In 1979 I needed to send a letter to someone on the University of Cambridge staff who signed a letter to me using the style "J. Smith". I realized that I didn't know the gender of the person I was writing to, so I couldn't write. At that time, the correct salutations were "Dear Mr. Smith," "Dear Miss Smith," "Dear Mrs. Smith," or perhaps "Dear Ms. Smith". For my letter, the gender of the recipient was completely irrelevant. I shouldn't have needed to know it. I don't remember what I did (an Englishman told me that Smith was undoubtedly male), but eventually I decided to adopt the style "Dear J. Smith" for most such letters. At that time it sounded jarring, and people thought it was strange.
I remember the separate "Help Wanted — Male" and "Help Wanted — Female" sections for job ads in newspapers. It was just "how it's done".
As a little kid, I felt strongly that we shouldn't use gendered pronouns. Everyone sould be called by the same pronoun. There already was a gender-neutral pronoun, namely "it". I didn't see why we couldn't use that. Someone gently explained to me that people would be offended if I called them "it". I didn't understand why. They were even offended when I referred to their pets as "it". Your pet is very cute. But do I really need to know your gerbil's gender? I'm glad that the "singular they" is gaining acceptance for generic he/she, though I'm not convinced it's the best solution when applied to a particular person. Perhaps we need a different word. I'm still rooting for "it".
I try to write in a gender-neutral way when gender isn't relevant (though I often fail, since old habits die hard). The more I do it, the easier it gets. Spending a short time thinking about it usually leads to a version that's objectively better written.
Recently I learned that a university changed the title of its "Men of Modern Mathematics" poster to "Women & Men of Modern Mathematics", and attached information about some female mathematicians. I was disappointed by this choice of title, especially with today's greater awareness of people who are non-binary. They could have changed it to "People of Modern Mathematics". Or better, just "Mathematicians". Or perhaps "Famous mathematicians" (given that the poster doesn't depict a representative sample of mathematicians). Personally, I'd rather focus on the mathematics, not the people.
At the Q&A after a Law School talk about same sex marriage (shortly before it was legal), I suggested to the speaker that proponents of same sex marriage encourage doctors to simply omit the sex of newborn babies on birth certificates. Why does the state have a right to know someone's sex? I don't see a compelling reason. (This is already a problem with intersex babies.) Is anyone really going to verify people's sex before issuing them a marriage license? That seems like excessive government interference, which is contrary to the views of many opponents of same sex marriage.
I'm amused by the anger of opponents of gender neutral language (as in the comments section of this article in the Washington Post). If the issue is as unimportant as they say, why do they spend so much time attacking it, and why do they feel so threatened? I'm hoping that with the proliferation of gender identities and pronouns, even these opponents will opt for gender neutrality as a simpler solution.
I don't like labels, and I don't want people to be tempted to treat me differently based on stereotypes or preconceived notions about certain groups. When my gender isn't relevant, I'd like it to be ignored. I joke that a major advantage of a PhD degree is so that we can address people with gender-neutral salutations, without needing to know their genders.