Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
You Know What They Say About “They”
Most of my pet peeves have to do with words and their use, misuse, and abuse — though baseball caps worn backward irritate me too. Give me a few more years and I’ll probably let my inner Kowalski run free, but so far I’ve kept him pretty well in check: I’m generally a live and let live kind of guy.
The use of the third-person plural pronoun “they” in reference to a single individual has always stuck in my craw. Saying “he or she” isn’t so hard, and has the virtue of grammatical correctness. Anyway, that’s what I thought, until I bothered to look up the use/misuse of the word in this context.
If the precedent of historical usage counts for anything — and it counts for quite a lot, where words are concerned — I have to give this one up: since at least the 13th century, people have been using “they” when they mean “he or she” but either don’t know the sexual specificity or don’t want to waste breath communicating it. I may be lexicologically cantankerous, but this isn’t the wild west and I’m no cowboy: if the law says “they” works, then “they” works. Let it go.
At least, that’s what I figured, until it struck me that saying “he or she” has the virtue, beyond simply being grammatically squeaky-clean, of rubbing the noses in gently communicating to a modern “woke” audience the truth that there really are only boys and girls, men and women. I’m willing to spend a couple of extra syllables to drive that point home, even in contexts where it’s completely beside the point and of no interest to anyone but me. So, even though I could use “they” to mean “he or she,” and do so feeling completely exonerated by its rich and ancient pedigree, I’m not going to, because we live in an era when people need to be reminded of even the simplest and most obvious truths, lest they be seduced by farcical tales of gender abundance and start inventing idiotic pronouns for themselves.
Now get off my lawn.
Published in Culture
Thank you.
I prefer the old way, but if I have to get all PC about it I’m going with s/he. It’s ugly and inelegant, and it’s on them, not me. I am not going to do contortions for them.
Fortunately, you don’t have to get all PC about it. None of us do.
He doesn’t. She doesn’t. And–
Well, I guess there isn’t an “and.” ;)
I didn’t think it worth leaving my job over it.
Fair enough. And I guess that’s the reality some people face. (The rest of us just come across as obnoxious throwbacks.)
Agree all. And. It would be false to label an infantry or armor battalion commander, in the real world, “she.” Yet it is perfectly reasonable to style some logistics, engineering, military police, and even air defense artillery (think Patriot) commanders “she.” I’ve worked with them over a fairly typical career. The Dallas Police Chief, “she” meets with the Phoenix Police Chief “her.” On the other hand, any men’s major professional sports team coach is “he/him/his,” except in a fictional account that is reaching for novelty.
Having thought about it a bit, I think it is okay to refer to Peter Sellers as “they.” And maybe Eddie Murphy.
If I read that sentence in a normal paragraph, I would have assumed by the use of “they” that both the sister and the lamppost fell down, the sister was hurt, and the lamppost was damaged or broke, though the “hurt themselves” is an odd phrasing for a damaged inanimate object like a lamppost.
Who the hell is “they?”
Great recovery! Smooth . . .
Thank you. I always try to be thoughtful where the weaker sex is concerned.
Not again (forehead smack) . . .