Top Law Schools

scoobers wrote:

capt_slow wrote:

scoobers wrote:

capt_slow wrote:Did someone just call scoobs a heshe?

Gender is a social construct hth

I am pretty sure gender is quite biological and important for reproduction.... But... Who knows

Completely off topic, but useful notes:
Sex = what you were born with (xy or xx, usually (but not always))
Gender = what you identify with
Identification = your sexuality
Attraction = whom you are attracted to

scoobers wrote:

Attax wrote:

EEguy5 wrote:So maybe capt was just pointing out that it is socially acceptable to use "he" as a term referring to all genders and thus he/she is unnecessary and rudundant?

Incorrect. (s)he or he/she seems the most appropriate as it doesn't imply any particular gender. Just like how Ms. is appropriate if you don't know a woman's marital status.

except she/he implies a gender binary.

English really needs a completely gender-neutral term. Using "he" is another example of putting women outside the norm, the same way how it is okay to refer to women using male terms, but not men using female terms.

Attax wrote:

scoobers wrote:

Attax wrote:

EEguy5 wrote:So maybe capt was just pointing out that it is socially acceptable to use "he" as a term referring to all genders and thus he/she is unnecessary and rudundant?

Incorrect. (s)he or he/she seems the most appropriate as it doesn't imply any particular gender. Just like how Ms. is appropriate if you don't know a woman's marital status.

except she/he implies a gender binary.

English really needs a completely gender-neutral term. Using "he" is another example of putting women outside the norm, the same way how it is okay to refer to women using male terms, but not men using female terms.

True, and it ignores a cisgendered person. However, I think that an or doesn't imply exclusion that it must be binary. So saying he/she meaning he or she means he, she, or some combination thereof (aka neither or both).

scoobers wrote:
English really needs a completely gender-neutral term.

leigh912198972 wrote:http://wpmedia.o.canada.com/2013/05/kit ... %3Fw%3D680

barrelofmonkeys wrote:

scoobers wrote:
English really needs a completely gender-neutral term.

"it"

scoobers wrote:

Attax wrote:

EEguy5 wrote:So maybe capt was just pointing out that it is socially acceptable to use "he" as a term referring to all genders and thus he/she is unnecessary and rudundant?

Incorrect. (s)he or he/she seems the most appropriate as it doesn't imply any particular gender. Just like how Ms. is appropriate if you don't know a woman's marital status.

except she/he implies a gender binary.

English really needs a completely gender-neutral term. Using "he" is another example of putting women outside the norm, the same way how it is okay to refer to women using male terms, but not men using female terms.

scoobers wrote:

EEguy5 wrote:So maybe capt was just pointing out that it is socially acceptable to use "he" as a term referring to all genders and thus he/she is unnecessary and rudundant?

Ohhhh you don't want to go there when I'm involved itt

jk148706 wrote:Thread is so bad right now.



More applicant freak out less lounge talk plz

Kthx

graphia wrote:

Michigan1442 wrote:Is it a bad sign for my status checker to still be on my first complete date (late Sept)? Is anyone else in this boat?

Didn't interview with an alum due to my location...but did write a why Northwestern.

Still complete as of early September myself. 174-176, 3.9x, no interview or Why Northwestern.

I think they forgot about me.

gobears!! wrote:can we please have nice things today and not break the status checker?!? we are smart people...we can do this!

cpslo12 wrote:just got DLA w/in 24 hours.. I checked at like 12:05 pacific time and I was still complete so maybe there's a delay? still no letter yet though.

cpslo12 wrote:just got DLA w/in 24 hours.. I checked at like 12:05 pacific time and I was still complete so maybe there's a delay? still no letter yet though.