One small step for a human, one giant leap for humankind. Abigail Mitchell at the Indiana Daily Student of Indiana University Bloomington writes in support of “they†and “their†as the third-person generic pronouns.
I didn't even know people were still considering it!
"They" for third person inspecific gender already part of English now. It's all over but the [conservative linguists] shouting. The fat lady has sung. (Or, consider the singer; they have sung.) Quoting Grant on the subjunctive, "Stick a fork in it, it's done!"
(Though I like the subjunctive mood, as if it were still viable!)
And thank goodness we don't have to resort to "amig@", the new Spanish fad in representing inspecific gender ...
(Bizarre circles; I googled her paper and blindly followed the link -- right back to AWWW! I thought I'd mistakenly hit the Back button. Finally found it here.)
Sorry about the missing link. There was a problem with the way I pasted it in, so the forum completely ate it. I've fixed it now and have reported it as a bug to the maker of the forum software.
I agree that the use of "they" as generic singular is already fully part of the language I experience. Still, there are some (pretty few) circumstances -- mostly based on consideration of the perception of others -- in which I would avoid the use and instead use the traditional forms. And while I was never part of the linguistic movement for gender neutrality, "they" always seemed and still seems the most natural and fluid alternative to address the gender issues: it was already well established as a generic impersonal personal pronoun as in "they say ... ." As you point out, it is a done deal, and we could have done much worse!