Question: I have met with [this edit](https://politics.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/29014) twice during review.

It boils down to changing a neutral pronoun to singular they. First time I thought this edit made next to no improvement (I know some other reviewer chose causes harm reason) because:

* it is a very little change (no significant improvement)
* it is quite clear that the author of the answer wanted to be like this

However, since the answer deals with UK Parliament rules which are in place for many years, from a historical perspective it makes more sense to use the singular they instead of the much newer gender neutral.

Answer: 
The answer was flagged: 

> 
> This answer is being deliberately provocative by using a neo-pronoun ("xyrself") where none is called for.
> 
> 
> 

I don't know about deliberately provocative, but I agree that the use of the neo-pronoun in the answer is unnecessary and would probably prove to be a distraction. The edit may look minor, but I think it's a helpful one and it's good it was ultimately approved. 

The (main) Meta discussion linked in the edit suggestion comment is worth a read:

[Can a user use neopronouns for any third party?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/340881/162704)
In this case I believe the edit should be rolled back and xyrself restored to the answer. 

The [main meta question](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/340881/can-a-user-use-neopronouns-for-any-third-party) top answer calls the use of a neopronoun for someone who has not requested it akin to misgendering. While I don't agree with that position, it is not relevant here because the answer does not refer to a specific individual.

The higher rated answer would agree with this edit because;

> 
> Yes, you were right. Parsing the word 'perself' may be hard for users who aren't used to neopronouns, and 'themselves' is clearer. 
> 
> 
> 

This is circular logic. No one can become used to neopronouns if they are not used. And the change from a singular to plural in the quote suggests things are hardly clearer.

Indeed this same flaw is the basis of my disagreement with comparing it to misgendering. Xyrself, a third person gender neutral pronoun does not asign a gender, and it does it reject the assigning of a gender to an individual.

Perhaps in this instance themself is serviceable and specific, but singular they while gramatically correct can be easily confused with a plural meaning, and use of xyrself as an extension of xyr is a logical requirement to increase familiarity, understanding and acceptance of neopronouns. If that is something the poster wishes to do then more power to xem.