• FooBarrington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      According to grammatical rules, it can be. That’s not saying these rules are good, but that is what they are right now.

    • Turun@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Yes it can be. In the DDR it was common for women in the work force to be called “Ingenieur” or whatever. They do the same thing as the guys, why would they need a new job description.
      Words are what we make them. But they are a woefully inadequate method of communication, because the listener may make them something different from what the speaker intended. So this may very well be a woman speaking, even though you don’t believe it.

      The thing is, if you operate under the assumption that generic male form is not generic you will see miscommunications all over the place. Even if none was intended.

      Btw, what’s your preferred form of gendering?

      Edit: I realize we may be talking about completely different things. The generic male form only applies to the plural. I still stand by my comment when talking about groups of students, but I realize now that that may have been completely orthogonal to the initial comment. You are correct when complaining about translation software incorrectly assuming the gender of a single individual.

      • hikaru755@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Even in the plural, you’re not really correct here. Yes, the plural “Studenten” has been and is still often used to include both genders, but it’s still the male form, and nobody would consider using the female plural equivalent, “Studentinnen”, in the same way to include both genders. The easy way out in this case, of course, is the participle “Studierende”. That one is truly free of gender connotations in the plural form.