**tl;dr – Old-school grammarians would have us believe that adapting singular "they/them" to use as non-binary pronouns shouldn't be allowed because "it's confusing." But not only is it *not* confusing to the modern mind (people already use it this way anyway), it's also being taught by well-respected scholarly bodies as grammatically correct language.** As we move towards accepting and normalizing the idea of gender existing on a non-binary spectrum, our language naturally needs to adapt. Despite opposition from a dying breed of old-school grammarians, a [majority of today's teachers](https://qz.com/923238/even-the-staunchest-grammarians-are-now-accepting-the-singular-gender-neutral-they/) have already accepted the use of singular "they/them" as pronouns for non-binary persons. But the use of singular "they/them" is still being disputed, and the argument against its grammatical legitimacy is really weak: "[It's confusing](https://blog.usejournal.com/using-they-them-as-singular-pronouns-615204bc4ded)." But we have been using singular "they/them" to describe persons of unknown gender for centuries, and it would take little to no effort to adapt it just *slightly* to address a non-binary person by their preferred pronouns. Many people already do so anyway, and quite naturally. In fact, back when I was in school, teachers corrected us all the time for doing this without even thinking – for us, speaking this way was as natural as breathing. (If you ask me, the only reason old-school grammarians find it confusing is because they find the idea of *non-binary gender* confusing – not the actual grammar itself. But hey, that's just me speculating about biased individuals who refuse to acknowledge a non-binary person's basic human rights). Teachers and students are already being trained in the modern use of singular "they/them" through well-renowned scholarly websites such as [Purdue Owl](https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/grammar/pronouns/gendered_pronouns_and_singular_they.html), which has an entire article explaining its usage as "gender-inclusive language," and highlights the reasons why students should be using gender-inclusive language in their writing. Even more notable is that the [American Psychological Association (APA)](https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language/gender) has accepted and now promotes singular "they/them" as proper non-binary pronouns. So, old-school grammarians, I think it's high time to give up the fight. Times, and modern language conventions, are changing – adapt or be left behind, it's your choice.

Honestly, I think we should come up with better pronouns that don't already have an existing function. But otherwise, they/them works pretty well for this purpose, because we already use it in a similar fashion. "If you have a passenger, make sure they put on their seatbelt"

Language evolves. A hundred years ago it would be grammatically incorrect. But a need has arisen, and a word has evolved to fill that need.

We use them all the time without thinking about it. When you don't know who's driving a car just about everyone says "what are they doing"?.

the *oxford english dictionary* traces singular 'they' back to ✨**1375**✨, where it appears in the medieval romance *william and the werewolf* also, fun fact: 'you' was originally plural before it was adopted for singular usage as well. 'you' was used as a polite singular alternative for 'thou', 'thee', and 'thy' for a few centuries, but by the 17th century it completely replaced them. this is why it feels more natural to say "you are" even when talking in reference to a single person, and "you is" doesn't sound right at all—that's a grammatical vestige of its roots as a plural 2nd-person pronoun. besides, singular 'they' has been a regular part of common usage in the modern day for a while now: if anyone has a problem with singular 'they', have **them** read this sentence, because then **they** might change **their** mind. '*have him or her read this sentence, because then he or she might change his or her mind*' just doesn't roll off the tongue quite as easily. it's pretty awkward and clunky in comparison, and it also isn't inclusive of those who may identify beyond or between the perceived 'binary' on the gender spectrum. that's all, thank you for coming to my ted talk :)

No, because at this rate we will eventually have to refer to people with D.I.D. as plural people.