He 'shouldn't' do anything. Stupid people purposely avoid the most obvious meaning of the title just to show off their morality.
It's obvious the guy that wrote these articles isn't trying to trigger anyone, so can we all just not get triggered?
It seems like a very valid thing to discuss, and suggesting that people might be 'triggered' for even bringing it up only serves to undermine a legitimate discussion on it.
No one here seems emotionally distraught by the author's words. Rather, all of the discussions about the inappropriateness of the remarks seem to be pitched in a constructive and explanatory way, without regard to whether they were offended by them or not.
The ancestor comments by andendau and dopu are admonishing him for it.
>He should change it. Regardless of the intention, this is how it will be interpreted.
Seems more like an advisement than an admonishment. Perhaps I should have said no one is rebuking them for it.
Either way, I don't see this as the 'political correctness police jumping on them'. It's not like people are organizing a lynch mob for the author.
"Elementary school unions explained to my husband"
Would that make you feel like the education community is unwelcoming of all genders?
I know dads feel excluded because a number of educational things specifically mention moms.