ALT TEXT:
- Panel 1: A person with the text "Singular 'they'" written on them smiling with open arms.
- Panel 2: "Singular 'They'" beaten up by others who said, "Singular they is ungrammatical. It's too confusing," "How can anyone use plural pronouns for singular," and "Every pronoun should only have one purpose."
- Panel 3: "You" hiding from the mob who was beating "Singular 'They'"
- Panel 4: "German 'Sie'" hiding with even more fear next to "You"
Yeah, but that's also an issue with "you". I'd say make a new pronoun but that's a whole other set of pains (e.g. I don't like xe/xem because it looks bad, doesn't fit with standard english. ze/zem is better or even something like ke or ge).
Hell, I'd be all for moving to an official constructed language for international communication but that's a whole other other set of problems (who makes it, what should it be based on and how do we make it fair, how to get people to use it).
Basically there's no good solution to language problems because prescriptivism doesn't work and all languages suck in some ways.
They is not just used to refer to singular people when they don't use he/she pronouns. It's literally been used as singular for hundreds of years.
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002748.html
I've replied elsewhere to your link, but for anyone else reading this: the above claim is misleading. Singular they to refer to a known, specific individual is a recent invention, and Shakespeare never used it that way. If you don't believe me, read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they, which refers to https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they, which says "Though singular 'they' is old, 'they' as a nonbinary pronoun is new—and useful".
I'm not sure why @[email protected] keeps pushing this, but the claim about Shakespeare is factually incorrect.
You can always use context clues. For example you go they for singular and they all for group.