I really don’t believe making this name change will really change nor increase the female pilot ranks, female mechanics, nor any other aviation oriented job description.
Those, such as Katherine Johnson, Patty Wagstaff, Jackie Cochran, Pancho Barnes, Katherine Stinson, Amelia Earhart, and many other women past and present, were and are, passionate about aviation. However, from 1903 through today, the percentage of women interested in aviation enough to participate has been virtually the same. Compared to males, women are not generally interested aviation, particularly flying. Likewise, when it comes to turning wrenches. The numbers are very steady during times of vast gender inequalities during our past, with no real uptick when those barriers have been significantly improved upon. Even with the last 10 years of intense focus, marketing, and women guided organizations like WIA and IWOAW being uplifted at Oshkosh, through virtually every aviation magazine and trade publication ( printed or online), the numbers are relatively the same. Maybe, just maybe, the vast majority of women, just are not interested in aviation.
There is no doubt in my mind that women who find flying as an avocation are equally adept at flying as men. Women get paid the same as men in the cockpit. Modern aviation has taken a lead in gender equality when it comes to pay. Women airline captains make the same as their counterpart. But it seems the idea
of flying, the passion it takes to go from student to rated pilot is not that interesting to most females. And if it is, their passion overcomes the challenges, regardless of the associated circumstances good and bad including gender hassles ( of which any discriminatory practices I do not sanction).
Doing all it takes to becoming an aviator, male or female, has proven to be a career or recreational interest not shared by the masses. It takes dedication, hard work, preparation, lots-o-time, and overcoming financial challenges to become someone who is reasonably safe and comfortable in an ever moving, 3D environment. And after spending all of this energy, time, resources, and preparation, the pay scale is not so high as to be an additional incentive. In other words, in today’s technical world, pay is a lot higher for a lot less overall personal investment in areas outside of aviation. Most of us in aviation do it because we are jazzed by it making many sacrifices to stay in it.
Look at an average car service center, the mechanics are predominately male. Pretty much the same for all motor-sport activities. Women who desire opportunities in those arenas, because they become passionate and immersed into it, can compete and excel. However, comparatively few women have an interest in those areas. Are they aware of the opportunities? Yes. But most are not interested enough to make it a career choice or recreation they desire to participate in.
In spite of equal capability in many endeavors, men and women are not hard-wired the same. Nor are men and women’s bodies equally the same. Therefore, interests for the majority are not necessarily the same. God created Adam from the dirt of the earth. Even if you are not a person of faith, you still have to wrestle with the scientific fact that we all have a DNA trail that includes dirt. Eve was formed from Adam’s rib. Eve came from a sophisticated , fully functioning body. That speaks volumes why guys like to play in the dirt and girls don’t. It also speaks volumes on the sophistication of women, whose thinking in many areas of life far outshines that of us men. It speaks volumes on why women think much more clearly in areas of life we men either have no interest in or are not nearly as adept. Men and women were designed to be complimentary of each other, different in some ways, but equal in importance, equal in dignity, equal in family relationships.
While history has proven that mankind has not treated each other fairly or justly, with women treated largely as less than human, these modern societal attempts to unisex our thinking and behavior in attempts to right a history of wrong, while noble and needed, does not seem to consider while men and women are human and should be treated equally, men and women are different in so many ways.
I have no problem with making some name changes to help in the endeavor of equality. I can appreciate Allie the ATP’s statement - “just because you don’t see anything wrong does not mean nothing is”. If a few word changes can help, why not? It’s good for both parties. But, the changes will not make flying more palatable or interesting for women. Those, male and female, who get bitten by the flying bug, will become pilots whether they are called airmen, pilots, or aviators/aviatrixes. But that bug does not infect the masses.
Having stepped out in the non-politically correct view of a unisex society, I add another question. If in the quest for politically correct verbiage for male and female aviators, what do we do about the new dilemma of naming airplanes, cars, boats, motorcycles, etc almost exclusively after women? No more Miss Behave, Daisy, or Miss Bardahl. If we cannot have airmen, we cannot have gender exclusive names for our toys either. Think about the change necessary in aircraft nose art. I am not ready for a naked picture of Burt Reynolds or Joe Namath on the nose of a fighter. Glamorous Glennis would have to come off the X-1.