Summary

The article argues for the acceptance of "they" as a singular pronoun, citing its historical use and the inherent flexibility of the English language, while criticizing those who oppose such linguistic evolution.

Abstract

The author of the article, a writer, defends the use of "they" as a singular pronoun by highlighting its centuries-long history, including its use by Shakespeare, and the natural evolution of the English language, which has always absorbed loanwords and adapted to new circumstances. The author points out that language is inherently inclusive and should not be used to oppress, particularly in the context of gender identity. The article criticizes those who cling to outdated grammar rules, such as the prohibition against ending sentences with prepositions, as an attempt to restrict language and assert superiority. Emphasizing that English is a living language, the author advocates for embracing changes like the singular "they" and neopronouns like "ze/zim/zir," arguing that such inclusivity is essential to the language's ability to describe the world accurately.

Opinions

The author believes that opposition to the singular "they" is unfounded, given its long history and common usage.
The article suggests that those who enforce arbitrary grammar rules, such as the ban on ending sentences with prepositions, are "giant shitheads" attempting to use language to assert intellectual dominance.
The author holds that language should evolve to be inclusive and reflective of the diversity of human experience, particularly in terms of gender identity.
The author is in favor of adopting new pronouns and linguistic conventions that better represent individuals' identities.
The article posits that restricting language through prescriptive grammar rules is detrimental to its natural growth and expressive capabilities.
The author insists that using language to oppress or restrict is inherently against the nature of language, which is to describe and adapt to the world.

Why Language Should Not Be Used To Oppress

Or: why you’re wrong if you think “they” cannot be singular.

I was at a conference on suicide prevention, and there was a segment on LGBTQIA+ folks. A topic that came up during the presentations was adhering to a person’s pronouns as a means of connecting with them when they’re in crisis. Something as simple as calling them what they want to be called.

One of the presenters used they/them pronouns, so it was personal for them. During the Q&A session at the end of the segment, I decided to make a statement.

I said that as a writer, I get upset when people deride the use of they/them as singular pronouns. They/them as singular pronouns have a history going back hundreds of years, and Shakespeare is said to have used it. Heck, most people use it when they’re not sure the gender of a person (as I just did, and I bet none of you blinked at it). I don’t get what the big deal was.

The presenter chuckled and said something to the effect of “that didn’t go where I thought it would.”

So why do people use grammar and syntax as a bludgeon when it comes to gender? I would posit that they’re giant shitheads, since language, by its nature, is inclusive.

Let’s start with the English language, which is more like three languages in a trenchcoat trying to pass as one. English doesn’t borrow words, it mugs other languages in back alleys and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.

Okay, enough English jokes.

English is a living language, and as illustrated above, it’s not really shy about stealing loanwords from other languages. Part of living languages is that they are constantly changing to adapt to modern circumstances. It seems pretty self-explanatory.

Let’s look at an example of this. The word “set” has hundreds of definitions. These all originated somewhere, and that somewhere was likely some rando deciding that “set” was the appropriate word for the situation, since it was close enough based on other definitions.

Additionally, we make up words all the time. If you traveled back to the distant time of the 1990s and told someone you were taking a selfie for your blog, they would look at you a bit funny because selfies and blogs weren’t a thing. Heck, the internet was barely a thing.

Going back to the use of singular “they,” there is, as I said, hundreds of years of history where people used “they” to describe a singular person. This article, which is a fascinating read, also discusses the use of “you” as singular, which is standard now but would’ve gotten you called an “idiot or a fool” by George Fox, the guy who founded Quakerism.

Unfortunately, the aforementioned giant shitheads have decided to ruin the singular “they” for us, as they did with ending sentences with prepositions a few hundred years ago.

You may have heard to not end sentences with prepositions. You may not know that this is not a fundamental grammar rule but one founded by a couple of shitheads in the 17th century. In a nutshell, this was ruined for everyone by Joshua Poole and John Dryden.

Dryden and Poole attempted to rewrite grammar guides to not end sentences with prepositions to better align with Latin. This was, arguably, to make them and their friends sound smarter than everyone else, and future grammarians would push this on people because, as the article says, they were the type of people who liked telling other people that they are wrong.

It is obviously okay to end a sentence with a preposition. If anyone tells you otherwise, ask them, “where are you from?” There is no better way to ask that question.

“Where were you born?” may not include people who were born somewhere and moved elsewhere early in life. “Where did you grow up?” or “where were you raised?” ignores people who identify as “from” the place they were born or an adopted city later in life.

Similarly, we do not ask “from where are you?” because that sounds dumb. We also do not ask “from whence do you hail?” unless we are at the Renaissance Faire.

Unfortunately, that is a problem with a living language: anyone can make shit up if they get enough traction. Thankfully, in the cases of the singular “they,” the singular “you,” and ending sentences in prepositions, the rest of us can continue to think that the shitheads who make up these rules are stupid.

As I said before, English is a living language and is inclusive by nature. For every person saying that “they” isn’t singular, there are others who say that “ze/zim/zir” are acceptable pronouns. As far as I’m concerned, making rules that restrict is against the basic nature of language: to describe the world.

Saying “they” can’t be singular when it has hundreds of years of history is unnecessarily restricting the language in a way it shouldn’t be. Same with ending sentences in prepositions. Singular “they,” and things like “ze/zim/zir” expand what language is and how it describes the universe, so they are much more positive than the aforementioned restrictions.

We should not use language as a tool to restrict, oppress, or put down. I’m not talking about insults here, more the fundamentals of the language. Insisting that “they” is not singular is oppressive to people who identify using they/them pronouns, as well as everyone who uses they/them to describe an individual (which is, pretty much, everyone).

So, in a nutshell, please do not try to restrict the English language. Let the language live and grow and expand. Trying to restrict it is detrimental to the language. If you insist on doing things to restrict the language, I will insist on calling you a giant shithead.