How does Howard Stark know this?Is Tony Stark the natural son of Howard Stark?How does Howard Stark get the vibranium for Capt America's original shield?Realistically, how does Captain Marvel know to rescue them?How did Tony Stark create this?How does Thanos do this using Nebula's beacon?How does this character return this stone in its original form?How did Tony Stark know where to go?How does Thor get this in Endgame?How does the past Nebula come to know about present Nebula?Why wasn't Tony Stark more affected by this?
How could it be that 80% of townspeople were farmers during the Edo period in Japan?
Why is the Advance Variation considered strong vs the Caro-Kann but not vs the Scandinavian?
Understanding Deutch's Algorithm
When did game consoles begin including FPUs?
Can anyone give me examples of the relative-determinative 'which'?
Will the volt, ampere, ohm or other electrical units change on May 20th, 2019?
Does addError() work outside of triggers?
Is there any good reason to write "it is easy to see"?
Capital gains on stocks sold to take initial investment off the table
Can my American children re-enter the USA by International flight with a passport card? Being that their passport book has expired
What do you call the hair or body hair you trim off your body?
Does this "yield your space to an ally" rule my 3.5 group uses appear anywhere in the official rules?
Is random forest for regression a 'true' regression?
What dog breeds survive the apocalypse for generations?
Understanding Python syntax in lists vs series
How to check if comma list is empty?
UUID type for NEWID()
How did the horses get to space?
How to continually let my readers know what time it is in my story, in an organic way?
I recently started my machine learning PhD and I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing
Cuban Primes
Developers demotivated due to working on same project for more than 2 years
Will consteval functions allow template parameters dependent on function arguments?
Meaning of "legitimate" in Carl Jung's quote "Neurosis is always a substitute for legitimate suffering."
How does Howard Stark know this?
Is Tony Stark the natural son of Howard Stark?How does Howard Stark get the vibranium for Capt America's original shield?Realistically, how does Captain Marvel know to rescue them?How did Tony Stark create this?How does Thanos do this using Nebula's beacon?How does this character return this stone in its original form?How did Tony Stark know where to go?How does Thor get this in Endgame?How does the past Nebula come to know about present Nebula?Why wasn't Tony Stark more affected by this?
In Avengers: Endgame, during the scene where Tony and Steve lose the Tesseract to Loki and now they improvise and travel back to 1970, Tony accidentally meets Howard and they start some small-talk in the lift.
During which they say to each other:
Tony: I have a girl.
Howard: A girl would be good.
Throughout this exchange we see that Howard is quite nervous about being a father.
When Steve Rogers (Captain America) gathers the extra Pym particles and signals to Tony that it's time to go, the following conversation occurs:
Howard: Smart guy (talking about Tony's dad)
Tony: He did his best
Howard: The kid’s gonna be here and there's nothing I wouldn't do for him.
So did Howard know he's having a boy?
plot-explanation marvel-cinematic-universe avengers-endgame
edited May 11 at 13:30
LogicalBranch
4811318
asked May 10 at 14:27
ShaliniShalini
1,03911329
add a comment |
In Avengers: Endgame, during the scene where Tony and Steve lose the Tesseract to Loki and now they improvise and travel back to 1970, Tony accidentally meets Howard and they start some small-talk in the lift.
During which they say to each other:
Tony: I have a girl.
Howard: A girl would be good.
Throughout this exchange we see that Howard is quite nervous about being a father.
When Steve Rogers (Captain America) gathers the extra Pym particles and signals to Tony that it's time to go, the following conversation occurs:
Howard: Smart guy (talking about Tony's dad)
Tony: He did his best
Howard: The kid’s gonna be here and there's nothing I wouldn't do for him.
So did Howard know he's having a boy?
plot-explanation marvel-cinematic-universe avengers-endgame
edited May 11 at 13:30
LogicalBranch
4811318
asked May 10 at 14:27
ShaliniShalini
1,03911329
add a comment |
In Avengers: Endgame, during the scene where Tony and Steve lose the Tesseract to Loki and now they improvise and travel back to 1970, Tony accidentally meets Howard and they start some small-talk in the lift.
During which they say to each other:
Tony: I have a girl.
Howard: A girl would be good.
Throughout this exchange we see that Howard is quite nervous about being a father.
When Steve Rogers (Captain America) gathers the extra Pym particles and signals to Tony that it's time to go, the following conversation occurs:
Howard: Smart guy (talking about Tony's dad)
Tony: He did his best
Howard: The kid’s gonna be here and there's nothing I wouldn't do for him.
So did Howard know he's having a boy?
plot-explanation marvel-cinematic-universe avengers-endgame
edited May 11 at 13:30
LogicalBranch
4811318
asked May 10 at 14:27
ShaliniShalini
1,03911329
In Avengers: Endgame, during the scene where Tony and Steve lose the Tesseract to Loki and now they improvise and travel back to 1970, Tony accidentally meets Howard and they start some small-talk in the lift.
During which they say to each other:
Tony: I have a girl.
Howard: A girl would be good.
Throughout this exchange we see that Howard is quite nervous about being a father.
When Steve Rogers (Captain America) gathers the extra Pym particles and signals to Tony that it's time to go, the following conversation occurs:
Howard: Smart guy (talking about Tony's dad)
Tony: He did his best
Howard: The kid’s gonna be here and there's nothing I wouldn't do for him.
So did Howard know he's having a boy?
plot-explanation marvel-cinematic-universe avengers-endgame
plot-explanation marvel-cinematic-universe avengers-endgame
edited May 11 at 13:30
LogicalBranch
4811318
asked May 10 at 14:27
ShaliniShalini
1,03911329
edited May 11 at 13:30
LogicalBranch
4811318
asked May 10 at 14:27
ShaliniShalini
1,03911329
edited May 11 at 13:30
LogicalBranch
4811318
edited May 11 at 13:30
LogicalBranch
4811318
edited May 11 at 13:30
LogicalBranch
4811318
4811318
asked May 10 at 14:27
ShaliniShalini
1,03911329
asked May 10 at 14:27
ShaliniShalini
1,03911329
asked May 10 at 14:27
ShaliniShalini
1,03911329
1,03911329
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
He did not know:
Tony: I have a little girl.
Howard: A girl would be nice. Less of a chance
she'd turn out exactly like me.
[...]
Tony: So, where are you
at with names?
Howard: Well, if it's a boy,
my wife likes Almanzo.
So I guess he's just using he as a somewhat neutral pronoun.
answered May 10 at 14:49
Pablo LozanoPablo Lozano
90349
14
It might also be worth noting that'emis a common North American shorthand forthem, which is a common gender-neutral pronoun (even in the singular, at least colloquially). It may be that the script says'emand nothim, as both sound extremely similar, and so it becomesthere's nothing I wouldn't do for 'em.
– Daevin
May 10 at 17:45
11
@Daevin: That's relatively recent, though. For example, according to Wikipedia, he was preponderant for gender-neutral until a push for they started around 1980.
– Matthieu M.
May 10 at 18:17
5
@MatthieuM. Although the singular pronoun "they" has actually been around since the 14th century. (It began to fall out of use in the 19th, though, and by the 20th century was not really used for the object.)
– wizzwizz4
May 10 at 18:21
4
In the early 1970's when this was set, it was standard to use a male pronoun in neutral situations. Arguing for another choice was at first a very radical notion, and I don't even remember hearing it personally until the late 70's. Even saying "he or she" back then would get you looks (like you're wasting the listener's time with unimportant technicalities).
– T.E.D.
May 10 at 20:24
This cross-site question backups this answer, which I think should be the accepted one.
– gsamaras
May 11 at 12:33
|
show 1 more comment
Howard and his wife don't know, as evidenced by his line "if it's a boy, my wife thinks Almanzo". Furthermore, while I don't know if it's the only way to determine a baby's sex, medical ultrasounds weren't that common by the early 70s, so they might even not have had a way to know.
Why did he use the masculine then? Couple of things to consider:
- Tony and him just talked about the "boy" possibility. Using "him" is in the flow of things;
- while he doesn't seem to have a preference, Howard might just be expecting it's a boy, having a feeling or something;
- "him" isn't that uncommon to refer to a person of unknown gender, although the English language does have a gender-neutral pronoun (they). Unsure how largely it was used by the 70s though.
answered May 10 at 14:53
JenayahJenayah
4,30412639
1
I definitely think it's the third bullet point. "They" as a singular gender-neutral pronoun seems to be becoming more widespread
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 17:39
Although as @DJMcMayhem "they" is becoming more widespread as a singular pronoun, the scene was set in the 70s, where I assume "he" was still more common as a neutral singular pronoun
– Stephen S
May 10 at 19:20
@StephenS Yes, I was trying to convey that same point.
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 19:55
2
Speaking as one who remembers the 1970s, the use of "they" as a singular was at best still considered ungrammatical. While the gender-bias inherent in the English language was a subject of active complaint, very little progress had yet occurred towards rectifying it. Masculine forms were still used almost exclusively for gender-neutral references. Despite what some people might claim, it was understood by everyone when the pronouns were to be interpreted as gender-neutral (but even if unintended, it was a biased practice). Thus "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."
– Paul Sinclair
May 11 at 20:06
add a comment |
He/Him/His etc... are typically used in English as both a masculine pronoun and a gender unknown pronoun (could refer to either a "he" or a "she"). While this is slowly falling out of practice now--they has become more common. He has historically (1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s) been the way to refer to a singular gender unknown person.
Neuter pronouns it/its etc... are typically used in English to refer to something that cannot have a gender, a bucket, chair, etc... And are never used to refer to a person that can have a gender (even eunuchs are not referred to as it/its/etc...) As this is considered rude.
This was done in both writing and speech. It is now more politically correct to use he/she (she/he?) or they, with they being more politically correct as it does not assume the number of possible genders.
So they (the movie makers) used the correct terminology for the time that they (Iron Man & Captain America) were in to refer to a person of whose gender has yet to be determined.
answered May 10 at 19:44
Garret GangGarret Gang
1313
New contributor
Garret Gang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
He did not know:
Tony: I have a little girl.
Howard: A girl would be nice. Less of a chance
she'd turn out exactly like me.
[...]
Tony: So, where are you
at with names?
Howard: Well, if it's a boy,
my wife likes Almanzo.
So I guess he's just using he as a somewhat neutral pronoun.
answered May 10 at 14:49
Pablo LozanoPablo Lozano
90349
14
It might also be worth noting that'emis a common North American shorthand forthem, which is a common gender-neutral pronoun (even in the singular, at least colloquially). It may be that the script says'emand nothim, as both sound extremely similar, and so it becomesthere's nothing I wouldn't do for 'em.
– Daevin
May 10 at 17:45
11
@Daevin: That's relatively recent, though. For example, according to Wikipedia, he was preponderant for gender-neutral until a push for they started around 1980.
– Matthieu M.
May 10 at 18:17
5
@MatthieuM. Although the singular pronoun "they" has actually been around since the 14th century. (It began to fall out of use in the 19th, though, and by the 20th century was not really used for the object.)
– wizzwizz4
May 10 at 18:21
4
In the early 1970's when this was set, it was standard to use a male pronoun in neutral situations. Arguing for another choice was at first a very radical notion, and I don't even remember hearing it personally until the late 70's. Even saying "he or she" back then would get you looks (like you're wasting the listener's time with unimportant technicalities).
– T.E.D.
May 10 at 20:24
This cross-site question backups this answer, which I think should be the accepted one.
– gsamaras
May 11 at 12:33
|
show 1 more comment
He did not know:
Tony: I have a little girl.
Howard: A girl would be nice. Less of a chance
she'd turn out exactly like me.
[...]
Tony: So, where are you
at with names?
Howard: Well, if it's a boy,
my wife likes Almanzo.
So I guess he's just using he as a somewhat neutral pronoun.
answered May 10 at 14:49
Pablo LozanoPablo Lozano
90349
14
It might also be worth noting that'emis a common North American shorthand forthem, which is a common gender-neutral pronoun (even in the singular, at least colloquially). It may be that the script says'emand nothim, as both sound extremely similar, and so it becomesthere's nothing I wouldn't do for 'em.
– Daevin
May 10 at 17:45
11
@Daevin: That's relatively recent, though. For example, according to Wikipedia, he was preponderant for gender-neutral until a push for they started around 1980.
– Matthieu M.
May 10 at 18:17
5
@MatthieuM. Although the singular pronoun "they" has actually been around since the 14th century. (It began to fall out of use in the 19th, though, and by the 20th century was not really used for the object.)
– wizzwizz4
May 10 at 18:21
4
In the early 1970's when this was set, it was standard to use a male pronoun in neutral situations. Arguing for another choice was at first a very radical notion, and I don't even remember hearing it personally until the late 70's. Even saying "he or she" back then would get you looks (like you're wasting the listener's time with unimportant technicalities).
– T.E.D.
May 10 at 20:24
This cross-site question backups this answer, which I think should be the accepted one.
– gsamaras
May 11 at 12:33
|
show 1 more comment
He did not know:
Tony: I have a little girl.
Howard: A girl would be nice. Less of a chance
she'd turn out exactly like me.
[...]
Tony: So, where are you
at with names?
Howard: Well, if it's a boy,
my wife likes Almanzo.
So I guess he's just using he as a somewhat neutral pronoun.
answered May 10 at 14:49
Pablo LozanoPablo Lozano
90349
He did not know:
Tony: I have a little girl.
Howard: A girl would be nice. Less of a chance
she'd turn out exactly like me.
[...]
Tony: So, where are you
at with names?
Howard: Well, if it's a boy,
my wife likes Almanzo.
So I guess he's just using he as a somewhat neutral pronoun.
answered May 10 at 14:49
Pablo LozanoPablo Lozano
90349
answered May 10 at 14:49
Pablo LozanoPablo Lozano
90349
answered May 10 at 14:49
Pablo LozanoPablo Lozano
90349
answered May 10 at 14:49
Pablo LozanoPablo Lozano
90349
90349
14
It might also be worth noting that'emis a common North American shorthand forthem, which is a common gender-neutral pronoun (even in the singular, at least colloquially). It may be that the script says'emand nothim, as both sound extremely similar, and so it becomesthere's nothing I wouldn't do for 'em.
– Daevin
May 10 at 17:45
11
@Daevin: That's relatively recent, though. For example, according to Wikipedia, he was preponderant for gender-neutral until a push for they started around 1980.
– Matthieu M.
May 10 at 18:17
5
@MatthieuM. Although the singular pronoun "they" has actually been around since the 14th century. (It began to fall out of use in the 19th, though, and by the 20th century was not really used for the object.)
– wizzwizz4
May 10 at 18:21
4
In the early 1970's when this was set, it was standard to use a male pronoun in neutral situations. Arguing for another choice was at first a very radical notion, and I don't even remember hearing it personally until the late 70's. Even saying "he or she" back then would get you looks (like you're wasting the listener's time with unimportant technicalities).
– T.E.D.
May 10 at 20:24
This cross-site question backups this answer, which I think should be the accepted one.
– gsamaras
May 11 at 12:33
|
show 1 more comment
14
It might also be worth noting that'emis a common North American shorthand forthem, which is a common gender-neutral pronoun (even in the singular, at least colloquially). It may be that the script says'emand nothim, as both sound extremely similar, and so it becomesthere's nothing I wouldn't do for 'em.
– Daevin
May 10 at 17:45
11
@Daevin: That's relatively recent, though. For example, according to Wikipedia, he was preponderant for gender-neutral until a push for they started around 1980.
– Matthieu M.
May 10 at 18:17
5
@MatthieuM. Although the singular pronoun "they" has actually been around since the 14th century. (It began to fall out of use in the 19th, though, and by the 20th century was not really used for the object.)
– wizzwizz4
May 10 at 18:21
4
In the early 1970's when this was set, it was standard to use a male pronoun in neutral situations. Arguing for another choice was at first a very radical notion, and I don't even remember hearing it personally until the late 70's. Even saying "he or she" back then would get you looks (like you're wasting the listener's time with unimportant technicalities).
– T.E.D.
May 10 at 20:24
This cross-site question backups this answer, which I think should be the accepted one.
– gsamaras
May 11 at 12:33
14
14
It might also be worth noting that
'em is a common North American shorthand for them, which is a common gender-neutral pronoun (even in the singular, at least colloquially). It may be that the script says 'em and not him, as both sound extremely similar, and so it becomes there's nothing I wouldn't do for 'em.– Daevin
May 10 at 17:45
It might also be worth noting that
'em is a common North American shorthand for them, which is a common gender-neutral pronoun (even in the singular, at least colloquially). It may be that the script says 'em and not him, as both sound extremely similar, and so it becomes there's nothing I wouldn't do for 'em.– Daevin
May 10 at 17:45
11
11
@Daevin: That's relatively recent, though. For example, according to Wikipedia, he was preponderant for gender-neutral until a push for they started around 1980.
– Matthieu M.
May 10 at 18:17
@Daevin: That's relatively recent, though. For example, according to Wikipedia, he was preponderant for gender-neutral until a push for they started around 1980.
– Matthieu M.
May 10 at 18:17
5
5
@MatthieuM. Although the singular pronoun "they" has actually been around since the 14th century. (It began to fall out of use in the 19th, though, and by the 20th century was not really used for the object.)
– wizzwizz4
May 10 at 18:21
@MatthieuM. Although the singular pronoun "they" has actually been around since the 14th century. (It began to fall out of use in the 19th, though, and by the 20th century was not really used for the object.)
– wizzwizz4
May 10 at 18:21
4
4
In the early 1970's when this was set, it was standard to use a male pronoun in neutral situations. Arguing for another choice was at first a very radical notion, and I don't even remember hearing it personally until the late 70's. Even saying "he or she" back then would get you looks (like you're wasting the listener's time with unimportant technicalities).
– T.E.D.
May 10 at 20:24
In the early 1970's when this was set, it was standard to use a male pronoun in neutral situations. Arguing for another choice was at first a very radical notion, and I don't even remember hearing it personally until the late 70's. Even saying "he or she" back then would get you looks (like you're wasting the listener's time with unimportant technicalities).
– T.E.D.
May 10 at 20:24
This cross-site question backups this answer, which I think should be the accepted one.
– gsamaras
May 11 at 12:33
This cross-site question backups this answer, which I think should be the accepted one.
– gsamaras
May 11 at 12:33
|
show 1 more comment
Howard and his wife don't know, as evidenced by his line "if it's a boy, my wife thinks Almanzo". Furthermore, while I don't know if it's the only way to determine a baby's sex, medical ultrasounds weren't that common by the early 70s, so they might even not have had a way to know.
Why did he use the masculine then? Couple of things to consider:
- Tony and him just talked about the "boy" possibility. Using "him" is in the flow of things;
- while he doesn't seem to have a preference, Howard might just be expecting it's a boy, having a feeling or something;
- "him" isn't that uncommon to refer to a person of unknown gender, although the English language does have a gender-neutral pronoun (they). Unsure how largely it was used by the 70s though.
answered May 10 at 14:53
JenayahJenayah
4,30412639
1
I definitely think it's the third bullet point. "They" as a singular gender-neutral pronoun seems to be becoming more widespread
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 17:39
Although as @DJMcMayhem "they" is becoming more widespread as a singular pronoun, the scene was set in the 70s, where I assume "he" was still more common as a neutral singular pronoun
– Stephen S
May 10 at 19:20
@StephenS Yes, I was trying to convey that same point.
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 19:55
2
Speaking as one who remembers the 1970s, the use of "they" as a singular was at best still considered ungrammatical. While the gender-bias inherent in the English language was a subject of active complaint, very little progress had yet occurred towards rectifying it. Masculine forms were still used almost exclusively for gender-neutral references. Despite what some people might claim, it was understood by everyone when the pronouns were to be interpreted as gender-neutral (but even if unintended, it was a biased practice). Thus "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."
– Paul Sinclair
May 11 at 20:06
add a comment |
Howard and his wife don't know, as evidenced by his line "if it's a boy, my wife thinks Almanzo". Furthermore, while I don't know if it's the only way to determine a baby's sex, medical ultrasounds weren't that common by the early 70s, so they might even not have had a way to know.
Why did he use the masculine then? Couple of things to consider:
- Tony and him just talked about the "boy" possibility. Using "him" is in the flow of things;
- while he doesn't seem to have a preference, Howard might just be expecting it's a boy, having a feeling or something;
- "him" isn't that uncommon to refer to a person of unknown gender, although the English language does have a gender-neutral pronoun (they). Unsure how largely it was used by the 70s though.
answered May 10 at 14:53
JenayahJenayah
4,30412639
1
I definitely think it's the third bullet point. "They" as a singular gender-neutral pronoun seems to be becoming more widespread
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 17:39
Although as @DJMcMayhem "they" is becoming more widespread as a singular pronoun, the scene was set in the 70s, where I assume "he" was still more common as a neutral singular pronoun
– Stephen S
May 10 at 19:20
@StephenS Yes, I was trying to convey that same point.
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 19:55
2
Speaking as one who remembers the 1970s, the use of "they" as a singular was at best still considered ungrammatical. While the gender-bias inherent in the English language was a subject of active complaint, very little progress had yet occurred towards rectifying it. Masculine forms were still used almost exclusively for gender-neutral references. Despite what some people might claim, it was understood by everyone when the pronouns were to be interpreted as gender-neutral (but even if unintended, it was a biased practice). Thus "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."
– Paul Sinclair
May 11 at 20:06
add a comment |
Howard and his wife don't know, as evidenced by his line "if it's a boy, my wife thinks Almanzo". Furthermore, while I don't know if it's the only way to determine a baby's sex, medical ultrasounds weren't that common by the early 70s, so they might even not have had a way to know.
Why did he use the masculine then? Couple of things to consider:
- Tony and him just talked about the "boy" possibility. Using "him" is in the flow of things;
- while he doesn't seem to have a preference, Howard might just be expecting it's a boy, having a feeling or something;
- "him" isn't that uncommon to refer to a person of unknown gender, although the English language does have a gender-neutral pronoun (they). Unsure how largely it was used by the 70s though.
answered May 10 at 14:53
JenayahJenayah
4,30412639
Howard and his wife don't know, as evidenced by his line "if it's a boy, my wife thinks Almanzo". Furthermore, while I don't know if it's the only way to determine a baby's sex, medical ultrasounds weren't that common by the early 70s, so they might even not have had a way to know.
Why did he use the masculine then? Couple of things to consider:
- Tony and him just talked about the "boy" possibility. Using "him" is in the flow of things;
- while he doesn't seem to have a preference, Howard might just be expecting it's a boy, having a feeling or something;
- "him" isn't that uncommon to refer to a person of unknown gender, although the English language does have a gender-neutral pronoun (they). Unsure how largely it was used by the 70s though.
answered May 10 at 14:53
JenayahJenayah
4,30412639
edited May 10 at 15:01
answered May 10 at 14:53
JenayahJenayah
4,30412639
answered May 10 at 14:53
JenayahJenayah
4,30412639
answered May 10 at 14:53
JenayahJenayah
4,30412639
4,30412639
1
I definitely think it's the third bullet point. "They" as a singular gender-neutral pronoun seems to be becoming more widespread
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 17:39
Although as @DJMcMayhem "they" is becoming more widespread as a singular pronoun, the scene was set in the 70s, where I assume "he" was still more common as a neutral singular pronoun
– Stephen S
May 10 at 19:20
@StephenS Yes, I was trying to convey that same point.
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 19:55
2
Speaking as one who remembers the 1970s, the use of "they" as a singular was at best still considered ungrammatical. While the gender-bias inherent in the English language was a subject of active complaint, very little progress had yet occurred towards rectifying it. Masculine forms were still used almost exclusively for gender-neutral references. Despite what some people might claim, it was understood by everyone when the pronouns were to be interpreted as gender-neutral (but even if unintended, it was a biased practice). Thus "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."
– Paul Sinclair
May 11 at 20:06
add a comment |
1
I definitely think it's the third bullet point. "They" as a singular gender-neutral pronoun seems to be becoming more widespread
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 17:39
Although as @DJMcMayhem "they" is becoming more widespread as a singular pronoun, the scene was set in the 70s, where I assume "he" was still more common as a neutral singular pronoun
– Stephen S
May 10 at 19:20
@StephenS Yes, I was trying to convey that same point.
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 19:55
2
Speaking as one who remembers the 1970s, the use of "they" as a singular was at best still considered ungrammatical. While the gender-bias inherent in the English language was a subject of active complaint, very little progress had yet occurred towards rectifying it. Masculine forms were still used almost exclusively for gender-neutral references. Despite what some people might claim, it was understood by everyone when the pronouns were to be interpreted as gender-neutral (but even if unintended, it was a biased practice). Thus "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."
– Paul Sinclair
May 11 at 20:06
1
1
I definitely think it's the third bullet point. "They" as a singular gender-neutral pronoun seems to be becoming more widespread
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 17:39
I definitely think it's the third bullet point. "They" as a singular gender-neutral pronoun seems to be becoming more widespread
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 17:39
Although as @DJMcMayhem "they" is becoming more widespread as a singular pronoun, the scene was set in the 70s, where I assume "he" was still more common as a neutral singular pronoun
– Stephen S
May 10 at 19:20
Although as @DJMcMayhem "they" is becoming more widespread as a singular pronoun, the scene was set in the 70s, where I assume "he" was still more common as a neutral singular pronoun
– Stephen S
May 10 at 19:20
@StephenS Yes, I was trying to convey that same point.
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 19:55
@StephenS Yes, I was trying to convey that same point.
– DJMcMayhem
May 10 at 19:55
2
2
Speaking as one who remembers the 1970s, the use of "they" as a singular was at best still considered ungrammatical. While the gender-bias inherent in the English language was a subject of active complaint, very little progress had yet occurred towards rectifying it. Masculine forms were still used almost exclusively for gender-neutral references. Despite what some people might claim, it was understood by everyone when the pronouns were to be interpreted as gender-neutral (but even if unintended, it was a biased practice). Thus "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."
– Paul Sinclair
May 11 at 20:06
Speaking as one who remembers the 1970s, the use of "they" as a singular was at best still considered ungrammatical. While the gender-bias inherent in the English language was a subject of active complaint, very little progress had yet occurred towards rectifying it. Masculine forms were still used almost exclusively for gender-neutral references. Despite what some people might claim, it was understood by everyone when the pronouns were to be interpreted as gender-neutral (but even if unintended, it was a biased practice). Thus "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."
– Paul Sinclair
May 11 at 20:06
add a comment |
He/Him/His etc... are typically used in English as both a masculine pronoun and a gender unknown pronoun (could refer to either a "he" or a "she"). While this is slowly falling out of practice now--they has become more common. He has historically (1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s) been the way to refer to a singular gender unknown person.
Neuter pronouns it/its etc... are typically used in English to refer to something that cannot have a gender, a bucket, chair, etc... And are never used to refer to a person that can have a gender (even eunuchs are not referred to as it/its/etc...) As this is considered rude.
This was done in both writing and speech. It is now more politically correct to use he/she (she/he?) or they, with they being more politically correct as it does not assume the number of possible genders.
So they (the movie makers) used the correct terminology for the time that they (Iron Man & Captain America) were in to refer to a person of whose gender has yet to be determined.
answered May 10 at 19:44
Garret GangGarret Gang
1313
New contributor
Garret Gang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
He/Him/His etc... are typically used in English as both a masculine pronoun and a gender unknown pronoun (could refer to either a "he" or a "she"). While this is slowly falling out of practice now--they has become more common. He has historically (1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s) been the way to refer to a singular gender unknown person.
Neuter pronouns it/its etc... are typically used in English to refer to something that cannot have a gender, a bucket, chair, etc... And are never used to refer to a person that can have a gender (even eunuchs are not referred to as it/its/etc...) As this is considered rude.
This was done in both writing and speech. It is now more politically correct to use he/she (she/he?) or they, with they being more politically correct as it does not assume the number of possible genders.
So they (the movie makers) used the correct terminology for the time that they (Iron Man & Captain America) were in to refer to a person of whose gender has yet to be determined.
answered May 10 at 19:44
Garret GangGarret Gang
1313
New contributor
Garret Gang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
He/Him/His etc... are typically used in English as both a masculine pronoun and a gender unknown pronoun (could refer to either a "he" or a "she"). While this is slowly falling out of practice now--they has become more common. He has historically (1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s) been the way to refer to a singular gender unknown person.
Neuter pronouns it/its etc... are typically used in English to refer to something that cannot have a gender, a bucket, chair, etc... And are never used to refer to a person that can have a gender (even eunuchs are not referred to as it/its/etc...) As this is considered rude.
This was done in both writing and speech. It is now more politically correct to use he/she (she/he?) or they, with they being more politically correct as it does not assume the number of possible genders.
So they (the movie makers) used the correct terminology for the time that they (Iron Man & Captain America) were in to refer to a person of whose gender has yet to be determined.
answered May 10 at 19:44
Garret GangGarret Gang
1313
New contributor
Garret Gang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
He/Him/His etc... are typically used in English as both a masculine pronoun and a gender unknown pronoun (could refer to either a "he" or a "she"). While this is slowly falling out of practice now--they has become more common. He has historically (1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s) been the way to refer to a singular gender unknown person.
Neuter pronouns it/its etc... are typically used in English to refer to something that cannot have a gender, a bucket, chair, etc... And are never used to refer to a person that can have a gender (even eunuchs are not referred to as it/its/etc...) As this is considered rude.
This was done in both writing and speech. It is now more politically correct to use he/she (she/he?) or they, with they being more politically correct as it does not assume the number of possible genders.
So they (the movie makers) used the correct terminology for the time that they (Iron Man & Captain America) were in to refer to a person of whose gender has yet to be determined.
answered May 10 at 19:44
Garret GangGarret Gang
1313
New contributor
Garret Gang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited May 10 at 19:50
answered May 10 at 19:44
Garret GangGarret Gang
1313
New contributor
Garret Gang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered May 10 at 19:44
Garret GangGarret Gang
1313
answered May 10 at 19:44
Garret GangGarret Gang
1313
1313
New contributor
Garret Gang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Garret Gang is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
