The word Man is inherently confusing/sexist? Oh the huMANity!

Given the complete inability of most posters and readers here to actually manage to communicate a message without it getting garbled in the process; don't you think it's a bit rich to read such motivations - beyond what was even said - into such writers?I mean, if there's anything the internet can teach you, it's that people are largely incapable of making what they want to be understood, understood by means of textual communication. How then can you possibly claim to be able to read deep sub-textual levels of communication from someone else's text?

What if it is genetic¹?Think about it, for a second, what difference will it make. Suppose men are genetically better at maths than women and I want to hire an accountant - what different would that FACT make?If I've got any sense it makes none. It makes none because the differences between individual women are far greater than the differences between men and women as groups. Hell, even where the differences are far more marked and quite clearly strongly genetic, as is the case with physical strength, picking someone for physical strength of the basis of their sex is dumb this woman - just for example - is far stronger than I am.Discrimination on the basis of group characteristics is a far inferior to individual testing as a way of identifying the best candidates. This is true for race, creed and sex - independent of the truth or fallacy of any claims to inherent differences or cultural differences in ability.¹For my part I think it is likely that are genetic differences in the intelligence and behaviour of men and women; just as there with other species. I also strongly suspect that these effects are amplified by cultural prejudices. As far as I know, there are no studies that credibly establish it one way or the other.