>>>>I'm just curious to know why putting a gender on somethings bother some people.
>>
>>>When it comes to stuff like 'Chairman' or 'postman', as far as I'm concerned that's the name of the job, and it's a lot of yelling over nothing. But sometimes it might be nice to have a gender neutral word. For example:
>>
>>>"When someone wants to cross the road, he should look both ways." We don't really mean 'he'. Of course, we don't really mean 'she' either. In that case, a gender neutral word might be nice so we didn't have to convolute it by saying 'he/she' or 'the person'. We have 'one', but that always sounds a little pompous somehow.
>>
>>So does it bother you if an anthropologist say "... MAN KIND arrived 15000 years ago.."? Should we do away with the phrase like "man kind" and use "Human kind" from now on?
>
>No. no. no! Human has the word "man", so we cannot use such a term! How about people kind (plural) or person kind (singular)? :)

Maybe OK for the first one. But "person" has "son" in it, so it is definitely a non-starter. :)