Mujus,

As Legatus has already pointed out, the use of "he" has nothing whatever to do with "female roles" being "limited in education," etc. For example, in the 1940s, it would have been common to see such things as, "A nurse should be educated in a variety of skills so as best to take care of his patients," even though nursing was dominated by women in the 1940s. (I have seen such examples).

I already suggested by my double verb tenses that the status is less clear now than it was 50 years ago. Nonetheless, I think there is no ambiguity still in merely using "he." You may call me stubbornly traditional, but I simply find both of the alternatives you suggest aesthetically appalling. Call me what you will I suppose.

Usually when I want to avoid the gender issue, then I will just write it in such a way so as to say "one would want to avoid gender problems" or "one might say..."

Yeah, I do that quite a lot, Legatus. Problems only arise when you need to use the pronoun about five times in one sentence, at which point it sounds awful.

Well, that is when I'll change to a regular noun like "a typical person" or " the reader"

Semck, why would I call you anything?? Based on your posts, I respect you a great deal. And please note that I used the impersonal third person "his" in my last post when I wrote "other tools that can aid the author to get his exact meaning across to readers." We just disagree is all. However, you stepped on my toes a bit because I'm the coauthor of a basic writing textbook in which this exact topic is addressed. Perhaps of interest is that in my students' writing, the main problem isn't with he/she/they--It's the use of you/your/yours as impersonal third-person pronouns or even as substitutes for I/me/my/mine.

"From my position outside of the front of the building, you could see Tijuana and a giant Mexican flag right across the river bottom." To which I reply, "No I couldn't." or "'You' means 'you.'"

Legatus, yes, avoiding the pronoun altogether is a strategy that often works well.

I hear that some Girl Scout troops now accept males. Would it sound good to write "Each Girl Scout should bring his own sleeping bag and utensils?" lol

That's a good one Mujus!

@Mujus - You just pointed out another thing wrong with society today. When girl scouts were founded, they were for YOUNG FEMALES, now how the shit are males getting into girl scouts? Seriously, boy scouts are for YOUNG MALES. I remember on my U12 soccer team there was a freakin girl on the opposing team and it was male-only soccer. I was like 'what is wrong with her?'.

Equality sucks, don't it. Separate but equal was found to not be equal so now girls can join boys clubs and vice-versa. And gentlemen's clubs are no more in the US.

@Mujus: "impersonal third-person pronouns"
It's called 'the Scottish you' as it's frequently used by Scots.
If there may be confusion, you (!) can add, after a statement like "You just don't know." "The Scottish you."

you can also be replaced by one. For instance "You need not do such and such" can be changed to "One need not do such and such".

Probably because "Well, one just doesn't know, does one?" sounds terribly pompous, like 'the royal we', and unbefitting to the Scots character. We leave that to the Englanders.

I think we should all just go back to using 'thou' 'thy' and 'thee' for everything.

Thou art indeed wise. Thy words are true. I thank thee for sharing them.

Mujus,

Sorry, I took the exclamation mark "is either stubbornly traditional (!)" to be an application of the phrase to this particular situation. Sorry if I was over-sensitive.

I guess, as you say, we disagree. Sorry for stepping on your toes, but I probably would disagree with the writing book you mention -- on this point. I didn't know you had written one though. I have no doubt at all it is excellent in just about every respect.

However, outstanding job using "his"! ; ) It is admittedly kind of ironic that I didn't even notice. Mea culpa and touche both.

@ Mujus, I've always felt that yes, while the use of "he" as a gender-neutral singular pronoun does speak on some level of underlying sexual inequity within our culture, it's so inanely academic as to be irrelevant to most members of the equal rights movement, who (I would hope) recognize that there are more pressing issues to tackle before we start discarding practical tools of language (particularly in the absence of suitable alternatives). Your suggestion of changing sentences like, "Every child should bring their notebook" to, "All the children should bring their notebooks" strikes me as a decent method to avoid taking a readily identifiable stance on the issue altogether, but it's not a fix applicable to all situations. I concede that, "Every child should bring his notebook" DOES sound a bit awkward, but I'd argue that it's only generally perceived in that way due to the rarity with which sentences are formed in that manner, not by any inherent "flaw" in their construction.

Aesthetic preferences aside, I think it boils down to the avoidance of ambiguity. Using "he" as the rules of grammar prescribe is the best way to convey thoughts involving gender-neutral singular third person pronouns that our language has to offer. Everything else is a compromise, and a compromise of understanding.

(Apologies in advance for probably misrepresenting your position. It's pretty cool how you helped write a grammar book, by the way)

"I have no doubt at all it is excellent in just about every respect."

Semck, thank you for that rather faint praise. ;-)

Narrator, I tend to agree with your point about compromises. Pesky gender issues! lol
Semck, maybe are both stubbornly traditional AND over-sensitive (your words in both cases), but that reality doesn't make me like you any less. ;-)

Mujus,

I don't think it's faint praise. I couldn't say "every" respect, obviously, having just said I disagreed with it on one point. ; )

(To your second post) Well, I don't consider myself stubbornly traditional -- but as I said, call me what you will. (This is exactly why I said that, and now you're calling me it, so I'm now confused why you were so upset that I to told you to call me what you would. You apparently DID intend to call me stubbornly traditional).

There are plenty of things that I think are not great about traditional ways, and traditional grammar. I make up my mind case by case. Here, I feel strongly that they happened to get it right, and the alternatives are inferior. That's all.

I perfectly well believe that you really think the alternatives are superior. I'm not going to call you an "insistent progressive." I'm happy to accept that people's opinions are often what they are, and don't necessarily rely on a particular attitude toward time or change.

Hey, I said "maybe" you are. Just playin' witcha, Man! :-)

Besides which, if you are stubborn, that's just the flip side of loyal. Like two sides of the same coin. :-)

Mujus,

Let us compromise on "resolute." ;-)

The girlscouts accepted someone who is transgendered. Of course the reactionary troglodytes around here who endlessly reify silly gender dichotomies would have a problem with that. Heaven forbid the transgendered be included in anything.

The girlscouts is the only youth organization that is worth a damn. They are always leading the charge for progress. They are the only organization I give money to.

lol. Resolute, loyal, stubborn--all character traits that can be extremely useful as we go through life. :-)