But aren't all these technicalities to undermine the inclusion of one or more genders on the basis of some linguistic purism?
This makes me smirk, because a single course in college linguistics will persuade you there is not bigger amalgamated bastard in town than a human language, which is any non-formal language.
For example, you say they ambiguity of they/them, isn't this comparable to the ambiguity between you/you in plural/singular.
Ambiguity is like, an inherent feature of any language and there are hundreds of languages that resolve ambiguities based on context. Plus, the scholars said that singular them is in usage since the Middle Ages or sth.
So to me all this is a tension between A and B, where A is either linguistic purism or typographical convenience, and B is always including women/trans/non-binary folks. At the same time most people won't accept the feminine gender as all-inclusive because of their fears of emasculation.
It is a deeply laughable situation.
Good point