First, some reference context: Italian is a gender-based language which linguistically contains only two genders, male and female, and every word, whether referred to a person, an animal, or an object, is classified in this binary system male/female noun.
As a linguistical practice, when you a have a mix of male and female elements like 'ragazzi' (boys) and 'ragazze' (girls), you refer to the group by using the masculine plural 'ragazzi'.
This rule applies independently of the actual number. For example, if you have 1 'ragazzo' (1 boy) and 10 'ragazze' (10 girls), you will still refer to the group as 'ragazzi', the masculine plural.
To overcome this and being more inclusive (and save characters), people on the web have resorted to various strategies, the most common being using the symbol <> (like 'ragazz') or, for the most sophisticated, the shwa <ə>.
@alx Here in Spain they often use @ in the same way: Chicos and Chicas becomes chic@s. I’m really worried that if Vox gets enough support to join the ruling coalition this month that we’ll have the same pearl clutching terfs fucking up the country here too. ☹️
@Tirial yes, I've seen this a lot from my Spanish-speaking friends. I've also seen some starting to use the general 'es', for example instead of 'tod@s' they write 'todES'. I felt the latter is a very elegant solution that also makes sense in the Spanish grammar and pronunciation, though there are issues with some words like your example 'chic@s', which might need like another transformation to maintain the 'c' as 'k' and not as 's': 'chiQUES' maybe?
@alx I like this. I’m not a native Spanish speaker though, so I worry my anglophone privileges might be imposing on others, but I’m gonna ask some of my friends what they about it.
None of the two solutions are grammatically accepted, but in the absence of a consensus from linguists and in the era of 140 characters messages, people kept using them, with the <> being the most popular choice because...where the fk is <ə> on the keyboard?
Anyway, as you can imagine, in LGTBQIA+ communities is not uncommon to find a lot of <*> in their Italian internet writing. Which is weird, but, there is no valid alternative
I don't like the <>, grammatically speaking, but I understand that in the absence of a proper alternative, all non-binary, trans, asexual and gender fluid people need a way to express themselves without having to send two or three toots at a time because they need to correctly type 'ragazzi e ragazze' (boys and girl). And Italian isn't even a succinct languange, believe me. So well, <> it is, then.
Little I knew, that <> is now becoming an evil symbol in Italy.
Because, if you still haven't had the pleasure to know, TERFs made it to Italy, and after two days of their Italian shouting nonsense on Twitter, I really need to have a rant about it, here on the WOKEST of all social media microblogging platforms which is also my favourite one. For those who wonder, I'm a simple cis straight woman. But I'm also a fing feminist.
So, "gender critical" TERFs have landed on Italian newspaper (just like, 5 or 6 years behind their British counterparts), with prominent cis lesbian ex politician leading the fight - hold on - AGAINST LAWS FOR EVERYONE. Well, the Italian title is 'Contro una legge per tutt*', which was so focused on the 'tutt*', that completely forgot the horrendous meaning. The article headline is really 'Against a law for everyone'.
Because TERFs are feminists, but inclusion is not for everyone, especially the when is written with a lot of <>, because <> is a bad type that wants to CANCEL WOMEN.
What happened that triggered such a response that is cluttering my Twitter feed and is now creeping also on (already horrible) Facebook feed?
Long story short, the Italian abortion law being rewritten to include transgender men and non-binary people is cast by this prominent woman as (conspiracyland strikes again) a measure to erase women. Which is something so stupid that it could have been said by JK Rowling.
Now, there are many things to unpack here, but let's stick to the basis.
There is no plan to erase women from the LGTBQIA+ community. Instead, there is the legal possibility for people who don't identify with their assigned gender to legally (sometimes also biologically, but not always) request to change their IDs with the gender identity the feel conform to. That means they change their name and their documents will present them with the gender they identify with.
'Transition' or 'non-binary' does not mean then a change in their body biology, but that they present in society with the gender they feel conform to.
Their biology remaining the same means that, if they're born female (yes, let's use the biological terminology), they can still get pregnant.
Now, if the abortion law - the LAW, the NORM, the ones that regulate our everyday social practices - states that abortion is granted only to WOMEN (love the double '*' here?), then the mismatch between the biology of these people seeking abortion and their documents can create a loophole in the law, meaning they can be denied the right to abortion and posing the base for a lot of discriminatory practices.
So, it is important, in the moment we accept transgenders, to grant them full rights, as they're first and foremost people and citizens.
Abortion law is always questioned by patriarchy, and the majority of discussion surrounding it are about abolishing it. For once, instead, the discussion is about making our society fairer and more inclusive. To me, these are the foundations for a true fair, inclusive and diverse society.
So, what about the cis lesbian ex politician woman rant on the front page of one of the major liberal centre-right Italian newspaper?
Well, from a legal point is not only incorrect, but also at odds with any idea of inclusive society❌
We could also enter in the discussion about 'womanhood' and the absolute bullshit that is defining womanhood just in relation of the capacity of being pregnant. FFS, this is how patriarchy defines women, as vessels for reproduction purposes.
This is already a long rant and convincing women that their womanhood can exist with or without motherhood (and the biological capacity to bear children) is an exhausting neverending discussion.
I'm calling it here, and leave the discussion on womanhood in a moment I will feel less angry. However, I'd like to point out that there is not feminism in TERFs. Their purist definition of women and men is actually the patriarchal definition of women and men.
Don't be a TERFs, be a real good and inclusive person.
And just FYI, <> in the old time represented a kiss.
So
:***************************************
@alx I really liked your rant! (if that's an appropriate thing to say...)
French has the same issue with being gendered and people have started using "iel" which I find very clever and quite straightforward to use and pronounce. I hope Italian find something similar!
@CCochard Oh, that's so clever! It's been ages I haven't practiced my French, and I'm so behind the current evolution of your language.
I love how languages change to readapt and express concept that were tabu or non-existent before, so I'm very very curious to see what will happen to very patriarchal Italian.
Thanks for 'liking my rants', I try to make them also informative and engaging, not just angry stream of words!
Add comment