Eisenberg (2021, FAZ) raises concerns a construction used to make language gender-inclusive in German, the so-called 'gender gap'. This study specifically addresses claims pertaining whether this construction is compatible with German Grammar. Eisenberg claims (i) that forms encoded with the gender gap are unambiguously feminine, and hence not in fact inclusive; (ii) realizing the gap before ’-in’ with a glottal stop, as is sometimes reported or even recommended, causes stress to shift to the suffix, but neither stress nor glottal stop on a suffix are compatible with German morphophonology. We report on two preregistered production experiments that compare Eisenberg’s analysis with an alternative, according to which gender gaps are shorthands for larger coordinate structures (e.g., Stefanowitsch 2018, Blogpost). More specifically, we propose that gender gaps involve ellipsis and (asyndetic) coordination. Forms like ‘Leser*in’ are understood to stand in for ‘Leser/Leserin’, which in turn are interpreted as coordinations (either existentially as ‘or’ or universally as ‘and’). The stress and the glottal stop on the suffix are due to a general phonological constraint on conjuncts, which must be at least prosodic-word-sized (Booij 1985). This predicts that gender gaps should show determiner-matching effects parallel to asyndetic and syndetic coordinations.