Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!decwrl!daemon
From: daemon@decwrl.UUCP (The devil himself)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion
Subject: Re: Deific Gender Question
Message-ID: <3278@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 11-Aug-84 11:40:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.3278
Posted: Sat Aug 11 11:40:31 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 12-Aug-84 02:28:02 EDT
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 50

Re: Deific Gender Question_____________________________________________________

> I stick to *he/him* because this is the common convention, and there doesn't
> seem to be much reason to switch.

	There most certainly *is* a good reason to switch!
	We've recently become aware of the socio-psychological effects of ass-
igning male gender to God.  They should be obvious:  over-inflated egos for
males, low self-esteem for females.
	I certainly remember incidents in my childhood where arguments between
boys and girls over superiority (a ridiculous pasttime in any event) were ir-
refutably ended with "God is a boy, so boys are better."
	Even when the local theological authority (like a Sunday school teach-
er) assured us all that God was both male and female, the belief that God is
male overrode that and was reinforced every time God was referred to as "he."
	You want a good reason to switch?  Think about all the poor little
girls growing up with the belief that they are cheap imitations of the species
made in "his" image.  Think about the poor little boys growing up with the idea
that they are superior.

> Also, men would be much more uptight about a female God than women seem to be
> about the male.

	What makes you say that?

> After all, it is not wise to go around offending the sensibilities of people
> without good reason!

	Then I hope you can give me some good reasons for offending me!  Seri-
ously (and don't take this personally), I am offended by things like the use
of male terms for God and the use of male terms for humans in general.
	But that's me.  I'll speculate that you're referring to the large num-
bers of people who would be offended by a female God or an "it" God.  If so, I
can only respond that such offenses have plenty of good reasons, some of which
I've mentioned above.

	It seems to me that the problem with using a term to refer to a gender-
less God is related to the problem of using a genderless pronoun for humans.
(That's a seperate issue.  Until something better comes along, I recommend the
singular "they.")
		<_Jym_>

:::::::::::::::: Jym Dyer
::::'  ::  `:::: Nashua, New Hampshire
::'    ::    `::
::     ::     :: DYER%VAXUUM.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA
::   .::::.   :: {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vaxuum!dyer
::..:' :: `:..::
::::.  ::  .:::: Statements made in this article are my own; they might not
:::::::::::::::: reflect the views of |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| Equipment Corporation.