Gender-neutral


#1

I have a problem.

I am an English teacher, and certain idiosyncracies of “politically correct” grammar bug the snot out of me. I actually heard someone say this recently:

God loved us enough to send God’s Son to us.

You don’t have to be a grammar nerd like me to know that this is poor English syntax! We have pronouns for a reason!:mad:

My question is this: granted that this is nitpicking, but doesn’t this “gender-neutral” thing a) divert attention from the idea of “God the Father”, and b) really just kind of bother your ear?

Peace,
Dante

PS: I’m sorry if this is the wrong forum for this thread, but it’s a controversy in my eyes…


#2

Yes

and b) really just kind of bother your ear?

Yes


#3

Hi Dante,

God has no gender, but He chose to present himself to us as the Father and the Son (and the Holy Spirit - “It”?). It’s His decision, not ours.

As for other cases, I’ m rather in favor of being gender neutral or gender-inclusive, when both genders are meant. “Humans” is often useful.

Or you can choose the road of a preacher who said, “This message is for all men. And when I say ‘men’, I mean to embrace all women”!

(Se non è vero, è ben trovato!)

Verbum


#4

Yes.

Applying the word “gender” to people also bothers me. Nouns have a gender, people have a sex.

The reason that this is important is that “sex” is based in biology and natural law. “Gender” connotes a choice, something that is subjective and can be chosen.

Now it has become so common that it is replacing the traditional terminology to the advantage of those who want the biological facts left out of the argument. Grrr…


#5

Well now in modern usage (or should I say postmodern usage) the idea is that we have a physiological “sex”, but “gender” is a complex personality trait and set of social expectations and roles which one takes on, as defined by competing narratives of societal norms and personal preference.

In other words, you can have an X and a Y chromosome, which makes you biologically male, and then society expects biologically male humans to act like “men”. And what’s up in the air today seems to be the latter part of that, as we increasingly blur the distinctions between gender roles, e.g. expecting men to be more communicative and expressive, and women to be more aggressive, which is fine to a point, but it even extends to the point of saying it doesn’t matter, and what difference does it make if two men or two women want to marry, or have a child. This all goes back to the postmodern belief that gender roles are basically artificial constructs with no underlying “objective” reality, and thus it is up to every individual to define their own reality.


#6

I agree it does make the language awkward. Makes me wonder, why couldn’t we have kept masculine and feminine nouns, hopefully that would have avoided this problem. If they’d have only known hundreds of years later this would come up as an issue. Oh, brother Cuthbert and sister Wealhtheow please tell them all not to neuter all the words.

After becoming aware of this issue, it makes me laugh now that I am going into nursing. There are a lot of books that tend to refer to nurses mainly as feminine. The injustice!


#7

quote: After becoming aware of this issue, it makes me laugh now that I am going into nursing. There are a lot of books that tend to refer to nurses mainly as feminine. The injustice!

I find it intersting reading books on babies, parenting, etc, they will routinely switch from one paragraph or section to the next referring to your baby as “he” or “she”.

Obviously saying “he or she” contiuously is awkward, and we don’t have a personal non-gendered pronoun (we would be offended to be called “it”), and at least for babies there is a pretty much 50/50 split of boys & girls!


#8

:cool: I’ve got it make a “he” printing and a “she printing.”


#9

It is incorrect grammar to do these things! Yargh! :mad:

The family handbook at my school uses “s/he”, which, in my opinion, is a feeble nod to the the “gender-neutral” crowd.

Why can’t we speak proper English! To quote our illustrious president, “If it was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for us!” :smiley:


#10

Our biology department issued a form with “gender” on it. I told them that humans have sex, and if we couldn’t get it right in biology then who could. The next form used the proper word.

Beyond the first few lectures in first year biologists don’t snigger about sex. It is an extremely important part of our subject.


#11

It takes cynicism to see in a reference to God as “He,” (or for that matter, a reference to Wisdom as “she”) and attempt by humans to assert the superiority of their respective sexes.

It’s hard to imagine any Christian female who believes in the inerrancy of Scripture being anything but comfortable with male references to the Persons of the Trinity.

Peace.
John


#12

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.