Cows, Dogs and Men
When we say Cow, we think of the female cow mor than we do of cows and bulls but it can certainly mean both cows and bulls in some context.Adrian, these are excellent instructive examples to show how the Greek words for "man" or "person", anthrōpos and anēr, work.
A similar example would be the word "Dog" which can and often does mean "Dogs and Bitches" but in certain context means male dogs only.
As I was brought up in an agricultural community, I would never dream of calling a male bovine a cow. For me this is a strongly gender marker word. But I know that others, city dwellers as well as people like Wayne, use the word "cow" in a different way. Yet we communicate clearly together, and only notice this dialect difference when we hear something that grates, e.g. when I hear someone calling a bull a cow.
This is an indication to us of how the English language is not uniform, in gender related language as just one example. English speakers also differ in exactly how they use words like "man" and "brother" with possible reference to mixed gender groups, and how they use generic "he". This is a fact of life, and we should not seek to impose uniformity or judge those whose usage is different from ours.
This is also an indication of how Koine Greek is also not likely to be uniform. Elementary grammars may tell us that anthrōpos is gender generic and anēr is male specific. An examination of actual usage, in the New Testament and elsewhere, shows a more complex picture, in which anthrōpos is sometimes used with some kind of male meaning component, and anēr is sometimes used generically. This is also a fact of life. But it would be quite wrong to conclude from occasional unusual usage that anthrōpos always has a male meaning component, or of course that anēr is always gender generic. Each case has to be judged, and translated, on its merits. This is the danger of "guidelines" such as those drawn up at Colorado Springs, especially when they are treated not just as guidelines but as strict rules to be adhered to.
To move on to "dog", it seems to me that this word works for canines in English in much the same way as anthrōpos works for humans in Greek. The commonest use of the word is gender generic. But when contrasted or collocated with a specifically female word, or in other contexts where gender is in focus, it can have a male meaning component.
This does not imply that the word always has some kind of male connotation or nuance. No one who reads a sign "Dogs must be kept on a lead/leash" would dream of claiming that this sign is gender specific and therefore it is OK to let a female animal roam freely. No one would even dream of suggesting that this sign applies directly only to male canines, and to female ones only by some kind of "male representation". No, they would recognise that in this context the word "dog" is being used in a completely gender generic sense.
Similarly, surely, with anthrōpos: this word must be understood as completely gender generic except in those rather rare cases where it is specifically signalled as gender specific.
Anēr, on the other hand, works more like "cow", at least for those like me from a rural background: its proper use is gender specific, but it is sometimes used (some might say misused) in a gender generic sense. Perhaps James the brother of Jesus was the equivalent of a city dweller: he seems to have used anēr quite a lot in an apparently generic sense, in 1:8,12,20, 3:2.