After more than two decades of non-sexist linguistic policies in Spain, a survey was carried out to evaluate the positive or negative attitude of almost 500 students from two Madrid universities to the most controversial verbal forms advocated in Spanish non-sexist linguistic policies: 1) the use of @ (as in alumn@s [students]); 2) the use of dual gender (as in alumnos y alumnas [students- masc and students-fem]); 3) the use of feminine terms for some women’s professional titles and occupations (i.e. ingeniera [engineer-fem], bedela [caretaker-fem], arquitecta [architect-fem], médica [physician-fem], aparejadora [quantity surveyor-fem], gerenta [manager-fem], perita [ex- pert-fem], cancillera* [chancellor-fem]); 4) the use of non-sexed collective nouns (as in profeso- rado [teaching staff]). Our aims were to know to what degree these resources were accepted by highly-educated young people, whether differences exist between the attitudes of men and women with respect to these forms, and which of these uses was the best accepted and which the least. Various examples of these non-sexist uses were presented to university students, who were asked to make a pronouncement on the feeling which these gave them or whether they used them. Our study concluded that the @ symbol and collective nouns are widely accepted among the student community. The dual gender seems to be also accepted, although greater vacillation was seen and sometimes the levels of rejection or indifference are higher. Nevertheless, of the four uses studied, the one which appears to provoke the greatest hesitation, vacillation or even opposition is the use of the feminine for some names of professions. In general, the number of female students in favour of the four features studied exceeds the number of male students.
 Calero Fernández, M. A. (2006). Creencias y Actitudes Lingüísticas en Torno al Género Gramatical en Espanol. In M. I. Sancho Rodríguez, L. Ruiz Solves, & F. Gutiérrez García (Eds.), Estudios Sobre Lengua, Literatura y Mujer (pp. 235-285). Jaén: Universidad de Jaén.
 Edwards, J. (1982). Language Attitudes and Their Implication among English Speakers. In E. Bouchard Ryan, & H. Giles (Eds.), Attitudes towards Language Variation (pp. 20-33). London: Edward Arnold.
 European Parliament. (2008). Informe Sobre el Lenguaje no Sexista en el Parlamento Europeo (Aprobado Por la Decisión Grupo de Alto Nivel Sobre Igualdad de Género y Diversidad de 13 de Febrero de 2008). PE 397.475.
 Garret, P. (2010). Attitudes to Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Guerrero Salazar, S. (2007). Esbozo de Una Bibliografía Crítica Sobre Recomendaciones y Guías Para un Uso Igualitario Del Lenguaje Administrativo. In A. M. Medina Guerra (Ed.), Avanzando Hacia la Igualdad (pp. 109-122). Málaga: Diputación de Málaga & AEHSM.
 Houdebine-Gravaud, A. M. (2003). Trente ans de Recherche sur la Différence Sexuelle, ou le Langage des Femmes et la Sexuation Dans la Langue, les Discours, les Images. Langage & Société, 106, 33-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/ls.106.0033
 Jaehrling, S. (1988). Attitudes to Sexist and Non-Sexist Language: A Comparative Study of German and Australian Informants. Unpublished B. A. Thesis. Melbourne: Department of German, Monash University.
 Katz, D. (1960). The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitude. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24, 163-204.
 Nissen, U. K. (1997). Do Sex-Neutral and Sex-Specific Nouns Exist? The Way to Non-Sexist Spanish. In F. Braun, & U. Pasero (Eds.), Kommunikation von Geschelecht. Communication of Gender (pp. 222-241). Pfaffenweiler: Centaurus-Verlagsgesellschaft.
 Nissen, U. K. (2002). Gender in Spanish: Tradition and Innovation. In M. Hellinger, & H. Bussman (Eds.), Gender across Languages: The Linguistic Representation of Women and Men, Vol. 2. (pp. 251-279). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
 Nissen, U. K. (2013). Is Spanish Becoming More Gender Fair? A Historical Perspective on the Interpretation of GenderSpecific and Gender-Neutral Expressions. Linguistik Online, 58. http://www.linguistik-online.net/58_13/nissen.html
 Paulston, C. B. (2002). Review of Dennis Ager, Motivation in Language Planning and Language Policy, and Kas Deprez and Theo Du Plessis, Multilingualism and Government. Language in Society, 31, 790-796.
 Real Academia Espanola. (2006). Informe Emitido por la RAE Relativo al Uso Genérico del Masculino Gramatical y al Desdoblamiento Genérico de Los Sustantivos. Revista Espanola de la Función Consultiva, 6, 307-308.
 Spolsky, B. (2006). Language Policy Failures. In M. Pütz, J. Fishman, & J. Neff-van Aertselaer (Eds.), Along the Routes of power. Explorations of Empowerment through Language (pp. 87-106). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.