I understand the context and definition. It's still sexist. It's unnecessary and would be extremely easy to replace with a non-sexist term that is equivalent in

I understand the context and definition. It's still sexist. It's unnecessary and would be extremely easy to replace with a non-sexist term that is equivalent in both meaning and elegance. The extreme resistance even to acknowledge that there's something wrong with using "man" to mean "humans" is very telling.