In honor of becoming a "journeyman" with this post, I'd like to get serious in the event (it's going to be a stretch for me). I wrote way back that I didn't get it; now here's why: it didn't have to be like this. We all know that one of the senses of "man" is "human being". And in fact, here is the entry from the AHD which covers the combinational form:

3. A human being or an adult male human being belonging to a specific occupation, group, nationality, or other category. Often used in combination: a milkman; a congressman; a freeman. [or Frenchman]

So, my question to you all is: who decided that we should always assume that "an adult male human" is stipulated by these combinations? Carrying political correctness to its logical extreme, we would arrive at "huwoman" I suppose?!

Oh, and BTW, the logical single-syllable representation would be "fem"; but that's been corrupted too.

...told you this would be a stretch for me.