> I think I only get ten [downvotes] a day, so I save them for the really annoying comments.

10 downvotes a day? Please reconsider your behavior. You are almost certainly unnecessarily alienating commenters, and in this case, misguidedly so.

> I'm not sure why you think he/his pronouns are nongendered.

When I said "it was non-gendered," I was referring to the blog post, which meant your original comment, "The author uses female pronouns," is factually incorrect.

> The nongendered pronouns in English are they/them.

I'm aware, and intimated as much: "I'll forego [discussing] my use of a singular default male pronoun". Yes, they/them is non-gendered, but it is also plural, making it grammatically historically incorrect. However, despite the informality of my comment, given the extreme propensity of the "generic he" to be controversialized, especially in technology and the internet, and the movement away from it during my lifetime, I'll placate to avoid the negative insinuations.

Educating yourself on the context of the matter would go a long way to ameliorate your sanctimonious attitude, and hopefully disincline you to feel the need to controversialize, divert and detract from conversations in the future.

he/his and they/them both have well-established non-gender-specific meanings in the more recent (social) meaning of "gender" (prior to that fairly recent linguistic evolution, words had gender and people had sex -- while its useful to have a term for the distinct feature of people referred to by "gender" as distinct from "sex", its a very different thing than grammatical "gender", and grammatical gender doesn't have a 1:1 mapping to linguistic constructs whose semantics refer to social gender), though he/his also has a gender-specific meaning (and there is considerable potential for ambiguity between the gender-neutral and gender-specific senses of he/his.)