Gender Neutrality

[Reynard]

Oxford also says 'he' has been used for both sexes or when unspecified. If the definition of proper usage is measured in centuries then 'he' has as much standing as 'they'! Therefore there is no need to drop 'he' to represent either sex. Gender neutrality is, in fact, centuries old. NEXT DEBATE!

And this is why I like Esperanto.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

He said, she said.

 

[dmccoy1693]

If the definition of proper usage is measured in centuries then 'he' has as much standing as 'they'!

Using singlular they was good enough for Shakespeare. link

 

[Reynard]

And that's why every english speaking country speaks in Shakespearean. Pray nay to be of pickering and chosen.

 

[Condottiere]

PDFs should have a switch gender referenced texts function, adjusted to whatever identity feels most comfortable to the reader.

 

[arcador]

The problem with the gender neutral modification is that it often introduces a passive voice. It is something most writers tend to avoid as it removes the actor from the action. It may look innocent enough, but it does make the text a step dull. Even the famous "Elements of Style" holds a criticism on this.

An example:

A ship is also supplied with a pressure sleeve for each a passenger.

"Passive voice is not a grammatical error, but a style choice. In general, active voice is the preferred style of most readers. With the active voice, the subject performs the action. This style can provide more clarity, brevity, responsibility, or certainty than passive voice. If the active voice makes sense, use it."

The same sentence revised:

The crew of the ship also supplies it with a pressure sleeve for each passenger.

In some exception, the passive voice can be useful, when the subject is far more important than the actor. But it will still sound like an engineering manual than a story.