5 ms·

It's been common for a while. I usually do it too. Or if there are two unnamed people, I usually make the higher-status one "she" and the lower-status one "he".

• Dewie 13y ago
  That might help with the incorrect perception that a man is more likely to be relatively high on the social totem pole compared to a woman (well, correct me if I'm wrong about this). If you wanted to be totally egalitarian, I guess you could role a dice each time you need to write about a new nameless person.
  • CurtMonash 13y ago
    No, I couldn't. However, I could roll one die or multiple dice. ;) Anyhow -- in this case, I see no need to be egalitarian, as nobody is harmed by the reverse discrimination. My other quibble with your comment is that the perception, on average, is correct. The point of what Horowitz, I and other writers are doing in this respect is to remind people that the common situation need not be the only one, and -- more important -- should not be regarded as the "natural" one.
    • Dewie 13y ago
      > , as nobody is harmed by the reverse discrimination. That's a funny word. > My other quibble with your comment is that the perception, on average, is correct. T Show me the numbers.
• SPSteinbeck 13y ago
  fag