'One' is the loveliest pronoun

It's no secret that from the women's lib movement of the 1970s to today's age of gender fluidity, personal pronouns have taken a beating. The problem is our language doesn't include a good gender inclusive singular personal pronoun. I distinctly remember being told by my eighth grade English teacher that the masculine (he, him, his) should be used when gender is not being specified. This didn't sit well with me in the late '70s, and it still doesn't.

When I was in graduate school in the early '90s, I noticed a bit of a backlash against the generic masculine, in which many scholarly authors had taken to using the feminine generically instead of the masculine. While that pointed out the problem, it didn't really offer a viable solution, and since then has faded from use.

My solution for many years was to use both the masculine and feminine together (him or her, his or hers, he or she), and while this could be viable in many situations, it could be awkward as well, especially when the pronouns need to be repeated in the same sentence. 

Interestingly, we have solved this problem in conversational language by using plural pronouns (they, them, their) in the singular, and it is gaining acceptance in written language as well. Most scholars and language experts still maintain that parallel construction should be maintained whenever possible (e.g., Children should do their homework before watching television, instead of A child should do their homework before watching television). In other words, when you use plural pronouns, it is still better to make the entire sentence plural; however, that view has become noticeably relaxed in recent years as our society attempts to accommodate gender fluidity, especially as people who consider themselves to be gender nonbinary embrace plural pronouns as an alternative to their gender-tagged counterparts.

But there is another alternative that, in my opinion, is too often overlooked. The use of 'one' as a singular, gender inclusive pronoun may sound a little formal and old fashioned to those who aren't accustomed to hearing or reading it, but it also conveys a certain simple elegance, as in 'Whether one chooses the steak or the lobster, the meal will be delicious'. 

The simplicity and inherent inclusiveness of 'one' make it an excellent tool for making written language both correct and comprehensible at a time when so much else, linguistically speaking, remains in flux.

To be sure, it can lend itself to awkwardness, especially with overuse or repetition in a sentence, but it's a good substitute for some of the even more awkward and convoluted constructions. but used judiciously, it can add variety and a more comfortable flow to our syntax. In short 'one' is ripe for a comeback. 

Setting Computers Free

Lately, I have been very focused on free and open source software, but the obsession is not new. It goes back almost to the beginning of my use of computers. Long before I even had a dial-up modem for my Mac Classic, I was enjoying freeware and shareware. The idea that someone would create a piece of software, and then distribute it for free, or maybe ask for a few dollars to unlock additional features, was fairly interesting. Yes, a lot of that software was garbage, but every now and then, a title would come my way that had a fair amount of polish and usability. 

By the late '90s, I was reading more and more about desktop Linux operating systems, and had begun experimenting with free and open source (FOSS) titles on Mac and Windows computers. The first open source title I installed with Mozilla Communicator, an open source version of Netscape Communicator, and forerunner of the Firefox Web browser and Thunderbird email client. I felt absolutely devious installing this software on my work computer, and actually questioned whether I was doing something wrong. 

Soon enough, I was branching out and trying more FOSS titles, most notably OpenOffice. The idea that a complete office suite, rivaling MS Office, which at the time cost hundreds of dollars, would be distributed for free was simply mind blowing. Granted, OpenOffice back then was not exactly ready for prime time, but it has matured over the years, to the point that its de facto successor, LibreOffice, is a worthy competitor in that market segment. 

It would not be until early 2009 when I encountered desktop Linux for the first time. I was immediately impressed that an entire operating system could be had for free, and that it came bundled with just about all the free software one might need for most day-to-day computing tasks. Even better, it was less hungry for system resources, and thus ran better and faster than the commercial operating system it was replacing, especially on older hardware. I quickly resolved to find a cheap, used laptop and begin some extended experimentation with Linux. 

I made that laptop pay for itself with interest by using it to write several articles on the Linux experience for the now-defunct PC Solutions magazine. All in all, it was a fun way to score a laptop.

Over the years, my understanding of the concept of 'free' has changed. I initially thought of it as software I didn't have to shell out cash for, which is admittedly appealing, but also misses the larger point. 'Free' in this case is more about freedom—the freedom to configure and modify software as one chooses. I'm still an end user with no real programming skills, but it's nice to know that if I had the technical skills, I would have license to truly make the software my own. It's also freedom, as in freedom from constant surveillance and data collection by Big Tech. Yeah, it's hard to get away from it entirely, but these days, my data is more or less my own, far less commoditized in the Linux world.

While I have never completely divorced myself from the world of commercial software and operating systems, I am increasingly finding that I can largely do without them. 

Case in point: A couple of months ago, I bought a Dell Latitude 7490 laptop, loaded with the latest Linux Mint, mainly as an excuse to dip my toes back into the Linux world after a few years away, where I had strayed to a Chromebook as a secondary computer. After trying in vain for two years to make that browser-in-a-box computer work like a regular PC, I discovered in coming home to Linux that, not surprisingly, it was easier to make a Linux computer behave like a Linux computer than it was to make a Chromebook do that. 

I have really come to enjoy the Linux experience on this relatively high-spec business laptop, and I find that it can cover my daily computing needs the way I want them covered, to the point that I seldom feel the need to go back to my aged MacBook pro, and I've all but completely abandoned Windows. 

There's just something about going non-commercial for my computing needs that strongly appeals to me in a very satisfying way. The bottom line is desktop Linux has really grown up in the past decade, to where it is as robust, user friendly and generally useful as any commercial operating system. I count myself as a Linux user in a way that I never have before. 

UPDATE (one year later)--What a difference a year makes. Linux Mint has now become my default operating system on several laptops at home, and although I still use Windows at work, because that's what I'm expected to use, not because it's what I want to use, my Windows laptop at home has been completely retired. Also, I almost never use my 12-year-old MacBookPro, except to retrieve files from it. The fact that I am using Linux Mint more or less full time doesn't really register with me anymore. I'm just getting things done efficiently and without surrendering as much of my data to Big Tech.