Classé dans :

Marianne Grier

Pink, Blue and the Singular “They”

Artyom Terechovitch © 123RF.com

I was a late adopter of the singular “they,” once thinking its usage was down to laziness or ignorance. I’ve recently changed my tune. The singular “they” helps streamline sentences, is considerate of those who don’t identify with a gender, and can help avoid the gender-charged language that can be our default.

This last strength of the singular “they” became apparent to me when I was out and about with my daughter. During my parental leave I often got from A to B on foot or transit, leaving my daughter and me open to public commentary. I quickly realized how strongly people’s understanding of her sex was tied to her wardrobe. People assumed she was a girl if dressed in pink, a boy if dressed in blue (or green, or most non-pink colours, for that matter). One woman suggested I had purposely set out to confuse when I chose my daughter’s clothes that morning, saying, “It’s hard to tell if she’s wearing pink AND blue.”  Another, after finding out my daughter was a girl, said “A girl! She looks so strong, I thought she was a boy.” I grew frustrated by the language associated with the perception of my daughter as male or female, and wished people would just say things like “What a happy baby!”

It’s interesting to consider how different languages work when it comes to gendered nouns. German has three genders: masculine, feminine and neuter. “The child” is neuter. Even “the girl” is neuter until she grows up. But do these linguistic constructions affect whether we see a person or thing as a certain gender? This focus on gender is not surprising. It’s the first thing we want to know when a baby is born — sex, weight, time of birth. We are stamped with a “boy” or “girl” marker on the day we’re born and carry it with us. Through adulthood, gender is still one of the first descriptors we use when talking about someone.

The singular “they” is growing more broadly accepted by the style guides. Chicago concedes that “they” and “their” are “steadily gaining ground.” It suggests we should remain wary of using it in a singular sense, especially in formal language, when the identity of a person is unknown/unimportant. That said, it also says that we should generally respect the people’s preference for the pronoun they identify with (5.256).

Not too long ago, I was looking at shoes as part of my preparation to return to work. My little one was by my side, dressed in a dinosaur t-shirt and bright bottoms. The shoe expert asked me, “How old are they?” Where I once would have been annoyed at his sentence construction, I was grateful for the way he asked and didn’t make any assumptions based on my daughter’s clothing or perceived strength. If nothing else, my conversations with strangers throughout the year made me more aware that it’s a shame to see someone as a gender before you see them as a person.

___

Previous post from Marianne Grier: Sleep Tight, Don’t Let the Bed Bugs Bite.

The Editors’ Weekly is the official blog of Editors Canada. Contact us.


Discover more from L'HEBDOMADAIRE DES RÉVISEURS

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

À propos du rédacteur / de la rédactrice

Marianne Grier

Marianne recently returned to Canada from the UK, where she worked for several years in communications and sustainability. She now lives in Vancouver, where she spends her time with lululemon as a communications specialist and as branch chair of Editors BC.

14 Comments on “Pink, Blue and the Singular “They””

  • Gael Spivak

    says:

    This is great! I’m adding it to my list of articles on the singular they (this will be number 71).

    • Marianne Grier

      says:

      71! That’s quite a list. I’m curious–how far back do they date?

  • Mark

    says:

    I agree with Gael. This was a real pleasure to read, Marianne. Thanks!

    • Marianne Grier

      says:

      Thank you for reading, Mark!

  • Margaret Shaw

    says:

    Marianne, I couldn’t agree with you more, and I have been arguing for the singular « they » for several years. As an aside, when I left the hospital with my baby Ian, he was in a mostly pink bunting bag that I had picked up on sale, and at that time I was so clueless about colour-coding babies that it took me a while to realize why the people we passed on our way through the lobby called him a beautiful baby girl!

    • Marianne Grier

      says:

      I’m sure you had things other than colour on your mind when you picked up that bunting bag, Margaret!
      When I was pregnant, my hairdresser at the time asked me how I would plan a gender reveal party for our baby if we weren’t finding out whether we were having a boy or a girl. I found the question fascinating–this colour-coding really comes into play so early!

  • K

    says:

    I agree that there is a need for a single, ungendered pronoun. I disagree we should press an existing pronoun into that service. We already did it with you. Some will argue that turned out fine, but upon reflection, don’t you often wish there were a way to distinguish between singular and plural second person? Doesn’t the existence of « y’all » suggest it is quite widely missed?
    How often do we get the chance to create a new pronoun? Let’s embrace the opportunity and make a new one, not pass over the opportunity and duplicate ourselves.

    • Frances Peck

      says:

      In embracing the singular « they, » we’re actually returning the pronoun to one of its traditional uses. « They » served as a gender-inclusive pronoun in English, for both singular and plural references, for centuries. Writers as far back as Chaucer used it as a « universal pronoun, » as Patricia O’Conner and Stewart Kellerman point out in their 2009 article on the pronoun’s history: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/magazine/26FOB-onlanguage-t.html.

      Near the end of the piece, the authors note that « the universal *they* isn’t universally accepted — yet. » Now, nine years later, we’re just about there. The singular « they » is permitted by many style guides and recommended by many more. In using it, we’re returning to a traditional practice that solved a lot of problems and prevented a lot of awkwardness throughout the history of our language.

      • Marianne Grier

        says:

        Thanks for this, Frances. I also feel that « they » is a more natural solution than creating something from scratch. There’s something to be said for letting language develop naturally when it can, rather than imposing a new word and hoping it’s adopted appropriately.

  • Great post, Marianne! I have no problem at all with the singular « they, » but if I’d been with one kid and someone had asked « How old are they? » I’d have looked around to see who had multiple kids in tow. In that case, « How old is your little one? » would have been a lot more clear. I don’t think we need to force the use of the singular « they » in cases where there’s a clearer, more elegant solution.

    • Marianne Grier

      says:

      Thanks, Dawn! This is a great point–clarity and elegance certainly shouldn’t be forgotten.

  • Claire Wilkshire

    says:

    Loved your post, Marianne! I too was a late adopter but I’m now firmly onside.

    I remember having a package of « receiving blankets » that were green, pink, or blue, and people interpreted the sex of my baby based on the colour of the blanket, which was often over my shoulder because its purpose was to “receive” the barf. It was quite a shock, first to be told when I was pregnant that I had finally come into my own or whatever as a woman, which I thought by being in a PhD program I had already done, and then to learn that by using the wrong coloured blanket to wipe regurgitations, I was broadcasting secret sex messages.

    I’m glad we’ve moved on, and I think we’re mostly smart enough to figure out whom “they” refers to.

    • Marianne Grier

      says:

      I think the « coming into your own as a woman » piece deserves a discussion of its own.
      I love your take on the name of « receiving blankets ». I never thought of them in this way but it’s really an accurate description!

  • copyedito

    says:

    I totally agree with this blog. There should not be a gender based pronoun.

Comments are closed.

To top