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)
- @Otvm: 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)
- @NeoMahler: In more traditional, English-speaking, western contexts, "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. Maybe we should add a warning to article? I think changing the title to "Nongendered language" would be false advertsing (but I think Nongendered language should exist as a separate article) Falkirks (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2017 (UTC)