To think I was suddenly back in the 1950s?

[clary]

My job involves reading a lot of powerpoints, documents and reports. In one I looked at this week, those reading it, who were due to take part in an activity, were asked to "speak to the team leader; he will advise you what to do" (my italics).

AIBU to be shocked and dismayed to read this in 2022? I know some people might argue that language does not matter, but to me it very much does; this kind of thing is insidious, suggesting as it does that the person in charge will of course be a man. I mean, they probably will be (sigh) but why state it like that?

I honestly thought we had moved on even from "he or she" (never "she or he") which was common in my younger days, and we would now surely use "they" in this scenario?

It's depressing isn't it. I flagged it up FWIW - so I am hoping at least that the person who wrote it may get some sense that it was not appropriate.

Anyone else seen this sort of thing lately?

Is it a generic situation - not referring to a particular person? Who is a he?

If it's specific to one event and the team leader is male, then it's fine.

If they're generic, or if there is more than one possible team leader (so could be either) then of course it should be 'they'

Ah I see what you mean; no it is generic - it is talking about a task that people are going to be involved in, but the team leader could be anyone - not even necessarily a member of the company as they could hire someone in to take on that role.

The document was very general as it was intended to be sent UK-wide; there was no way anyone could have thought it referred to a specific person.

I was reading a leaflet recently and annoying I can't remember exactly what it was for, but think women's health services, something that a male may possibly very unlikely have but a lot of women will encounter.

Anyway the language was himself/herself, because of the nature of the leaflet it made me think for the first time. Why? Why is it always him then her, in usual language placement its alphabetical order ie addressing a letter, having an accountancy practice Jones & Smith.

In listings like bibliographies it's the same often using the second or third letter of the surname to account for position ie Aardvark and Andrews.

So why is it still himself/herself? I suppose we should be thankful to still be selved at all. But its infuriating me, mainly because its taken me 40 years to notice. Conditioning....

I work with engineers. Everyone refers to them as he before they even know who it is. Ive realized I do it so started training myself to use She as the default. And saying she feels a bit presumptuous. But no one who question a he.

@ElenaCouch

I work with engineers. Everyone refers to them as he before they even know who it is. Ive realized I do it so started training myself to use She as the default. And saying she feels a bit presumptuous. But no one who question a he.

Really? That is truly appalling. How can women ever dream of a career in engineering while all the people who do it are automatically described in male language?

Honestly. Jane Austen used "they" to refer to a person whose sex (or gender) was unknown, and that is 200 years ago. I really don't understand why this is still an issue. So frustrating. Good on you @ElenaCouch for using she instead :)

I saw this video in work last week and thought it was really interesting and depressing how early gender stereotypes are set in children.

I used They to describe my then unborn child and the amount of "oh so it's twins!" "jokes". Jane Austen knew what was up

Had to register for an account with my local council this week. There was no “Ms” in the drop down title options.

I agree that is annoying. YABU for getting my hopes up with the thread title though - I'm very disappointed that this isn't a thread about you having an actual 'timeslip' moment where you saw old cars and shops like this..
www.google.com/amp/s/www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/bizarre-tale-bold-street-timeslips-20350964.amp

A few years ago (7 maybe) I was asked to review some new (updated) HR policies before they were published, as part of my role as staff rep.

The policies generally did say 'they', but had this weird disclaimer at the front which said something like 'any mention of he in this policy should be read as he or she'. Something odd like that.

I flagged it. Said it was unnecessary and that all policies should be reviewed to make sure appropriate language was used.
They said no. I asked what was the point of asking staff rep to review if they were going to ignore my comments anyway. Kicked up a stink. HR manager threatened to quit if he had to rewrite them.
HR director passed a message via my manager: these policies will remain, but any new ones won't contain that wording.

I'm no longer a staff rep. HR manager quit a couple of months later anyway. Couple of years later everything had to be rewritten when general and equality manager (new role) started and complained about wording.

I'm in a very male dominated industry - especially higher up (who isn't). Stuff like this really pisses me off.

I had to write a publication recently. I got annoyed with all the literature quoting data for men first and women second and then comparing the differences in the women's data to that of the men. So I wrote my paper and made sure all the data for women was mentioned before the data for men and compared the differences the other way round. Silly but

thought it was really interesting and depressing how early gender stereotypes are set in children.
I find this also quite worrying, especially as I've always tried to model balance. But DD comes home from school talking about how boys are better than girls and yesterday asked DH to look up the national team for a sport that she's interested in. He looked up the women's team and she told him to look for the men's because they're better than women. Even he was

NHS - the number of patients who always presume the doctor is going to be a 'he' 🤦