Register to read the introduction…
Today, it is no longer uncommon for writers to use "chairperson" "or "chair" for "chairman," "police officer" for "policeman," "firefighter" for "fireman," and "postal worker" for "postman." Old habits die hard, though, so it will perhaps take several more years for English-language users to fully accept and comfortably use these gender-neutral words.
…show more content…
When the gender is not specified, a "doctor," "engineer," "architect," "accountant," "dentist," "nutritionist," "biologist," or "scientist" is presumed to be male, and the gender bias invariably shows up in male-specific sentence constructions such as this one: "A good doctor is always true to his noble calling." We can see that it doesn't help that English happens not to have a gender-neutral, singular pronoun for people in general. Still, such sentences can usually be made gender-neutral by simply making the noun plurala process that also conveniently does away with the pesky male pronoun "his": "Good doctors are always true to their noble
When the gender is not specified, a "doctor," "engineer," "architect," "accountant," "dentist," "nutritionist," "biologist," or "scientist" is presumed to be male, and the gender bias invariably shows up in male-specific sentence constructions such as this one: "A good doctor is always true to his noble calling." We can see that it doesn't help that English happens not to have a gender-neutral, singular pronoun for people in general. Still, such sentences can usually be made gender-neutral by simply making the noun plurala process that also conveniently does away with the pesky male pronoun "his": "Good doctors are always true to their noble