<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Is They Right?]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>Transgender activist and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1476709122/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=1476709122&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=thdi09-20">author</a> Janet Mock tries to convince Colbert to substitute &#8220;they&#8221; for &#8220;he&#8221; or &#8220;she&#8221;:</p>
<p><p class="protected-embed-fallback">This embed is invalid</p><!-- blog has no permission to use protected embeds --><br />
<P></p>
<p>Meanwhile, linguist Gretchen McCulloch <a href="http://the-toast.net/2014/06/02/a-linguist-gendered-pronouns/view-all/">gets technical</a> about why the singular &#8220;they&#8221; became nonstandard in the first place, arguing that it&#8217;s time to rescue the all-purpose pronoun from Middle English obscurity:</p>
<blockquote><p>[I]n the late 18th century, grammarians started recommending that people use <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2014/05/22/ancillary_justice_gender_pronouns_comparing_sci_fi_and_natural_language.html" target="_blank"><em>he</em> as a gender nonspecific pronoun</a> because <em>they</em> was ostensibly plural&#8230;. <a href="http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austheir.html#authlistrev" target="_blank">Many excellent writers</a> proceeded to ignore them and kept using singular they, just as English-speakers had been doing for some four hundred years by that point, although &#8230; a whole bunch of style manuals did end up adopting generic <em>he</em>. That is, until they started facing pushback in the 1970s from people like the incredibly badass Kate Swift and Casey Miller, who you should <a href="http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/old-WILLA/fall94/h2-isele.html" target="_blank">go read about right now</a>.</p>
<p>Recognizing that it’s useful to have a gender-neutral (aka epicene) pronoun but that many people are uneasy with both generic <em>he</em> and singular <em>they</em>, various creative people in both language reformer and nonbinary activist camps <a href="http://www.english.illinois.edu/-people-/faculty/debaron/essays/epicene.htm" target="_blank">from the 1850s to the modern day</a> have developed and advocated for an assortment of options.</p></blockquote>
<p><!--tpmore --></p>
<blockquote><p>While some invented epicene pronouns never made it past 1850s obscurity (<em>heesh</em>) and others are deliberately more fanciful (<em>bun</em>, <em>bunself</em>), a few made it to relative popularity particularly in certain communities, including <em>ey</em>, <em>eir</em>, <em>em</em> (the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spivak_pronoun" target="_blank">Spivak pronouns</a>) and <em>xe</em>, <em>xir</em>, <em>xem</em>, both with a variety of spellings. It’s pretty hard to change the most common words in a language though, so at the moment the only one that has really wide use is our old friend singular <em>they</em>.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Despite this occasional lingering sense of unease around it, these days <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/they" target="_blank">reputable usage guides </a>endorse singular <em>they </em><a href="http://motivatedgrammar.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/singular-they-and-the-many-reasons-why-its-correct/" target="_blank">for a whole host of reasons</a> and institutions from Facebook to the <a href="http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/legis-redact/legistics/p1p32.html" target="_blank">Canadian Government</a> are increasingly accepting of it, so maybe in another couple hundred years we’ll have finally forgotten about this foolish vendetta.</p>
</blockquote>
]]></html></oembed>