Where did “folx” originate?





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}






up vote
6
down vote

favorite
1












I've been noticing the term "folx" appear in my transgender circles recently, but I'm not sure where it came from.



This article from the Boston Globe uses the term in an article addressing recent trends in gender-neutral neologisms, but only incidentally.



It doesn't seem - to me - like it's more gender-neutral than "folks," so I'm curious why the addition was made.



I'm looking around online, and there's a lot of speculation, but it's difficult to find anything definitive. Ideas I've seen include,




  • that it just looks better,

  • that it matches other neutral forms, like "Latinx,"

  • that it's tonally in line with a punk theme


But these ideas can only explain why it's still in use, and not where it came from.



Is its origin known?










share|improve this question
























  • This is gonna get real weird for languages that distinguish male and female people. Take Spanish friend amigo/amiga. Things are going to get very weird indeed.
    – Zebrafish
    Apr 1 at 8:03










  • @Zebrafish To say nothing of "he" and "she" in English.
    – WS2
    Apr 1 at 8:44










  • How weird, Google ngrams will give a graph for "folx" and it had high usage in 1800s but I can’t find a citable definition for it.
    – Pam
    Apr 1 at 9:12






  • 3




    @Zebrafish I have seen things like ‘carísimxs amigxs’ used in Spanish, though a more common (and quite brilliant, I think) variation is ‘carísim@s amig@s’. It takes more effort in such languages because more things are inflected so the neutrality-marker requires more repetition than in English where it only applies to nouns; but languages that inflect for masculine/feminine gender do manage to find ways of achieving the same effect.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Apr 1 at 14:22






  • 1




    @bof I don't know where to begin. Quickly, 1. Mother tongue means first or native tongue. 2. No conclusive evidence it's called that for reason you assert. 3. Even if true, you learned from others, not only your mum. 4. Your mother may have spoken sexist language because it was the language of her wider society. 5 Historically literature and law is written by males. Texts of major religions are or attributed.I don't know any man who's published under a woman's name to be taken seriously. Yet disguising a writer's female sex is common, George Elliot, Bronte sisters, even J.K. Rowling arguably.
    – Zebrafish
    Apr 3 at 7:53

















up vote
6
down vote

favorite
1












I've been noticing the term "folx" appear in my transgender circles recently, but I'm not sure where it came from.



This article from the Boston Globe uses the term in an article addressing recent trends in gender-neutral neologisms, but only incidentally.



It doesn't seem - to me - like it's more gender-neutral than "folks," so I'm curious why the addition was made.



I'm looking around online, and there's a lot of speculation, but it's difficult to find anything definitive. Ideas I've seen include,




  • that it just looks better,

  • that it matches other neutral forms, like "Latinx,"

  • that it's tonally in line with a punk theme


But these ideas can only explain why it's still in use, and not where it came from.



Is its origin known?










share|improve this question
























  • This is gonna get real weird for languages that distinguish male and female people. Take Spanish friend amigo/amiga. Things are going to get very weird indeed.
    – Zebrafish
    Apr 1 at 8:03










  • @Zebrafish To say nothing of "he" and "she" in English.
    – WS2
    Apr 1 at 8:44










  • How weird, Google ngrams will give a graph for "folx" and it had high usage in 1800s but I can’t find a citable definition for it.
    – Pam
    Apr 1 at 9:12






  • 3




    @Zebrafish I have seen things like ‘carísimxs amigxs’ used in Spanish, though a more common (and quite brilliant, I think) variation is ‘carísim@s amig@s’. It takes more effort in such languages because more things are inflected so the neutrality-marker requires more repetition than in English where it only applies to nouns; but languages that inflect for masculine/feminine gender do manage to find ways of achieving the same effect.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Apr 1 at 14:22






  • 1




    @bof I don't know where to begin. Quickly, 1. Mother tongue means first or native tongue. 2. No conclusive evidence it's called that for reason you assert. 3. Even if true, you learned from others, not only your mum. 4. Your mother may have spoken sexist language because it was the language of her wider society. 5 Historically literature and law is written by males. Texts of major religions are or attributed.I don't know any man who's published under a woman's name to be taken seriously. Yet disguising a writer's female sex is common, George Elliot, Bronte sisters, even J.K. Rowling arguably.
    – Zebrafish
    Apr 3 at 7:53













up vote
6
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
6
down vote

favorite
1






1





I've been noticing the term "folx" appear in my transgender circles recently, but I'm not sure where it came from.



This article from the Boston Globe uses the term in an article addressing recent trends in gender-neutral neologisms, but only incidentally.



It doesn't seem - to me - like it's more gender-neutral than "folks," so I'm curious why the addition was made.



I'm looking around online, and there's a lot of speculation, but it's difficult to find anything definitive. Ideas I've seen include,




  • that it just looks better,

  • that it matches other neutral forms, like "Latinx,"

  • that it's tonally in line with a punk theme


But these ideas can only explain why it's still in use, and not where it came from.



Is its origin known?










share|improve this question















I've been noticing the term "folx" appear in my transgender circles recently, but I'm not sure where it came from.



This article from the Boston Globe uses the term in an article addressing recent trends in gender-neutral neologisms, but only incidentally.



It doesn't seem - to me - like it's more gender-neutral than "folks," so I'm curious why the addition was made.



I'm looking around online, and there's a lot of speculation, but it's difficult to find anything definitive. Ideas I've seen include,




  • that it just looks better,

  • that it matches other neutral forms, like "Latinx,"

  • that it's tonally in line with a punk theme


But these ideas can only explain why it's still in use, and not where it came from.



Is its origin known?







etymology






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Apr 1 at 10:37









Edwin Ashworth

48.7k986151




48.7k986151










asked Apr 1 at 7:25









Zyerah

321213




321213












  • This is gonna get real weird for languages that distinguish male and female people. Take Spanish friend amigo/amiga. Things are going to get very weird indeed.
    – Zebrafish
    Apr 1 at 8:03










  • @Zebrafish To say nothing of "he" and "she" in English.
    – WS2
    Apr 1 at 8:44










  • How weird, Google ngrams will give a graph for "folx" and it had high usage in 1800s but I can’t find a citable definition for it.
    – Pam
    Apr 1 at 9:12






  • 3




    @Zebrafish I have seen things like ‘carísimxs amigxs’ used in Spanish, though a more common (and quite brilliant, I think) variation is ‘carísim@s amig@s’. It takes more effort in such languages because more things are inflected so the neutrality-marker requires more repetition than in English where it only applies to nouns; but languages that inflect for masculine/feminine gender do manage to find ways of achieving the same effect.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Apr 1 at 14:22






  • 1




    @bof I don't know where to begin. Quickly, 1. Mother tongue means first or native tongue. 2. No conclusive evidence it's called that for reason you assert. 3. Even if true, you learned from others, not only your mum. 4. Your mother may have spoken sexist language because it was the language of her wider society. 5 Historically literature and law is written by males. Texts of major religions are or attributed.I don't know any man who's published under a woman's name to be taken seriously. Yet disguising a writer's female sex is common, George Elliot, Bronte sisters, even J.K. Rowling arguably.
    – Zebrafish
    Apr 3 at 7:53


















  • This is gonna get real weird for languages that distinguish male and female people. Take Spanish friend amigo/amiga. Things are going to get very weird indeed.
    – Zebrafish
    Apr 1 at 8:03










  • @Zebrafish To say nothing of "he" and "she" in English.
    – WS2
    Apr 1 at 8:44










  • How weird, Google ngrams will give a graph for "folx" and it had high usage in 1800s but I can’t find a citable definition for it.
    – Pam
    Apr 1 at 9:12






  • 3




    @Zebrafish I have seen things like ‘carísimxs amigxs’ used in Spanish, though a more common (and quite brilliant, I think) variation is ‘carísim@s amig@s’. It takes more effort in such languages because more things are inflected so the neutrality-marker requires more repetition than in English where it only applies to nouns; but languages that inflect for masculine/feminine gender do manage to find ways of achieving the same effect.
    – Janus Bahs Jacquet
    Apr 1 at 14:22






  • 1




    @bof I don't know where to begin. Quickly, 1. Mother tongue means first or native tongue. 2. No conclusive evidence it's called that for reason you assert. 3. Even if true, you learned from others, not only your mum. 4. Your mother may have spoken sexist language because it was the language of her wider society. 5 Historically literature and law is written by males. Texts of major religions are or attributed.I don't know any man who's published under a woman's name to be taken seriously. Yet disguising a writer's female sex is common, George Elliot, Bronte sisters, even J.K. Rowling arguably.
    – Zebrafish
    Apr 3 at 7:53
















This is gonna get real weird for languages that distinguish male and female people. Take Spanish friend amigo/amiga. Things are going to get very weird indeed.
– Zebrafish
Apr 1 at 8:03




This is gonna get real weird for languages that distinguish male and female people. Take Spanish friend amigo/amiga. Things are going to get very weird indeed.
– Zebrafish
Apr 1 at 8:03












@Zebrafish To say nothing of "he" and "she" in English.
– WS2
Apr 1 at 8:44




@Zebrafish To say nothing of "he" and "she" in English.
– WS2
Apr 1 at 8:44












How weird, Google ngrams will give a graph for "folx" and it had high usage in 1800s but I can’t find a citable definition for it.
– Pam
Apr 1 at 9:12




How weird, Google ngrams will give a graph for "folx" and it had high usage in 1800s but I can’t find a citable definition for it.
– Pam
Apr 1 at 9:12




3




3




@Zebrafish I have seen things like ‘carísimxs amigxs’ used in Spanish, though a more common (and quite brilliant, I think) variation is ‘carísim@s amig@s’. It takes more effort in such languages because more things are inflected so the neutrality-marker requires more repetition than in English where it only applies to nouns; but languages that inflect for masculine/feminine gender do manage to find ways of achieving the same effect.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Apr 1 at 14:22




@Zebrafish I have seen things like ‘carísimxs amigxs’ used in Spanish, though a more common (and quite brilliant, I think) variation is ‘carísim@s amig@s’. It takes more effort in such languages because more things are inflected so the neutrality-marker requires more repetition than in English where it only applies to nouns; but languages that inflect for masculine/feminine gender do manage to find ways of achieving the same effect.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Apr 1 at 14:22




1




1




@bof I don't know where to begin. Quickly, 1. Mother tongue means first or native tongue. 2. No conclusive evidence it's called that for reason you assert. 3. Even if true, you learned from others, not only your mum. 4. Your mother may have spoken sexist language because it was the language of her wider society. 5 Historically literature and law is written by males. Texts of major religions are or attributed.I don't know any man who's published under a woman's name to be taken seriously. Yet disguising a writer's female sex is common, George Elliot, Bronte sisters, even J.K. Rowling arguably.
– Zebrafish
Apr 3 at 7:53




@bof I don't know where to begin. Quickly, 1. Mother tongue means first or native tongue. 2. No conclusive evidence it's called that for reason you assert. 3. Even if true, you learned from others, not only your mum. 4. Your mother may have spoken sexist language because it was the language of her wider society. 5 Historically literature and law is written by males. Texts of major religions are or attributed.I don't know any man who's published under a woman's name to be taken seriously. Yet disguising a writer's female sex is common, George Elliot, Bronte sisters, even J.K. Rowling arguably.
– Zebrafish
Apr 3 at 7:53










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote













It seems notable that an earlier cited use of an "X" to denote gender neutrality is in the honorific Mx., which dates in writing to the 1970s.



According to this article in The Huffington Post, Latinx appears to have grown into use in the 2000's, and it appears from articles covering folx that it was also cited in writing as recently as the 21st century.



The OED has this to say about the etymology of "Mx."




Apparently < M- (in Mr n., Mrs n.1, Ms n.2, etc.) + X n., probably denoting an unknown or variable quantity (compare sense 3 at that entry)




The referenced sense 3 refers to "X" as it is commonly used in algebra to refer to an unknown entity, and allusive extensions.



Katherine Rosman in The New York Times describes the earliest found citation of the honorific:




The first citation of Mx. found by Ms. Martin’s team dates to 1977, in a publication called The Single Parent. In the midst of the Ms. era, an article in it wondered whether a courtesy title that masks gender might help ameliorate any bias against single parents. “On second thought, maybe both sexes should be called Mx.,” the article said. “That would solve the gender problem entirely.”




This leads me to believe that "X" as a gender-neutral particle originated with "Mx.," functioning as a wildcard character of sorts, and was used similarly by the communities that coined "Latinx" and "folx."



It's possible that "folx" evolved independently of these other words that use "x" to denote gender-neutrality, but it would also be a significant coincidence. For this reason, I suspect that tracing earlier uses of gender-neutral "x" is the best we can do regarding an etymology of "folx."






share|improve this answer




























    up vote
    0
    down vote













    Folx is a gender neutral collective noun used to address a group of people. Unlike the term "folks", the ending "-x" on "folx" specifically includes LGBTQ people and those who do not identify within the gender binary. wikipedia, urban dictionary, Boston Globe article



    The X connotes a difference. An effort to highlight. To focus their lexicon to their identities.



    Etymology is s/w lacking: (same citation)




    According to Word Spy lexicographer Paul McFedries, the term "folx"
    has existed for "at least a century".1 According to McFredies, the
    first published use of "folx" appeared in 2001 in a blog post written
    by BiNet Los Angeles board member and owner of GirlFags.com Clare in
    describing her identity as well as other queer identities.2 The
    first documented definition of "folx" appeared in 2006, when an
    individual named Ranmoth provided a definition of "folx" on Urban
    Dictionary.




    Your questions:




    • That it just looks better? I don't know.

    • That it matches other neutral forms, like Latinx? Probably

    • That it's tonally in line with a punk theme? Yes. anecdotal, from a blog 3 years ago ... not meant to be a citation but a link






    share|improve this answer



















    • 2




      You've cited authorities, but you haven't made a case for "folx" being more gender-neutral than "folks". That's what the question was about....
      – Spencer
      Apr 1 at 13:14






    • 1




      @Spencer - No reference, but I've been under the impression that "X" is being used of late to suggest "trans-gender" in various contexts. It has a natural association with the concept of "trans" in the non-sexual sense from way back -- eg, "xfer" for "transfer".
      – Hot Licks
      Apr 1 at 13:18










    • Ultimately, I'm not sure this is an answer to my question. I understand fairly well why it exists - but this is an etymology question.
      – Zyerah
      Apr 1 at 17:06






    • 1




      I'm not sure the math in the quote is right: "at least a century" "the first published use of 'folx' appeared in 2001".
      – Laurel
      Apr 3 at 0:04






    • 1




      'Unlike the term "folks" '—[Citation needed]. "Folks" has absolutely no connotation or denotation of sex, sexuality, or gender. Unless you're saying people are using it because they don't identify as Human?
      – Kevin
      Apr 3 at 0:36










    protected by MetaEd 2 hours ago



    Thank you for your interest in this question.
    Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



    Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?














    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    2
    down vote













    It seems notable that an earlier cited use of an "X" to denote gender neutrality is in the honorific Mx., which dates in writing to the 1970s.



    According to this article in The Huffington Post, Latinx appears to have grown into use in the 2000's, and it appears from articles covering folx that it was also cited in writing as recently as the 21st century.



    The OED has this to say about the etymology of "Mx."




    Apparently < M- (in Mr n., Mrs n.1, Ms n.2, etc.) + X n., probably denoting an unknown or variable quantity (compare sense 3 at that entry)




    The referenced sense 3 refers to "X" as it is commonly used in algebra to refer to an unknown entity, and allusive extensions.



    Katherine Rosman in The New York Times describes the earliest found citation of the honorific:




    The first citation of Mx. found by Ms. Martin’s team dates to 1977, in a publication called The Single Parent. In the midst of the Ms. era, an article in it wondered whether a courtesy title that masks gender might help ameliorate any bias against single parents. “On second thought, maybe both sexes should be called Mx.,” the article said. “That would solve the gender problem entirely.”




    This leads me to believe that "X" as a gender-neutral particle originated with "Mx.," functioning as a wildcard character of sorts, and was used similarly by the communities that coined "Latinx" and "folx."



    It's possible that "folx" evolved independently of these other words that use "x" to denote gender-neutrality, but it would also be a significant coincidence. For this reason, I suspect that tracing earlier uses of gender-neutral "x" is the best we can do regarding an etymology of "folx."






    share|improve this answer

























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      It seems notable that an earlier cited use of an "X" to denote gender neutrality is in the honorific Mx., which dates in writing to the 1970s.



      According to this article in The Huffington Post, Latinx appears to have grown into use in the 2000's, and it appears from articles covering folx that it was also cited in writing as recently as the 21st century.



      The OED has this to say about the etymology of "Mx."




      Apparently < M- (in Mr n., Mrs n.1, Ms n.2, etc.) + X n., probably denoting an unknown or variable quantity (compare sense 3 at that entry)




      The referenced sense 3 refers to "X" as it is commonly used in algebra to refer to an unknown entity, and allusive extensions.



      Katherine Rosman in The New York Times describes the earliest found citation of the honorific:




      The first citation of Mx. found by Ms. Martin’s team dates to 1977, in a publication called The Single Parent. In the midst of the Ms. era, an article in it wondered whether a courtesy title that masks gender might help ameliorate any bias against single parents. “On second thought, maybe both sexes should be called Mx.,” the article said. “That would solve the gender problem entirely.”




      This leads me to believe that "X" as a gender-neutral particle originated with "Mx.," functioning as a wildcard character of sorts, and was used similarly by the communities that coined "Latinx" and "folx."



      It's possible that "folx" evolved independently of these other words that use "x" to denote gender-neutrality, but it would also be a significant coincidence. For this reason, I suspect that tracing earlier uses of gender-neutral "x" is the best we can do regarding an etymology of "folx."






      share|improve this answer























        up vote
        2
        down vote










        up vote
        2
        down vote









        It seems notable that an earlier cited use of an "X" to denote gender neutrality is in the honorific Mx., which dates in writing to the 1970s.



        According to this article in The Huffington Post, Latinx appears to have grown into use in the 2000's, and it appears from articles covering folx that it was also cited in writing as recently as the 21st century.



        The OED has this to say about the etymology of "Mx."




        Apparently < M- (in Mr n., Mrs n.1, Ms n.2, etc.) + X n., probably denoting an unknown or variable quantity (compare sense 3 at that entry)




        The referenced sense 3 refers to "X" as it is commonly used in algebra to refer to an unknown entity, and allusive extensions.



        Katherine Rosman in The New York Times describes the earliest found citation of the honorific:




        The first citation of Mx. found by Ms. Martin’s team dates to 1977, in a publication called The Single Parent. In the midst of the Ms. era, an article in it wondered whether a courtesy title that masks gender might help ameliorate any bias against single parents. “On second thought, maybe both sexes should be called Mx.,” the article said. “That would solve the gender problem entirely.”




        This leads me to believe that "X" as a gender-neutral particle originated with "Mx.," functioning as a wildcard character of sorts, and was used similarly by the communities that coined "Latinx" and "folx."



        It's possible that "folx" evolved independently of these other words that use "x" to denote gender-neutrality, but it would also be a significant coincidence. For this reason, I suspect that tracing earlier uses of gender-neutral "x" is the best we can do regarding an etymology of "folx."






        share|improve this answer












        It seems notable that an earlier cited use of an "X" to denote gender neutrality is in the honorific Mx., which dates in writing to the 1970s.



        According to this article in The Huffington Post, Latinx appears to have grown into use in the 2000's, and it appears from articles covering folx that it was also cited in writing as recently as the 21st century.



        The OED has this to say about the etymology of "Mx."




        Apparently < M- (in Mr n., Mrs n.1, Ms n.2, etc.) + X n., probably denoting an unknown or variable quantity (compare sense 3 at that entry)




        The referenced sense 3 refers to "X" as it is commonly used in algebra to refer to an unknown entity, and allusive extensions.



        Katherine Rosman in The New York Times describes the earliest found citation of the honorific:




        The first citation of Mx. found by Ms. Martin’s team dates to 1977, in a publication called The Single Parent. In the midst of the Ms. era, an article in it wondered whether a courtesy title that masks gender might help ameliorate any bias against single parents. “On second thought, maybe both sexes should be called Mx.,” the article said. “That would solve the gender problem entirely.”




        This leads me to believe that "X" as a gender-neutral particle originated with "Mx.," functioning as a wildcard character of sorts, and was used similarly by the communities that coined "Latinx" and "folx."



        It's possible that "folx" evolved independently of these other words that use "x" to denote gender-neutrality, but it would also be a significant coincidence. For this reason, I suspect that tracing earlier uses of gender-neutral "x" is the best we can do regarding an etymology of "folx."







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Apr 2 at 23:52









        RaceYouAnytime

        18.8k24198




        18.8k24198
























            up vote
            0
            down vote













            Folx is a gender neutral collective noun used to address a group of people. Unlike the term "folks", the ending "-x" on "folx" specifically includes LGBTQ people and those who do not identify within the gender binary. wikipedia, urban dictionary, Boston Globe article



            The X connotes a difference. An effort to highlight. To focus their lexicon to their identities.



            Etymology is s/w lacking: (same citation)




            According to Word Spy lexicographer Paul McFedries, the term "folx"
            has existed for "at least a century".1 According to McFredies, the
            first published use of "folx" appeared in 2001 in a blog post written
            by BiNet Los Angeles board member and owner of GirlFags.com Clare in
            describing her identity as well as other queer identities.2 The
            first documented definition of "folx" appeared in 2006, when an
            individual named Ranmoth provided a definition of "folx" on Urban
            Dictionary.




            Your questions:




            • That it just looks better? I don't know.

            • That it matches other neutral forms, like Latinx? Probably

            • That it's tonally in line with a punk theme? Yes. anecdotal, from a blog 3 years ago ... not meant to be a citation but a link






            share|improve this answer



















            • 2




              You've cited authorities, but you haven't made a case for "folx" being more gender-neutral than "folks". That's what the question was about....
              – Spencer
              Apr 1 at 13:14






            • 1




              @Spencer - No reference, but I've been under the impression that "X" is being used of late to suggest "trans-gender" in various contexts. It has a natural association with the concept of "trans" in the non-sexual sense from way back -- eg, "xfer" for "transfer".
              – Hot Licks
              Apr 1 at 13:18










            • Ultimately, I'm not sure this is an answer to my question. I understand fairly well why it exists - but this is an etymology question.
              – Zyerah
              Apr 1 at 17:06






            • 1




              I'm not sure the math in the quote is right: "at least a century" "the first published use of 'folx' appeared in 2001".
              – Laurel
              Apr 3 at 0:04






            • 1




              'Unlike the term "folks" '—[Citation needed]. "Folks" has absolutely no connotation or denotation of sex, sexuality, or gender. Unless you're saying people are using it because they don't identify as Human?
              – Kevin
              Apr 3 at 0:36















            up vote
            0
            down vote













            Folx is a gender neutral collective noun used to address a group of people. Unlike the term "folks", the ending "-x" on "folx" specifically includes LGBTQ people and those who do not identify within the gender binary. wikipedia, urban dictionary, Boston Globe article



            The X connotes a difference. An effort to highlight. To focus their lexicon to their identities.



            Etymology is s/w lacking: (same citation)




            According to Word Spy lexicographer Paul McFedries, the term "folx"
            has existed for "at least a century".1 According to McFredies, the
            first published use of "folx" appeared in 2001 in a blog post written
            by BiNet Los Angeles board member and owner of GirlFags.com Clare in
            describing her identity as well as other queer identities.2 The
            first documented definition of "folx" appeared in 2006, when an
            individual named Ranmoth provided a definition of "folx" on Urban
            Dictionary.




            Your questions:




            • That it just looks better? I don't know.

            • That it matches other neutral forms, like Latinx? Probably

            • That it's tonally in line with a punk theme? Yes. anecdotal, from a blog 3 years ago ... not meant to be a citation but a link






            share|improve this answer



















            • 2




              You've cited authorities, but you haven't made a case for "folx" being more gender-neutral than "folks". That's what the question was about....
              – Spencer
              Apr 1 at 13:14






            • 1




              @Spencer - No reference, but I've been under the impression that "X" is being used of late to suggest "trans-gender" in various contexts. It has a natural association with the concept of "trans" in the non-sexual sense from way back -- eg, "xfer" for "transfer".
              – Hot Licks
              Apr 1 at 13:18










            • Ultimately, I'm not sure this is an answer to my question. I understand fairly well why it exists - but this is an etymology question.
              – Zyerah
              Apr 1 at 17:06






            • 1




              I'm not sure the math in the quote is right: "at least a century" "the first published use of 'folx' appeared in 2001".
              – Laurel
              Apr 3 at 0:04






            • 1




              'Unlike the term "folks" '—[Citation needed]. "Folks" has absolutely no connotation or denotation of sex, sexuality, or gender. Unless you're saying people are using it because they don't identify as Human?
              – Kevin
              Apr 3 at 0:36













            up vote
            0
            down vote










            up vote
            0
            down vote









            Folx is a gender neutral collective noun used to address a group of people. Unlike the term "folks", the ending "-x" on "folx" specifically includes LGBTQ people and those who do not identify within the gender binary. wikipedia, urban dictionary, Boston Globe article



            The X connotes a difference. An effort to highlight. To focus their lexicon to their identities.



            Etymology is s/w lacking: (same citation)




            According to Word Spy lexicographer Paul McFedries, the term "folx"
            has existed for "at least a century".1 According to McFredies, the
            first published use of "folx" appeared in 2001 in a blog post written
            by BiNet Los Angeles board member and owner of GirlFags.com Clare in
            describing her identity as well as other queer identities.2 The
            first documented definition of "folx" appeared in 2006, when an
            individual named Ranmoth provided a definition of "folx" on Urban
            Dictionary.




            Your questions:




            • That it just looks better? I don't know.

            • That it matches other neutral forms, like Latinx? Probably

            • That it's tonally in line with a punk theme? Yes. anecdotal, from a blog 3 years ago ... not meant to be a citation but a link






            share|improve this answer














            Folx is a gender neutral collective noun used to address a group of people. Unlike the term "folks", the ending "-x" on "folx" specifically includes LGBTQ people and those who do not identify within the gender binary. wikipedia, urban dictionary, Boston Globe article



            The X connotes a difference. An effort to highlight. To focus their lexicon to their identities.



            Etymology is s/w lacking: (same citation)




            According to Word Spy lexicographer Paul McFedries, the term "folx"
            has existed for "at least a century".1 According to McFredies, the
            first published use of "folx" appeared in 2001 in a blog post written
            by BiNet Los Angeles board member and owner of GirlFags.com Clare in
            describing her identity as well as other queer identities.2 The
            first documented definition of "folx" appeared in 2006, when an
            individual named Ranmoth provided a definition of "folx" on Urban
            Dictionary.




            Your questions:




            • That it just looks better? I don't know.

            • That it matches other neutral forms, like Latinx? Probably

            • That it's tonally in line with a punk theme? Yes. anecdotal, from a blog 3 years ago ... not meant to be a citation but a link







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Apr 3 at 0:05









            Laurel

            29.2k654104




            29.2k654104










            answered Apr 1 at 13:03









            lbf

            16.4k21561




            16.4k21561








            • 2




              You've cited authorities, but you haven't made a case for "folx" being more gender-neutral than "folks". That's what the question was about....
              – Spencer
              Apr 1 at 13:14






            • 1




              @Spencer - No reference, but I've been under the impression that "X" is being used of late to suggest "trans-gender" in various contexts. It has a natural association with the concept of "trans" in the non-sexual sense from way back -- eg, "xfer" for "transfer".
              – Hot Licks
              Apr 1 at 13:18










            • Ultimately, I'm not sure this is an answer to my question. I understand fairly well why it exists - but this is an etymology question.
              – Zyerah
              Apr 1 at 17:06






            • 1




              I'm not sure the math in the quote is right: "at least a century" "the first published use of 'folx' appeared in 2001".
              – Laurel
              Apr 3 at 0:04






            • 1




              'Unlike the term "folks" '—[Citation needed]. "Folks" has absolutely no connotation or denotation of sex, sexuality, or gender. Unless you're saying people are using it because they don't identify as Human?
              – Kevin
              Apr 3 at 0:36














            • 2




              You've cited authorities, but you haven't made a case for "folx" being more gender-neutral than "folks". That's what the question was about....
              – Spencer
              Apr 1 at 13:14






            • 1




              @Spencer - No reference, but I've been under the impression that "X" is being used of late to suggest "trans-gender" in various contexts. It has a natural association with the concept of "trans" in the non-sexual sense from way back -- eg, "xfer" for "transfer".
              – Hot Licks
              Apr 1 at 13:18










            • Ultimately, I'm not sure this is an answer to my question. I understand fairly well why it exists - but this is an etymology question.
              – Zyerah
              Apr 1 at 17:06






            • 1




              I'm not sure the math in the quote is right: "at least a century" "the first published use of 'folx' appeared in 2001".
              – Laurel
              Apr 3 at 0:04






            • 1




              'Unlike the term "folks" '—[Citation needed]. "Folks" has absolutely no connotation or denotation of sex, sexuality, or gender. Unless you're saying people are using it because they don't identify as Human?
              – Kevin
              Apr 3 at 0:36








            2




            2




            You've cited authorities, but you haven't made a case for "folx" being more gender-neutral than "folks". That's what the question was about....
            – Spencer
            Apr 1 at 13:14




            You've cited authorities, but you haven't made a case for "folx" being more gender-neutral than "folks". That's what the question was about....
            – Spencer
            Apr 1 at 13:14




            1




            1




            @Spencer - No reference, but I've been under the impression that "X" is being used of late to suggest "trans-gender" in various contexts. It has a natural association with the concept of "trans" in the non-sexual sense from way back -- eg, "xfer" for "transfer".
            – Hot Licks
            Apr 1 at 13:18




            @Spencer - No reference, but I've been under the impression that "X" is being used of late to suggest "trans-gender" in various contexts. It has a natural association with the concept of "trans" in the non-sexual sense from way back -- eg, "xfer" for "transfer".
            – Hot Licks
            Apr 1 at 13:18












            Ultimately, I'm not sure this is an answer to my question. I understand fairly well why it exists - but this is an etymology question.
            – Zyerah
            Apr 1 at 17:06




            Ultimately, I'm not sure this is an answer to my question. I understand fairly well why it exists - but this is an etymology question.
            – Zyerah
            Apr 1 at 17:06




            1




            1




            I'm not sure the math in the quote is right: "at least a century" "the first published use of 'folx' appeared in 2001".
            – Laurel
            Apr 3 at 0:04




            I'm not sure the math in the quote is right: "at least a century" "the first published use of 'folx' appeared in 2001".
            – Laurel
            Apr 3 at 0:04




            1




            1




            'Unlike the term "folks" '—[Citation needed]. "Folks" has absolutely no connotation or denotation of sex, sexuality, or gender. Unless you're saying people are using it because they don't identify as Human?
            – Kevin
            Apr 3 at 0:36




            'Unlike the term "folks" '—[Citation needed]. "Folks" has absolutely no connotation or denotation of sex, sexuality, or gender. Unless you're saying people are using it because they don't identify as Human?
            – Kevin
            Apr 3 at 0:36





            protected by MetaEd 2 hours ago



            Thank you for your interest in this question.
            Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



            Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?



            Popular posts from this blog

            Morgemoulin

            Scott Moir

            Souastre