6

There is the word "genderless" (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/genderless), however there is no such word as "genderful", so what word should I use instead?

3
  • 3
    Also see sexed, “having a sex; being male or female” Commented Jun 16, 2013 at 18:36
  • 1
    @jwpat7: Also "having been assigned a sex" - which in the case of two-day-old male chicks is an assignment I'm sure they'd rather forego! Commented Jun 17, 2013 at 20:45
  • 4
    I would just say "gendered"; "gendered" is to have gender, "genderless" is to be without it.
    – WendiKidd
    Commented Jun 17, 2013 at 22:52

1 Answer 1

9

It depends on the exact context, but often just gender would work...

1: If one wished to apply adelphoi specifically to one gender or the other, one had to couple it with a gender noun.

In other contexts (or simply through stylistic preference) you could use gendered...

2: The relationship between a gendered division of work and a gendered division of dominance was a crucial issue.

But probably the most "general-purpose" form is gender-based...

3: Similarly, a gender-based analysis that considers sexual orientation would be essential to understanding the often troubled political and social relationships between lesbians and gay men.

A few people have used genderised, but I wouldn't recommend that one at the moment. Though I can imagine it becoming more useful in future, if and when biotechnology advances to the point where we routinely force a "non-sex-differentiated cell" to definitely become one sex or the other.

1
  • 1
    Good answer! Genderised is interesting. I haven't heard it before, and I don't much like the sound of it--too much like tenderised, I think.
    – user230
    Commented Jun 18, 2013 at 9:18

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .