Jim, thank you for testing this!  It is precisely what I was trying to describe in my previous email--dances which are themselves gender-free both in their teaching and base pattern without need for term changes.  They don't have to be custom-created (as I kind of suggested previously), but they do have to be carefully identified.

Perhaps ECD has been more amenable to non-gendered choreography and instruction because many of its identifying terms are already non-gendered (1st corners, 2nd corners, opposite, partner, 1s, 2s) and a lot of the choreography is position-oriented rather than person-oriented.  Just a hunch; I don't know of any generally used contra term corresponding to ECD's "1st/2nd corners" other than Gents and Ladies.