I kind of wish I still subscribed to the Washington Post because I’ve had luck getting letters published there before, but this misconception is repeated enough that I should find an outlet. This is all original thought that was subsequently fact-checked by AI – I first thought of the indefinite/definite distinction, then split the indefinite into two, though there is some overlap. I can’t fold up cubes, but I’m not a moron at everything!

Editor:

[author] in [article] repeats a common oversimplification, one peddled even by academics: that the singular “they” dates back centuries. The truth is more nuanced.

It has several distinct uses: first, as an indefinite pronoun to refer to general or hypothetical persons: “If anybody calls, tell them I’m not home.” This is very old and mostly non-controversial.

The second is for a generic person: “A lawyer and their client.” This usage has grown ever more accepted since the feminist era.

Finally we have the third, the source of consternation: a personal pronoun referring to a named, flesh-and-blood individual.

This is legitimately an innovation, popularized only in the last 15-20 years, and some people’s ears are more sensitive to the pronoun-antecedent clash than others’.

The best that can be said of the third is that it flows naturally from the second; it is ill-thought-through to conflate the three and say simply that the singular “they” has been around for hundreds of years.

But the cat is out of the bag, so to speak, and once linguistic change begins it rarely reverses; as English speakers we’d better get used to it, if grudgingly.

(signature, contact info)

“The truth is more nuanced” is used for the sole purpose of tweaking smug liberal types unable or unwilling to engage with other systems of thought on their own terms (contrary to their self-image, and which studying language gives you a leg up on, as you’re studying thought) who use “nuanced” as a buzzword synonymous with “left-leaning” – rubbish; the intellectual strains of conservatism, communism, and fascism have plenty of nuance (not to endorse the last two.) Also, it’s true. (If your only exposure to the left were activists and MSNBC anchors, as much of Fox News’ audience, you’d think liberalism were simplistic, too.)

My pet hypothesis is that people adopt whatever politics most comport with their inborn temperament and prejudices, then work backwards to justify it, with the odd exceptions, like opposition to Donald Trump or strained relations with conservative/liberal parents.