An example of my transgender confusion.

[Politesse]

You are suggesting that the State 'mischaracterises' transgender people? The State does not. The State records your sex at birth, as it does for all people.

Those two statements have nothing to do with each other, given that sex and gender are not synonyms. The State could entirely correctly typify someone's biological sex at birth, and still inaccurately describe their chosen gender.

And the state has frequently, demontrably, mischaracterized people's sex as well, so I've no idea where your misplaced faith came from but it wasn't the track record of state birth records departments. They make mistakes that have nothing to do with social controversies, and they've absolutely never known how to handle intersex births in a consistent fashion.

Transgender activists demand more than 'calling others how they prefer'. JK Rowling didn't 'misgender' a single person in the world, but she was cancelled. They demand compliance with their belief systems, under threat of social censure, economic ruination, and State force.

This is a random rant, with no relation to the discussion at hand, unless Mrs. Rowling commented on this person's gender at some point. It's also paranoid nonsense, as that person's case study clearly shows (as Rowling has faced neither economic ruin nor State force for her backwards views).

 

[Metaphor]

Those two statements have nothing to do with each other, given that sex and gender are not synonyms. The State could entirely correctly typify someone's biological sex at birth, and still inaccurately describe their chosen gender.

Your sex is recorded on your birth certificate, and it is used as the basis for your sex recorded on other documents. The State never asked anybody's gender. The state did not allow two men to marry each other as long as one of them identified as a woman. The discrimination was done on sex.

And the state has frequently, demontrably, mischaracterized people's sex as well, so I've no idea where your misplaced faith came from but it wasn't the track record of state birth records departments. They make mistakes that have nothing to do with social controversies, and they've absolutely never known how to handle intersex births in a consistent fashion.

It's true that birth certificates are poorly equipped to handle intersex births, so there is a good reason to record a third category for people with intersex conditions.

But there's no good reason for the state to engage in the delusion of transactivists that birth certificates record gender rather than sex.

This is a random rant, with no relation to the discussion at hand, unless Mrs. Rowling commented on this person's gender at some point. It's also paranoid nonsense, as that person's case study clearly shows (as Rowling has faced neither economic ruin nor State force for her backwards views).

Rowling can't be economically ruined, but she is subject to the harassment, death threats, and social censure the transactivists can muster, such as the derogatory and vile sentiments like wishing death upon her (#RIPjkrowling)

Of course, as with a recent example in Australia, the State can and does indeed fine people for misgendering someone else in public.

 

[Metaphor]

I've never encountered a scenario where an individual was expected to not refer to their spouse as their husband or their wife if either of those terms fit.

I've seen it - an instructional video about gender-neutral terminology, suggesting that calling your spouse 'husband' or 'wife' is the less desirable terminology, and calling them 'spouse/partner' is preferred.

 

[Politesse]

Your sex is recorded on your birth certificate, and it is used as the basis for your sex recorded on other documents. The State never asked anybody's gender. The state did not allow two men to marry each other as long as one of them identified as a woman. The discrimination was done on sex.

Which is exactly why your comment was off-topic, in addition to being wrong.

It's true that birth certificates are poorly equipped to handle intersex births, so there is a good reason to record a third category for people with intersex conditions.

And a third gender category, presumably, to accomodate people whose sex is unclear at birth? Hmm, if only there were already a word for someone whose gender is either indeterminate or no longer matches their self preception.... Hmmmmmmm.....

But there's no good reason for the state to engage in the delusion of transactivists that birth certificates record gender rather than sex.

You're the only one who confused the two. I didn't say anything about biological sex in the post you were responding to, nor would I have ever made such an elementary mistake.

 

[Politesse]

I've never encountered a scenario where an individual was expected to not refer to their spouse as their husband or their wife if either of those terms fit.

I've seen it - an instructional video about gender-neutral terminology, suggesting that calling your spouse 'husband' or 'wife' is the less desirable terminology, and calling them 'spouse/partner' is preferred.

I would certainly prefer such a world, I hate having to out myself every time my partner comes into conversation.

 

[Metaphor]

Which is exactly why your comment was off-topic, in addition to being wrong.

And a third gender category, presumably, to accomodate people whose sex is unclear at birth? Hmm, if only there were already a word for someone whose gender is either indeterminate or no longer matches their self preception.... Hmmmmmmm.....

What? If your sex is unclear at birth, then you are probably intersex, and intersex should be recorded on your birth certificate.

You're the only one who confused the two. I didn't say anything about biological sex in the post you were responding to, nor would I have ever made such an elementary mistake.

I haven't mistaken the two. It's transactivists who insist that we should treat people as if their gender were their sex. The State does not mischaracterise anybody's gender, because the state was only ever referring to people's sex.

 

[Metaphor]

I've never encountered a scenario where an individual was expected to not refer to their spouse as their husband or their wife if either of those terms fit.

I've seen it - an instructional video about gender-neutral terminology, suggesting that calling your spouse 'husband' or 'wife' is the less desirable terminology, and calling them 'spouse/partner' is preferred.

I would certainly prefer such a world, I hate having to out myself every time my partner comes into conversation.

Well, bustle agrees with you
https://www.bustle.com/p/7-gender-neutral-terms-we-should-all-be-using-9565996

Though, I'm not sure how you would avoid outing yourself, unless you avoid using their (almost certainly not gender neutral first name) and using pronouns like 'they', which will out you anyway.

But if I got married, I sure as hell wouldn't refer to my husband as my spouse. Fuck that.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Some people can't handle change, or the idea that something they grew up knowing, turned out to be false. True, it isn't a comforting feeling. But some people seem to be frightened of change.

I can just imagine Metaphor and Trausti singing the wrong words to songs they were mistaken about, and after being corrected, belting the wrong words out even louder.

No demographic covered under 'LGBTQ+' gets as much attention as cisgender and heterosexual people. It's just so ubiquitous and normalized you've all taken it for granted. It's like you've walked into a restaurant, noticed they have an aquarium, and then started crying about drowning because less than 1% of the restaurant was made habitable for fish, all the while forgetting that the remaining 99%+ of the space is actually breathable air and space for humans to use and enjoy.

Everyone has to change their language throughout life. LGBTQ issues have had only a fraction of the impact on language as evolutions in consumer electronics and communications products. No one is asking you to start speaking Portuguese. My god what a little whiner you are.

You have to learn biology, including the ambiguities and variances. Actually, not even that. You just have to let go of treating your eight grade health class (or whatever basic education you had)
like it was the gospel.

We didn't make it political. Having to fight to live our lives differently from you made it political. If y'all would stop shoving your cis-het dicks into everything, it wouldn't have been an issue, you needy, whiny fucks.

Amazing that the people who constantly crow about biology with regards to trans people are consistently the ones who also entirely ignore all the actual discussions about biology, particularly about neurobiology and genital-brain discordance.

They entirely ignore the neurological elements, instead harping on about junk science that was invalidated nearly half a century ago ("it's a psychological problem!").

I've tried to dumb it down to the point where someone of at least average education and minimal intelligence could probably grasp it, but for whatever reason, some people just don't seem to ever grasp it.

I've got this medical book from the 17th century and it is pretty damn clear that leaches "take out the gay".

 

[Politesse]

I would certainly prefer such a world, I hate having to out myself every time my partner comes into conversation.

Well, bustle agrees with you
https://www.bustle.com/p/7-gender-neutral-terms-we-should-all-be-using-9565996

Though, I'm not sure how you would avoid outing yourself, unless you avoid using their (almost certainly not gender neutral first name) and using pronouns like 'they', which will out you anyway.

But if I got married, I sure as hell wouldn't refer to my husband as my spouse. Fuck that.

Which is your choice. But your problem here is thinking that you should be able to make choices for everyone else, too. And you have not been invited to do so, in fact.

 

[Metaphor]

Some people can't handle change, or the idea that something they grew up knowing, turned out to be false.

What did I grow up knowing that turned out to be false?

 

[Gun Nut]

I've never encountered a scenario where an individual was expected to not refer to their spouse as their husband or their wife if either of those terms fit.

I've seen it - an instructional video about gender-neutral terminology, suggesting that calling your spouse 'husband' or 'wife' is the less desirable terminology, and calling them 'spouse/partner' is preferred.

I would certainly prefer such a world, I hate having to out myself every time my partner comes into conversation.

What about the feelings of those heterosexuals who then would be pressured into referring to their spouse in a non-gender way, but do not wish to be ambiguous, or give the impression they are part of a particular gender association that they are not associated with?
I do not buy into the notion that choosing to be more specific causes harm to those that do not wish to be specific, and that the ability to be specific be stricken from the language.
I do understand the notion of being sensitive to those you do not really know by referring to THIER partner in a nongender way so as not to imply a presumption on your own part. That is different than how one chooses to refer to elements of their own life.
and before i am charged with the crime of being insensitive to their feelings, just know I charge the same to those who are insensitive to the feeling s of those speaking of their own experiences and the way they choose to describe elements of their own life.
I never met a homosexual couple that had a "problem" with me referring (or them referring, after I do) to my spouse as my wife.

 

[Politesse]

I would certainly prefer such a world, I hate having to out myself every time my partner comes into conversation.

What about the feelings of those heterosexuals who then would be pressured into referring to their spouse in a non-gender way, but do not wish to be ambiguous, or give the impression they are part of a particular gender association that they are not associated with?
I do not buy into the notion that choosing to be more specific causes harm to those that do not wish to be specific, and that the ability to be specific be stricken from the language.
I do understand the notion of being sensitive to those you do not really know by referring to THIER partner in a nongender way so as not to imply a presumption on your own part. That is different than how one chooses to refer to elements of their own life.
and before i am charged with the crime of being insensitive to their feelings, just know I charge the same to those who are insensitive to the feeling s of those speaking of their own experiences and the way they choose to describe elements of their own life.
I never met a homosexual couple that had a "problem" with me referring (or them referring, after I do) to my spouse as my wife.

Who's stopping them? I said I appreciate those who are normalizing this usage, not that I think there should be a punishment for not doing so. Nor have I ever heard of there being one, anywhere. Indeed, nongendered spousal references are still vanishingly rare in normal social life.

 

[Trausti]

Name this gender.

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

Name this gender.

I've never really seen someone so desperate to prove their own irrelevance to a conversation.

That person should be wearing their mask properly though.

 

[ruby sparks]

Name this gender.

Ok. I'll bite.

My guess is.....that....it's one of these:

Agender
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
FTM
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Genderqueer
Intersex
Male to Female
MTF
Neither
Neutrois
Non-binary
Other
Pangender
Trans
Trans*
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transfeminine
Transgender
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transmasculine
Transsexual
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman
Two-Spirit
More than two-spirit
Other


Do I win?

 

[Emily Lake]

Name this gender.

I'm going to go with "confused" and also say that in this particular case, gender is irrelevant to everything that's off in that person's world. In other words, this person has problems... and of those problems, gender is probably pretty low on the list.

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

Name this gender.

I'm going to go with "confused" and also say that in this particular case, gender is irrelevant to everything that's off in that person's world. In other words, this person has problems... and of those problems, gender is probably pretty low on the list.

Why?

 

[Jarhyn]

Name this gender.

Ok. I'll bite.

My guess is.....that....it's one of these:

Agender
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
FTM
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Genderqueer
Intersex
Male to Female
MTF
Neither
Neutrois
Non-binary
Other
Pangender
Trans
Trans*
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transfeminine
Transgender
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transmasculine
Transsexual
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman
Two-Spirit
More than two-spirit
Other


Do I win?

The gender, here, is "fucking irrelevant". The have made a statement that people should quit paying attention to irrelevant things, of which gender, sex, and color of skin are all members of such a set.

The person in the photo has correctly identified that color shouldn't matter in deciding whose lives matter, but many people, some of whom are black, have decided that some lives do not matter because the person who lives those lives is black.

 

[J842P]

The person in the photo has correctly identified that color shouldn't matter in deciding whose lives matter, but many people, some of whom are black, have decided that some lives do not matter because the person who lives those lives is black.

In society at large? No, no they haven't. Although, that is a narrative that exists, yes.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Name this gender.

Sectoid?

(From the first XCOM game.)