While I understand that humans tend to like labeling and categorizing things — GTTRPNK

Absolutely. We the humans always had to labeled and categorized things just to make an order in our living context. Not only in gender but in time, seizure, ethnics, nations, etc...
Nevertheless, as you put the example of your friend that sometimes we have other cases that are not in the "order" I guess the pronoun usage will be more showed in the future because we are taking the reality furthermore than basic labels like "he/she" patrons....

I do not know if this is needed as you ask. It depends of your friend and other non-binary people way if see it. I guess they choose this patron or "label" because it is the one which fits the most with them. If it is helpful to them who are the ones what are living it, it is helpful then.

So what form do you think pronoun usage will take in the future?
Are they helpful?
Are they arbitrary?
Is there need for such a label? — GTTRPNK

I prefer the standard gender pronouns applied in the usual way.
I don't think changing pronouns to fit the fantasies and peculiarities of a very small minority makes any practical sense at all.
Gender, and the appropriate pronouns, are not arbitrary.
There is no need for new patterns of pronoun usage.

There is no need for new patterns of pronoun usage. — Bitter Crank

My lords, ladies and gentlemen {and rainbow warriors},

When I were a lad, persons of the feminine persuasion would be addressed and were obliged to style themselves as Miss or Mrs - according to their marital status. After a long campaign by rabid feminists claiming that this was unfair, a maritally neutral honorific 'Ms' was officially sanctioned. I don't see why pronouns should be exempt from change. Some people are unhappy being referenced by gender. They can be accommodated at little cost. Why not be generous?

I think that most people would prefer to be referred to as 'he' or 'she', but a few like the singer, Sam Smith, like 'they'. Probably those who use 'they' are trying to make a statement and if everyone was referred to in that way it would even take away the possibility of such a statement. Generally, I think it is highly unlikely that enough people would choose to be called referred to as 'they'. One art is to try to write or speak without using pronouns at all; it is extremely difficult and has to involve repetition of the person's name. In writing a sentence referring to a general human being rather than a specific one, I think it works to use the term they, rather than clumsy use of he and she.

Aside from pronouns, the whole question of titles is another related one, and I really can't see how they serve any purpose at all. It used to be the case that titles not only showed which gender a person is but whether a person is married or not. However, a lot of women use Ms instead. I believe that this was controversial at first. The writer, Zoe Fairburns, wrote a short story about how she was one of the first to take this on board and described how she was on a bus and how the bus driver was querying what this meant, as if there was something strange about her sex. One recent addition which I have come across is some people have started using the term Mx to be gender non specific. Pronouns are necessary because we have to refer to people, but I just can't see what purpose titles have at all and I think they are outdated and unnecessary.

For what it's worth, I think that pronouns are necessary because they symbolize social sex (as in, gender) as opposed to biological sex. One's biological sex and social sex (gender) don't actually have to match. And while there are only two biological sexes, there can be much more than two social sexes.

See recent thread here. And call me God.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/10727/pronouns

Your world extends as far as your capacity to be open, and what you grasp of understanding someone else’s. Who someone is, the very core of someone's identity may not be even able to be linguistically marked down. If we have shown that identity is not a concrete thing but a social and discursive construction, we can then realize that the creation of these “new identities” are the representation in a new way of someone’s individual experience. Identities are not concrete, but rather discursive, social, & linguistic symbols which evolve and change over time; their implications have always been determined by us. Because we all consciously perpetuate gender, we CAN choose to do it differently.