But also, I read once that there was a time when man referred to both men and women, and the genders were not differentiated as we know them today. If you doubt this, at least consider how less than 100 years ago, pink was for boys and blue was for girls, and how less than 200 years ago the idea that one color fit one better than the other was unheard of.

Just food for thought,
-Fellow coder…or coderess!  I like the sound of that!

Maybe kids should be taught to use he/man/etc when either referring to males or persons of unspecified gender. And use feminine versions of the words (she/woman/etc) when specifically indicating a female person.

If the change becomes official then there will be no ground for anyone to get offended. “No offense woman. I was using it in a genderless fashion”.

but yes, it is all just about professionalism — UncleBob had a pretty good post about that recently[1]. however, i think because of the historically cultural significance of crafspersons, “software professional” doesn’t evoke quite the same emotional imperatives and expectations as “software craftsperson”.

Craftsmanship is not, and should not be gender specific. It is a term, just as the term “man” is used to represent Homo Sapiens regardless of gender.

Leave P.C. concerns for the Froot Loops of the world to put in their debates about whether teachers should use the terms “Mom & Dad” in schools, and whether Santa Clause should say “Ho Ho Ho.”. Nonsense like this holds us back, it doesn’t move us forward.

I’d say gender in this context is just positive – a female developer calling herself or wants to be called a “software craftswoman” indicates both pride in the profession and gender.

“Craftswomanship”, however, doesn’t work when I think about it.

At its core, software craftsmanship is just analogy to show the importance of being professional and taking your profession seriously. Maybe “software professional[s] / professionalism” are more useful terms than the handicraft analogy.