She probably meant female-excludent

Anyway, the word "monk" is male! °

There has always been a "generic male form" in grammar.

my 2cents: It would be far more efficient to exclude female forms in favour of the generic male, hence abandoning "explicit male" too, instead of inventing new grammar.

The originally male forms are normally shorter.

°) do you want to register a new sites for perlnuns?

Well, "excludent" isn't a word in English. The proper word would be "excluding", but that still sounds somewhat awkward. I believe "exclusive" is correct, but it makes me realize that the word has, to some extent, become its own antonym.

The proper word would be "excluding", but that still sounds somewhat awkward

I was thinking that "female-exclusive" would be taken to mean "exclusive of females".
If I wanted to convey "exclusively female", then I would have used that exact phrase. It might have been clearer if I had written "exclusively male".

The level "Patriarch" is the only level that I regard as "male only" - though my 25-year-old Concise Oxford Dictionary decrees that a "monk" is male.
All of the other levels look gender-neutral (ie implying neither male nor female) to me - and I still find it interesting (and mildly unsettling) that, in 2021, we have created this specifically male level named "Patriarch".

Cheers,
Rob

> I believe "exclusive" is correct,

please search the internet for "member exclusive" and show me the instances where it meant that members were excluded. ;-)

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery}