Yes, thank you for that. I'm specifically not using gender-neutral terms in this instance, actually. The goal is to muddy the associations that exist and unfortunately gender-neutral terms are unable to do that. They definitely have a time and place for use, though, and I do use them when I think it makes sense to.

Interesting approach, but what it reads like is that you are intentionally gendering the term for some purpose. I was trying to figure out if you meant Senator Warren specifically, because she has been behind a lot of this discussion.

You might be confusing your audience more than you are accomplishing your other objective.

Hey thanks for the feedback. Yea you're right that I was intentionally gendering the term here. My goal was to have someone notice that I used Congresswoman in a negative context.

But I definitely appreciate your comment here and it's something I'll continue to evaluate. On one hand it's shouting into the void. On the other... well... it's probably still shouting into the void.

On the third hand, you’re deliberately using sexist language to … secretly fight sexism? I think a continued evaluation is indeed in order.

Hmmm. Could you specify what sexist language I’m using? That’s quite the accusation.

> I was intentionally gendering the term here. My goal was to have someone notice that I used Congresswoman in a negative context.

The proper generic term is obviously "Congresscritter".