Skip to main content
Politics

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

11
  • 15
    If the subject of how this question was resolved in other countries interests you, you might wish to look at the bizarre history of the "Persons case" in Canada. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v_Canada_(AG) Amongst its oddities is the fact that at the time, the Supreme Court of Canada was not the supreme court of Canada, and that women were determined by the supreme court to be persons when the law restricts the rights of a person, but not qualified persons when the law requires a qualification for office. Truly a low moment for Canada. Commented Aug 31, 2020 at 21:06
  • @Headcrab : and, in Canada, potentially send to prison those who disagree. Unlikely to happen, but not impossible. Commented Sep 2, 2020 at 5:23
  • 10
    In English, "he" is the generic third-person pronoun. This does not refer to only men. Case closed. Commented Sep 2, 2020 at 16:31
  • 2
    This certainly puts a bit of a twist on the current trend in gender identification and pronoun use. Commented Sep 2, 2020 at 16:50
  • 1
    @WS2: in the UK, it's made explicit in section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978: "In any Act, unless the contrary intention appears,[...] words importing the masculine gender include the feminine" (and vice versa, and singular implies plural). Is there an equivalent in US law? Commented Dec 13, 2020 at 11:34