. Let us be ourselves.
Ever since I put the nonbinary label on my gender, ever since I started gender bending, ever since I started experimenting with my pansexuality, I started realising how made up gender is.
We don't choose our partners based solely on the mere existence of a penis or a vagina, right? We like them for their character, skills, sense of humour, we're physically attracted to their body type, body hair, muscles, face, hair, makeup, etc. etc.
Our appearance and behaviour, our romantic and sexual attraction – are way more complex than just those simple binary categories: man and woman, gay, straight and bi...
Sure, it's a decent approximation, and I still use them to describe myself and other people. And I'm not trying to invalidate anyone's identity.
I just wanted to share how much liberty it gave me when I started to just care about those labels less.
I'm not enforcing gender rules on anyone. I'm not trying to follow them myself. In my mind – gender is over 💪
]]>Polszczyzna, jak każdy żywy język, nieustannie się zmienia i ewoluuje.
W kwestii inkluywności płciowej obserwujemy na przykład trend powrotu do używania feminatywów. I choć jest to świetne dla reprezentacji kobiet w przestrzeni publicznej, to do neutralnej płciowo polszczyzny jeszcze daleka droga.
Osobom niebinarnym ciężko jest się odnaleźć w binarnym do bólu języku polskim.
Bo płeć nie powinna mieć znaczenia. Nie żyjemy w średniowieczu ani pod prawem szariatu. Żona nie jest własnością męża. Kobieta może robić karierę, głosować, ma prawo zarabiać tyle samo co mężczyzna na tym samym stanowisku.
Tymczasem nasz język w wielu przypadkach preferuje rodzaj męski jako domyślny. To męska wersja jest formą podstawową, a feminatyw się tylko od niej tworzy. Żeby opisać kobietę biegłą w prawie, zaczynamy od słowa „prawnik” i musimy do niej dodać sufiks „-czka”. Tak jakby w zawodzie prawnika było coś nieodłącznie męskiego, a kobieta-prawniczka była jakąś aberracją.
Grupę informatyków i informatyczek nazwiemy męskoosobowo: „informatykami”. Osoby zapisane do partii to jej „członkowie” – i mało kto pamięta, żeby wspomnieć także o członkiniach. Istnieje słowo „sędzina”, ale nie oznacza kobiety sprawującej urząd sędziowski, lecz… żonę sędziego. Polszczyzna przez wieki opisywała kobiety głównie przez pryzmat ich małżonków czy ojców: wójtowa była żoną wójta, młynarzówna – córką młynarza…
Język, którego używamy, wpływa na to, jak myślimy ( Hipoteza Sapira-Whorfa). Ciężko nam zatem będzie traktować wszystkich równościowo, jeżeli nasza podświadomość będzie dzieliła wszystkich napotkanych ludzi na dwie kategorie.
No i żeby jeszcze były tylko dwie kategorie… Niektórzy ludzie nie należą do żadnej z tych dwóch opcji ( “and if that surprises you, you need to get out more” – Tom Scott).
Dla nich język polski jest jeszcze mniej łaskawy niż dla kobiet.
Polski ma to nieszczęście, że jest fleksyjny i silnie zgenderyzowany.
W niektórych innych językach wystarczy zmienić zaimek (ang. he/she → np. they) oraz nieliczne słowa określające płeć (np. husband/wife → spouse, podczas gdy większość innych jest neutralnych płciowo, np. politician to zarówno „polityk”, jak i „polityczka”) i parę zwrotów grzecznościowych (nid. Dames en heren („panie i panowie”) → Beste reizigers („Drodzy podróżni”)), by zacząć posługiwać się (niemal) zupełnie neutralnym płciowo językiem.
W angielskim od dawna istnieje “singular they” – możliwość użycia liczby mnogiej do określenia jednej osoby, jeżeli nie znamy jej płci bądź nie ma ona znaczenia (“A neighbour left us a note, they want us to come and collect a package.”). Od niedawna natomiast ta sama forma jest używana również przez osoby niebinarne.
Oprócz “they” zostały stworzone również tzw. “neopronouns” – zupełnie nowe, wymyślone zaimki, takie jak ze/hir, ze/zir, xey/xem/xyr, etc., ale z tego co widzę, są mniej popularne niż “they”.
Niemiecki nie ma luksusu wyboru, musi się ubiegać do neopronouns, jak stworzony przez Illi Annę Heger xier/xieser/xiem/xien. Zmiana zaimka na inny nie wymaga jednak na szczęście dostosowania odmiany związanego z nim czasownika, jak to jest w języku polskim (er ist, sie ist, xier ist).
Niemiecki ma wiele rzeczowników określających płeć (Freund/Freundin („przyjaciel/przyjaciółka”), Schüler/Schülerin (uczeń/uczennica)), dlatego gdy mówi się o grupie obejmującej osoby wszystkich płci, zamiast Schülern und Schülerinnen często używa się nowej formy SchülerInnen (z wielkim „I” pośrodku wyrazu), albo w wariancie urzędowo używanym w Lubece: Schüler:innen, Lübecker:innen, … Niektóre takie słowa można też zastąpić imiesłowami: np. Studenten → Studierenden („studenci/studentki” → „studiujący”).
Tymczasem język polski wymaga określenia płci nie tylko, gdy mówi się o kimś w trzeciej osobie (on/ona), lecz także w pierwszej i drugiej (zrobiłem/zrobiłam, zrobiłeś/zrobiłaś). Nie tylko w liczbie pojedynczej, ale takżę i mnogiej (zrobiliśmy/zrobiłyśmy), i w czasie przeszłym (zrobiłem/zrobiłam), i przyszłym (będę robił/będę robiła), i w trybie przypuszczającym (zrobiłbym/zrobiłabym). Nie tylko w przypadku czasowników, ale też i przymiotników (ładny/ładna). Rzeczowniki określające zawody itp. są silnie zgenderyzowane (polityk/polityczka)…
Krótko mówiąc: odgenderyzowanie polszczyzny to twardy orzech do zgryzienia.
Autorka blog Przemyślenia Maniaka stworzyła świetny przegląd sposobów, na które można tłumaczyć z innych języków kwestie dotyczące niebinarnych postaci w filmach. Szczerze polecam lekturę!
W skrócie: sposobów jest od groma. Niektórzy używają tzw. „dukaizmów”, jak w książce Perfekcyjna niedoskonałość Jacka Dukaja. Inni wolą form ze znakami specjalnymi albo łączonymi literami. Inni, zamiast tworzyć neogramatykę, używają tej istniejącej – choć rzadko używanej wobec ludzi – formy nijakiej. Albo formy mnogiej. Albo zamiennie używają wobec siebie formy męskiej i żeńskiej. Albo po prostu używają binarnych zaimków (bo płeć ≠ zaimki).
Uznałem zatem, że fajnie by było te wszystkie pomysły na genderneutralizację polszczyzny zebrać w jedno miejsce i usystematyzować w tabelkach.
Kto wie, może w takiej formie łatwiej będzie zauważyć prawidłowości, potencjalne problemy, możliwości rozwoju, a może nawet zbudowania spójnego i wszechstronnego systemu?
Na pewno nie zbiorę ich wszystkich, ale próbować warto. A przynajmniej nie zbiorę ich wszystkich sama. Dlatego jeśli znasz jakąś alternatywną formę, którą warto by tu było uwzględnić, albo jakąś problematyczną konstrukcję językową, dla której warto by znaleźć alternatywy, to zapraszam do skontaktowania się ze mną.
Update: udało mi się przekuć te tableki w ciekawy projekt, który spotkał się z bardzo pozytywnym przyjęciem, także zapraszam na Zaimki.pl.
Tymczasem, oto i tabelki:
forma męska | forma żeńska | placeholder | inne znaki specjalne | dukaizmy | rodzaj nijaki | pominięcie litery | samogłoska nosowa ø |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
widziałem | widziałam | widział*m widział_m widział…m widziałxm | widziałæm / widziałaem widział@m | widziałum | widziałom | widziałm | widziałøm |
widział | widziała | widział* widział_ widział… (dwuznaczne) widziałx | widziałₐ widział@ | widziału | widziało | ✘ | widziałø |
był | była | był* był_ był… (dwuznaczne) byłx | byłₐ był@ | byłu | było | ✘ | byłø |
chciałby(-m)(-ś) | chciałaby(-m)(-ś) | chciał*by chciał_by chciał…by chciałxby | chciałₐby chciał@by | chciałuby | chciałoby | ✘ | chciałøby |
zaczął | zaczęła | zacz*ł zacz_ł zacz…ł zaczxł | zaczæł / zacząęł zacz@ł | zaczęłu | zaczęło | zaczł | zaczøł (dwuznaczne w wymowie) |
zacząłeś | zaczęła | zacz*ł*ś zacz_ł_ś zacz…ł…ś zaczxłxś | zaczæłæś / zacząęłąęś zacz@ł@ś | zaczęłuś | zaczęłoś | zaczłś | zaczøłś (dwuznaczne w wymowie) |
widzieli(-śmy)(-ście) | widziały(-śmy)(-ście) | widzi*(niejasne)/widzi*śmy/widzi*ście | ❓ | widziału(-śmy)(-ście) widzialy(-śmy)(-ście) | ❓ | ❓ | widziałøśmy |
zaczęli(-śmy)(-ście) | zaczęły(-śmy)(-ście) | zaczę*(niejasne)/zaczę*śmy/zaczę*ście | ❓ | zaczęłu(-śmy)(-ście) zaczęly(-śmy)(-ście) | ❓ | ❓ | zaczłøśmy |
zadowolony | zadowolona | zadowolon* zadowolon_ zadowolon… (dwuznaczne) zadowolonx | ❓ | zadowolonu | zadowolone | zadowolon | zadowolonø |
forma męska | forma żeńska | forma neutralna | rodzaj nijaki | dukaizmy |
---|---|---|---|---|
będę robił | będę robiła | będę robić | będę robiło | będę robiłu |
Uwagi:
Liczba pojedyncza:
przypadek | forma męska | forma żeńska | rodzaj nijaki | dukaizmy |
---|---|---|---|---|
mianownik | on | ona | ono | onu |
dopełniacz | jego / go / niego | jej / niej | jego / go / niego (ident. z r.m.) | jenu / nu / nienu |
celownik | jemu / mu / niemu | jej / niej | jemu / mu / niemu (ident. z r.m.) | jewu / wu / niewu |
biernik | jego / go / niego | ją / nią | jego / go / niego (ident. z r.m.) | jenu / nu / nienu |
narzędnik | nim | nią | nim (ident. z r.m.) | num |
miejscownik | nim | niej | nim (ident. z r.m.) | num |
Liczba mnoga:
przypadek | rodzaj męskoosobowy | rodzaj niemęskoosobowy | forma neutralna |
---|---|---|---|
mianownik | oni | one | ony |
dopełniacz | ich | ||
celownik | im | ||
biernik | ich | je | ony |
narzędnik | nimi | ||
miejscownik | nich |
przypadek | forma męska | forma żeńska | rodzaj nijaki | dukaizmy | forma neutralna |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
mianownik | mój | moja | moje | moju | moj mója |
dopełniacz | mojego | mojej | mojego (ident. z r.m.) | moju | |
celownik | mojemu | mojej | mojemu (ident. z r.m.) | moju | |
biernik | mojego | moją | moje | moju | |
narzędnik | moim | moją | moim (ident. z r.m.) | moju | |
miejscownik | moim | mojej | moim (ident. z r.m.) | moju |
forma męska | forma żeńska | dukaizmy | rodzaj nijaki | |
---|---|---|---|---|
ten/tego/temu/tym | ta/tej/tę/tą | tenu | to/tego/temu/tym | |
każdy/każdego/każdemu/każdym | każda/każdej/każdą | każdu | każde/każdego/każdemu/każdym | |
żadny/żaden/żadnego/żadnemu/żadnym | żadna/żadnej/żadną | żadnu | żadne/żadnego/żadnemu/żadnym | |
wszyscy | wszystkie | wszyscu | wszystkie (ident. z r.ż.) | |
wszystkich/wszystkim/wszystkimi |
liczba | forma męska | forma żeńska | rodzaj nijaki | dukaizmy | obie litery | placeholder |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
poj. | ładny | ładna | ładne | ładnu | ładnya | ładn* ładn_ ładn… (dwuznaczne) ładnx |
mn. | ładni | ładne | ❓ | ❓ | ❓ |
forma męska | forma żeńska | propozycje form neutralnych | uwagi | |
---|---|---|---|---|
chłopak narzeczony mąż | dziewczyna narzeczona żona | partner/ka (binarne) partner_ka (binarne) | wciąż określa płeć, ale przynajmniej nie wymaga dookreślenia relacji, a słowa mają wspólny rdzeń, więc da się je połączyć | |
pan | pani | państwo | liczba mnoga w odniesieniu do jednej osoby może brzmieć nienatualnie | |
panie i panowie | drodzy państwo | |||
ojciec i matka | rodzice | |||
ojciec | matka | rodzic | ||
synowie i córki | dzieci | |||
syn | córka | dziecko | ||
bracia i siostry | rodzeństwo | |||
brat | siostra | ❓ | ||
mężczyzna, facet mężczyźni | kobieta kobiety | człowiek ludzie | ||
chłopak, chłopiec chłopaki, chłopacy, chłopcy | dziewczyna dziewczyny | dzieci, młodzież, młodzi, nastolatki enby, enbies (dot. osób niebinarnych) | ||
kolega | koleżanka | koleg/żanka (binarne) koleg_żanka (binarne) kolo | ||
doktor | doktorka | doktor/ka (binarne) doktor_ka (binarne) | ||
psycholog | psycholożka | psycholog/żka (binarne) psycholog_żka (binarne) | ||
psycholodzy | psycholożki | psycholodzy/żki (binarne) psycholog_żka (binarne) | ||
członek | członkini | ❓ | ||
członkowie | członkinie | ❓ | ||
(ten) sędzia | (ta) sędzia sędzina | ❓ | ||
kandydaci | kandydatki | osoby kandydujące |
forma męska | forma żeńska | forma neutralna | dukaizmy |
---|---|---|---|
obaj | obie | oboje | ❓ |
trzej | trzy | troje | ❓ |
jednym | jedną | jedno (r.n.) | jednum |
Szczerze mówiąc… Póki co, czarno to widzę 😢
Każda propozycja ma jakieś wady. Wiele ma sens tylko w piśmie, nie w mowie. Wiele, zwłaszcza wśród rzeczowników, wciąż jest bardzo binarnych – choć włączają i kobiety i mężczyzn, to nie obejmują nikogo pomiędzy. Nawet jeśli dana propozycja działa nieźle w jednej kategorii, ciężko znaleźć jej odpowiednik dla innych części mowy.
A przede wszystkim: większość brzmi „nienaturalnie”. Są neologizmami i „neogramatyką”.
Pamiętacie oburzenie na feminatywy, gdy posłanki Lewicy chciały być nazywane „posłankami”? To wyobraźcie sobie sobie, że mówicie publicznie, że „onu zaśpiewału”. 😱 Wyobraźcie sobie, czego muszą wysłuchiwać osoby niebinarne używające form neutralnych… (btw, osoby, które nie są w stanie choćby próbować używać twoich poprawnych zaimków, być może nie są osobami, które warto mieć w swoim życiu, just saying…)
Genderneutralizowanie polszczyzny jest zadaniem z góry skazanym na spore antagonizmy. Na oskarżenia o „ideologizację” i „psucie” języka. Tyle że języka nie da się „zepsuć”. To żywy organizm, który dostosowuje się do tego, jak go użytkownicy używają.
A używają. Mój twitterowy znajomy, Ausir, stworzył listę literatury używającej niebinarnych form w języku polskim. I jest ona długa!
Język nieustannie się zmienia. Zmienia się wprawdzie powolutku, ale liczy się każda drobna zmiana w dobrym kierunku. Zmienia się wtedy, gdy go używamy. Więc używajmy 😊
]]>Where are you on the Sexuality Spectrum?
Disclaimer:
I'm not the author of the original concept of those axes. They were circulating online in form of a picture without a watermark – making it practically impossible to find the author. I just made an interactive version of it, with a few adjustments.
I'm aware that this representation of gender & sexuality is not perfect – but none is! Humans are more complex than just a few axes!
Yes, us nonbinary folx aren't necessarily in between “male” and “female”, yes, lumping bisexuality and pansexuality together is not ideal, etc. etc. etc. But it's an approximation. If you come up with a better one, I'd gladly make an app for it 😉
]]>#IAmNonbinary is trending on Twitter. Next to beautiful pictures and inspiring stories of nonbinary folks, there’s also tons of hateful replies. Apart from the usual phobic comments, there’s also some idiotic requirements. Haters reproach people that they aren’t andogynous enough, or that they aren’t using “they/them” pronouns, etc, etc.
Oh for fuck’s sake. You’re missing the entire point.
Nonbinary isn’t about creating a third box, next to “male” and “female”. It’s about getting out of the box.
It’s in the name: “nonbinary” = beyond the binary, beyond the two usual “options”.
I used to get it wrong as well. I thought that this word only applies to those people that you see on the street and can’t help but wonder, if they’re a boy or a girl. That it’s only for people like Jonathan Van Ness, who dare to rock high heels and gender bend the hell out of their wardrobe.
It’s not.
It’s just about looking at what the society considers “male” and “female”, and feeling that you’re neither. That’s all.
Today I realised that on my inactive Facebook account I’ve put gender “doesn’t matter” and pronoun “neutral” many, many years ago. But only a few months ago I’ve finally dared to call myself “nonbinary”. How stupid of me.
You can be AFAB and wear makeup, you can be AMAB and have a beard. You dont’ have to be adrongynous, you don’t have to use them/they pronouns. No worries, other enbies won’t think of you as any less nonbinary.
Gender ≠ expression ≠ pronouns.
We call people “they”, even in singular, when we either don’t know their gender or if it isn’t important. That doesn’t mean we think they’re nonbinary. We call ships “she” (well, some people do, I think it’s stupid), which doesn’t mean that ships are female. When a woman wears pants (unthinkable two centuries ago), she doesn’t become a man. When a clergyman wears a cassock (basically a dress), he doesn’t become a woman.
You know why? Yes, because gender ≠ expression ≠ pronouns.
So please stop telling nonbinary people how to be nonbinary. Nobody is “not nonbinary enough”.
And while we’re at it: stop telling women how to be women and stop telling men how to be men.
We’re all valid. We’re all enough.
]]>You can’t be scared shitless about seeming even just a bit feminine without secretly thinking that being a woman is somehow worse than being a man.
]]>No such thing as a “real man”.
It’s just a social construct. It changes over time, it differs from country to country, from social group to social group. It’s super arbitrary.
All men are real men.
]]>No, honestly, am I? I wanna know 😅
One thing is, in general, I don’t think gender should be a thing. It’s just some set of stupid arbitrary rules telling you what are you allowed to do and what not depending on which genitals you were born with. I don’t want to follow those rules. I refuse to follow them.
Women used to have no right to vote. Women used to not be allowed to wear pants. But they refused to play by those rules – and now, surprise surprise, turns out having a penis is not a requirement to vote or to wear pants anymore! Who would have thought!
I went to a Pride Week showing of “The Danish Girl” this Monday, followed by a panel discussion with three transgender people who told the audience about their experience of being trans in the Netherlands. What struck me is how much their lives would’ve been easier if only our society didn’t have those strange gender rules. No one would mock that trans guy as a child for having a “boy haircut” or riding a “boy bike” if there was no such thing as a “boy haircut” or “boy bike”. Our society has put gender labels on mundane things like toys, books, movies or haircuts and now it hates people who don’t comply. That’s crazy and hurtful!
Summing up, I really believe that breaking all the idiotic gender-related rules that our society has made up is a right thing to do.
But do I break them?
Well, that’s why I’m not sure if calling myself nonbinary would be okay... I just look like a guy. That’s all.
I mean, I have a friend that looks a different gender in each picture of their dating profile. I see Jonathan van Ness rocking their heels and long hair... And then there’s me – a guy that looks like a guy. I sometimes feel that if I did call myself nonbinary, I’d be all like how dare I do that?
But also, I don’t always look 100% like a guy. I paint my nails every once in a while when I feel like it – and I’m gradually getting more and more comfortable wearing shiny pink nail polish in public. On some occasions (mostly Pride) I wear some makeup on my face as well.
On the other hand, I don’t shop in the “women’s” part of stores, I don’t wear heels or shirts or dresses. I am planning to buy some, but I probably won’t dare to wear them in public for quite a while anyway.
I use the “men’s” locker room at the gym and the “men’s” restroom at work, no matter how inclusive for gender nonconforming people that restroom might be. I don’t think I’m ready for the confusion / confrontation it might possibly spark... Does it make me conforming after all?
People refer to me as he/him, but I honestly wouldn’t mind she/her or they/them. I really, really, don’t care. In my native Polish, which distinguishes gender in many more ways than English, I started using artificial, gender-neutral forms or words (”chciałₐbym” instead of male “chciałbym” or femal “chciałabym”, “zrobiłæm” instead of male “zrobiłem” or female “zrobiłam”). Oh, and I also use female emojis 🤷🏼
I don’t do that because I don’t feel like a man anymore or because I feel like a woman, or even anywhere in between.
I do that because I truly hate the very distinction of “femininity” and “masculinity”. Skirts should be just yet another type of clothing one could wear, and not a political statement or a reason to be beaten up in the street. Makeup should be just a time-consuming way to look better – not something reserved to a particular half of the population depending on the contents of their underwear.
I don’t care about being or not being a particular gender. I care about being free from caring about those stupid rules.
And you know what? Is a person not gay if they’re still in the closet? Are they not gay if they are still a virgin? Of course not! Then why do I care so much if I am non-conforming enough to call myself so?
I am angry at the world for attempting to put us all into binary categories – and I don’t wanna stay in one of them anymore.
So yes, I will be putting “enby” in my bio 😉
]]>At first I didn’t really think about it. It was yet another thing that my parents taught me and I just accepted. Boys and girls need to have separate toilets and locker rooms, so that the boys wouldn’t do nasty things to the girls. Simple.
But one day a cleaning lady came in to the boys’ locker room. And one day a female teacher come in. How come? Why can they see half-naked boys, while our female classmates cannot? That got me thinking and trying to find any sense in that.
Even more when I started realising I was gay. Since I fancy other guys, and since girls might fancy me, should I be always given a private locker room and bathroom, so that nobody sees anyone they might fancy?
Showers in the male locker room at my gym were in renovation for over two weeks. Having to go back home all sweaty and stinky – not the best experience, trust me... The solution could be really simple – just temporarily let the guys use female showers. Nothing would happen. I have no problem not raping or assaulting anyone, no matter how hot and muscular they are, and I’m sure straight guys wouldn’t do that either, if they saw hot naked girls. It’s not a darkroom, it’s just basic hygiene, grow up!
Assuming we only strip to our underwear in the school locker room[1], how is that different from just enjoying a beach in our swimsuits? We don’t separate those by gender (not anymore, at least). Did the world collapse? Did the beaches become dens of iniquity? Did we stop controlling ourselves just because we can see almost-naked persons of the opposite sex? No.
And what’s the deal about the toilets? We have to unnecessarily build separate public toilets for two genders, because what? Because urinals? Man, if someone were inappropriately looking at my junk while I’m pissing in a public restroom[2], I would be pissed – totally regardless of whether it’s a female or male pervert. And except for pissing in a urinal, it’s not like we do anything intimate in front of other people. Why would I care at all, what gender is the person in a next stall?
The separation of restrooms and locker rooms is not just idiotic and baseless, but can often become problematic, if you don’t easily fit into binary gender division. And I’m not talking only about the transgender, transsexual and nonbinary people. You can encounter some problems even if you’re a cis, straight person. In which locker room should a mother help her little son change, so that none of them feels uncomfortable? To which toilet should a father take his little daughter, not to be regarded a pervert?
The whole thing with the gender division makes no sense on any level. Can someone explain to me, why are we still doing that?
[1] Why the hell do people prefer to keep stinking with sweat for the rest of the day rather than just take their pants off and take a shower, is a separate topic. Hint: homophobia.
[2] Well, except if it happened like in a gay bar or something 😉
But there is also a good side to that. The side of being gay that I really really love!
When I see a straight couple on a date, most of the time the guy seems nervous: he plans the whole thing, he tries to impress the girl, he bares responsibility for the date to work out well. She, on the other hand, is more passive, just enjoying his efforts.
When I hear about family problems of straight couples, they often concern the division of household chores or generally the traditional gender roles. The wife is expected to sacrifice her career for the children and the household, while the husband is expected to heroically protect the family from every danger.
And almost nobody seems to be happy with that. Girls, who try to impress a guy or want to ask him out, often feel strange, inappropriate. And some guys might be shy and prefer to be approached by a girl, or might not like the burden of organising their dates. Girls might want to focus on their careers, guys might need the privilege of being cowardly...
Gays, on the other hand, can be so flexible in all of that! Who reels up the the other? Well, whoever’s brave enough. Who organises the dates? Whoever feels like it, or whoever has a nice idea, or we just do it together. Who does the chores? We just split it, so that everybody does, what they do best. If both of you are the man or the woman, then you don’t have to “be the man in this relationship” or wonder “what should I do as a woman?”.
I’m not saying straight couples cannot have such equality and freedom to be yourself, as same-sex couples do. That would be stereotypical, plain stupid and simply not true. They obviously can, and I know many that do. But you’ve got to admit, the overall trend of equality in a relationship and the general expectations from the society in that matter look way better for same-sex couples, don’t they?
A girl meets a boy: he’s nice, interesting, handsome and strong. She falls in love with him. Well, at least until they talk about politics for the first time. Then it turns out that her prince charming is actually a nationalistic fucktard, he’s hateful towards other nations and skin colours, he wants to let the refugees die in the war zone...
Obviously, gays also can be right-wing extremists, but statistically I would expect much lower percentage of such people among the LGBTQ community. Why? We can sympathise with minorities, because we are a minority ourselves. We’ve been hurt by inequality, so we have a lot of determination to fight against it. Our common suffering unites us and makes us stronger.
Which brings me to the awesomeness of the LGBTQ community in general. My first time in a gay bar was an amazing, unforgettable experience, even though nothing special actually happened. But it was just so open!
Obviously, that’s a huge generalisation, but you know... In a gay bar, during a pride parade or in some LGBTQ association, as long as you share the same values, you can feel welcome, you can be yourself and not be judged for that, you can feel safe and wanted. It’s just so warm and friendly! You can be on first name terms with everybody by default (even in Poland or Germany, where “Du” and “Sie” thingy is quite a big deal).
The Community is like a huge, worldwide family for me. I cried after the massacre in Orlando as if I’d lost really close friends – even though I didn’t know those people. After my biological family rejected me, it’s the misfits of the LGBTQ community that made me feel at home again.
For a shy guy like me online dating is quite a big deal. Remember all the jokes in the sitcoms about couples being ashamed that they’ve met online and coming up with some fake “how we met” stories? This shows a stigma around the topic. As if it was a worse way to meet someone. If anything, it’s better in many ways. Like being able to get to know someone’s interests and character (and not just their looks) from their profile before even talking to them – you can’t see any of that when you’re saying hello to a stranger in a bar.
Sure, now in the age of Tinder’s popularity, that stigma is getting smaller and smaller. But nevertheless: I’m happy to be part of a community, where meeting your boyfriend or your hookup on the Internet is not a big deal, but practically a default.
Ever wondered, why sex-related jokes about gays are almost always about us doing anal (”haha, they fuck in the shithole!”) or about straight guys’ irrational fears that we would rape them (”I’ll sleep on this side, otherwise you’d fuck me, faggot, hehe...”)? Well, yeah, we do anal, and it’s awesome, what’s your point? And no, gay ≠ rapist, and if you’d joke about that, it probably means that’s the way you’d treat a woman in a similar situation...
Meanwhile, in sit-coms, standups etc. I keep hearing jokes about guys constantly underperforming in bed, finishing after 3 minutes, refusing to go down on a girl while demanding a blowjob for themselves, being generally boring and self-absorbed in bed... I might think they’re just jokes, but then I keep hearing complaints about precisely that from my straight female friends about their boyfriends.
Seems like many straight guys don’t experiment with their bodies, as if their cock was their only sex organ and a woman was basically just a toy for their wank. Getting your nipples stimulated, your armpits or asshole licked, etc. etc., that feels so amazing! Your G-spot is your prostate, and if you don’t play with it for fear that “it’s gay”, you’re just missing out. Licking other people’s bodies can be so hot as well...
From what I hear, many straight people divide sex into foreplay and penetration. Penetration is what a guy really wants, while foreplay is what he is willing to do, reluctantly, to be allowed to get to the penetration. And gays? Seriously, I don’t remember the last time I even used the word “foreplay”. It’s all just sex. It’s all awesome. Did you know that most of the time we don’t even fuck in the ass during sex? Anal requires preparation, douching, status talk, condoms, lube, etc., meanwhile everything else is almost just as good, so why bother that much every time?
“Seducing a straight guy” is quite a common theme in gay porn. But I don’t really get that phantasy. If the majority of straight guys is really the way standuppers, sitcoms, jokes and their own partners say they are in bed, well... I’m just glad that there are only gay/bi guys in my bed.
I don’t have to worry about getting someone pregnant. Or about my country trying to restrict access to contraception and abortion (although I am fighting for others’ right to use them). I won’t end up in a marriage where we don’t actually want to be together, but we just ended up with an unwanted pregnancy and decided it’s best for the baby... If I share my clothes and underwear with my boyfriend, my wardrobe becomes twice as big. There are so many things I don’t really think about every day, but when they do come up, I can’t help but think “thank goddess I’m gay!”.
So if I were born straight, I guess I’d be trying to be as “gay” as possible anyway. Looking for a girlfriend that would treat be like a partner, not as a patriarch. Visiting gay bars, because why not. Using online dating sites and not caring what others think...
There’s naturally nothing wrong with being straight, or with being gay, or lesbian, or bisexual, or pansexual. But hell yeah I’m happy I happened to be born just the way I have!
]]>