An interesting article and enjoyable, but contradictory. If you insist on one person’s right to be called X, then you have to simultaneously insist on the rights of the other person to not call anyone X. That is the libertarian position.

For that reason asserting that one group of people is selfish for not adhering to the prescribed world view of the other is counter intuitive. Both groups would be selfish, or neither would be. Your article suggests that it is a small change to an already existing grammatical system, and I’m inclined to agree with you — but that’s an entirely subjective decision we’ve both made. We cannot assert that change is easy without having the subjective experience of others. The flip side to ‘just change your behaviour’ is simply ‘get over it’.

So whilst I agree with the general thrust of your article, and lots of people do — there’s a wider argument at play here. The right to oppose something that you disagree with, and not to have that invalidated using the implied social contract as a weapon to beat down dissent.

Change will come, it will just come slowly. Slower than many people would like and too fast for some. That’s how society works.