Original sentence: " to allow for the possibility that she might be dating a woman, though this example deals more with assumptions about sexual orientation than the issues typcially associated with gender-neutral language."; however, unless one is certain that the new doctor is a man, advocates of gender-neutral language generally argue that it would be better to state, "Tomorrow I will meet Dr.A business might advertise that it is looking for a new chair or chairperson, rather than a new chairman, which gender-neutral language advocates fell would imply that only a man would be acceptable for the position.Critics argue that this creates an undue burden on the speaker by forcing him to change the structure of his sentence, with the result often being rather akward.Likewise, if a woman states that she is dating someone; a system of gender-neutral language might deem it inappropriate to ask her, "Who is he.Some advocates of gender-neutral language would see it as unobjectionable to refer to a man in such a position as a chairman, provided that a woman would be referred to by the equivalent term chairwoman.Such language would be an attempt to avoid the perception of heterosexism.They would cite the above example as a case in point, as it seems rather contrived, since non-defining relative clauses are extremely rare in everyday speech
Edited sentence: " (Critics would point out that this example is rather contrived, since non-defining relative clauses are extremely rare in everyday speech." to allow for the possibility that she might be dating a woman."; however, unless one is certain that the new doctor is a man, advocates of non-sexist language generally argue that it would be better to state, "Tomorrow I will meet Dr.A business might advertise that it is looking for a new chair or chairperson, rather than a new chairman, thereby implying that only a man would be acceptable for this position.Likewise, if a woman states that she is dating someone; a system of non-sexist language might deem it inappropriate to ask her, "Who is he.Some advocates of non-sexist language would see it as unobjectionable to refer to a man in such a position as a chairman, provided that a woman would be referred to by the equivalent term chairwoman.Such language is an attempt to avoid heterosexism