In a stunning display of judicial schizophrenia, Judge Prudence P. Prude of the Superior Court of Kalamazoo has simultaneously banned the use of gender-neutral pronouns in her courtroom *and* published a 700-page manual on inclusive language, which includes a comprehensive section on pronoun etiquette for interdimensional beings. The ruling, which has sent shockwaves through the already-fragile ecosystem of legal jargon, came after a heated debate concerning the proper address for a litigant identifying as a 'gender-fluid sentient cactus'.
"It's simple," explained Judge Prude in a press conference held in a yurt decorated with artisanal crystals and rainbow flags (ironically, all sourced from ethical, non-exploitative factories, as per the new manual's stipulations). "We must respect traditional gender norms while simultaneously celebrating the exquisite tapestry of human, and non-human, identities. Therefore, we will use traditional pronouns, but let's use them very, very inclusively. Think of it as 'inclusivity 2.0: Now with 37 more genders!'"
The 700-page manual – whose foreword alone contains 17 different types of non-binary apostrophes – provides guidelines on everything from addressing sentient houseplants to choosing the appropriate pronouns for 'neo-pronoun-adopting' goldfish. It also includes a comprehensive list of microaggressions, ranging from the commonplace (asking someone's preferred pronouns) to the utterly absurd (looking at a toaster for too long, implying a lack of respect for its potential gender identity).
The manual’s Appendix B – a particularly spicy segment – delves into the complex question of pronoun usage for inanimate objects, specifically arguing for the inherent right of garden gnomes to self-identify as either ‘they/them’ or ‘your highness’. Legal experts, however, are struggling to comprehend the implications of such a ruling, particularly as it relates to traffic violations committed by sentient lawn ornaments.
One prominent legal scholar, Professor Quentin Quibble, commented, "This is like trying to solve a Rubik's Cube while riding a unicycle blindfolded – it's confusing, impressive in its sheer audacity, and ultimately, leaves you questioning the very fabric of reality." The case is expected to set a precedent that will simultaneously overturn centuries of legal precedent while simultaneously creating a hundred new legal loopholes shaped like fabulous gender-fluid unicorns. Stay tuned for updates, and please remember to use your new pronouns correctly or face the wrath of Appendix C. (It's not pretty.)
