I'm sure I'm misunderstanding something here, because I agree that the non-specificity of "they" is exactly what makes it an ideal candidate for the universal pronoun. Ooh, that terminology just came to me! I should've used that phrase for the title! This story from the Oxford English Dictionary article made me remember discussions in the gay student group in college about people either misgendering (a deliberate lie) or using "they" (as an honest escape route) when talking about their significant other. It's been nearly a quarter-millenium, and no other word is poised to take its place, a substitute for many possible meanings at once.
In 1794, a contributor to the New Bedford Medley mansplains to three women that the singular they they used in an earlier essay in the newspaper was grammatically incorrect and does no ‘honor to themselves, or the female sex in general.’ To which they honourably reply that they used singular they on purpose because ‘we wished to conceal the gender,’ and they challenge their critic to invent a new pronoun if their politically-charged use of singular they upsets him so much.
Rule #2 does not prohibit using "they" with additional specificity in the familiar context. My own given name is an "overloaded operator", from the helpful terminology in computer programming, used to suggest either female gender or male gender. It is indistinguishable in the general context but particular in the familiar context. I find it charming and desirable as a name, and I'm glad my parents chose it for me. (Distracting detour: There are a lot of names in that flexible category. The most famous name is probably "Jackie" (Jackie Chan (male), Jackie Onassis (female)), but apparently the most evenly-split is "Kerry".)
no subject
In 1794, a contributor to the New Bedford Medley mansplains to three women that the singular they they used in an earlier essay in the newspaper was grammatically incorrect and does no ‘honor to themselves, or the female sex in general.’ To which they honourably reply that they used singular they on purpose because ‘we wished to conceal the gender,’ and they challenge their critic to invent a new pronoun if their politically-charged use of singular they upsets him so much.
Rule #2 does not prohibit using "they" with additional specificity in the familiar context. My own given name is an "overloaded operator", from the helpful terminology in computer programming, used to suggest either female gender or male gender. It is indistinguishable in the general context but particular in the familiar context. I find it charming and desirable as a name, and I'm glad my parents chose it for me. (Distracting detour: There are a lot of names in that flexible category. The most famous name is probably "Jackie" (Jackie Chan (male), Jackie Onassis (female)), but apparently the most evenly-split is "Kerry".)