I find it jarring to see a plural pronoun where a singular is correct. Reading "they" where "he" or "she" is appropriate causes a slight mental distraction and disrupts the message the writer is trying to convey.
I've always been taught and considered "he" or "him" to be gender neutral unless context indicated otherwise, in the same way that "man" can refer to any human and not just a male.
This is a tempest in a teapot if I ever saw one. Women are not underrepresented in technology because of male-gendered pronouns in code comments. As someone in the earlier discussion suggested, if you want to make a difference, quit complaining about pronouns and go help mentor some girls at your local school, Girl Scouts, Girl's Club, etc. If we had more females writing code, we would probably see more use of "her" or "she" in their comments.
It's only jarring if you harbor the misconception that "they" always requires a plural antecedent. But it does not. The distraction is coming from your own head, not from idiosyncratic usage. Better writers than us settled this long ago.
Henry Fielding: "Every Body fell a laughing, as how could they help it."
Thackeray: "A person can't help their birth." (spoken by Becky Sharp, the main character, with reference to her own social climbing)
George Eliot: "I shouldn't like to punish anyone, even if they'd done me wrong."
Lewis Carroll: "'Whoever lives there,' thought Alice, 'it'll never do to come upon them this size: why, I should frighten them out of their wits!'"
I don't see how anyone could read such examples of singular "they" and not immediately be relieved of any objection they may have been entertaining. The extraordinary thing is how modern it sounds, even when the rest of the language is archaic:
"Every one Sacrifices a Cow or more, according to their different Degrees of Wealth or Devotion" (Dr. Johnson)
"Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves." (King James Bible)
Sometimes the formulation seems deliberately mischievous:
C. S. Lewis: "She kept her head and kicked her shoes off, as everybody ought to do who falls into deep water in their clothes."
Doris Lessing: "And how easy the way a man or woman would come in here, glance around, find smiles and pleasant looks waiting for them, then wave and sit down by themselves."
That last one (from Charlotte's Web) is delicious because White put the White in Strunk and White and knew full well when a writer should break his own rules.
Women are not underrepresented in technology because of male-gendered
pronouns in code comments.
I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that.
As someone in the earlier discussion suggested, if you want to make a
difference, quit complaining about pronouns and go help mentor some girls at
your local school [...]
I believe promoting more inclusive language does make a positive difference. Regardless, can't one do both of these things? I don't see how they're incompatible.
Comments
I find it jarring to see a plural pronoun where a singular is correct. Reading "they" where "he" or "she" is appropriate causes a slight mental distraction and disrupts the message the writer is trying to convey.
I've always been taught and considered "he" or "him" to be gender neutral unless context indicated otherwise, in the same way that "man" can refer to any human and not just a male.
This is a tempest in a teapot if I ever saw one. Women are not underrepresented in technology because of male-gendered pronouns in code comments. As someone in the earlier discussion suggested, if you want to make a difference, quit complaining about pronouns and go help mentor some girls at your local school, Girl Scouts, Girl's Club, etc. If we had more females writing code, we would probably see more use of "her" or "she" in their comments.
It's only jarring if you harbor the misconception that "they" always requires a plural antecedent. But it does not. The distraction is coming from your own head, not from idiosyncratic usage. Better writers than us settled this long ago.
Yup. This page has a host of endlessly fascinating examples: http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/sgtheirl.html, plus Jane Austen has so many that they had to refactor her into her own page: http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austhlis.html.
Henry Fielding: "Every Body fell a laughing, as how could they help it."
Thackeray: "A person can't help their birth." (spoken by Becky Sharp, the main character, with reference to her own social climbing)
George Eliot: "I shouldn't like to punish anyone, even if they'd done me wrong."
Lewis Carroll: "'Whoever lives there,' thought Alice, 'it'll never do to come upon them this size: why, I should frighten them out of their wits!'"
I don't see how anyone could read such examples of singular "they" and not immediately be relieved of any objection they may have been entertaining. The extraordinary thing is how modern it sounds, even when the rest of the language is archaic:
"Every one Sacrifices a Cow or more, according to their different Degrees of Wealth or Devotion" (Dr. Johnson)
"Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves." (King James Bible)
Sometimes the formulation seems deliberately mischievous:
C. S. Lewis: "She kept her head and kicked her shoes off, as everybody ought to do who falls into deep water in their clothes."
Doris Lessing: "And how easy the way a man or woman would come in here, glance around, find smiles and pleasant looks waiting for them, then wave and sit down by themselves."
E.B. White: "But somebody taught you, didn’t they?”
That last one (from Charlotte's Web) is delicious because White put the White in Strunk and White and knew full well when a writer should break his own rules.
"They" can be either singular or plural.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that. I believe promoting more inclusive language does make a positive difference. Regardless, can't one do both of these things? I don't see how they're incompatible.