My point was that the ambiguous term "man" was immediately interpreted as a sign of discrimination. If HN can have "Assume good faith" in the guidelines then society should also have it. So hearing such a reaction to a term where the most plausible interpretation is "human" can only be bad faith. Looking for reasons to squabble.

If enough people use such bad faith arguments to make a point how long until it will be easy to overlook a good, valid argument and assume the same kind of bad faith from the start?