Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00028)

Mauri,

You did not seem antagonistic. If I seemed to respond in 
that way, it may be a form of frustation coming through. 
Limits in the written language is found to be frustrating at
times. I know of no term that represents dual genders. 
"It" represents no or neutral gender. "Them" or "us" can be
both genders or a single one, but not representing or defining
of a dual gender. If one was to introduce a new term to
represent a dual gender. and utilize it, there would be resistance
to the change. I personally feel the change would be an 
improvement and could be used to express what other words
can not, making a truer and more expressive communication.
There is difficulty not only in language being limited, but in 
expanding that language as well. 
Many terms may be taken as being biased if used. Sometimes
it is just the word that one is sensitive to, not actually the individual
using it. 
I regret my earlier correspondence came forth as antagonistic to
you as it was not intended in that manner. My explanation and
reasoning behind using the term brotherhood and responses of
it appears to not have been optimally presented.