A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics'. All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer.
George Orwell
Sadly, you can’t tell folks what to say because if they don’t believe it they will either avoid saying it or carry on. Remember all of the effort to stop calling drones ‘drones’ - it didn’t work. You can’t force people to stop using airmanship, as much as you can’t stop them using human, woman, fireman, horseman, crewman, spaceman, seaman, etc…etc…, or their derivatives like horsemanship or seamanship, if they don’t want to.
Personally, I don’t use Aviator either - it is wrong in the true meaning and also it is the masculine term to the female Aviatrix. I use in day-to-day language either Service Personnel, RAF Personnel, Officers, WOs, SNCOs, JNCOs and Enlisted Personnel if I want to be correct over the errant use of Aviator (unless, of course, I am referring to a male who flies or operates an aircraft). There is no way that the Services can force me not to do this as it is correct and not misleading.
I’ll leave you with this thought. The use of ‘horsemanship’ by the British Horse Society (BHS) is commonplace - it is the main Charity for horse ownership and sport in the UK. Now what is intriguing about this is that the Board of Directors of the BHS is around 85% FEMALE. So this female dominant organisation does not worry about the use of ‘horsemanship’ in their sport, which across the UK has ~75% female horse riding followership , and they just get on with it. So why does a sport with a female majority still publish and use the word ‘horsemanship’ if, according to some ‘allies’ and ‘male saviours’, they really are that bothered about it? Oddly enough, even though they have the full majority to change it, they don’t and just carry on. Maybe other organisations should learn from the BHS what females really want…