I am myself to me, not to others....

[french frank]

Isn't the second form strictly incorrect?

I don't think either is 'incorrect' and in context I might use either. Thinking of 'cabinet responsibility', and replacing 'government' with 'cabinet':

1) emphasises that the single entity [the cabinet] is speaking with two or more voices.

2) emphasises that the many members [of the cabinet] who could potentially have [quot homines] many opinions are all speaking with one.

There is no absolute requirement for grammar to be 'strict'. [Do not begin sentences with a conjunction, do not split infinitives ... ]

[ahinton]

I don't think either is 'incorrect' and in context I might use either. Thinking of 'cabinet responsibility', and replacing 'government' with 'cabinet':

1) emphasises that the single entity [the cabinet] is speaking with two or more voices.

Par for the course, that, I'd submit...

2) emphasises that the many members [of the cabinet] who could potentially have [quot homines] many opinions are all speaking with one.

Not if Mr Farage is in the House, methinks!

Ouch! Sorry, FF. Wrist (though not, I hope, writs) duly slapped...

[jean]

Themself is found as a plural form very early; it shouldn't be too hard to get used to it again as more appropriate when them is being used as a (non-gender-specific) singular.

To that I should have added that there's a precedent for the singular themself when the 'royal' we is used:

MACBETH: Ourself will mingle with society
And play the humble host.
Our hostess keeps her state, but in best time
We will require her welcome. (Act III, Sc. 4)

It's strange, isn't it, that myself, yourself, ourselves are standard forms, but hisself, theirselves are terrible solecisms?

[french frank]

To that I should have added that there's a precedent for the singular themself when the 'royal' we is used:

MACBETH: Ourself will mingle with society
And play the humble host.
Our hostess keeps her state, but in best time
We will require her welcome. (Act III, Sc. 4)

That seems quite logical and is clearer than 'we' anyway (which could mean 'my husband and I/we). The newer aspect is the feeling that that you can no longer say 'himself' and plead that 'it includes the feminine'; or 'him or herself' which used to be quite common but is now too cumbersome for people with busy lives ...

It's strange, isn't it, that myself, yourself, ourselves are standard forms, but hisself, theirselves are terrible solecisms?

Wait a while ...

[James Wonnacott]

I was doing some cabling in the English staffroom the other day when I heard "Julie, you know Shakespeare better than me"
In general the I and me question can be answered simply by completing the sentence: "Julie, you know Shakespeare better than me do"

I had a 'phone call from a salesman the other day: "Would it be possible to meet with yourself?"
My reply: "Of course, I do it all the time. Goodbye"

[jean]

I was doing some cabling in the English staffroom the other day when I heard "Julie, you know Shakespeare better than me"
In general the I and me question can be answered simply by completing the sentence: "Julie, you know Shakespeare better than me do"

A simple answer, but possibly not the only correct one.

[Don Petter]

A simple answer, but possibly not the only correct one.

Yes. Julie could be 400 years old?

[Sir Velo]

Yes. Julie could be 400 years old?

Of course, it could also mean that Julie knows Shakespeare better than she knows her interlocutor.