Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Meeting other Poly's!

15 views
Skip to first unread message

Todd Q

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 10:24:26 AM6/9/05
to
Okay, since my last post created such a HUGE discussion, I'd like to
ask some deeper questions.

A) How does a poly meet other poly's?

B) How does a poly explain him/herself to non-poly's?

C) If a poly is new to being poly (myself included), how does oneself
approach others that he/she would like included in the poly
relationship?

Well, I guess those are enough for now! Thanks for all the neat
answers on my last post and I look forward to getting to know you all
better soon!

Todd Q - Whatever happened to expensive printers with cheap ink? What
the hell is up with a $50 printer that takes $75 ink?

Kai Jones

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 11:04:44 AM6/9/05
to
On 9 Jun 2005 07:24:26 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>
wrote:

>Okay, since my last post created such a HUGE discussion, I'd like to
>ask some deeper questions.
>
>A) How does a poly meet other poly's?

I don't know. How I've met other polys: by accident (livejournal
friendslist, Usenet group other than this one), on purpose (subscribed
to local poly mailing list, read this NG).

>B) How does a poly explain him/herself to non-poly's?

So far I've only done it once. The explanation was particular to my
relationship with that person and is not what I would say to anyone
but that person.

>C) If a poly is new to being poly (myself included), how does oneself
>approach others that he/she would like included in the poly
>relationship?

Haven't done it yet: I was approached by a poly person who asked
whether zir perception that we'd been on what felt like a "first date"
was accurate.

>Todd Q - Whatever happened to expensive printers with cheap ink? What
>the hell is up with a $50 printer that takes $75 ink?

Got them at work. They're called laser printers. The printer is
relatively expensive and the toner is relatively inexpensive, compared
to inkjet.
--
Kai Jones sni...@pacifier.com
Smartass by nurture as well as nature.

Todd Q

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 11:15:48 AM6/9/05
to
Kai Jones wrote:
> Haven't done it yet: I was approached by a poly person who asked
> whether zir perception that we'd been on what felt like a "first date"
> was accurate.

What is "zir"?

> >Todd Q - Whatever happened to expensive printers with cheap ink? What
> >the hell is up with a $50 printer that takes $75 ink?
>
> Got them at work. They're called laser printers. The printer is
> relatively expensive and the toner is relatively inexpensive, compared
> to inkjet.

The bit about the printers was being funny :D I still have an Epson
RX-80 from 1981 that prints just fine (if you like dot matrix) and I
can buy a dozen ink cartridges for about $1.

Todd Q

Kai Jones

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 11:20:19 AM6/9/05
to
On 9 Jun 2005 08:15:48 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>
wrote:

>Kai Jones wrote:


>> Haven't done it yet: I was approached by a poly person who asked
>> whether zir perception that we'd been on what felt like a "first date"
>> was accurate.
>
>What is "zir"?

It's a gender neutral pronoun--instead of "he" or "she" which
sometimes elicit a particular image (male or female), I enjoy using a
neutral one when the sex of the person about whom I am speaking is not
necessary to the meaning of the conversation.

>> >Todd Q - Whatever happened to expensive printers with cheap ink? What
>> >the hell is up with a $50 printer that takes $75 ink?
>>
>> Got them at work. They're called laser printers. The printer is
>> relatively expensive and the toner is relatively inexpensive, compared
>> to inkjet.
>
>The bit about the printers was being funny :D I still have an Epson
>RX-80 from 1981 that prints just fine (if you like dot matrix) and I
>can buy a dozen ink cartridges for about $1.

I fondly remember daisy-wheel printers, with their big big sound
hoods.

Mean Green Dancing Machine

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 11:27:19 AM6/9/05
to
In article <senga1he8ovi4j7ic...@4ax.com>,

Kai Jones <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>
>I fondly remember daisy-wheel printers, with their big big sound
>hoods.

You wouldn't remember them so fondly if you'd ever been near one without
sound hood.
--
--- Aahz <*> (Copyright 2005 by aa...@pobox.com)

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/
Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista

Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html

Steve Pope

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 11:48:10 AM6/9/05
to
Kai Jones <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote:

>On 9 Jun 2005 08:15:48 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>
>wrote:

>>What is "zir"?

>It's a gender neutral pronoun--instead of "he" or "she" which
>sometimes elicit a particular image (male or female), I enjoy using a
>neutral one when the sex of the person about whom I am speaking is not
>necessary to the meaning of the conversation.

Just to be specific, "zir" is used in place of "his" or her",
while "zie" is used in place of "she" or "he". They are always
used in the singular.

Steve

Kai Jones

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 11:59:28 AM6/9/05
to
On 9 Jun 2005 08:27:19 -0700, aa...@pobox.com (Mean Green Dancing
Machine) published the following for anyone to read:

>In article <senga1he8ovi4j7ic...@4ax.com>,
>Kai Jones <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>>
>>I fondly remember daisy-wheel printers, with their big big sound
>>hoods.
>
>You wouldn't remember them so fondly if you'd ever been near one without
>sound hood.

Dude, who do you think lifted the hood to get stuff out? I'm the one
who insisted they buy the sound hood!

But also, I could make those puppies sing and dance; I could specify
exactly where to print on any piece of paper, load it, and get what I
wanted. As a control freak, I am happy to have that level of control
over a print job.

Todd Q

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 11:59:15 AM6/9/05
to
Steve Pope wrote:
> Just to be specific, "zir" is used in place of "his" or her",
> while "zie" is used in place of "she" or "he". They are always
> used in the singular.

Is this something I MUST do, SHOULD do, or CAN/MAY do? It seems
confusing to me.

Todd Q - How many licks does it take to get to the center of a
Tootsie-Roll Tootsie-Pop?

Steve Pope

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 12:06:06 PM6/9/05
to
Todd Q <todd.q...@maines.net> wrote:

>Steve Pope wrote:

>> Just to be specific, "zir" is used in place of "his" or her",
>> while "zie" is used in place of "she" or "he". They are always
>> used in the singular.

>Is this something I MUST do, SHOULD do, or CAN/MAY do? It seems
>confusing to me.

In my view, you can do it if you like, however if you wish
to speak and write correct English you're better off avoiding
"zie" and "zir".

Steve

Kai Jones

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 12:12:49 PM6/9/05
to
On 9 Jun 2005 08:59:15 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>

published the following for anyone to read:

>Steve Pope wrote:


>> Just to be specific, "zir" is used in place of "his" or her",
>> while "zie" is used in place of "she" or "he". They are always
>> used in the singular.
>
>Is this something I MUST do, SHOULD do, or CAN/MAY do? It seems
>confusing to me.

In my opinion using gender neutral pronouns is completely optional.
Some people have a strong aversion to them, and it is possible that
using them will alienate those people. I like them and I use them for
that reason.

>Todd Q - How many licks does it take to get to the center of a
>Tootsie-Roll Tootsie-Pop?

Obviously, it's three. Three licks.

Because after that, you crunch it.

Tacit

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 12:15:58 PM6/9/05
to
In article <1118327066.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
"Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net> wrote:

> Okay, since my last post created such a HUGE discussion, I'd like to
> ask some deeper questions.
>
> A) How does a poly meet other poly's?

I personally don't meet "other polys." I meet other *people*; and some
of those people will turn out to be poly.

What I think happens in a lot of subcultures is that people canstart
looking for another partner, and become so fixated on finding someone of
a particular TYPE--a hot bi babe, a submissive woman, a polyamorous
man--that they stop thinking of peple as *people*, y'know? Even a hot bi
babe or a submissive woman or whatever likes to be seen as a person
first.

That doesn't really answer the question, but hang on, it leads into:

> B) How does a poly explain him/herself to non-poly's?

I don't try to "explain myself," unless someone asks. But I am very open
and casual about being polyamorous. For example, I was at work one
Valentine's day and received a huge bouquet of flowers delivered to my
office. A lot of my coworkers asked "Is that from your wife?" and when i
read the card, i said 'No, it's from my girlfriend; it's to my wife and
I."

What I've found is that people who can't deal with that kind of thing
generally don't remain in my social circle. They don't go into fits
about it; I've never been confronted with a situation where someone goes
off on me, or it's affected my job, or anything like that; people who
don't like it have simply tended to fade away. hat that means is that
the people who are in my social circle tend to be people who are at
least open to the idea of non-traditional relationships--which helps in
answering Question A.

> C) If a poly is new to being poly (myself included), how does oneself
> approach others that he/she would like included in the poly
> relationship?

As with any kind of communication, communication about interest in a
relationship works best, in my experience, when it's up front.
Generally, what I do is remain open to new romantic relationships
without actually searching for them, and when I meet someone I connect
with, I say so. Simple, but it works very well.



> Well, I guess those are enough for now! Thanks for all the neat
> answers on my last post and I look forward to getting to know you all
> better soon!
>
> Todd Q - Whatever happened to expensive printers with cheap ink? What
> the hell is up with a $50 printer that takes $75 ink?

There's more money in siving the razors away and selling the blades.
Inkjet ink is incredibly profitable--in 2003, for example, 70% of all of
Hewlett-Packard's total net operating profits, across the board, came
from sales of inkjet ink. Ounce for ounce, the stuff is more expensive
than the most expensive champagne, and it's all profit.

--
Art, photography, shareware, polyamory, literature, kink:
all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Todd Q

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 1:14:34 PM6/9/05
to

Tacit, those are some excellent answers! I am grateful for your
advice. Looking at it from the perspective of going about normal life
and allowing oneself to consider others seems so much more simple. And
as any relationship, I am always open about the situation, now more so!
Sometimes our vision is clouded behind a veil of our own making. Keep
it simple!

> Well, I guess those are enough for now! Thanks for all the neat
> answers on my last post and I look forward to getting to know you all
> better soon!
>
> Todd Q - Whatever happened to expensive printers with cheap ink? What
> the hell is up with a $50 printer that takes $75 ink?

> There's more money in siving the razors away and selling the blades.
> Inkjet ink is incredibly profitable--in 2003, for example, 70% of all of
> Hewlett-Packard's total net operating profits, across the board, came
> from sales of inkjet ink. Ounce for ounce, the stuff is more expensive
> than the most expensive champagne, and it's all profit.

As to the printer question, it was sort of a signature! :D I am
putting on oddball questions as a little bit of showing people who I
am, and who I am is one who questions the way things are.

Laura Elizabeth Back

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 4:43:19 PM6/9/05
to
Todd Q <todd.q...@maines.net> wrote:

>As to the printer question, it was sort of a signature! :D I am
>putting on oddball questions as a little bit of showing people who I
>am, and who I am is one who questions the way things are.

Then you should get along well with all the folks here who like to answer
rhetorical questions. :-) It's safe to expect that if you raise something
interesting or amusing, *somebody* will jump on the opportunity to talk
about it...

--
Laura E. Back

Philippa Cowderoy

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 4:53:39 PM6/9/05
to
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Kai Jones wrote:

> On 9 Jun 2005 08:15:48 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Kai Jones wrote:
>>> Haven't done it yet: I was approached by a poly person who asked
>>> whether zir perception that we'd been on what felt like a "first date"
>>> was accurate.
>>
>> What is "zir"?
>
> It's a gender neutral pronoun--instead of "he" or "she" which
> sometimes elicit a particular image (male or female), I enjoy using a
> neutral one when the sex of the person about whom I am speaking is not
> necessary to the meaning of the conversation.
>

They're also useful when the person in question isn't of one of the two
conventional genders, as "it" is rather likely to offend.

--
fli...@flippac.org

The task of the academic is not to scale great
intellectual mountains, but to flatten them.

suzee

unread,
Jun 9, 2005, 7:57:04 PM6/9/05
to
Laura Elizabeth Back wrote:

I like his sig questions!

sue

Message has been deleted

Philippa Cowderoy

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 6:04:54 AM6/10/05
to
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, ChickPea wrote:

> In alt.polyamory, (Mean Green Dancing Machine) wrote in
> <d89n4n$blf$1...@panix3.panix.com>::


>
>> In article <senga1he8ovi4j7ic...@4ax.com>,
>> Kai Jones <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I fondly remember daisy-wheel printers, with their big big sound
>>> hoods.
>>
>> You wouldn't remember them so fondly if you'd ever been near one without
>> sound hood.
>

> Eh?
>

What was that? I can't hear you!

ElissaAnn

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 6:54:52 AM6/10/05
to
"Kai Jones" <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:8hqga1pjeqfhtlpan...@4ax.com...

> On 9 Jun 2005 08:59:15 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>
> published the following for anyone to read:
>
>>Steve Pope wrote:
>>> Just to be specific, "zir" is used in place of "his" or her",
>>> while "zie" is used in place of "she" or "he". They are always
>>> used in the singular.
>>
>>Is this something I MUST do, SHOULD do, or CAN/MAY do? It seems
>>confusing to me.
>
> In my opinion using gender neutral pronouns is completely optional.
> Some people have a strong aversion to them, and it is possible that
> using them will alienate those people. I like them and I use them for
> that reason.

ROFL

Marry me?

Elissa

--
"Who doesn't look good with a harp?" -- Anya, somewhere in the nonexistent
Season 6


Kai Jones

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 9:30:51 AM6/10/05
to
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 06:54:52 -0400, "ElissaAnn"
<eli...@everybodycansing.com> wrote:

>"Kai Jones" <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote in message
>news:8hqga1pjeqfhtlpan...@4ax.com...
>> On 9 Jun 2005 08:59:15 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>
>> published the following for anyone to read:
>>
>>>Steve Pope wrote:
>>>> Just to be specific, "zir" is used in place of "his" or her",
>>>> while "zie" is used in place of "she" or "he". They are always
>>>> used in the singular.
>>>
>>>Is this something I MUST do, SHOULD do, or CAN/MAY do? It seems
>>>confusing to me.
>>
>> In my opinion using gender neutral pronouns is completely optional.
>> Some people have a strong aversion to them, and it is possible that
>> using them will alienate those people. I like them and I use them for
>> that reason.
>
>ROFL
>
>Marry me?

Aren't we already married by concatenation?

Todd Q

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 9:51:00 AM6/10/05
to
suzee wrote:
> I like his sig questions!

Awww! Thanks Sue! (I have a fan!) Hugs! :D

Todd Q - Okay, my health insurance goes up 10% and they give me a raise
of 2% and expect me to be happy?!?

Stef

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 12:13:32 PM6/10/05
to
>Okay, since my last post created such a HUGE discussion, I'd like to
>ask some deeper questions.
>
>A) How does a poly meet other poly's?

By hanging out where other poly folks hang out (in online forums like
this, and in local groups, many of which are listed on
www.polyamory.org.

>B) How does a poly explain him/herself to non-poly's?

I think it's easier if you have partners already; then you can say "I
have more than one partner, and we all know about each other" or "I have
an open relationship." A lot of non-poly folks seem to know the term
"open relationship."

When I didn't have partners already, I said to prospective sweeties "I
don't want to be exclusive" and "I don't want to be monogamous." I
didn't discuss it with people who weren't prospective sweeties. But
that was before I had heard the term polyamory, and I didn't know all
the philosophy that went with it.

The FAQ available at the abovementioned web site has more Q&As.

>C) If a poly is new to being poly (myself included), how does oneself
>approach others that he/she would like included in the poly
>relationship?

Very carefully. :-)

If the others in question are also poly, then I approach them by getting
to know them better as people and seeing if there is any mutual romantic
interest.

If the others in question are not poly - I haven't done this in a long
time - then I might approach them by getting to know them as friends and
over a period of months and years letting them see how poly fits into my
life, and letting them take the lead if they have questions or if they
decide they are interested in poly. I usually won't agree to be their
first poly relationship and am very uncomfortable being both a "poly
mentor" and a sweetie at the same time.

>Todd Q - Whatever happened to expensive printers with cheap ink? What
>the hell is up with a $50 printer that takes $75 ink?

The same thing that's up with inexpensive razors that take expensive
cartridges. But there are also expensive printers with expensive ink...

--
Stef ** avid/sensible/sensual/wise/essential/elemental/tangle
** st...@cat-and-dragon.com <*> http://www.cat-and-dragon.com/stef
**
"The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
vote."
-- Kosh Naranek, "Believers," Babylon 5

Stef

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 12:17:15 PM6/10/05
to
In article <8hqga1pjeqfhtlpan...@4ax.com>,

Kai Jones <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>On 9 Jun 2005 08:59:15 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>
>published the following for anyone to read:
>
>>> Just to be specific, "zir" is used in place of "his" or her",
>>> while "zie" is used in place of "she" or "he". They are always
>>> used in the singular.
>>
>>Is this something I MUST do, SHOULD do, or CAN/MAY do? It seems
>>confusing to me.

Can/may.

>In my opinion using gender neutral pronouns is completely optional.
>Some people have a strong aversion to them, and it is possible that
>using them will alienate those people. I like them and I use them for
>that reason.

You use them because you like them? Or you like them and use them
because it alienates some people? Or "amplectere potestem 'et'"?

--
Stef ** avid/sensible/sensual/wise/essential/elemental/tangle
** st...@cat-and-dragon.com <*> http://www.cat-and-dragon.com/stef
**

A journey of a thousand miles starts under one's feet. --Lao Tsu

ElissaAnn

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 12:24:58 PM6/10/05
to

"Kai Jones" <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:qf5ja1t91o69r4ftd...@4ax.com...

Married with cats. That sounds about right.

Kai Jones

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 12:52:33 PM6/10/05
to
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:17:15 +0000 (UTC), st...@panix.com (Stef)

published the following for anyone to read:

>In article <8hqga1pjeqfhtlpan...@4ax.com>,
>Kai Jones <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>>On 9 Jun 2005 08:59:15 -0700, "Todd Q" <todd.q...@maines.net>
>>published the following for anyone to read:
>>
>>>> Just to be specific, "zir" is used in place of "his" or her",
>>>> while "zie" is used in place of "she" or "he". They are always
>>>> used in the singular.
>>>
>>>Is this something I MUST do, SHOULD do, or CAN/MAY do? It seems
>>>confusing to me.
>
>Can/may.
>
>>In my opinion using gender neutral pronouns is completely optional.
>>Some people have a strong aversion to them, and it is possible that
>>using them will alienate those people. I like them and I use them for
>>that reason.
>
>You use them because you like them? Or you like them and use them
>because it alienates some people? Or "amplectere potestem 'et'"?

I use them because I like them. The other bit was just "buyer beware"
for someone who is new to the concept and also might care not to
alienate people.

I wouldn't have said it before you asked, because I didn't actually
think about it, but it is true that I also use them to alienate
people. Not any particular person, and not specifically because of
those words (I've got a little list of words myself, and "should" is
at the top of the list), but because I find them useful, euphonious
and nice (in the old fashioned sense).

Stef

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 1:42:27 PM6/10/05
to
In article <u6gja15gnshbojesu...@4ax.com>,

Kai Jones <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:17:15 +0000 (UTC), st...@panix.com (Stef)
>published the following for anyone to read:
>>You use them because you like them? Or you like them and use them
>>because it alienates some people? Or "amplectere potestem 'et'"?
>
>I use them because I like them. The other bit was just "buyer beware"
>for someone who is new to the concept and also might care not to
>alienate people.
>
>I wouldn't have said it before you asked, because I didn't actually
>think about it, but it is true that I also use them to alienate
>people. Not any particular person, and not specifically because of
>those words (I've got a little list of words myself, and "should" is
>at the top of the list), but because I find them useful, euphonious
>and nice (in the old fashioned sense).

For me it's along the lines of "I use them because I find gender-neutral
pronouns absolutely essential to my writing, and zie/zir forms are the
best option among not-all-that-great options.

I also sometimes use "they/them/their" in place of singular pronouns,
but only if no "-self" forms are required in what I am writing; I hate
hate hate using "themselves" and "theirselves" in that capacity.

ObPedantry (not a correction of anyone, just something I haven't seen
many people mention): "They" is not a singular pronoun, because even
when used to refer to a single person, it still takes plural verb forms
- "when someone has an umbrella, they have protection from the rain,"
not "they has protection from the rain." I'm terribly thankful that I
learned English as a baby and don't have to try to make sense of this
weirdness as an adult ESL learner.

I know that zie/zir alienate some people, and I'm OK with alienating
people who are going to jump to the conclusion that I'm doing this to be
politically correct. I'm sad that it might alienate people just because
they think zie/zir forms look awkward. But since I'm the only person who
is guaranteed to read what I write, I'll default to writing in a way
that looks non-awkward to me over a way that might look non-awkward to
other people.

--
Stef ** avid/sensible/sensual/wise/essential/elemental/tangle
** st...@cat-and-dragon.com <*> http://www.cat-and-dragon.com/stef
**

The Goddess does not seek worship--she rejoices in being vividly imagined.

Laura Elizabeth Back

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 1:53:39 PM6/10/05
to
Stef <st...@cat-and-dragon.com> wrote:

>I also sometimes use "they/them/their" in place of singular pronouns,
>but only if no "-self" forms are required in what I am writing; I hate
>hate hate using "themselves" and "theirselves" in that capacity.

Ooh, me too. I sometimes go with "themself" instead, but that is also
icky.

>ObPedantry (not a correction of anyone, just something I haven't seen
>many people mention): "They" is not a singular pronoun, because even
>when used to refer to a single person, it still takes plural verb forms
>- "when someone has an umbrella, they have protection from the rain,"
>not "they has protection from the rain." I'm terribly thankful that I
>learned English as a baby and don't have to try to make sense of this
>weirdness as an adult ESL learner.

I'm not sure it'd be particularly more perplexing than learning that the
formal "you" is a plural pronoun in French, or that it's a third-person
pronoun in Spanish.

Not that English isn't ugly in plenty of other ways that make me glad it's
my native language...

--
Laura E. Back

Darkhawk (H. Nicoll)

unread,
Jun 10, 2005, 9:48:51 PM6/10/05
to
Stef <st...@panix.com> wrote:
> ObPedantry (not a correction of anyone, just something I haven't seen
> many people mention): "They" is not a singular pronoun, because even
> when used to refer to a single person, it still takes plural verb forms
> - "when someone has an umbrella, they have protection from the rain,"
> not "they has protection from the rain." I'm terribly thankful that I
> learned English as a baby and don't have to try to make sense of this
> weirdness as an adult ESL learner.

And so is "you".

- Darkhawk, expandingly


--
Darkhawk - H. A. Nicoll - http://aelfhame.net/~darkhawk/
They are one person, they are two alone
They are three together, they are for each other
- "Helplessly Hoping", Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young

umarc

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 12:10:55 AM6/11/05
to
st...@panix.com (Stef) writes:

>>Todd Q - Whatever happened to expensive printers with cheap ink? What
>>the hell is up with a $50 printer that takes $75 ink?

>The same thing that's up with inexpensive razors that take expensive
>cartridges. But there are also expensive printers with expensive ink...

By coincidence, at work today my assistant showed me information on
several color printers he's considering to replace one in Sales. Do I
want to buy a $1300 printer, a $1500 printer, or a $3000 printer? Well,
it turned out that the cartridges for these machines vary from $30
apiece to $170, and we'd need four of them every couple of months.
So the question isn't so much the cost of the machine but how expensive
it'd be to keep it running. I asked him to do some more research and get
back to me next week.


umar

Steve Pope

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 2:36:46 PM6/11/05
to
Laura Elizabeth Back <leb...@cyclone.stanford.edu> wrote:

>Stef <st...@cat-and-dragon.com> wrote:

>>ObPedantry (not a correction of anyone, just something I haven't seen
>>many people mention): "They" is not a singular pronoun, because even
>>when used to refer to a single person, it still takes plural verb forms
>>- "when someone has an umbrella, they have protection from the rain,"
>>not "they has protection from the rain." I'm terribly thankful that I
>>learned English as a baby and don't have to try to make sense of this
>>weirdness as an adult ESL learner.

>I'm not sure it'd be particularly more perplexing than learning that the
>formal "you" is a plural pronoun in French, or that it's a third-person
>pronoun in Spanish.

Also the singular "they" sometimes uses the same verb tenses
as other singular pronouns, as in "they did what they had to do"
or "they came to work early". I'm more comfortable with the
singular "they" in such sentences than Stef's example above,
which I would probably rearrange into something like "when someone
has an umbrella, it protects them from the rain".

Steve

Steve Pope

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 3:58:07 PM6/11/05
to
Darkhawk (H. Nicoll) <dark...@mindspring.com> wrote:

> Stef <st...@panix.com> wrote:

>> ObPedantry (not a correction of anyone, just something I
>> haven't seen many people mention): "They" is not a singular
>> pronoun, because even when used to refer to a single person, it
>> still takes plural verb forms - "when someone has an umbrella,
>> they have protection from the rain," not "they has protection
>> from the rain." I'm terribly thankful that I learned English
>> as a baby and don't have to try to make sense of this weirdness
>> as an adult ESL learner.

>And so is "you".

Good point.

One difference is that while the language contains third-person
gender-specific pronouns, it does not contain any second-person
gender specific pronouns, unless you admit constructs such as
"you man".

Steve

Aqua

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 4:43:59 PM6/11/05
to Steve Pope
Steve Pope wrote:
> Laura Elizabeth Back <leb...@cyclone.stanford.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>Stef <st...@cat-and-dragon.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>ObPedantry (not a correction of anyone, just something I haven't seen
>>>many people mention): "They" is not a singular pronoun, because even
>>>when used to refer to a single person, it still takes plural verb forms
>>>- "when someone has an umbrella, they have protection from the rain,"
>>>not "they has protection from the rain." I'm terribly thankful that I
>>>learned English as a baby and don't have to try to make sense of this
>>>weirdness as an adult ESL learner.
>
>
>>I'm not sure it'd be particularly more perplexing than learning that the
>>formal "you" is a plural pronoun in French, or that it's a third-person
>>pronoun in Spanish.
>
> Also the singular "they" sometimes uses the same verb tenses
> as other singular pronouns, as in "they did what they had to do"
> or "they came to work early". I'm more comfortable with the
> singular "they" in such sentences than Stef's example above,
> which I would probably rearrange into something like "when someone
> has an umbrella, it protects them from the rain".

I don't quite understand the point of these examples: they still takes
the plural verb form, it just happens to be the same as the singular
third person verb form for all tenses other than the present:

I did what I had to do
You did what you had to do
Zie did what zie had to do
We did what we had to do
They did what they had to do.

Aqua


Steve Pope

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 6:07:09 PM6/11/05
to
Aqua <aq...@internode.on.net> wrote:

>Steve Pope wrote:

>> Also the singular "they" sometimes uses the same verb tenses
>> as other singular pronouns, as in "they did what they had to do"
>> or "they came to work early". I'm more comfortable with the
>> singular "they" in such sentences than Stef's example above,
>> which I would probably rearrange into something like "when someone
>> has an umbrella, it protects them from the rain".

>I don't quite understand the point of these examples: they still takes
>the plural verb form, it just happens to be the same as the singular
>third person verb form for all tenses other than the present:

>I did what I had to do
>You did what you had to do
>Zie did what zie had to do
>We did what we had to do
>They did what they had to do.

Yes, you're right, my phrase "the same verb tenses" above is incorrect.

The singular "they" is always used with a plural verb form.
However, when that form happend to be the same word as the
corresponding singular verb form, I find the singular they
less jarring.

Dunno if it's just me.

Steve

Stef

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 7:57:46 PM6/11/05
to
In article <d8ffof$p1j$1...@blue.rahul.net>,

Some people would argue that "you guys" stands in as a gender specific
pronoun. And the feminist in me agrees. But I grew up with it, and it
feels entirely comfortable to me to use it to refer to a group of women
and girls. (I don't feel comfortable using "man" to refer to humans as a
whole or using "he" to refer to a human regardless of gender.)

--
Stef ** avid/sensible/sensual/wise/essential/elemental/tangle
** st...@cat-and-dragon.com <*> http://www.cat-and-dragon.com/stef
**

...once this realization is accepted, that even between the closest
people infinite distances exist, a marvelous living side-by-side can
grow up from them, if they succeed in loving the expanse between them,
which gives them the possibility of always seeing each other as a whole
and an immense sky. -- Rilke

Aqua

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 9:37:40 PM6/11/05
to

Maybe because it's easier to mentally substitute a specific person into
the "they" slot, because the rest of the sentence doesn't need to be
changed?

Aqua

Aqua

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 9:52:11 PM6/11/05
to
Stef wrote:
> In article <d8ffof$p1j$1...@blue.rahul.net>,
> Steve Pope <spo...@speedymail.org> wrote:
>
>>One difference is that while the language contains third-person
>>gender-specific pronouns, it does not contain any second-person
>>gender specific pronouns, unless you admit constructs such as
>>"you man".
>
> Some people would argue that "you guys" stands in as a gender specific
> pronoun. And the feminist in me agrees. But I grew up with it, and it
> feels entirely comfortable to me to use it to refer to a group of women
> and girls. (I don't feel comfortable using "man" to refer to humans as a
> whole or using "he" to refer to a human regardless of gender.)

I feel very ambivalent about "you guys" as gender neutral. I think
Douglas Hofstadter is responsible for my ambivalence. In one of his
books, he mentions looking at how it's used and talking to various
people about it. One woman, in defence of "you guys" as gender neutral,
says, "Even guys use it that way". That example left both Hofstadter
and me thinking it probably wasn't as neutral as all that.

Aqua

Ruth Lawrence

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 10:06:18 PM6/11/05
to

"Aqua" <aq...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:q2hsn2-...@transparent.jamver.id.au...

And yet we used it at my girls' school, which also had a female staff,
constantly.

-which may be why I'm not very bothered by it, I guess.

Ruth, who doesn't know


Steve Pope

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 11:09:43 PM6/11/05
to
Aqua <aq...@internode.on.net> wrote:

>Steve Pope wrote:

>> The singular "they" is always used with a plural verb form.

>> However, when that form happens to be the same word as the

>> corresponding singular verb form, I find the singular they
>> less jarring.
>>
>> Dunno if it's just me.

> Maybe because it's easier to mentally substitute a specific
> person into the "they" slot, because the rest of the sentence
> doesn't need to be changed?

That, or simply that the verb one expects with "he" or "she"
also sounds right with the singular "they", whereas the
verb one does not expect doesn't sounds as right.

S.

Steve Pope

unread,
Jun 11, 2005, 11:44:50 PM6/11/05
to
Aqua <aq...@internode.on.net> wrote:

>I feel very ambivalent about "you guys" as gender neutral. I think
>Douglas Hofstadter is responsible for my ambivalence. In one of his
>books, he mentions looking at how it's used and talking to various
>people about it. One woman, in defence of "you guys" as gender neutral,
>says, "Even guys use it that way". That example left both Hofstadter
>and me thinking it probably wasn't as neutral as all that.

That I have seen it isn't exactly gender neutral because
"you guys" is often used to refer to a group of females, or a
group of males, but not usually a mixed group.

Steve

Darkhawk (H. Nicoll)

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 12:18:21 AM6/12/05
to
Aqua <aq...@internode.on.net> wrote:
> I feel very ambivalent about "you guys" as gender neutral. I think
> Douglas Hofstadter is responsible for my ambivalence. In one of his
> books, he mentions looking at how it's used and talking to various
> people about it. One woman, in defence of "you guys" as gender neutral,
> says, "Even guys use it that way". That example left both Hofstadter
> and me thinking it probably wasn't as neutral as all that.

In all discussion I've seen of this, most people have come to the
conclusion that "guys" and "you guys" are almost completely distinct.

As my father is wont to say, "Complicated language, English."

- Darkhawk, distractedly

ElissaAnn

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 1:02:28 AM6/12/05
to

"Steve Pope" <spo...@speedymail.org> wrote in message
news:d8gb3i$kqi$1...@blue.rahul.net...

That is not my experience.

Elissa, wondering whether the two US coasts speak two different languages

greenfizzpops

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 2:27:25 AM6/12/05
to
Stef wrote:
> In article <1118327066.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
> Todd Q <todd.q...@maines.net> wrote:

>>A) How does a poly meet other poly's?
>
>
> By hanging out where other poly folks hang out (in online forums like
> this, and in local groups, many of which are listed on
> www.polyamory.org.

How often are the local resources lists on www.polyamory.org updated?
Reason being - I submitted 1 website and 2 mailing lists by email a
while back.

Greenfizzpops, intrepid local organiser
--
http://zapoly.wuzzle.org
Trust is more important than monogamy

Erasmus

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 4:20:46 AM6/12/05
to

Darkhawk (H. Nicoll) wrote:

> Aqua <aq...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>
>>I feel very ambivalent about "you guys" as gender neutral. I think
>>Douglas Hofstadter is responsible for my ambivalence. In one of his
>>books, he mentions looking at how it's used and talking to various
>>people about it. One woman, in defence of "you guys" as gender neutral,
>>says, "Even guys use it that way". That example left both Hofstadter
>>and me thinking it probably wasn't as neutral as all that.
>
>
> In all discussion I've seen of this, most people have come to the
> conclusion that "guys" and "you guys" are almost completely distinct.
>
> As my father is wont to say, "Complicated language, English."
>
> - Darkhawk, distractedly
>
>

Yes, but don't be distracted. At least we have a real language, unlike
most other folks. Your father I might like to meet, as his mind is not
trivial. Yours is growing out of the trivial, groping toward the light,
and Norm's is not trivial, however misguided.

I don't know why my thinking seems to be such a challenge to others, as
it is so simple to me. But the simplest things are often the hardest.
As in where did E = mc^2 come from? It's a derivation plus an
extrapolation.

Pay attention to Norm. I do, especially when I take him to the
woodshed. He yelps most satisfactorily.

jimbat

Todd Q

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 7:21:04 AM6/12/05
to

Aqua <aq...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>I feel very ambivalent about "you guys" as gender neutral. I think
>Douglas Hofstadter is responsible for my ambivalence. In one of his
>books, he mentions looking at how it's used and talking to various
>people about it. One woman, in defence of "you guys" as gender neutral,
>says, "Even guys use it that way". That example left both Hofstadter
>and me thinking it probably wasn't as neutral as all that.

Steve Pope wrote:
> That I have seen it isn't exactly gender neutral because
> "you guys" is often used to refer to a group of females, or a
> group of males, but not usually a mixed group.

I think "you guys" derives from a famous movie quote "Hey you guys!"
found in the movie "The Goonies". I'm sure it is from an earlier movie
too, but it has become so common as to be constantly used as a slang
replacement for "you people" with no gender specific reference.

Todd Q - Shoot me if I'm wrong. (luckily I have a bullet-proof vest)

umarc

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 8:29:21 AM6/12/05
to
spo...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) writes:

>One difference is that while the language contains third-person
>gender-specific pronouns, it does not contain any second-person
>gender specific pronouns, unless you admit constructs such as
>"you man".

Arabic has such pronouns. I've never enconutered them in an Indo-European
language, though.


umar

umarc

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 8:31:23 AM6/12/05
to
st...@panix.com (Stef) writes:

>Some people would argue that "you guys" stands in as a gender specific
>pronoun. And the feminist in me agrees. But I grew up with it, and it
>feels entirely comfortable to me to use it to refer to a group of women
>and girls.

I have heard it so used.


umar

Todd Q

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 8:33:01 AM6/12/05
to
Darkhawk H. Nicoll wrote:
> In all discussion I've seen of this, most people have come to the
> conclusion that "guys" and "you guys" are almost completely distinct.

And I finally discovered Darkhawk is a female! Yay! Not to mention
intelligent, now only if she is attractive and willing to have another
relationship! :D

Todd Q - Put them in the Iron Maiden! Excellent! Execute them! Bogus!

Jose

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 8:51:24 AM6/12/05
to
I find it amusing that this thread is about the subtleties of language,
and nobody has commented on the title of the thread.

Jose

Mean Green Dancing Machine

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 9:19:06 AM6/12/05
to
In article <gdWqe.12$on...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>,

Jose <1...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>I find it amusing that this thread is about the subtleties of language,
>and nobody has commented on the title of the thread.

Welcome to Usenet!
--
--- Aahz <*> (Copyright 2005 by aa...@pobox.com)

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/
Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista

Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html

Erasmus

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 9:22:45 AM6/12/05
to

umarc wrote:

Arabic is Indo-European in the Semitic branch.

jimbat

For Madmen Only

unread,
Jun 12, 2005, 10:03:51 AM6/12/05