Talk:Gender neutral language

It would be nice to include other languages in the last section. I can do it for Catalan and Spanish, and I have heard about the hen pronoun of Swedish, so I can do it too (if there aren't swedes here, of course!). --NeoMahler (talk) 08:52, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

I feel like saying "gender neutral" language unintentionally promotes the gender binary, since there are many genders which are certainly not "neutral". Inclusive is a much better term, since "neutral", in my mind, seems slightly exclusive, saying that 1. Nonbinary people cannot use "he" and "she" (which sometimes happens), and 2. somehow nonbinary people are "other". I know this is a wonderful thing to see on a form, but it seems exclusive at the same time. --Otvm (talk) 17:19, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I get what you mean, but I think that "neutral" does not refer to a specific identity in this case. I guess it's used as "regardless of gender". I'm not native English though, so feel free to suggest a better title! :) --NeoMahler (talk) 20:26, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


 * In more traditional, English-speaking, western contexts (at least where I currently reside at), "neutral" often has the connotation of "for both male and female", maybe unintentionally. I think "inclusive" would make it clearer for cisgender people visiting the wiki. People usually use signs which have (sexist) symbols to mean "man" and "woman" together when they want to make a sign for a "gender neutral" bathroom, at least in the country I currently reside in. --Otvm (talk) 20:40, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with Otvm, but I don't see an easy replacement for this title. I think changing the title to "Nongendered language" would be false advertsing (but I think Nongendered language should exist as a separate article). Gender inclusive language would probably be better than the current one, even though agender people don't have a gender.  Falkirks (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clarifying. Maybe just Inclusive language? An article with this title could include inclusive language for other things, but I think that the context of the article (Nonbinary wiki) makes it easy to understand that the article is about gender (or lack of thereof). --NeoMahler (talk) 13:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Would it be useful to use the information required template here? --Otvm (talk) 16:40, 12 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Maybe. I mean, all pages can be expanded (that's a wiki!), but pages which are a list of countries or languages are specially incomplete, so it could be useful. I'll add it now and tweet for some help -- let's see if we attract contributors! --NeoMahler (talk) 14:11, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Addition to the Italian section
Hello all. New contributor here. I am the author of a proposal for a gender-neutral/inclusive modification of the Italian language, which has been gaining some attention by the local nonbinary/intersex community (for example it has been widely used on https://www.intersexioni.it/).

If you can read Italian, you can read about it here: https://goo.gl/OxJApV

Do you think it would be appropriate for me to write about it on this page?

--Lucǝ (talk) 13:46, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Info on Brazilian Portuguese
This post and this page have a lot of info on ways to gender-neutralize BRPT, but I barely know any Portuguese so maybe someone else can extract the info to add to this article.--TXJ (talk) 18:22, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Addition to the Irish section
Hi folks, I'm new here. I'm cis-male myself, but I have nonbinary friends, and I wanted to learn more about gender-inclusive Irish. This wiki was actually the most comprehensive source I found, so thanks for that. The lack of citations meant I couldn't source more info on most of the suggested pronouns, though - would be great to see some link-outs if possible to help people use them. Anyways, I set out to devise a pronoun-set for "ea" and in the process I've been making a little pronoun-building spreadsheet. I'd like to check with some open-minded native speakers about the "ea" set before documenting more fully, but I could share the spreadsheet for the curious. What's the policy here around documenting ones' own work? Would I document in my user-page and link from the article, or would I keep it own-page only for now, or should I work off-site entirely and see if a third-party cares to document on the wiki (like Wikipedia's 'no original work' policy)? Seachaint (talk) 10:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


 * hey! yes, unfortunately we do not accept original work - we have a content policy  that outlines what we can/cannot add here. we do our best for sources, but with some of our information copied over from the previous iteration of the wiki there are some places that lack them. if you do happen to find any for the ones we're missing, please add them!


 * Thanks! Good to know. I'll document elsewhere and I'll keep any learning notes on my user-page only. If I find anyone else's work to document, I'll try to improve the sections here. So far I can probably attest for "siú" (apparently a one-post speculative post, no obvious further development), I'll try and get that link added. Seachaint (talk) 10:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)