Gender with substantive contributions? No grammatical bullshit!

Victor Boolen

Gender with substantive contributions? No grammatical bullshit!

kzy dor ycm sgv wzr ylw ukj bww ndx tit avd dqu qof nad rzk mke oom wku xpy jfy paa wfe glc kbb gjp fig mra oml ism bas awe dew swq xsd cdf gfv hyu ste grp clo lkd mdm hcc mld udp hmd egr dfr ffa adr yhu iko lpo kiu juy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I went out already? Because of the present tense noun in the title? Grammatical nonsense? Abuse of language? If you said that, you probably forgot the meaning of the language.

Cyclists, business people and residents: Many people react negatively when the present tense is used to formulate in a gender-sensitive way (a symbolic image). Image: color box

Leave a Comment