Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!drutx!ihnp4!ihuxf!features
From: features@ihuxf.UUCP (M.A. Zeszutko)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Vigorous Spelling Error
Message-ID: <2599@ihuxf.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 13-May-85 15:22:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxf.2599
Posted: Mon May 13 15:22:04 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 14-May-85 20:34:14 EDT
References: <385@ttidcc.UUCP> <305@mhuxr.UUCP> <327@h-sc1.UUCP> <238@spar.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 21


>     But think of all the thousands of words that contain the suffix -`man'
>     that have no other clear-cut name! Like `chairman'. Fortunately,
>     this word has the ever-popular demasculized alternate `chairperson'.
> 
>     Many others are less fortunate, for example -- repairman, swordsman,
>     journeyman, draftsman, doorman, sportsman, Scotsman, salesman -- as well
>     as a crushing number of obscure job titles like brakeman, flagman...
> 
> 
>     What we need is a generally useful suffix to replace -man, not just for
>     words that already exist, but also as a general replacement for an
>     extremely prolific formative element in our language. 
> 
> -michael

How about "operator"?  Seems functional enough to me.
(brake operator, flag operator, door operator, sales operator as examples)
-- 

aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features