Since the decision in Germany and several other countries to allow records of birth a third option for sexual identity as indefinite, as opposed to male or female, there has been much discussion among linguists on how to frame this new category—with tact and sensitivity. There have been quite a few proposals put forward, which mostly support removing gender distinction from language, culling nuance in other ways too, or reforming the word neuter and its equivalents so as to make it have no negative connotations.
Speech reflects realities, however, and not the other way around. Going back to Latin roots, neutral from
neutralis simply means neither and the unrelated word neuter comes from
ne-uter—not whether, not either (
unweder auf Deutsch) and suggests impartiality, which probably captures the meaning conveyed the best. It is a distinct challenge, however, to introduce or re-introduce a new designation without controversy or stigma. Despite past social aversion, this is a condition that exists for not just a clinical minority, and depending on the jurisdiction, it is a matter for self-determination or a decision left to fretful parents with physician-recommendation. What do you think? Whether or not a particular language assigns gender along conventional and sometimes arbitrary lines or has any grammar of emasculation or misogyny, there is a lot of unspoken vocabulary having to do conventional roles and ready assignment.
