Grammar Pronoun use for non-binary character

My problem with a Wikipedia entry like this is simple. If I know beforehand this actor identifies as non-binary, I can follow the 'story' with some success. If I don't know this fact, however, I will assume there is a gap in the entry somewhere and another person is also being talked about.

I'm certainly not in any way opposed to non-binary people being designated as such via the use of a pronoun. In fact I think it's necessary. It's just that I WISH 'they' would create—and accept—a new one that means 'non-binary person' and nothing else. That would solve the problem instantly. Piggy-backing onto another word with long-established meaning seems unnecessarily awkward.

Our language is constantly evolving and can certainly take on new words quite quickly, and new words enrich our language. However, deliberately changing the meaning of an old word so it means something else instead deprives us of that original meaning—or makes the meaning unclear.

They and them are problematic enough now.

They and them are pronouns currently used to designate more than one person whose identities are known—the primary meaning:

They and them are also used when the identity of a person is not known, as in:

Or the identity isn't important, as the meaning of the sentence is a universal one:

Now we're adding a fourth meaning as well?

Wilfully creating confusion in language is a mistake, in my opinion. We're supposed to be communicating with one another, aren't we? Why make it more difficult than it needs to be?

Ach well. If it happens, it happens I guess. I'll just need to adjust.

 

The problem I think is that "they" is such a key part of the language, that it's creates massive confusion if you use it in the plural AND the singular.

It's one thing to redefine "queer" and "gay", since those words aren't (now) in common use with another meaning. But they is, and is very likely to remain so.

I don't hold with the notion that you can solve the problem by rewording. Why should I have to solve a problem that simply didn't exist before, and wouldn't exist with a distinct pronoun?

I have to say, if I ever do write a story with a non-binary character, I would always refer to them by physical sex, and demonstrate the fact that they are non-binary through what they do. Show, don't tell.

 

There's a sort of irony in the notion that people who go out of their way not to be identified as male or female are ultimately identified, by pronoun, as both.

 

Sweden added a gender neutral pronoun by having a group of feminists using it despite not being a real word. It came into the dictionary because someone used it, but by being for everyone to hide the fact that it's actually for genderless people, it ended up being a crutch for poor vocabulary. Now 51% is boycotting the word to preserve cultural legacy while some government organizations use it in public on their own to make a statement, which reduces trust in neutrality from public service. A core language change of that significance every ten years is like burning down a national library with poetry, science, history, et cetera because dead authors can't keep up. Nothing wrong with making transgenders feel more included, but I think people just got pissed off about political correctness in general.

 

There's also a sort of irony in that the people that have the most vocal opinions on this subject are generally the most removed from the problems involved with it.

 

From the article linked below:

"For the still unpersuaded, he points out that singular “they” is older than singular “you.” Only in the 1600s did singular “you” start pushing out “thou” and “thee.” Having the same pronoun for both singular and plural forms makes for potential ambiguity. So colloquial plural forms have sprung up, such as “y’all,” common in the American South, or the more recent “you guys” — an oddly gendered locution at a time when the generic “he” is becoming extinct. Still, we get by. No one considers ditching the singular “you.”"

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/books/review/whats-your-pronoun-dennis-baron.html

That's far from the only source to point out that singular 'they' has been used for hundreds of years. It's not a problem. If it's confusing, it's down to the ineptitude of the writer and nothing else, imo. It's not a problem, per se, as a writing matter.

 

Show me any pre-21st century author who uses it to consistently refer to a character.

 

I understand it's common now, but I more or less reject that third example in every day life. I would say: A person with dimentia often doesn't recognize his own spouse. That (or with she in place of he) sounds more normal to me than they.

'They' can be done. I don't doubt that. Knock yourself out. But it would very likely be at the cost of style. Is that desirable? During editing I have sometimes gone over the same sentence twenty times because it doesn't 'feel' right (tone, cadence, basic meaning, flow etc), and extra constraints aren't going to help with that process. As many others have mentioned, finding a pronoun like xe/xim seems to be the less ambiguous and most efficient option. And I know this is supposed to be about writing, but would prefer it if non-binaries unanimously agreed on a single new pronoun.

 

You may have noticed that the majority of non-binary people that weighed in on this her have expressed their preference for a singular they, and people that have non-binary acquaintances also said that they seem to prefer the 'they/them' route, but people are still arguing about it. Which I guess speaks more to public acceptance than it does the literary merit of any of the options, and public acceptance usually wins out long term when it comes to the English language. Guess time will tell as to what the 'proper' way to do it will be.

Being referred to by xe/xim kind of makes one feel like a cheesy alien in a cheap 60's sci-fi film. Quite possibly dehumanizing for some. I don't really find it much better from a style perspective, either. It looks ugly, isn't going to be understood by the majority of readers, much less pronounceable, and draws a lot of unsolicited attention to itself. Having a novel with this word in it would likely have above average instances of people stopping just to grimace at it and be annoyed by it's very existence. Likely in every sentence it's used.