It is quite true that there are no limits to masculine egotism in ordinary life. -Lev Trotski
The same objection applies to these forms as NEGROES AS BUSINESSMEN, etc. The "as" strongly suggests that women are not ordinarily competent or otherwise equipped to work as accountancy, bear arms, or fly to the moon. Implicit is the wholly indefensible stereotype that relegates women to "hearth and home". Skeptics not convinced that the "as" is a reflex of male chauvinism are invited to cite comparable terms assigned to the other sex; e.g., MEN AS ACCOUNTANTS. But they needn't bother, of course. They aren't there.
[...Joan Marshall] asks: "Why are WOMEN AS LIBRARIANS" included? Logically, given our profession and the construction of the list, MEN AS LIBRARIANS should be a subject heading. In this field, women are the majority."
As another, later eruption of what may be called the masclinocentric reflex note innovated MEN NURSES as a primary head without making even a cross reference from "Men as nurses," though they are statistically less common than women in that profession.
Remedy: As with "Negroes" forms, remove the "as"; e.g., WOMEN ACCOUNTANTS [ARCHITECTS, ARTISTS, ASTRONAUTS, SOLDIERS, ETC.]
