526
Well yes, but actually no
(jlai.lu)
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
An "-e" suffix would indicate a holdover neutral gender word from Latin, which only still exists as a historical artifact – it's not really a valid way to construct new words, if using formal language. It's also important to understand that grammatical gender has no need to align with your social gender, unlike what an anglophone may expect.
I'm not an anglophone, I'm german ;) we use gendered articles/endings for everything. There still is a debate on aligning to gender neutral language however. Not for things, but for everything regarding people, like job positions e.g., because the male version is just socially assumed to be the standard.
Who dictates the 'valid way to construct words'? People made up language, they might as well change the way it's constructed. If people adopt the change, it will prevail, if not it will vanish. That's the only way it works imo. No rules are set in stone regarding language and culture.
Also I took the -e suffix solution from another person on here, wasn't really my point to begin with. But I see your position. It's not exactly an uncommon opinion.
Society does. If I wished to spell words differently and did so in a formal setting, I'd most likely be seen as illiterate, not vanguardist. Also, some countries have prescritivist bodies controlling standard formal language, such as France and Spain (and a Portugal-Brazil joint group, to an extent).
Change always has to start somewhere and culture constantly changes. Sure people might first be opposed to these changes, but wasn't that always the case when something new was popping up? Tale as old as times.
Some changes prevail, some vanish. No matter whether there are prescriptive governing bodies or not.