Gender Neutral Pronouns

Gender Pronouns are a stupid concept.
People who claim to be gender neutral suffer from a mental illness. Offended? Facts don't care about your feelings pvssy..

#NHKRETURNS

Although my opponent failed to properly write his very first sentences, his claim is as follows: "Gender neutral pronouns are a stupid concept."

This is perhaps the easiest claim to refute I've ever seen. My stance is naturally the opposite: "Gender neutral pronouns are inherently valuable to our language," and I will demonstrate why clearly so that there is no room left for doubt.

First, let's take a look at a few of English's gender neutral pronouns (i.e., pronouns that do not inherently state the gender or biological sex of the nouns to which they refer):

1. I
2. me
3. you
4. they
5. we
6. us
7. who
8. whom
9. whoever
10. whomever
11. it
12. them
13. myself
14. this
15. these
16. those
17. our
18. their
19. its
20. your

...and the list goes on and on. Surely we can find value in the usefulness of all these pronouns.

If pronouns such as "I" and "me" are inherently stupid, what is the better alternative? Should we have two separate singular first-person pronouns, one for males and one for females? But why? When "I" or "me" is spoken, the person to which they refer is immediately obvious. There is only ever one possible culprit. To double the number of pronouns belonging in this category would be pointless.

Even Spanish, which has two separate words for "they" (one for a group of all females, "ellas," and one for a group of people which contains at least one male, "ellos"), has only one singular first-person pronoun: "yo."

Gender neutral pronouns are also helpful when their subjects literally have no gender. For example, one could say "I don't like baseball. I find it boring." The sport of baseball has no gender or biological sex, so we use "it."

In fact, all of these pronouns are so useful, let the record show that my opponent couldn't even state his argument without using TWO gender neutral pronouns ("who" and "your")! His claim was so silly, he swiftly and unwittingly refuted it himself.

Finally, I will briefly address my opponent's statement that people who identify as having no gender are mentally ill. This is entirely irrelevant to the debate at hand. Even if that were true, it would not debunk the usefulness of gender neutral pronouns, which I have clearly demonstrated (and so has my opponent by using them himself).