Gender is a definition and is not dependent on society. It is perceived by the society at the time, but that doesn't necessarily change the truth behind it. Gender is not mercurial. Our understanding and interpretation should hopefully be mercurial. Male and female is as objective and rigid a definition as the sky being blue. Yes, societally we agree on the sky being blue but what's to stop it from being chartreuse in 2000 years? Whatever we call it we're still describing the same thing, the color of the sky. Another example of the wonderful revolving lexicon would be if I said I were gay. I would only be meaning it in the pre 20th century definition, not the modern etymology of homosexual. It would have better to say I'm positive and optimistic. That seems like a topic for another thread though.
Back to your point. I would say that definitions are a reflection of societal norms at the time. If you said gender is dependent on a scientifically genetic definition I would agree. Perhaps you could rephrase to "The grammatical gender for animate objects in traditional noun classes is usually male, female or other as interpreted by societal norms of the time". Language reflects society because society defines language. Objects being described don't cease existing because society interprets their definitions differently. Which is exactly why I didn't want to get into a pedantic etymology of language and simply discuss the symbolic meaning. I don't think it matters in the slightest what gender the OP thinks the Holy Spirit is, or what the writers thought it was when it was written.
Back to your point. I would say that definitions are a reflection of societal norms at the time. If you said gender is dependent on a scientifically genetic definition I would agree. Perhaps you could rephrase to "The grammatical gender for animate objects in traditional noun classes is usually male, female or other as interpreted by societal norms of the time". Language reflects society because society defines language. Objects being described don't cease existing because society interprets their definitions differently. Which is exactly why I didn't want to get into a pedantic etymology of language and simply discuss the symbolic meaning. I don't think it matters in the slightest what gender the OP thinks the Holy Spirit is, or what the writers thought it was when it was written.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
