Posted on 09/13/2024 10:31:19 AM PDT by DFG
An aggressive otter pulled a young child off a dock and dragged them underwater at a marina in Washington, officials said.
The attack happened at about 9:30 a.m. Thursday, Sept. 12 at the Bremerton Marina, the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife said in a news release.
A family was walking down the dock when the animal appeared and pulled the child underwater for a few moments, officials said.
The mom reached into the water to rescue her child and was bitten on the arm by the attacking otter, officials said.
She was able to get her child to safety, but the otter followed after the family as they left the dock, official said.
Officials said the child was taken to a hospital for bites and scratches to their head, face and legs.
“We are grateful the victim only sustained minor injuries, due to the mother’s quick actions and child’s resiliency,” WDFW Sgt. Ken Balazs said in a statement.
Details regarding the child’s age and sex were not released by officials.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services was contacted to trap and kill river otters at the marina.
The animals will then be taken to the Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Lab for testing, including rabies.
River otters can be unpredictable and territorial, officials said.
In the last 10 years, there have been six reports of “human-river otter incidents” in Washington, officials said.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Strunk and White
Still my Bible
They. A common inaccuracy is the use of the plural pronoun when the antecedent is a distributive expression such as each, each one, everybody, every one, many a man, which, though implying more than one person, requires the pronoun to be in the singular. Similar to this, but with even less justification, is the use of the plural pronoun with the antecedent anybody, any one, somebody, some one, the intention being either to avoid the awkward “he or she,” or to avoid committing oneself to either. Some bashful speakers even say, “A friend of mine told me that they, etc.”
Use he with all the above words, unless the antecedent is or must be feminine.
It was a JOKE....GEESH
Idiots changed the 'number' of the subject in the middle of the headline.
If you're not going to hire decent editors, then you really need to think at least about hiring fully-literate writers.*
* I can't qualify them as "journalists."
My guess is the idiot writing the article is non-binary?
“To my ear, if the sex of the child is unknown, it would be better to say “the otter dragged it underwater.” “
I would never in a million years use the inanimate pronoun “it” to refer to a human being. That’s what abortionists do.
Otter 1: Too bad nobody will show these pronoun-twisting Trannistas what indulging psychosis leads to.
Otter 2: Hold my crawfish.”
All right. How about “the otter dragged the child underwater?” Genderfree but still fully animated. That’s the best I can do.
“Details regarding the child’s age and sex were not released by officials.”
It is Washington state, so perhaps the parents didn’t want the name of their 8-year old whom they are raising as non-binary out there. Seriously.
Do you think all of these sentences below are incorrect and poor usage; and how would you state them otherwise in everyday language?
“Somebody left their umbrella in the office. Could you please let them know where they can get it?”
“My personal rule is to never trust anyone who says that they had a good time in high school.”
“The patient should be told at the outset how much they will be required to pay.”
“But a journalist should not be forced to reveal their sources.”
Yes. It jars.
How would you state them otherwise?
“My personal rule is to never trust anyone who says that they he had a good time in high school.”
“The patient should be told at the outset how much they he (or "she" as required) will be required to pay.”
“But a journalists should not be forced to reveal their sources.”
But don't trust me. I had a good time in high school.
You’re using the generic masculine.
(But your spelling and grammar need some work here and there:)
Yes, I am. That is standard English. Such usage was understood to be generic until politically motivated feminists campaigned to convince us that such usage was not generic, implying only men, and was thus sexist.
Your use is correct in formal or rhetorical writing, but not in a news article. (In fact, in a news article about an actual incident where the sex of the child is unknown, using ‘he’ could be a big and confusing problem, especially in today’s atmosphere.)
I remain in my conviction that the journalist was using the correct, ages-old form in the article; and was not kowtowing to contemporary thought about ‘gender language’.
Good Night!
I would not advocate “he” in this instance. In this case, with a specific person whose sex is unknown, I would simply go with “the child.”
“I do not care for what someone’s “self-identified pronoun” is. A person is either male or female according to his biology.”
I totally agree...but “they” is still a long accepted singular pronoun. (Where this train wreck started)
...and that’s all I have to say.
Someone left their phone in the restroom, tell them when they come back where they can find it.
Singular
Rule of thumb our grade school teacher taught us.
If the answer is “her” or “him”, use whom or them.
IOW, the words all end in “m”
Example:
Q. To whom should I send it?
A. Send it to them.
A generic “they” may have been accepted by some for a hypothetical statement but not when referring to a known individual. It is inappropriate in the context of the article. And if it is OK for some to advocate its usage, it is also OK for others to oppose it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.