Banjo Johnny, I do not go round looking for masculinisation of the language, but a lot can be told from context, and very frequently, it is apparent from the rest of the sentence that he does not include women, that the base state of humanity is seen as men.

I once saw a presentation of "best practice" in computer teaching in a very impressive primary school with a really keen teacher. Full of photographs of little people sitting around keyboards busily working. The first one was all boys, captioned "children". No probs, though with equal access to the keyboard an issue on ever so many questionnaires, not the best choice to open with. Next one also boys, also captioned "children". Eventually a picture of girls, captioned "girls", and later one mixed, captioned "boys and girls". About twenty boys, five girls, and the girls never captioned "children". what is the subtext?

Granted, the word man originally was the equivalent of Latin "homo", not "vir", and was inclusive, with "wifman" and "wereman" the subgroups ("were" being cognate with "vir"), but there have been many years of change, and the influence of such thinkers as the Greek philosophers and Augustine, and the churchmen who held that women had no souls. "Man" is not used inclusively, nor is "he". Once you start noticing that you're left out, it becomes very obvious. Have a look at the tenth commandment, for example. You aren't supposed to covet a wife, but no banning of coveting a husband.

Natural usage seems to result in the use of "they" in a singular meaning, anyway, when the gender is unknown, and in spoken English it doesn't seem to sound wrong, as it does in writing.

One I find irritating is the use of "sir" for male teachers and "miss", without the surname, for females. Not equivalent. "Sir" is honorific, "miss" is diminutive, originally used for children. Many schools teach that both are polite, and do not notice that the roots go back to times when men were graduates and women not able to attend university, and compelled to leave teaching when they married (or were seen with a man). It is part of the failure to see women as included, and goes unnoticed, especially by men, some of whom with the best of intentions believe that the language is inclusive.

Penny