FAA Holding ‘Inclusive Language Summit’ Nov. 10


The FAA is starting the consultation process on a gender-neutral rewrite of its vast trove of rules, regs and other documents with a virtual “Inclusive Language Summit” on Nov. 10 from 10 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. EST. The event will be livestreamed on all of the agency’s social media platforms and the public is welcome to observe and comment. Follow the link to the Federal Register notice for instructions on how to take part. A subcommittee of its Drone Advisory Committee recommended the rewrite last June.

The agency has apparently gotten on board with those recommendations and in the Federal Register notice it indicates it’s willing to go to considerable lengths to bring its language in line. “The FAA notes that implementation of policies and plans related to the adoption of inclusive terminology may necessitate changes in legislation, as well as rules and regulations,” the notice says. “However, the FAA is committed to ensuring FAA is both a workplace and a regulatory agency free of bias and discrimination in all practices.”

Other AVwebflash Articles


  1. So my newly minted UAS license will be my last “Airman’s Certificate”. I’ll keep it next to my commemorative Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben’s containers. No, I’m not a racist or sexist. I just like things left alone that don’t need changing. Missed out on my opportunity to suggest changing “Mail Man” to PostIts. ;o)

  2. Wonderful … now we’ll not only have an intransigent FAA but a woke FAA, too. I call Bravo Sierra, too. Next thing ya know, white pilots will be deemed racists and have to take remedial training during Flight Reviews. BIG SIGH!

  3. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

  4. You guys (previous commenters) crack me up. Is any of this hurting you, in any way? No. So even if you can’t comprehend the value in it, to current or potential future female aviators, A&P’s, ATC’s, etc. (the value of which seems fairly obvious, but when you’ve got your blinders on, maybe not), let it go. Or are you not “emotionally adult enough” to admit that maybe you’re just a step or two behind the times?

    • Brian, that is a great comment. What studies do you have that show that “gender neutral” phraseology has added value? What studies show that gender neutral phraseology, if implemented, has significantly changed an industries demographics?

    • The better question J.W. is whether any of this will benefit anyone, which you boastfully proclaim is so obvious but fail to specify for us unenlightened troglodytes. Furthermore how does this in any measurable way comport with the mission of the FAA? The only obvious positive is the furtherance of “newspeak” for the terminally woke “groupthink” cult. Who, bye the way are the purveyors of the most narrow minded of intolerance towards anyone that isn’t in lockstep with their bigotry, the brainwashed “woke”!

    • Hey Brian how about the cost for something that is NOT safety related? The “manhours” (pun intended) of meetings, employee training and employees bitching to each other about how stupid the training was. And all of this in the middle of the FAA trying to implement the plain language writing.

      All this will do is add another layer of complexity of trying to communicate relatively technical information to a few snowflakes that are unable to man up (pun intended) and realize that the world does not revolve around their feelings. They need to realize that for almost 100 years of aviation regulation the existing terminology has worked and shown almost continuous increases in aviation safety.

    • Thanks Brian, good to see at east one voice of reason on AvWeb comments. These crusty old farts are too set in their ways to comprehend that just because we’ve been doing things a certain way for 100 years doesn’t mean it’s not wrong and doesn’t need to be changing. I’m guessing if many of them were around in 1864 they would have been part of the groups that thought slavery was something that “wasn’t broke and didn’t need fixing”, so why expect them to be concerned about basic civility. Of course since they have never been personally affected by the status quo they view and change towards inclusiveness as a personal threat. So they come here to vent because apparently they are privileged enough to have free time to rant about “leftists” and “wokeness” on trivial internet news sites. Only time and attrition will solve their problems.

  5. If it is going to take the FAA FOUR years to define the word “Commercial” how long will it take to change the dozens of offensive words? and at what cost?

    I’m busy that day that they are going to have the virtual “Inclusive Language Summit” on Nov. 10 from 10 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. EST. But, if I could join in the conversation, I would recommend all the passengers and flight crew join together at the boarding gate for a “Big Group Hug” before every single flight. “Group Hugs” will solve the passenger unruliness and the Airman’s microaggressions in the Cockpit 😀

  6. “Whoever is offended by the use of pronouns is not emotionally adult enough to own or operate an aircraft.”

    Spit-take fodder there. Always a proud feeling to see fellow pilots use sarcasm in realms of fantasy to illustrate hypocrisy.

  7. Thanks to Klause M above for stating EXACTLY what I was going to write!
    If I was going to be “offended” by language, I’d be “offended” by the twists the FAA incurred with “commercial”–and their acknowledgement that they are SO CAUGHT UP IN THEIR OWN BUREAUCRACY that it will take them 4 years to correct their error! We have far more problems with the FAA in their own “language” issues than we do about imagined slights.

    Aviation USED to be all about “taking control of a situation” with competence. The FAA has shown recently that they are just as beholden to the “easily offended” as any other useless government agency.

    Perhaps the “easily offended” might be helped by spending some time in the military under the tutelage of a drill sergeant–reducing a new recruit to tears–but the recruits toughened up to the point where they could shrug it off and DO THEIR JOB–and earn the respect of their fellow soldiers. If people are distraught over “gender identities”–maybe they shouldn’t be pilots–I don’t know that I’d care to ride with a pilot that can’t function because of a perceived negative connotation of a word. Perhaps the FAA should also school Air Traffic Controllers to use the work “Please” in controlling traffic, so as not to offend anyone. (sarcasm) (Standing by to receive comments from “virtue signallers.”)

    • I spent 21 years in the military and retired a Sr NCO … send Brian to me … I’ll have him crying for his mama in about 24 hours. Thirty days later … he will have found Geezus !! Guaranteed! While we’re at it, send that woke General Chief of Staff to me … I’ll fix HIS clock, too.

      The FAA “invents” a massive problem called LODA to punish some poor entity in Kissimmee and then has the unmitigated GAUL to tell us — at Airventure — that it’ll take four years to fix it because it has to go thru the process. So why would we think they could do this task any faster? They could managed the people riding shotgun on Boeing / MCAS either … not that I think about it.

  8. I have a different take on this.

    I view this as GOOD news!

    It’s a sign that all the real problems in the world have been ameliorated and nonsense like this is all that’s left to worry about.

    For example police giving a ticket to a guy going 10 over the speed limit on his way to work to earn a living for his family. There are no more murderers or rapists to arrest so another good sign.

    The progressives HAVE fixed our problems!

  9. The resources, human and taxpayer funds applied to this will not be utilized towards the core mission of the FAA, which is safety.
    We’re supposed to accept a fallacy that laborious hand wringing over a few pronouns might somehow create a un-welcoming or un-safe feeling about entering the field of aviation. Further that de-gendering these pronouns is somehow going to cure the psychosis that permeates the lunatic fringe who are so quick to source out (invent) new excuses to proclaim oppression.

  10. “Perhaps the “easily offended” might be helped by spending some time in the military under the tutelage of a drill sergeant–reducing a new recruit to tears”

    “send Brian to me … I’ll have him crying for his mama in about 24 hours. ”

    Wow. Evidently, there really is no bottom for some who will go straight to the gutter of intolerant, spiteful language to fellow GA pilots, while ironically whining about a language adjustment by the FAA in consideration of bias and discrimination. Absolutely disgusting. A teaching professor’s syllabus of projection, blindness and naivete – and crude, classless desperation for peer approval and esteem.

    What a display of shameless, vulgar language in a news article about an attempt to rid language pertaining to bias and discrimination.

    • “I do not think our current generation of snowflakes could have saved the world like the Greatest Generation did in the 1940s”

      That’s virtually unknown. What is known, by my late father’s service and purple heart in WW2 in the Italian theatre and according to countless others, is that despite their fears, cowardice, bravery and heroism, my dad and others have since regrettably said that most – the majority – of his comrades from his generation didn’t want to serve alongside coons, spics, wops, japs, women, jews, pussies and homos.

      It’s this evolvement of language in the social consciousness that is ever changing and, effectively or not, is at least being addressed by the FAA in its broad consideration of words that could connote bias or discrimination, and that is being resisted by, indeed, your ‘snowflakes’ among us of limited consciousness to see the beneficial changes needed in our developing social evolution.

  11. “It’s this evolvement of language in the social consciousness that is ever changing and, effectively or not, is at least being addressed by the FAA in its broad consideration of words that could connote bias or discrimination, and that is being resisted by, indeed, your ‘snowflakes’ among us of limited consciousness to see the beneficial changes needed in our developing social evolution.”

    Trying to break down that stream of incomprehensible thoughts–it is difficult to see exactly WHAT the FAA is expected to do–other than spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and hours on something that only the far left has suddenly found “offensive” after all these years.

    My favorite movie is Blazing Saddles–Mel Brooks mocks the “norms” of society by lampooning them. In the movie, the town “Gabby Hays” spews incomprehensible bits of gibberish–without a meaning. The Mayor of Rock Ridge addresses the townspeople–“Now WHO can argue with THAT? NOT ONLY WAS IT AUTHENTIC FRONTIER GIBBERISH, but it speaks with a clarity little seen in this day and age…….”

    Perhaps you should look at “All in the Family”–they used the very words you used in your illustration above–and people rightly LAUGHED at the reference! I would suggest that Archie Bunker did more for “political awareness” than ALL OF THE “CANCEL CULTURE” types COMBINED! (laugh)

    • As for ‘All in the Family”, selective perception helps explain why the show was so popular. Non-bigots understood the intention of the series and found confirmation of their views in the jokes. Carroll O’Connor in real life was an outspoken defender of liberal and civil rights causes—as was the show’s producer, Norman Lear.
      Some bigoted viewers, however, perceived the series in the opposite way: it re-affirmed their bigotry. To them, Archie Bunker was both funny and speaking truths, according to the studies.

      So both groups laughed at the jokes, but each with entirely different intent. Is that what I needed to re-examine?

      Therefore, what the FAA in my view is trying to do, to try and simplify, is use wording in their language that helps to promote one of the above views more than the other in word bias or discrimination, as society changes and becomes more varied and complex. This sort of effort is going on across the board in the military, education, health care and now, even aviation.

      Hope that helps, but I’m certain it won’t.

  12. SERIOUSLY? I don’t know if ANYONE took Archie Bunker seriously. Almost everyone was shocked at what came out of his mouth–nearly everyone had heard those words before–as you said, “coons, spics, wops, japs, women, jews, pussies and homos.” “Japs” and “Krauts” were common vernacular, and used on banner front pages of newspapers by none other than liberal icons like the New York Times–and every major newspaper. As for the rest, we were shocked–most of us don’t use those words, but we were MOSTLY shocked that they could be said on TV–and that was part of the allure of the show. As for the words themselves, though “Archie” mouthed them, they had almost lost their original meaning–for example, “Jews” IDENTIFY as Jews–“wop” and “spic” are used by families to describe themselves, much as “Stubborn German” or “tight Scotsman” are used to describe themselves. FAR from being offended by the terms, those people have embraced them–for the most part, they have ceased to be offensive (except, of course, for the “politically correct.”

    I guess the system WORKS–for the most part, the words used say less about the people being described as they do about those that utter them.

  13. First, I suggest that everyone read (or re-read) George Orwell’s story 1984.

    “By controlling the language, Big Brother controls the way that the people think.”

    We’re here.

    I’m okay when we (as a society) organically change our language, as happens naturally over centuries. I am NOT okay when a select few (the government) force us to change our language.

    I can see where this is going.

    Already in Arizona courts, Big Brother can punish you for not “properly” referring to a he as a “she.” How long will it be before BB FAA can pull your Airman Certificate (oops) for “wrong think” because you “offended” a man who wears a dress?

    (You know, transvestism used to be a disqualifying Medical condition, once considered a mental disorder. But we don’t think that anymore.)

  14. Wow, I wonder if the Pauls and other AvWeb writers look at a story like this and say “boy, this will bring all of the AWOGs out of the woodwork”. Guys (and btw, it’s all guys), in 5 years, this will be SOP and no one will care. Now, global warming, well…