I'm still very curious, as to why you think your DIL-- thanks for the abbreviation-- wanted you to do this, if the impetus did not come from her daughter, herself.
The voices of many, speak louder than the lone voice-- as long as we now realize, we are speaking facetiously.
I'm not really sure why she wants to do this, but I suspect it's because she wants to be a social rebel. You know, like the hippies used to be? I also suspect it's because she's totally addicted to social media and wants to get "liked". It would be groovy if all us skuz buckets would just drop out and accept the flower power. I mean, hey man, it would be such a righteous world. Peace, man.
I don't think it's fair to compare someone wanting her child to be referred to, as if she were plural-- without any desire for this, even, on the child's part-- with people who'd wanted us out of Vietnam, or who'd felt that we all should have the right to decide for ourselves, what substances we wish to ingest. And advocating the making of love-- hard to knock that. Not that, certainly, there weren't excesses, among that subculture, but they did raise legitimate issues, including being the tip (and shaft) of the spear, when it came to pushing for Black civil rights, women's equality, and gay rights, to be treated like other citizens, not targeted by police & discriminated against, by society at large.
That just means the person rejects both male and female as labels for themselves. They have attributes of both. They reject the idea that they must be either male or female, they are both and so are non-binary. It really is not the same as bisexual or asexual, which refers to sexual interest rather than gender. As for "they," yes I have seen it used in the singular form all of my life in place of "he or she." Prior to the trans movement, it was when the gender was unknown.
Only by the less educated. I can remember teachers back in the '50s & '60's hammering their desks while emphasizing the difference between singular an plural pronouns.
"They" is plural in your first example. "any one of many possible people" is considered plural in that context. More than one person may have a problem, and more than one may file a complaint.
Sure. They've decided to recognize that the mentally ill use a plural pronoun to describe a singular person that doesn't have a plural antecedent, as has it has been since English was a thing. It's still wrong.
Webster's is pointing out that there are mentally ill people using it. Still doesn't make it correct usage of the English language.
Did you read it? Singular "they" in use since the 1300s when the gender is ambiguous or unimportant. A famous use of it from Dickinson was mentioned. They noted an English practice long ago when gender-ambiguous persons were referred to as "it" and noted that "they" is a better solution, since it already has a singular form and is less dehumanizing.
No, that's not a "singular" they. It's only used if there is a possible PLURAL antecedent. In other words, you don't know if you might be talking about one or many, or one or the other. In those cases, because there are plural options for a singular person, you use "they". It has NEVER been used to apply a plural pronoun to a singular, known person or thing.
Of course it's new. Go ahead and explain to me how you don't understand what it means by plural antecedents.
It amazes me that people get so worked up about pronouns. How many people, in their real lives, even experience someone who uses pronouns outside of the binary? I live in Austin, Tx and hang out in some of the most LGBTQ friendly areas you could imagine and I know maybe two people who don’t use he/him or she/her. Seriously, it seems like a lot of effort to worry about how people live their lives whom you will never meet.
I was wondering when you'd try that, as it's the only thing everyone ever posts, without reading or understanding, to try and prove their point. ‘Each man hurried . . . till they drew near . . . where William and his darling were lying together.’ Was more than one man hurrying? The rest of this nonsense is just more plural antecedents in unknown situations. I tell you what. If two people who call themselves "they" ever comes up, I'll talk about one of them.
Obviously it has. You disagree with dictionaries, for some reason. They Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster 3 a —used with a singular indefinite pronoun antecedent No one has to go if they don't want to.Everyone knew where they stood …—E. L. Doctorow b —used with a singular antecedent to refer to an unknown or unspecified person An employee with a grievance can file a complaint if they need to. The person who answered the phone said they didn't know where she was. c —used to refer to a single person whose gender is intentionally not revealed A student was found with a knife and a BB gun in their backpack Monday, district spokeswoman Renee Murphy confirmed. The student, whose name has not been released, will be disciplined according to district policies, Murphy said. They also face charges from outside law enforcement, she said.—Olivia Krauth d —used to refer to a single person whose gender identity is nonbinary (see NONBINARY sense c) I knew certain things about … the person I was interviewing.… They had adopted their gender-neutral name a few years ago, when they began to consciously identify as nonbinary—that is, neither male nor female. They were in their late 20s, working as an event planner, applying to graduate school.—Amy Harmon
Yea, they has always been used to refer to unknown situations. He or She is what replaced they. They is older. The point is that "they" has been used in English to refer to a single individual when the gender is uncertain for a really long time.
Thanks for the regurgitation that I'm familiar with. The first three have always been a thing. The last one is saying that there are some people who use a plural pronoun to describe themselves. It's still both: a. Stupid b. Wrong c. Not in the same category as A thru C
