they don't mind

Every single person who complains that “they” is weird has, without the slightest wisp of a shadow of a doubt, said something along the lines of “yeah their coat is just over there” or “I think they were saying that…”. They can already do it, and it’s not hard, they just really wanna hate.

I'm fine with 'they', but I think you're misrepresenting the very real problem that is inserting a 3rd-person pronoun as a personal pronoun due to the existing patterns ingrained and interpreted through speech.
It doesn't hurt me to try and make the conscious change, I do actively try for the people in my life, but it DOES flow weird in my brain and takes more mental effort to keep straight. At least, it still does, it might get easier with more time, I don't know.
- We’ve been doing it for hundreds of years. If you really want to fix something then come up with a plural for “you”; that would be far more helpful.
  You may not notice those times you say “they” like in the examples I already gave, but you do say it, and the only thing tripping you up is that you’re thinking about it. It’s like breathing, it’s weird when you’re paying attention but it’s not wrong and you’ve always done it.
- They has always been a 3rd person personal pronoun just like he/she/it have as far as I know. The thing that people find upsetting is that people want to go back to using it as a singular after some grammarians decided everyone should use he or her for a while.
- "Ah yes, let us disregard basic grammar rules in order to make a stupid argument to 'prove' my point, that's clearly what'll convince people that my way is the right one"
  your stupid ass
- “They are running late”. We’ve been using the singular “they” for hundreds of years, it isn’t that difficult. German uses third person plural for polite second person singular, it’s not that weird to have third person plural be third person singular, too, especially when English makes no distinction between between “you” and “you”.
  Anyway, it’s simple shit.
- You are almost there, well done for trying
- You is not very smart, is you?
- You are singularly really dumb.
- They're running late?

The singular "they" isn't even the first time English has specifically appropriated a plural pronoun for the singular for the sake of social respect!!!

We don't even use the second person singular "thou" anymore, we just use "you" for both of them!

At one point in American history the singular they was normal and accepted but the singular you was deeply controversial
- I would love to see what the discourse would've looked like if they had the internet back then.
As a side note, if I'm talking to you, I won't be using "they", that's only for talking about you
TIL 'thou' is second person singular

Are they very tall?

The tits?
- It's an inherited property, so yeah them too

Only weirdos talk to tits, I, as a gentleman, always address each individually (by their preferred pronouns ofc).

/s

When he was 2, one of my nephews decided to name my tits after the main characters of his favorite TV show. I thought it was so funny that I still introduce them to partners as Bingo and Rolly.
- Lol.
  Better than:
  \ Tom & Jerry
  \ Mario & green Mario
  \ Finn & Jake
  \ Patrick & SpongeBob
  \ Fox & Dana
  \ Beavis & Butthead
  Ohh, Bingo & Rolly are sweater puppies, now I get it!
Lefty and righty?
- I still sometimes get those two wrong ...

"They did a great job on the last project. They are a valuable member of the team"

I have (begrudgingly) gotten used to "singular they". I accept that I am not an authority on how language is used, and this is how the language has evolved. I'd have preferred a separate singular non-gendered pronoun, but I wasn't consulted because, again, not an authority on the subject. It is fine, I will adapt (and have already done so to some degree).

HOWEVER, I still have beef with what happened to "literally" and will bring it up any time semantic shift is the subject of conversation.

Asking "how are they doing" when referring to a singular third person has literally always been normal english. The singular they has basically always been fine and proper english.
Shakespeare had no problem with singular they, by the way.
I also found it natural to use before I had a concept of those existing outside the gender binary. "Who left their umbrella?"
Mentioning semantic shift here doesn't seem to do anything but make me imagine you are grandpa Simpson yelling at passing clouds.
- i'm totally grandpa simpson about this. "Literally" is literally a lost cause.
Nothing happened to “literally”, its meaning is the same as always and it never means “figuratively”.
When people say “literally” to exaggerate, the word is part of the exaggeration, not describing the exaggeration.
They’re not literally “dead”, they’re “literally dead”. “Literally dead” is the state they exaggerate being in.
- Can you explain the difference between the two? To me, either case still creates ambiguity and unnecessary confusion in the language.
Gotten used to the singular they? Were you born in 900 or something? Seriously, the first written example we have of the singular they dates back to the 14th century.
- Literally also dates back to the 1600s
Literally literally means figuratively.
- i know, and it upsets me.

as the kids say, this sent me 💀

My hot take: there’s no such thing as “singular they” because you don’t need a special case for using plural pronouns with a single person; the basic usage already allows that. The plural pronouns refer to a group of people of any size. That includes a group of size 1.

A group of only one person is still a group of people.

That’s why it has always been correct to refer to a single person using the plural pronouns; you’re not directly referring to the person but rather to the group consisting of just that one person.

The reason this confuses people isn’t because the usage is incorrect but rather because what they were taught is incorrect.

People are taught that plural pronouns only refer to more than one person and that has always been wrong.

To see why that’s wrong, consider what happens when the size of the group is neither exactly one or more than one. For example if the group is actually empty or if you don’t know how many people are in it.

In both those cases you need to use the plural pronoun.

If the plural pronouns are a valid choice for both a group of size zero and a group of size two, then it would be ridiculous to argue that they are not a valid choice for a group of size one.

"My pronouns are set P of unkown size."
Hot take? That's simply not true.
From the Chicago Manual of Style:
5.51: Generic singular “they” Traditionally, a singular antecedent requires a singular pronoun. But even beforetheir, and themselves (or possibly themself) as generic singular forms—especially in speech and informal prose.
So, "They" is commonly used to refer to a singular person of unknown gender or sex. You'll see it in the news occasionally.
"An intruder wearing a chicken mascot costume was caught on video breaking into a bank. They stuffed their costume full of $100 bills before fleeing the scene."
Sure, writers will more likely not use pronouns at all, maybe saying "the assailant," but when a pronoun is used, "they" and "their" would be perfectly fine.
- I think you misunderstood what I’m saying.
  I’m not saying you can’t use “they” when referring to a single person; I’m saying that when you do that you haven’t deviated from the simple usage in any way shape or form.
  I’m saying there’s no “singular they” because using “they” in that context is just the same as any other usage of “they”. It isn’t any sort of exception to the base rules and so doesn’t require any special treatment.

I get the sentiment but tits are plural, a better analogy is needed