I'm a member of the LGBT community. So perhaps, let me share our side of the story, rather than you folks making guess about our feelings. (Percentage-wise, the majority of you aren't LGBT.)

The truth is, we don't really care. Well, yes, we do, but much, much less than what you folks think. If we do, we'd have made it clear what is our preference. If I'd like to be called "she / her", I'd be wearing dresses & earrings in public. If I'd like to be called "he / him" I'd be wearing sport shirts, a golf cap and jeans, and having a mustache. It is how we behave in public. And it reflects in our online preference as well. If I prefer female pronouns I'd call myself Fiona. If I prefer male pronouns I'd call myself Mike. If I call myself BatteryHorse645, I don't really care.

I feel like this is being blown way out of proportion. To put it in code-jargon, it is like senior software engineers refusing to produce code to the point of threatening to quit, when the argument is whether you should put curly brackets in one-line for-loops.

The use of singular-they is problematic because it is not taught in most schools. In acknowledging we have a diverse community, we must also recognize that Stack Exchange has an international user base. Users come with a wide variety of cultural background. And, English skills.

And...well, people just don't talk naturally that way.

Just communicate in a friendly tone. Simple.

If you want to adopt this policy of your own free will, that's absolutely fine – with me.

However, I fear that this is not how the upcoming Code of Conduct changes will be explained; all evidence so far points to the addressed person having the final judgement about whether language directed at him/her/them is respectful or not. (Which, depending on your viewpoint, either makes some or a whole lot of sense.) So hypothetically speaking, let's say that I'm offended when referred to by they/them/their, I can, by the Code of Conduct, require you to use he/him/his instead.

Trying to impose this policy on all users is a definite no-go. It would be really strange having to avoid some very common and natural words (he/she/...) only on Stack Exchange while continuing to use them literally everywhere else. Not even just in writing; whenever you see someone, your mind will automatically try to classify it as male or female.

Furthermore, on the scale of Stack Exchange, such a policy would be unenforceable:

• There are so many old posts out there using non-gender-neutral language, they're simply too much to be edited.
• There are so many new users coming to the site every day, they simply can't be taught fast enough

(Well, unless maybe we block the words 'he', 'she', etc.) like we do with link shorteners </evil thought> ... We can't even have the Community user mass-edit-without-bumping 'he' and 'she' to 'they', since that would lead to grammatical errors like 'they writes faster than they thinks'.)

1. Why people might avoid pronouns?

The fact is that most people avoid using pronouns on users who are not clearly male nor clearly female not because they are queerphobic, transphobic or anything like that. It is simply because they don't know which pronoun they should pick up. So the easier way out of the situation is just to rephrase it and avoid the pronoun at all.

However, it seems that the new CoC would forbid that too, leading to a dead end. I don't know which pronoun to use but I'm obliged to use it anyway and if I use it wrongly, I might be suspended for that.

2. Why using "they" as a catch-all pronoun won't work

Some people insists that I should use "they" to refer to them. I'm ok with that. But also, I think I also have the right to not be called as "they". I feel that "they" is not suitable for me and particularly dislike being referred to as "they". I prefer to be called as "he" when referred in 3rd person and I'm sure that everyone would be ok to call me as "he".

Also, I doubt that I'm the only single person in the universe that dislikes being called as "they" and would prefer to be called as "he". The same could be argued for some people preferring being called by "she".

Non-native English speakers might never learn that "they" can be used in singular, because that is not what English schools teach out there. Heck, I just discovered that with this controversy and never heard about that before. I also guess that even many native English speakers are not aware of that because using "they" in singular seems to be at least very unusual.

Now, I and a few of the regulars that are tuned in the controversy are now aware of the use of "they" for people who rejects both "he" and "she". But the millions of non-regular users and newbies from everywhere else in SE will be clueless, and it is not realistic to expect that they would ever be aware of the issue and start to use "they". That is simply not going to happen. The millions of clueless newbies would still continue to use "he" and "she" regardless of what is in the CoC that most of them don't even know that exist and much less have ever read.

I think uncomfortable to be called with "they". Misgendering "he" or "she" is a no-no. Most people will think that "xe", "zie", "fe", etc. are either typos or gibberish. This ends in a situation where there is simply no neutral-gender one-size-fits-all 3rd person pronoun in English and pretending that Stack Exchange will be able to change the entire world about that is not a very realistic expectation.

Now, to make things still worse, let��s say that HJ57 is a user that states that all the pronouns "he", "she" and "they" severely misrepresent HJ57's gender or sexual orientation. Most chances is that this user is simply a troll, but who knows? Supposing that such person is acting in good faith, how can we ever refer to that user with any 3rd person pronoun that doesn't sound offensive for that person?

3. Why finding out the correct pronoun is ineffective

Ok, now let's suppose that I would be posting a chat comment to User X answer like:

@UserX I like your approach to deal with the infinite recursion, but you got the foobar algorithm wrong. Take a look at Zaptro's approach on his answer.

See the problem? It is written "his", but I have no clue that Zaptro is a "he". If I'm unlucky and Zaptro happens to be a "she", people would flag my comment as offensive, and I would be warned that I'm not being nice, that I should not do that again and perhaps I could be suspended, banned or even having my diamonds revoked if I'm a moderator due to use of such blatantly disrespectful and offensive language.

I could just rephrase it as:

@UserX I like your approach to deal with the infinite recursion, but you got the foobar algorithm wrong. Take a look at Zaptro's approach.

But now, the new CoC forbids me of doing that because I'm avoiding the pronoun, which proves that I'm one of the most intolerant persons in the world. So again, this would be flaggable as offensive, but this time I do not even could hope for having luck in guessing the pronoun, because there is no pronoun at all to be guessed. So, I would be warned that I'm not being nice, that I should not do that again and perhaps I could be suspended, banned, impaled, hang, drawn and quartered.

To post that comment, I'm required to find out what is the best pronoun to use to refer to Zaptro even if this is completely irrelevant for the conversation and even if this is a task that drains me time and focus that could be used in something more productive and would be otherwise completely unneeded. But, to complicate things further, Zaptro's answer was posted two years ago, Zaptro is not around for months, so I can't simply ask that, and Zaptro's profile either is silent about gender or sexual orientation or features disorganized and contradicting information about that. So, I have zero information about which pronoun should I use. I could simply guess and take the risk, but what if I guess wrong and a week later Zaptro's come back and flags my comment due to misgendering? Even "they" might be unsuitable, because since I think that "they" is unsuitable for me, it could be for Zaptro too. Also, Zaptro's case is not an odd exception that possibly never ever happens, it is in fact a very common case.

Maybe trying this?

@UserX I like your approach to deal with the infinite recursion, but you got the foobar algorithm wrong. Take a look at this answer.

Oh, I'm still missing the pronoun! My bad for being a such offensive person! What a shame!

So, let's see the facts in this particular case:

• (a) There is no one-size-fits-all pronoun that could be used every time.
• (b) There is no way to find out what the correct pronoun is.
• (c) Not using a pronoun has severe consequences (including losing your diamond if you have one with no chance for an appeal).
• (d) Guessing the pronoun is a risk too big to be worth it (people who misgenders others should be burnt on a stake).

The solution? Simply not posting anything at all. That is the way to build a great community here and really help people!

4. If the user is around, why not just ask for the pronoun?

Asking for the pronoun is not very different than asking for gender and/or sexual orientation. Many people might take that question as offensive. Many things might go wrong.

For example, on some occasions, people that wants to irritate, insult, bully and annoy me, asks if I'm really a man or if I'm a little girl or perhaps asks me if I'm gay or do some other questioning casting doubts about my gender or sexual orientation even if they already surely know the obvious answer for years. Thankfully, this never happened to me in any SE community, but it is something that happens in real life with many people, not only me, because there are always lots of people that just want to be jerks in the worst way possible.

Now, get some random unknown person in the Internet asking something about your gender or your sexual orientation, and you will see that many people will interpret that as disrespectful.

Misgendering people is offensive for many people. However, asking for gender or sexual orientation data can be equally offensive.

5. We need to make the community more friendly, not less

Creating a rule that states that people (including newbies with poor English skills that joins Stack Exchange every day) should look somewhere in user profiles to find the correct pronoun to refer to them and be enforced to use that pronoun is not friendly.

Stack Exchange's Q&A already has a lot of complicated rules that many users takes years to understand (if ever). I'd seen even some moderators in many occasions having trouble recalling details of Stack Exchange rules and policies correctly.

The FAQs and help pages are already enough to fill a book, and most newbies don't have enough time to read because what them need right now is to just have their JavaScript question answered and then hurry to go back to their business. Inserting a new page about how to use pronouns in the middle of all that won't make them stop everything else and going there just to read.

6. "But user XYZ is really lgbtphobic, we have to do something about that!"

Surely, those people exists and sometimes posts comments featuring lgbtphoby. But we already have for many years the flag tool for cases of people presenting opinions that are lgbtphobic, sexist, racist, etc. Even the old CoC already covers that and the still older "be nice" policy too. So, there is no need to change the rules in that way. Posting that sort of stuff is not allowed in this site and has never been. There is no need for a change here.

7. Is avoiding the pronoun really offensive?

At least half of the profiles encountered in any Stack Exchange community features no easy way to tell the user gender or sexual orientation, and I think that this is very good and very rarely a problem. The reason is simply that in most cases, I shouldn't need to care about knowing whatever the gender or sexual orientation is of any user because this is not (or at least should not be) something of my business.

I have no problem with anyone here being a queer, trans, straight, man, woman, dog, alien, robot or whatever else for one simple reason: I don't care and I really think that I shouldn't care or even know that. Seriously, I don't want to know what your gender or sexual orientation is except if I have a very strong reason for that, and I almost never have.

Frankly, I really fail to see how on Earth those sentences could ever be offensive or misrepresent Zaptro's gender just because they lack a pronoun:

@UserX Take a look at Zaptro's answer, but I don't know if the argumentation is right.

@UserX Take a look at this answer, but I don't know if the argumentation is right.

There is nothing wrong in rephrasing stuff to avoid the pronoun! There is no reason to flag a comment like that. Also, it is much more clear and simple than writing this:

@UserX Take a look at Zaptro's answer, but I don't know if their argumentation is right.

The issue is not that people avoids using a pronoun to LGBTQI+ people due to intolerance. This is just a misrepresentation of the problem, a misrepresentation so severe that was used to unfairly fire an excellent moderator. The real issue is that people avoids using a pronoun on any person for which they are unable to determine the gender and so unable to choose a pronoun. This is not a form of lgbtphobia, it is just the form that people naturally and unconsciously chooses to be safe for not having an information that they shouldn't need at all, and there shouldn't be any reason to try to guess.

And as far as I can tell, the simplest solution is to avoid pronouns if you don't have to use them, exactly what Monica Cellio was trying to say, but Stack Exchange responded by shooting at the messenger. Instead, Stack Exchange seems to want to mandate that people uses pronouns just because that is the way it must to be even if that would need some English language contortionism to just add a pronoun where none should be needed.

There is no offense in avoiding a pronoun. Instead, the reason to avoiding the pronoun is exactly to avoid offending someone. We shouldn't promote a witch-hunt and burn at stake people that writes sentences avoiding pronouns.

I am trying to very carefully avoid any identity / personal values /... pitfalls here (and yes, I do have an opinion, but that’s absolutely not what I want to bring into this minefield) and stick to two different issues where the singular they has a disadvantage and which are sometimes overlooked:

1. The singular they is likely not taught at schools¹ etc. I am not a native speaker and will freely admit that I stumbled over this structure for the first time when I started using the SE network and only after a while. Please don’t assume that a non-native speaker that already struggles with forming a coherent and understandable English post will adapt to what may seem counterintuitive or contradictory to what they learned. Offering some kind of “instructions” may or may not be helpful - considering how often I point new (and not so new) users to the Tour or Help Center, I would lean towards the latter.

2. Outside the tech-oriented SE posts, it may actually matter whether we are talking about a “he” or “she” - from Workplace or Interpersonal experiences to metabolism differences on Physical Fitness. Yes, I am mixing sex and gender here (somewhat on purpose), but at least for the first two, the real or perceived gender will influence how the environment interacts with someone. Sticking to the “safe they” may actually make things less clear.

¹ My eldest is in 8th grade of the German Gymnasium (which has the highest standards) and it was definitely not part of the curriculum. We introduced the singular they usage at home and it was initially marked as wrong by the teacher - “they” being plural.

English as a foreign language

English is not my mother tongue. I have learned English at school and from books. English not being my mother tongue, I do not feel that I am allowed to change it; I must use it according to the rules as stated in reputable books.

Moreover, at work I use English to communicate with many people from many countries, most of whom are also not native English speakers. To use English successfully as a language for international communication we must all use it according to the rules.

I do not have any objection to use "they" for both 3rd person singular and 3rd person plural. It means nothing to me, it's a foreign language. But this usage must be agreed by everybody, and it must be taught as such.

What are the actual rules for using "they" for both 3rd person singular and 3rd person plural? Do I write "they sing" for both singular and plural, or is it "they sings" for singular and "they sing" for plural? Does "they" also apply for words which would normally (that is, according to conventional grammar) require "she" (for example, "ship" or "frigate") or "it" (for example, "algorithm")? Are those rules universally agreed, and written in reputable English grammar books published in France, in Germany, in Romania, in India and so on?

In communicating on Stack Exchange I have always strived to avoid using "he" or "she" when I could use "they" within the boundaries of English grammar as I have learned it. I do not find it onerous, or exceedingly difficult. But I must stress that any general policy must take into account that a very large part of the users of this site are not native speakers of English; please think of us when mandating or promoting novel linguistic constructs, and explain them fully.

Following up on @Stephie's observation–see below–I would like to support it with something that just happened to me recently.

Please don’t assume that a non-native speaker that already struggles with forming a coherent and understandable English post will adapt to what may seem counterintuitive or contradictory to what they learned.

Here is a page from a school textbook that I use to help prepare Italian students for a B2 English exam.

As you can see, the singular they is used throughout. It neatly avoids the awkward "he or she" expression that some of us find in well-meaning textbook publications. Unfortunately, my 18-year-old male student was confused by the meaning of they, he believed it to be always a plural pronoun. The student didn't feel confident enough to answer the question because he was looking for two or more people in questions 3, 4, and 9. Moreover, in the four stories nobody went on holiday alone, the person was either with his or her family, school or with a bunch of friends.

Note that the task begins with the phrase, Which person… , and person is a singular noun, therefore the answer had to be the name of an individual. The four different names were: Pauline Vernon (a girl's name), Nola Tracey (an Irish name for a girl), Harry Green (a boy's name) and Sandy Henderson. "Sandy" is short for Alexander, Santiago, Alexandra or Sandra, and is what I'd call a unisex name, although I believe the expression a gender-neutral name is more commonly used today. _{(Despite doing my best to keep abreast with the trends of the English language, it's not easy when you live in a non-English speaking country for almost 40 years!)}

When the gender of a person is ambiguous, as in the case of Sandy, in English we often use the pronouns they, their, and them. For example,

Sandy said they went to Yosemite National Park but the holiday almost ended in tragedy when one night they heard their friend screaming because a giant black bear was rearing.

Currently on EL&U there are 204 results for "singular they" I'd like to quote in full one of the answers. [Emphasis in bold mine]

Certainly many usage guides have advised against use of this "singular they" on various "logical" grounds. Nevertheless, singular they has long been part of the English language, and there are various posts on Language Log giving examples of it being used in the Bible, by Shakespeare, by the president, by the Canadian Department of Justice, etc.. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language's coauthor Geoff Pullum (a frequent Language Log contributor) calls the idea that they must never occur with a singular antecedent a myth.

There is no shortage of usage "experts" who advise against it, as the other answers in the question should make clear (though these days their reasoning tends away from a simple "it's wrong" towards something more defensive–"some people will think it's wrong, so avoid it"). But despite them, use of singular they occurs at all levels of the language, both spoken and written, informal and formal.

It's not ungrammatical per se on the basis of analysis of actual usage using reasonable linguistic methods. But use it at your own risk of being criticized by the self-righteous but misinformed.
@nohat♦ Aug 6'10

I hope therefore, I have shown that the singular and gender-neutral they is very common in speech and in writing but why it may also be confusing for non-native speakers who are unaware that they is used for singular subjects as well. They might even be offended if a user or a moderator addresses he or she as "they". Anything is possible nowadays.

As for genderqueer native speakers, if their pronoun is they, which is gender-neutral, I see no hardship in it. And truth be told, especially in recent years, I have never thought it to be a problem. But as a Stack Exchange user, I find the proposed gender free pronouns such as Spivak's: ey (they), em (them), and eir (their), Charles Crozat Converse's thon (that one), Mary Orovan proposed co or Bornstein's ze (zie, sie), and hir confusing and I hope the gender queer community will finally agree on one set of fixed pronouns. Until that day arrives, we (users) can use they and a person's username with the @ symbol to help avoid ambiguity. As an example:

@user44553322 gives strong supporting evidence in their answer but they didn't forget to mention the possible drawbacks.

Using the singular they is not hard to master once you understand how it is used. Overall, English pronouns are very simple words but they can be ambiguous at times, which is why context is always fundamental.

The problem with the imperative and declaratory is sometimes folks lose track of what's really important. People. We get too caught up in rules and debate and politics and... forget.

A bunch of folks I hang out with, and respect me far more than I deserve, asked me about the current situation.

I'm not great with rules.

I'd say one part of this ought to be something we agree on.

If someone asks you to use a particular pronoun - it isn't just preferred, it is correct. You do it. No theying someone who specifically tells you they're a she. Any good faith request on this vein ought to be honoured. No ifs no buts.

I don't particularly care which venue this is in. I'd be deeply disappointed in anyone who intentionally acted in such a way that a fellow human was hurt.

As a generic in writing - it's going to be significantly difficult to actually enforce. It would affect every post written.

Someone talked about COCs having two roles. One was to set down the rules. The other is aspirational. I'd say that using the "they" as a aspiration - that which is expected for us to be the best.

This isn't simple. It's worth being mindful when slaying monsters that one doesn't become one themselves. Or create a worse one.

We need to acknowledge this will take time, patience and work. That it's more than something that can be enforced.

It's more something we need to build up slowly - to get the 'immune system' of the community in place. As many of the answers show - we need resources in place that help people transition to effectively use the singular they.

Then we can begin to start working towards making it the default. Not before.

I first joined the Stack Exchange back in 2012, on ELU. I liked the way it was different from other user forums; it was about getting answers – no distractions, no chitchat. It was largely drama-free. Oh, here and there occasional disagreements might get heated in the comments, but the Exchange as a whole had some good mechanisms in place to keep that in check – autogenerated messages that suggested moving the debate into a chat room, system-generated flags as discussions got too lengthy, user-raised flags when comments got too rude, and even a culture that reminded us that comments are ephemeral and could therefore be cleaned up at any time.

A couple of my more memorable tussles were with tchrist. He's been an active member of the Exchange for about a year longer than I have. Every now and then, he and I would get into a protracted argument over some linguistic puzzle, but we always managed to work things out, and I think we wound up respecting each other a little more in the end. Eventually, we both were elected as moderators – him on ELU, me on ELL. We still chat occasionally on Stack, and I'd consider him a friend, even though I've never met the man in person.

I hope no one who might be reading through my reminiscing is loathing right now, assuming I'm an insensitive, hurtful bigot. I haven't misgendered anyone; I haven't made any mistakes about Tom's gender identity (his name is on his profile, so I'll assume he doesn't mind me using it here).

Yes, erroneous presumptions about gender can be embarrassing, so it's wise to not to assume too much. Deliberate misgendering is a hurtful act that ought to be handled accordingly. But the solution is not to prescribe the use of singular they for everyone network-wide.

After having read the open letter by Monica Cellio and the resignation by Caleb, I suspect that the new Code of Conduct (CoC) is going to treat avoiding the use of preferred pronouns as transphobic behavior on the grounds of malicious compliance (i.e., referring to someone solely by their name is technically grammatically correct while completely missing the point).

That being said, I suspect changes to the CoC are likely to be a non-issue for the vast majority of network users and this goes above and beyond using the singular they. To break things down a bit:

1. On most technical sites (ex., Stack Overflow) you can just enforce gender-neutral language in the questions and answers. The net change would likely just be to enforce that. For comments things might be a bit trickier, but are likely within the bounds of issues the moderators can address.
2. On sites where gender does play a role (ex., The Workplace) it seems like most people are already used to using the gender when it is known or necessary to address the question. There might not be any change other than addressing malicious compliance (if recognized).
3. Chat rooms here appear to operate like most others in that people are referred to by their handle most of the time. As with above, the major concern would continue to be addressing malicious compliance.
4. Moderators might have to adjust things a bit when dealing with the public, but in the absence of knowing someone's gender things are unlikely to change. When dealing with someone one-on-one you tend not to use their gender and given the sheer number of users on the network, referring to them by name is typically appropriate.
5. Moderators working with other moderators may have to adjust their behaviors.

Obviously one concern for all of this might be if Stack Exchange requires users to disclose their preferred pronouns as part of their account. However, gender is sensitive information under the General Data Protection Regulation requiring special handling. Thus, this goes back to the original point: this is likely to be a non-issue for most network users.

The question in the title is easy to answer: Yes, there are objections.

But ... the same would be true for any question that starts with "Are there any objections...?", so this won't help us here. Cynicism aside, there are multiple dimensions along which this issue could be analyzed. Some of these aspects have already been discussed (some of them ad nauseam), and mentioned in the comments here:

• Being forced to use a certain pronoun, and being threatened with suspension, is not acceptable for a variety of reasons. Dictating a language or a certain form of speech is bound to influence the way you think. While this may be perceived as something positive in this particular case, in that it ~"could increase the acceptance e.g. of non-binary people in the broader society", the measure that is taken to achieve this goal is highly problematic. There is a crucial difference between "educating" people so that they behave "properly", and forcing people to behave in a certain way.

  ^{Some people refer to "Newspeak" and "thought control" at this point, but that tends to sound hyperbolic - at least compared to more differentiated views, like the Sapir-Whorf-Hypothesis}

  But actually, forcing people to use a certain pronoun is not even what this issue is about. From what I have read so far, the goal is not to enforce a certain pronoun or a gender-neutral form. The goal seems to be to force people to use the pronoun that the other side demands, whatever that pronoun is.

• One could argue about how relevant this issue is. And maybe people will continue reading before downvoting my answer for this sentence alone: This does not refer to "how relevant misgendering is", but "how relevant pronouns are on this site": Most interactions on the site are not about persons, but about questions and answers. It is rarely the case that people interact directly, one-to-one. And if they interact directly, the issue is even less relevant, because when interacting directly, there usually are no pronouns involved anyhow. Still, there are cases where people interact in a way where pronouns could be used, even though they still may be avoided in most cases.

  ^{Frankly, I cannot remember being referred to in third person at all, ever, on this site. I have received comments like "Thank you, Sir", but that's a different issue, and "Thank you"-comments should be avoided anyhow}

• Most interactions of this kind are singular events. Several million users are writing several million contributions. At one point, UserX may refer to a user called "Sasha" as "he", and Sasha says: "Hey, I'm a woman!". In the course of the ongoing discussion, it would be awkward to not refer to Sasha as "she". (It would at least be awkward. One could even call it "impolite". But not necessarily "disrespectful"). Two years later, UserX and Sasha interact again. Realistically, UserX cannot even know whether it's the same "Sasha", and once more refers to her as "he". Should this be a reason to ban UserX?

  There are many, many users who appear once on the site, maybe do not even speak English very well, and try hard to articulate the question that they'd like to have answered. Punishing them for not using a form of speech that they may never have heard of seems to be counterproductive (and not welcoming, for that matter...). In most cases, educating them about how to properly state a question is far more important than details of a language that they hardly speak, and that not even the native speakers can agree on...

So I think that this issue is mainly relevant for staff, community managers, moderators, and maybe a few long-time users. Or to put it that way: It is mainly relevant for people who know each other and 1. interact within a group, and 2. interact with other individuals, as a group.

And for these, one should assume that they will not intentionally "misgender" people, and if one of them does, one should assume that they are able to resolve this conflict without trying to enforce impractical rules for the community.

After all, managing and resolving conflicts may be the most important part of their job.

In my native language we don't have gendered pronouns. When I talk I have to use extra brain power to determine which pronoun to use as I was raised in an environment where this was a non-issue. It is really hard to think about whether to use he or she if you were simply not raised up to care about genders when talking about someone in the third person.

In English classes we were usually told to use he in translations from our native language unless we knew that the person is female. This default did lead me to some issues when I moved to the UK as I did use he simply too much - even when I actively knew the other person being a female. I started actively using they afterwards, as that was definitely the easy way out for me, whether I knew the gender (and preferred pronoun) of the other person or not.

However I know that in English the use of they can be disrespectful to some group of people. Women might object to the usage as it removes their gender from conversations, which especially in male-dominated fields can be problematic, as the reader might assume a male behind the pronoun. Also some trans people might also object to it as it can be one kind of misgendering, as it can mean you are trying to avoid referring to them using their new gender.

I am always trying to use they in conversations both written and oral. However if anyone objects I'm happy to use their version as well, as that is the nice thing to do.

Are there any objections to using singular they for everyone?

It's not my habit (though I might change my habit if asked).

My habit is:

1. Use "you" as a pronoun -- why gossip about 3rd parties?
2. Refer to 3rd parties by their username -- or, often, as "the OP"
3. Use "they", unless I think it's obvious -- but take it as obvious (and therefore use "he" or "she"), if:
   • The username is a conventionally male or female name
   • Or their avatar depicts a man or woman

Nobody has ever asked me to change a pronoun I have used -- so I suppose this has been a fairly harmless habit, as habits go.

FWIW I've never even noticed anybody ask other people to use a specific pronoun.

I have another problem with the use of "they" that hasn't been mentioned yet. There are hundreds of minorities out there. People with special psychological conditions. People with special physical conditions which make them see things different and which also affect their emotional lifes, and which makes them more sensitive to things than is healthy. And others, which I don't even know exist.

For example, we could accommodate people who have had bad experiences with parents who have been drinking too much alcohol and who feel uneasy if you mention "beer", as in "there is no free beer". So should we avoid phrases like "free beer", because there are some people who may find it offensive?

What is so special about trans and LGBT+ people that they deserve special treatment as a minority? There are uncountably many minorities out there, and not every minority even has a name, and we can never accommodate all of them. We can only try to be excellent with each other and to not force our own point of view on everyone else. Firing someone right before their religious holiday because of supposedly incorrect pronoun usage is just ridiculous. That person you fired is also part of a particular minority, but Stack Exchange values that minority less than they value the LGBT+ minority.

In other words, the new unforgivable social sin is not actively affirming a belief with which you disagree. -- from the resignation letter of Caleb

I don't want to use "they" as a pronoun, because I don't want to give the impression that I am happy about Stack Overflows latest management decisions. If this violates the upcoming CoC, feel free to ban me. I believe that there are two genders; I am sure there is a word ending in "-phob", that describes people like me. (And of course I know there are some people who don't fit into this model, but they are extremely rare, and most of them self-identify as either male or female. And this phenomenon has nothing to do with "trans" or LGBT-whatever.) People who use it don't want tolerance; they want agreement, which is not the same thing. Gender is not something you self-assign.

At least, we should acknowledge that there can be a difference between what you are and what you want to be. A white person cannot just say "I feel like a black person", and a black person cannot just say "I feel like a white person". (We would call that "cultural appropriation", I suppose. Ok, maybe they can say that, but that doesn't change who they are.) I disagree with most people on something. I hate only very few. Disagreement is not the same as hate, and I hope Stack Exchange will understand this some day.

You can use "they" for everyone if you really want to. The CoC requests that you do so when you're unsure of the respondent's pronouns.

It's a known factor that in some cases, using "they" as a singular creates a potentially confusing grammar. It would seem appropriate and acceptable to side-step that grammatical issue by referring to someone by their screen name instead. Indeed, this would seem preferable in order to identify to readers which one out of the multiple people you're referring to. And this usage is fine, otherwise there would be a whole lot of confusion surrounding who is referring to who as "they".

However, people have a right to be addressed by their pronouns where possible, and where requested. By intentionally side-stepping their pronouns, you're denying their gender in a way that can be deeply hurtful. This is something that Stack Exchange wishes to avoid in their aim to be welcoming to all.

I know this is a subtle and difficult concept and it's taken me three weeks to understand and process this.

In general, use "they" when you're not sure. Use "he" or "she" or "they" (or whatever else) when you are sure, or asked to. It's ok to assume gender in the face of strong evidence (for example, Michael is usually male, but except when a character in Star Trek:Discovery), but be prepared to be corrected and accept that correction moving forward.

Leaving this here as well.

I point to this list here.

List of protologisms/third person singular gender neutral pronouns

I submit that they, them, or their be allowed to refer to any and all of those in that list, based on the evidence that I submit below. I submit that if they has been the preferred inclusive word for the existing pronouns, then it should also be considered the standard for all other pronouns.

Cesar said it himself.

Official FAQ on gender pronouns and Code of Conduct changes

The vast majority of people go by the pronouns sets “he/him” or “she/her.” A small but increasing number of people use “they/them” pronouns or another pronouns set -- sometimes simply because they don’t want to go by pronouns with a gender association (just as some folks go by “Ms.” whether or not they are married, because they don’t think their marital status should be a relevant issue), and sometimes people use pronouns that aren’t associated with one of those two most common (binary) genders because they are nonbinary (i.e. people who are neither exclusively a man nor exclusively a woman -- e.g. genderqueer, agender, bigender, fluid, third/additional gender in a cultural tradition, etc.).

I want to draw attention to the fact that the text Cesar quoted uses "they" in the rest of their post. Why? What's the reason? This thread is a defense of Monica's stance and I believe a necessary inclusion within the new Code Of Conduct. I will do my best to remain completely unbiased and use nothing but language, history, and trends that I can cite.

In The Handbook of Non-Sexist Writing for Writers, Editors and Speakers by Kate Swift and Casey Miller, they rightfully state that the traditional usage to refer to a person of any gender would take the male form. This has been true for thousands of years.

• Plurality in Latin, Spanish, and many other languages takes the male form.
• In English, he/his is often used in place of indeterminate antecedent. Example: Each person to his own, but they or their is becoming more popular. See Cesar's quote above.

Efforts to reduce the male bias has led to a more inclusive switch to neutrality.

• The study "Singular they: An Empirical Study of Generic Pronoun Use" by Darren K. LaScotte found that the majority of respondents chose they because it acknowledged the non-binary individuals who do not use he or she.
• In 2015, The American Dialect Society chose they as the Word Of The Year for its ability to refer to all individuals as a collective rather than any specific gender-based word.
• A study found that usage of gender-neutral pronouns in a broad, sweeping manner helped to combat a bias towards the male gender.
• A survey of 11,242 people, all of whom identify as non-binary and LGBTQ+, led to them choosing they at 79.5% as their preferred pronoun, followed by using the pronoun that reflects their identity, followed by just mixing it up.
• They has the advantage of neutrality due to already existing in the language, and being the only gender-neutral word that has made it to widespread usage, since at least 1375.

Some people may take issue with this from a grammatical standpoint. However...

In In Search of Gender Neutrality: Is Singular They a Cognitively Efficient Substitute for Generic He?" Julie Foertsch, she writes this:

As ungrammatical as this shift may be, the justification for it is quite clear. The generic he that grammarians prescribe is typically perceived as referring to a male, not as being all-inclusive (Khosroshahi. 1989; Kidd, 1971; MacKay & Fulkerson, 1979; Martyna, 1978a; Moulton, Robinson, & Elias, 1978; Silvera, 1980).

and

Eor this reason, it is perhaps not surprising that the pronoun they—a technically plural pronoun— was readily accepted for all four antecedent types. Indeed, when the antecedent was an indefinite pronoun, readers actually processed singular they faster than he or she, and the rules of prescriptive grammar have already been changed to accommodate this apparent preference.

This demonstrates that they is also preferred by speakers. As a Q&A site, I believe we should strive to maintain clarity and inclusiveness for everyone.

• People already struggle with the English language. They have complained that they will have trouble articulating and formulating the various pronouns. However, I will also add that as a native speaker, I too will have that trouble.
• As someone on the autism spectrum, I do not feel inclusiveness or friendliness towards my constant, daily struggle to follow social norms. I would like a break and for the SE mods/CMs to recognize that it is polite to be neutral.
• It allows those whose conscience cannot allow them to use specific pronouns. For whatever reason, they feel like they cannot. I do not put this here to debate their intentions or moral compass. However, I strongly feel that it is professional to remain neutral.

Going back to Cesar's quote, they use they in the text to refer to each individual in the identity groups. It is very telling that Cesar refers to each and every non-binary as they or their in his own post, without even realizing it. The question is: Why?

Because our brains process the word differently.

Firstly, when there was no explicit antecedent, a larger fronto-central positivity was observed 750 msec after pronoun onset for he/she than they, possibly reflecting the additional difficulty involved in establishing a referent for he/she than for they when no explicit referent is available.

That's the difference. They is an implicit referent. It's so natural to our brains that StackExchange themselves couldn't avoid it, to the point that you'll see comments like "If someone asks to be called ze, oblige them," even though the list states that the accusative would be zim.

In summary, they, them, and their are not references to self. They are placeholders for references. They act as a catch-all for he, she, xir, zir, xe, or any other identity that a person would like to have.

I will end this with a biased opinion, and how I feel.

I saw Shog9's answer stating that "language changes." Yes, it does change, but it's changed for the better with the inclusion of gender neutral language. I believe their answer is at odds with the evidence and ideas I've put forth, and that his stance, while well written, does not sufficiently defend the idea that neutrality is a form of misgendering.

I believe StackExchange has made a mistake in believing that neutral language is a form of misgendering, as certain words weren't invented to be a gender, but to refer to any gender, and that includes the words I've defended here.

A lot of users here have talked about freedom of speech, the law, etc. I feel like this is a red herring. I do not feel like it applies here. I feel strongly that the right to be neutral isn't a legal right. It is a right given to me by the universe itself. By virtue of being a lifeform with a central nervous system, I was given the abilities to be silent, refrain from sides, decline to be included, and to do nothing.

I feel very strongly that taking away neutrality such as a centuries old word that the LGBTQ+, feminist, and other activist communities have spent years to include and embrace to avoid bias and exclusion is at odds with that right.

Generally, it often is not a good idea to tell people "don't say this" and even worse "do say this". For two reasons:

It's an absolute rule which defines words or sentences to mean something very specific; that hardly works in a socio-cultural context as language is dynamic and ambiguous. The the more diverse context and community is, the broader the perception of phrases and words may be due to different backgrounds

Second, even when everyone is a native speaker of the same socio-economic background, it is just expression of a thought-ban. The fundamental rule which is supposed to be enforced requiring specific wording, remains much broader though and can be summarized much simpler: be polite, be respectful, don't intentionally harm other people. (There is no way to avoid harming people unintentionally at times, even when you are polite and respectful - but you will be forgiven the verbal harm you caused unintentionally, if those are also polite and respectful towards you).

As such, I'm not convinced that any requirements on wordings from people is useful but harmful - words and phrases often get their meaning from context.

English is not my mother tongue. I first learned about singular they on this site. It was confusing to me for about twenty seconds, then I understood how that pronoun was used from the way I saw it used and am now comfortably using that pronoun in this meaning. Not being a native speaker did not make singular they more difficult for me than many other new things I had to learn about English since I began using the internet, and it certainly didn't make using Stack Exchange difficult or unpleasant. Everyone who says that singular they is confusing to non-native speakers is implying that we are too stupid to quickly grasp such a simple thing.

My two cents: each user will be able to add "he/him", "she/her" or anything else to the profile. Ideally as a new field, otherwise to the About Me section.

That won't bound anyone by itself, but those who care will be able to see quickly and clearly how the person they address wants to be addressed without getting into comment discussions.

The important part: Without such info in the profile, the user won't be able to complain about mistreating when being addressed in the "wrong way". For example, when raising a flag on a comment or chat message, the moderator will be able to say "Please update your profile to indicate your preferred pronoun".

This will put some order in the chaos, since comments are often deleted and people can't possibly know how others want to be addressed before writing.