• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Men wearing dresses

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I see no point in replying to your responses, as it is obvious to me that we will never agree. That is fine; I did not expect complete agreement from anyone. I will say, however, that you don’t know me and your opinion of what causes me true emotional pain is just that – your opinion.

But THIS statement gives me pause:
As for finding a solution that works, you do not have the background or experience to contribute meaningfully to that conversation, and chances are good that you don't want to.
I am seriously curious. Why do you flatly state that I cannot or do not want to contribute meaningfully to the conversation? In my opinion, this is a conversation that should include everyone as it will impact all of us. Do you think that only those who are non binary should have input on this?

Ruth

It seems like the 99.9% of the population that are being asked to make fundamental alterations to our language should be included in the discussion. Call me crazy, I guess.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
So what? You are taking away all responsibility from the person who is affected more to regulate their emotions and think ahead, and not put themselves in these kinds of situations or understanding this about themselves and can take steps to manage their own emotions.

If we act on this and refrain from being fully honest when debating, because of the feelings of others, we're treating them as children who don't know better. How isn't that MORE insulting?

I think it's even worse than you propose. Everyone ends up having to defer to whoever can most loudly claim to be hurt. It places emotion far, far above reason.
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,171
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
So what? You are taking away all responsibility from the person who is affected more to regulate their emotions and think ahead, and not put themselves in these kinds of situations or understanding this about themselves and can take steps to manage their own emotions.

If we act on this and refrain from being fully honest when debating, because of the feelings of others, we're treating them as children who don't know better. How isn't that MORE insulting?

It's this kind of thinking which makes everybody hate Millennials.

It's just feelings. Getting ones feelings hurt isn't a disaster nor a big deal. In debates I think we should always gun for full honesty, no matter what.

And if we can't handle our own emotions in the conversation we can always bow out from the conversation. This is what sets children apart from adults. It's not that adults don't have feelings. They just have learned how to manage them.

No you haven't. Having the privilege to be unfeeling toward others without consequence isn't maturity.

At this point in history there is no one more childish and unable to manage their emotions than white men being told they are not as important as they have been led to believe.

Cry, bluster, stamp your feet, blame made up enemies like "millennials" and "cancel culture," but you are being challenged and called out for your hubris, immaturity, and callousness like it or not. Your opinions about people and experiences you know nothing about are not useful or required, and your lack of humanity is your responsibility to handle if you don't want it called out. Die mad about it.

I agree that middle aged white men having temper tantrums on forums is hilarious. I totally agree about your assessment of this group of people (which I belong to). It's totally the sting of the pain of privilige slipping away.

But here's the thing. You are sinking to their/our level.

The goal of Woke is to protect the feelings of people just as much as we used to protect the feelings of middle aged mediocre men. I think that's totally backward.

I say fuck everybodys feelings. It's just feelings. If something hurts to hear in a forum then it's likely something that is healthy for you to hear. That's my experience from having my feelings hurt in forums.

And if you can't handle having your feelings hurt, then why are you on a philosophy, sceptics and religion discussion forum? For people like us it should be a sacred mission to poke at everything we avoid to face out of fear.

Everybody loses from disengenuin politiness.

I always prefer a cutting insult to a friendly lie. Especially in a forum like this
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
YEs, I am 100% certain. "Intersex" doesn't actually mean that they're in-between the sexes. They may have ambiguous genitalia, but each individual is still ONLY male or female. There is LITERALLY no alternative among humans - a single individual cannot produce both egg cells and sperm cells. It's not possible.

I don't think it's actually impossible--the key being your statement "a single individual". What if it isn't a single individual? What if the person is actually a chimera? One part is male, the other is testosterone-insensitive, could be either XX or XY. Get just the right blend and you could end up with two functional sets of anatomy downstairs.

Horrendously unlikely but I see no reason to think it's impossible. Chimeras certainly exist and I seriously doubt we even know how common it might be as most of them will not be detected. (I'm thinking of a woman arrested for welfare fraud because the DNA test came back saying the kid wasn't hers. Turns out her reproductive apparatus wasn't hers, either.)

A chimera is an amalgam of two gene sets, but is still a single individual. You'd have to have duplicate organs in order to produce both sperm and ova. You'd have to have duplicate organs in order to have both a penis and a vagina. You don't get duplication in chimerism. It's possible for a chimeric person to have some chromosomes that are male and some that are female - absolutely. But unless they are literally duplicating organs, they can't end up with two functional sets of anatomy - not as a chimera.

Maybe as conjoint twins?

This is not true. There ARE individuals with both ovaries and tested. It is extremely rare but it happens
And is well documented. I provided links earlier.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/differences-in-sex-development/

https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/ovotesticular-disorder-of-sex-development/#related-disorders

Ovotesticular disorder of sex development (ovotesticular DSD) is a very rare disorder in which an infant is born with the internal reproductive organs (gonads) of both sexes (female ovaries and male testes). The gonads can be any combination of ovary, testes or combined ovary and testes (ovotestes). The external genitalia are usually ambiguous but can range from normal male to normal female.

Co-joined twins are identical twins which are derived from the union of a single ovum fertilized by a single sperm that failed to divide completely into two separate embryos. They will continue to develop into two fetuses but will remain connected through development. Because they are genetically identical, they would have identical gonads and sex organs.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I'm just going to step in here to write that I am prejudiced about a lot of things. I hope that I am conscious of my various prejudices and that none of them are against any people. But I am certain that is not really the case.

Somewhat relevant to this discussion, it appears that now some federal documents call mothers 'birthing persons' which I find offensive and extremely upsetting.
Here's a link to an article, reprinted from the Chicago Tribune which only allows paid subscribers to read the column there: https://www.startribune.com/theres-...t-dear-old-birthing-person-of-mine/600068973/

I am happy to celebrate all individuals who help give rise to a human being by egg donation, gestation, or childbirth the word mother, and to add context where necessary for clarification: An egg donor is only the genetic mother. A gestational surrogate carried the child but is not usually genetically related to the child. Transmen who retain a uterus and choose to carry a child act as the child's mother during gestation, whatever they prefer to be called during the pregnancy or after. And if, after giving birth, they see themselves as the child's father or simply parent, no problem. But biologically, they are the mother, even if that is never mentioned again. Even if they are married to a woman who becomes the mother. Nonbinary persons who choose to carry a child are the child's mother during gestation, and often from conception onward, whatever they choose to call themselves. Those who give birth and then give the child up for adoption are still the birth mother, even if they never laid eyes on the child. Women who adopt children, be they cis or trans, are mother to the adopted child. Women who raise children, even temporarily in foster situations are nonetheless mother to those children, however fleetingly. It's more than possible to have two or more mothers! Ask any child raised in part or wholely by a stepmother or foster mother! Heck, when they were growing up, some of my kids' friends called me mom. So did some of the exchange students who lived with us. Frankly, some single fathers also act as mother to their children and that, too, should be honored just as women who act as both mother and father should be honored for assuming the paternal role.

THAT term: birthing person, has kind of broken me.

I also struggle with watching transmen who break into new public positions as the first trans woman being celebrated when so few, or no cis women have ever held that role. This is an individual who, no matter what her private struggles, benefited from all of society's benefits conferred on boys and men until she decided to act on her innermost understanding and awareness of herself and dress and present herself as the woman she is, or even have gender confirmation surgery. Ideologically, I have no problem with transgender women being as successful in their careers and lives as they can be. It just grates sometimes when a transwoman breaks a barrier that so few or no ciswomen have been able to break in a chosen career.

I fully acknowledge that I might be wrong, that it might be prejudice or even bigotry on my part.

I think they're perfectly reasonable concerns and frustrations, and that you're not at all bigoted.

For the record, I no longer use Always pads, and I won't be using Midol in the future, because both of those companies have embraced this sort of language. Always got rid of the female symbol on their packaging... even though only females use their product. Midol released a whole series of internet ads referring to their customers as "menstruators". It's insulting and dehumanizing.

I also won’t be using those products but not for any political reason or to make a statement.
 

steve_bank

Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
9,420
Location
seattle
Basic Beliefs
secular-skeptic
So what? You are taking away all responsibility from the person who is affected more to regulate their emotions and think ahead, and not put themselves in these kinds of situations or understanding this about themselves and can take steps to manage their own emotions.

If we act on this and refrain from being fully honest when debating, because of the feelings of others, we're treating them as children who don't know better. How isn't that MORE insulting?

It's this kind of thinking which makes everybody hate Millennials.

It's just feelings. Getting ones feelings hurt isn't a disaster nor a big deal. In debates I think we should always gun for full honesty, no matter what.

And if we can't handle our own emotions in the conversation we can always bow out from the conversation. This is what sets children apart from adults. It's not that adults don't have feelings. They just have learned how to manage them.

No you haven't. Having the privilege to be unfeeling toward others without consequence isn't maturity.

At this point in history there is no one more childish and unable to manage their emotions than white men being told they are not as important as they have been led to believe.

Cry, bluster, stamp your feet, blame made up enemies like "millennials" and "cancel culture," but you are being challenged and called out for your hubris, immaturity, and callousness like it or not. Your opinions about people and experiences you know nothing about are not useful or required, and your lack of humanity is your responsibility to handle if you don't want it called out. Die mad about it.

If you want to start painting with a broad brush..

Or minorities who whine about being suppressed as an excuse for not making an attempt to succeed. Or minorities who are 'deeply offended' at any possible interpretation of something being race related. Or minorities who do not take responsibility for their lves and blame every bump in the road as racism....ad nauseum.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
So what? You are taking away all responsibility from the person who is affected more to regulate their emotions and think ahead, and not put themselves in these kinds of situations or understanding this about themselves and can take steps to manage their own emotions.

If we act on this and refrain from being fully honest when debating, because of the feelings of others, we're treating them as children who don't know better. How isn't that MORE insulting?

I think it's even worse than you propose. Everyone ends up having to defer to whoever can most loudly claim to be hurt. It places emotion far, far above reason.

The 'change' has already been in use for years. So far, no one has been upset when I use 'they' to indicate person or persons whose sex or gender is not known or not relevant. It's just an indefinite pronoun and it's been in use for a long, long time.

Yes, I admit that sometimes it is jarring when I see persons who appear to be biologically male present themselves as female by their hair and wardrobe. When I was a kid, I found it jarring to see inter racial couples which were rare in my tiny corner of the world 50 years ago. My discomfort at seeing something I am not familiar with is not a reason to treat other people badly. Refusing to acknowledge people as they see themselves, whatever their chromosomal array or genitalia they were born with or acquired through medical treatment IS worse than feeling uncomfortable because it doesn't fit my personal set of boxes that people can be placed into.

As a child and adolescent, I had many interests that were not stereotypical 'girl' interests---yet many girls and women have held those same interests throughout history, even to the point of disguising their sex and/or gender in order to pursue those interests. But even if I were the first and only girl who liked to collect bugs and rocks and climb trees, it didn't matter. I was a girl and I liked those things and other 'non-girl' things. It was indeed hurtful to be told, sometimes by people who supposedly loved and cared about me, that I wasn't really a 'girl' because girls didn't like to do the things I did or that I couldn't really be good at certain things because everyone knew that boys were better than girls at (fill in the blank). Which led me to engage in some pretty stupid contests.

But that wasn't nearly as hurtful as the names that gay people were called in my high school, even though their orientation was unacknowledged openly. By several orders of magnitude! Or to be told that it matters more that someone else--a family member, a stranger, whoever--has a better understanding of who you REALLY are than you do yourself, even if it's something you struggled with your whole life, spent hours and money in doctor's offices and therapists offices trying to figure out or figure out how to tell other people. And that it's 'too much trouble' because it makes cis straight people uncomfortable if you insist on being acknowledged for who you are. Because they might have to use words that they already use regularly in a slightly different way.

And then: FFS, some languages do not even have gendered pronouns! Chinese, Finnish and Estonian are 3 such languages!

https://deepbaltic.com/2018/03/20/being-non-binary-in-a-language-without-gendered-pronouns-estonian/
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
35,638
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
So what? You are taking away all responsibility from the person who is affected more to regulate their emotions and think ahead, and not put themselves in these kinds of situations or understanding this about themselves and can take steps to manage their own emotions.

If we act on this and refrain from being fully honest when debating, because of the feelings of others, we're treating them as children who don't know better. How isn't that MORE insulting?

It's this kind of thinking which makes everybody hate Millennials.

It's just feelings. Getting ones feelings hurt isn't a disaster nor a big deal. In debates I think we should always gun for full honesty, no matter what.

And if we can't handle our own emotions in the conversation we can always bow out from the conversation. This is what sets children apart from adults. It's not that adults don't have feelings. They just have learned how to manage them.

No you haven't. Having the privilege to be unfeeling toward others without consequence isn't maturity.

At this point in history there is no one more childish and unable to manage their emotions than white men being told they are not as important as they have been led to believe.

Cry, bluster, stamp your feet, blame made up enemies like "millennials" and "cancel culture," but you are being challenged and called out for your hubris, immaturity, and callousness like it or not. Your opinions about people and experiences you know nothing about are not useful or required, and your lack of humanity is your responsibility to handle if you don't want it called out. Die mad about it.

If you want to start painting with a broad brush..

Or minorities who whine about being suppressed as an excuse for not making an attempt to succeed. Or minorities who are 'deeply offended' at any possible interpretation of something being race related. Or minorities who do not take responsibility for their lves and blame every bump in the road as racism....ad nauseum.

A person complaining about minorities by saying anyone that complains is a lazy minorities. Presumption.

Complaining about blacks complaining about racism. Why don’t own a home? Because you are lazy! It is that simple! Why if I had all the advantages of AA...

Ignorance screaming from the mountain tops.
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,138
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
I agree that middle aged white men having temper tantrums on forums is hilarious. I totally agree about your assessment of this group of people (which I belong to). It's totally the sting of the pain of privilige slipping away.
Except nothing is slipping away from you. In addition, your feelings are not relevant to whether non binary people prefer the pronoun "they" in the singular.

But here's the thing. You are sinking to their/our level.
You mean showing a complete disregard for your feelings? Maybe, though that's not relevant, either. But hang on to that thought. It could be useful to you at some point.

The goal of Woke is to protect the feelings of people just as much as we used to protect the feelings of middle aged mediocre men. I think that's totally backward.
And you'd be wrong, but it doesnt matter because your opinions about imaginary enemies are not relevant to non binary people prefering the pronoun "they" in the singular anyway.

I say fuck everybodys feelings. It's just feelings. If something hurts to hear in a forum then it's likely something that is healthy for you to hear. That's my experience from having my feelings hurt in forums.
Yes, we already know you turn to callousness as a way of coping with your feelings whenever you're uncomfortable. No need to keep repeating it. We get it. You have limitless privilege to be as unfeeling toward others as you please with zero consequences.

And if you can't handle having your feelings hurt, then why are you on a philosophy, sceptics and religion discussion forum?
Who are you talking to? My feelings are fine and they're irrelevant anyway.

For people like us it should be a sacred mission to poke at everything we avoid to face out of fear.

Everybody loses from disengenuin politiness.
Who is "us"? Is this your mission? Is it sarcasm? It doesn't logically follow anything I've said. Maybe you quoted the wrong person by mistake? Also, if you're talking about fake politeness in that last sentence, yes, there are people who win with fake politeness and they enforce it with every bit of privilege they have. (Hint: you are not Socrates in that scenario. :rofl:)

I always prefer a cutting insult to a friendly lie. Especially in a forum like this.
Are those your only options?

Also, telling someone their opinion isn't relevant when it really isn't relevant is not an insult. It’s just not a friendly lie.
 

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
20,133
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
Dr Z said:
I say fuck everybodys feelings. It's just feelings. If something hurts to hear in a forum then it's likely something that is healthy for you to hear. That's my experience from having my feelings hurt in forums.
AF said:
Yes, we already know you turn to callousness as a way of coping with your feelings whenever you're uncomfortable. No need to keep repeating it. We get it. You have limitless privilege to be as unfeeling toward others as you please with zero consequences.

Why would someone want to be unfeeling toward others? Because it hurts to be feeling toward others when they hurt.
The more empathic a person is the more it hurts. Masking or filtering the feelings of others is a "privilege" that all can enjoy, and one for which we can all suffer the consequences.
I think it's relatively easy for right wing sociopaths to reflexively say "fuck 'em and their feelings". But I can almost hear DrZ suffering under the weight of the decision to do so.
The temptation is plain enough -
This shit is a pain in the ass to deal with, some people are annoying, minorities always whine, life is short, who needs the bother, dresses are stupid looking, black people are hard to see in the dark, we'd all be better of if everyone just grew thicker skin and didn't get so upset...

Come to think of it, that does hold some appeal... :thinking:
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Poor babies. The injustice of it all! :rofl:

WHO is treating you all so badly?

In this thread? You, mostly.

Rather than trying to have a discussion and find common ground, you're kind of hell-bent on berating people and insulting them.

Oh my goodness, that's terrible! And also irrelevant.

Hmm. You mocking and demeaning other posters for not adopting your views is irrelevant to you mocking and demeaning other posters for not adopting your views? Alright then, carry on Noble Floof. Here, let me hand you a fresh lance for your next run at the windmill.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
This is not true. There ARE individuals with both ovaries and tested. It is extremely rare but it happens
And is well documented. I provided links earlier.
We're taking at cross purposes, or maybe using different language. There are absolutely individuals who have one ovary and one testis. On that you are absolutely correct - I even specifically mentioned that. What they don't have, however, are two ovaries and simultaneously two testes. Andi n those cases where an individual does have one of each, only one can be fertile - the other will be sterile (although more commonly both are sterile). Your quoted information regarding Ovotesticular disorder (colloquially referred to as true hermaphroditism) is the same information that I provided several posts ago.

For reference:

Mmm... even in cases of true hermaphroditism, a person won't have two ovaries and two testes. They can't - ovaries and testes start out as the same tissue, and diverge during fetal development based on the chromosomal signals sent.

True hermaprhoditism is extremely rare - 0.0012%. Most commonly among that incredibly rare population are people who either have two ovotestes (a sterile tissue formation stalled halfway through differentiation) or they have one ovary and one ovotestis. These are female people (XX chromosomes, other internal reproductive organs are female) and they frequently have a malfunctioning SRY gene. This formation is somewhere around 3/4 of the cases. These female people are only fertile if they have one functioning ovary.

The remainder of the cases involve disorders that occur at conception: a single ovum ending up fertilized by two differently-sexed sperm, two ovum that fuse prior to being fertilized by a single male sperm, and vanishingly rare - two separate ovum, fertilized by two separate differently-sexed sperm that fuse after fertilization resulting in a true chimera.

In none of these cases will the individual produce both ova and sperm. In the majority of cases, they produce neither and are sterile. In no cases does a person have both a fully functional penis and a fully functional vagina. And in all cases, the person with the disorder is still only male or female.


When you read your quoted info from rare diseases or nhs, are you interpreting that to mean that these individuals have a total of FOUR gonads and simultaneously produce both ova and sperm?

Co-joined twins are identical twins which are derived from the union of a single ovum fertilized by a single sperm that failed to divide completely into two separate embryos. They will continue to develop into two fetuses but will remain connected through development. Because they are genetically identical, they would have identical gonads and sex organs.
Thanks :) I wasn't sure if a single fertilized ova that doesn't completely divide was the only way for them to form, or if it were possible to have a single ova fertilized by two sperm, that doesn't completely split.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I also won’t be using those products but not for any political reason or to make a statement.

:D I'm not there yet. Still in the stage of night sweats, hot flashes, and occasional bouts of wanting to kill strangers for the crime of breathing. But I am counting the years...
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The 'change' has already been in use for years. So far, no one has been upset when I use 'they' to indicate person or persons whose sex or gender is not known or not relevant. It's just an indefinite pronoun and it's been in use for a long, long time.

Yes, I admit that sometimes it is jarring when I see persons who appear to be biologically male present themselves as female by their hair and wardrobe. When I was a kid, I found it jarring to see inter racial couples which were rare in my tiny corner of the world 50 years ago. My discomfort at seeing something I am not familiar with is not a reason to treat other people badly. Refusing to acknowledge people as they see themselves, whatever their chromosomal array or genitalia they were born with or acquired through medical treatment IS worse than feeling uncomfortable because it doesn't fit my personal set of boxes that people can be placed into.

As a child and adolescent, I had many interests that were not stereotypical 'girl' interests---yet many girls and women have held those same interests throughout history, even to the point of disguising their sex and/or gender in order to pursue those interests. But even if I were the first and only girl who liked to collect bugs and rocks and climb trees, it didn't matter. I was a girl and I liked those things and other 'non-girl' things. It was indeed hurtful to be told, sometimes by people who supposedly loved and cared about me, that I wasn't really a 'girl' because girls didn't like to do the things I did or that I couldn't really be good at certain things because everyone knew that boys were better than girls at (fill in the blank). Which led me to engage in some pretty stupid contests.

But that wasn't nearly as hurtful as the names that gay people were called in my high school, even though their orientation was unacknowledged openly. By several orders of magnitude! Or to be told that it matters more that someone else--a family member, a stranger, whoever--has a better understanding of who you REALLY are than you do yourself, even if it's something you struggled with your whole life, spent hours and money in doctor's offices and therapists offices trying to figure out or figure out how to tell other people. And that it's 'too much trouble' because it makes cis straight people uncomfortable if you insist on being acknowledged for who you are. Because they might have to use words that they already use regularly in a slightly different way.

And then: FFS, some languages do not even have gendered pronouns! Chinese, Finnish and Estonian are 3 such languages!

https://deepbaltic.com/2018/03/20/being-non-binary-in-a-language-without-gendered-pronouns-estonian/

90% of the time, I completely agree with respect to using pronouns as a person prefers. But I have reservations. They're limited to a few particular kinds of interactions, but they're still present.

For example, there was a case a couple of years ago where a 60 year old woman in London went to a meeting to discuss the potential impacts of the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act (specifically rewriting it to make legal recognition a matter solely of self-declaration and removing any requirement for a diagnosis or living as the target gender). The meeting was mobbed by a collection of activists... one of whom, a transgender identified male, proceeded to attack and beat up that 60 yo woman. In court, she kept referring to her attacker as "he" because, well, they were male and they looked male. The judge reprimanded the victim of this assault for not honoring her attacker's preferred pronouns. Ultimately, even though the judge found the attacker guilty of assault... the judge denied the victim financial recompense because she misgendered her male attacker.

Generally speaking, I'm not a fan of compelled speech. I'm especially not a fan of compelled speech when it is in direct opposition to observed reality.

As a courtesy and as expected good manners - 100%. Required and subject to penalty if you don't conform? No, not so much.
 

steve_bank

Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
9,420
Location
seattle
Basic Beliefs
secular-skeptic
If you want to start painting with a broad brush..

Or minorities who whine about being suppressed as an excuse for not making an attempt to succeed. Or minorities who are 'deeply offended' at any possible interpretation of something being race related. Or minorities who do not take responsibility for their lves and blame every bump in the road as racism....ad nauseum.

A person complaining about minorities by saying anyone that complains is a lazy minorities. Presumption.

Complaining about blacks complaining about racism. Why don’t own a home? Because you are lazy! It is that simple! Why if I had all the advantages of AA...

Ignorance screaming from the mountain tops.

Sarcasm.

AF is resorting to the worse of bigotry, race bating, and stereotypes. The left and right are equally guilty. We see it every dauy in the nedia.

If AF us searching for common ground rce bating is not the way.

Off topic, but I have black friends whose conspiracy theoryyes rval the wacky whute right.

Did you know that Jews control the music industry and black musicans? It those Jews who force balcjk artsist to be crude and offensive.

People like AF resort to stereotypes without any real experience with the world around him.

On the question of blacks finding work another black friend said 'in Seattle there was always work..for anyone that wanted it'.

ave you heard American blacks complain about immigrants, including blacks, who do not speak English? I certainly have.

AF represents the narrow shallow minded liberal who only see one side.. Arm chair moralizing. Trafficking in cheap steeotypes.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
YEs, I am 100% certain. "Intersex" doesn't actually mean that they're in-between the sexes. They may have ambiguous genitalia, but each individual is still ONLY male or female. There is LITERALLY no alternative among humans - a single individual cannot produce both egg cells and sperm cells. It's not possible.

I don't think it's actually impossible--the key being your statement "a single individual". What if it isn't a single individual? What if the person is actually a chimera? One part is male, the other is testosterone-insensitive, could be either XX or XY. Get just the right blend and you could end up with two functional sets of anatomy downstairs.

Horrendously unlikely but I see no reason to think it's impossible. Chimeras certainly exist and I seriously doubt we even know how common it might be as most of them will not be detected. (I'm thinking of a woman arrested for welfare fraud because the DNA test came back saying the kid wasn't hers. Turns out her reproductive apparatus wasn't hers, either.)

A chimera is an amalgam of two gene sets, but is still a single individual. You'd have to have duplicate organs in order to produce both sperm and ova. You'd have to have duplicate organs in order to have both a penis and a vagina. You don't get duplication in chimerism. It's possible for a chimeric person to have some chromosomes that are male and some that are female - absolutely. But unless they are literally duplicating organs, they can't end up with two functional sets of anatomy - not as a chimera.

Maybe as conjoint twins?

A chimera is basically the ultimate example of conjoined twins. It's two bodies grown together as one seamlessly. What if it's not quite seamless--some duplicate tissue?

Some cells in the body have one set of genes, other cells have another. It is not mixed within a cell. DNA from the twin comes back as the twin, not as you.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I see no point in replying to your responses, as it is obvious to me that we will never agree. That is fine; I did not expect complete agreement from anyone. I will say, however, that you don’t know me and your opinion of what causes me true emotional pain is just that – your opinion.

But THIS statement gives me pause:
As for finding a solution that works, you do not have the background or experience to contribute meaningfully to that conversation, and chances are good that you don't want to.
I am seriously curious. Why do you flatly state that I cannot or do not want to contribute meaningfully to the conversation? In my opinion, this is a conversation that should include everyone as it will impact all of us. Do you think that only those who are non binary should have input on this?

Ruth

It seems like the 99.9% of the population that are being asked to make fundamental alterations to our language should be included in the discussion. Call me crazy, I guess.

99.9999999% of the population is expected to abide by your wishes in terms of address. Or should we call you Amy?
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
When I was a kid, I found it jarring to see inter racial couples which were rare in my tiny corner of the world 50 years ago.

Something like 20 years ago in Shanghai we were the inter racial couple that just about caused a guy to bike into a telephone pole (looking at us rather than where he was going. It was late enough the sidewalk was empty of other people.)

And then: FFS, some languages do not even have gendered pronouns! Chinese, Finnish and Estonian are 3 such languages!

Yup--which is why Chinese speakers are so bad at gender in English. He/she/it are one concept to her and it is much harder to learn new word concepts than it is to learn new words.
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,138
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Oh my goodness, that's terrible! And also irrelevant.

Hmm. You mocking and demeaning other posters for not adopting your views is irrelevant to you mocking and demeaning other posters for not adopting your views? Alright then, carry on Noble Floof. Here, let me hand you a fresh lance for your next run at the windmill.

For fuck's sake, it's not about you! I am not interested in demeaning or insulting you. I don't know you well enough to be bothered by you either way or to feel the slightest bit challenged by your temper tantrums about how your irrelevant perspective must be respected on the topic of human beings who actually are disrespected far beyond just having their insecurities triggered by strangers on the internet. AND in an internet community that does not allow for you to be treated with actual abuse or bullying or threats.

But please, continue the demonstrations!
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,171
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Except nothing is slipping away from you. In addition, your feelings are not relevant to whether non binary people prefer the pronoun "they" in the singular.

I don't agree. When white men in their 70'ies and above are in public discussions the disappearance of white privilege is palpable. Did you notice just how much everybody made fun of Trump, for instance? The reverence for old white men is gone now. I think it's a result of social media and Internet culture.

Everybody knows how systematic racism and the corrupting forces of power dynamics now.

That's why it's so fun when white middle-aged feminists crash and burn online trying to tell black women how they feel about being oppressed, completely unaware that they are also talking from a now defunct white priviliged position.

Social media is a fantastic equalizer.

On this forum we're all just text. Our beings have been reduced to electronic letters floating through space. It's like we're reduced to nothing but our souls communicating. It's beautiful and it's amazing. Radically stripping away any privilege.
 
Last edited:

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,171
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Dr Z said:
I say fuck everybodys feelings.

Why would someone want to be unfeeling toward others?

On a discussion forum shouldn't the goal primarily be to be interesting?

I'm on a number of mailing lists. For a variety of functions. They've all banned congratulary messages where we simply applaud the previous poster. Why? Because it's just noise. It adds no value to the discussion.

A forum like this isn't a pub where we're hanging out with our friends. I'm not here to get validated. I'm here to get my opinions challenged. Other people on this forum making me realize that I've been wrong about something is, for me, the best moments of this forum. I'm happy those people, at that moment, didn't give a fuck about my feelings about it.

I detest sycophants as much as I detest trolls on forums. Neither add anything of value.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
35,638
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
If you want to start painting with a broad brush..

Or minorities who whine about being suppressed as an excuse for not making an attempt to succeed. Or minorities who are 'deeply offended' at any possible interpretation of something being race related. Or minorities who do not take responsibility for their lves and blame every bump in the road as racism....ad nauseum.

A person complaining about minorities by saying anyone that complains is a lazy minorities. Presumption.

Complaining about blacks complaining about racism. Why don’t own a home? Because you are lazy! It is that simple! Why if I had all the advantages of AA...

Ignorance screaming from the mountain tops.

Sarcasm.

AF is resorting to the worse of bigotry, race bating, and stereotypes. The left and right are equally guilty.
Yeah, Moore-Coulter there.

We see it every dauy in the nedia.
We do?

People like AF resort to stereotypes without any real experience with the world around him.

On the question of blacks finding work another black friend said 'in Seattle there was always work..for anyone that wanted it'.

ave you heard American blacks complain about immigrants, including blacks, who do not speak English? I certainly have.

AF represents the narrow shallow minded liberal who only see one side.. Arm chair moralizing. Trafficking in cheap steeotypes.
But you seem to be the one carrying the broad brush.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Except nothing is slipping away from you. In addition, your feelings are not relevant to whether non binary people prefer the pronoun "they" in the singular.

I don't agree. When white men in their 70'ies and above are in public discussions the disappearance of white privilege is palpable. Did you notice just how much everybody made fun of Trump, for instance? The reverence for old white men is gone now. I think it's a result of social media and Internet culture.

Everybody knows how systematic racism and the corrupting forces of power dynamics now.

That's why it's so fun when white middle-aged feminists crash and burn online trying to tell black women how they feel about being oppressed, completely unaware that they are also talking from a now defunct white priviliged position.

Social media is a fantastic equalizer.

On this forum we're all just text. Our beings have been reduced to electronic letters floating through space. It's like we're reduced to nothing but our souls communicating. It's beautiful and it's amazing. Radically stripping away any privilege.

Are you kidding me?

The reverence for old white men, particularly if they appear to be wealthy is what elected Trump. That and the bigotry they represent--lack of respect for women, sexual assault of women, denigration of women, disdain for the poor, cheating and lying, racism, fake patriotism.

The reverence for old white men is how Biden got elected as well. Just a nicer, kinder, smarter, more competent version.

Being white and male was enough to knock every woman and person of color out of the running, even though Biden entered the race 'late.'

Love the mention of white middle-aged feminists and how they are all talking from a now defunct white privileged position.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
A chimera is an amalgam of two gene sets, but is still a single individual. You'd have to have duplicate organs in order to produce both sperm and ova. You'd have to have duplicate organs in order to have both a penis and a vagina. You don't get duplication in chimerism. It's possible for a chimeric person to have some chromosomes that are male and some that are female - absolutely. But unless they are literally duplicating organs, they can't end up with two functional sets of anatomy - not as a chimera.

Maybe as conjoint twins?

A chimera is basically the ultimate example of conjoined twins. It's two bodies grown together as one seamlessly. What if it's not quite seamless--some duplicate tissue?

Some cells in the body have one set of genes, other cells have another. It is not mixed within a cell. DNA from the twin comes back as the twin, not as you.

On a technical note, a chimera is the opposite of conjoined twins. In chimerism, two separate ova fuse. In twins (including conjoint), a single ova divides. What you're saying above is like saying that nuclear fusion is the ultimate example of nuclear fission.

On a more general note: whatever. If you really really really feel that it's absolutely necessary to get a W for a far-fetched hypothetical situation that might possibly occur based on imagined potentials, please yourself. It has never been observed. But sure, nobody can prove that there's not a teapot in orbit around Mercury, so have a blast I guess.

The remaining question here is *why* are you so determined that this hypothetical genetic anomaly is possible? What bearing does it have on this discussion?
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Oh my goodness, that's terrible! And also irrelevant.

Hmm. You mocking and demeaning other posters for not adopting your views is irrelevant to you mocking and demeaning other posters for not adopting your views? Alright then, carry on Noble Floof. Here, let me hand you a fresh lance for your next run at the windmill.

For fuck's sake, it's not about you! I am not interested in demeaning or insulting you. I don't know you well enough to be bothered by you either way or to feel the slightest bit challenged by your temper tantrums about how your irrelevant perspective must be respected on the topic of human beings who actually are disrespected far beyond just having their insecurities triggered by strangers on the internet. AND in an internet community that does not allow for you to be treated with actual abuse or bullying or threats.

But please, continue the demonstrations!

"Temper tantrums" Sheesh.

You know what? If it makes you feel virtuous to white knight this, go right ahead. Be the gatekeeper for language. Go ahead and pick up your banner and loudly exclaim that everyone should alter their language in order to avoid hurting the feelings of a very few whose internal image of themselves doesn't align with stereotypes of men and women in society. Go for it.

Just make sure you're on board with calling yourself a "uterus haver" and "cervix owner" and a "birthing parent" and a "menstruator". And referring to your female birthing parent as your "chest feeder". And all of your female relatives. And every female that you meet out in the wild. So... you know - half of the entire global population. Because being 'inclusive' of this minute segment of the population who have souls that don't match their bodies requires you to dehumanize and demean everyone else. And somehow, for some reason, this price seems to be borne almost exclusively by women.

So hey - if your "compassion" is so strong that you're happy to jump on board with reducing half the fucking population to their reproductive organs and stripping them of their humanity, go for it. Because yeah - that's *true* progress!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Alternatively... maybe you could take a step down from your podium and actually engage in a complex discussion about a difficult topic and treat the posters in this thread - especially the female posters in this thread that you seem most angered by - with a modicum of basic civility and respect?
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
That's why it's so fun when white middle-aged feminists crash and burn online trying to tell black women how they feel about being oppressed, completely unaware that they are also talking from a now defunct white priviliged position.
Love the mention of white middle-aged feminists and how they are all talking from a now defunct white privileged position.

I'm going to go with some middle ground here. I don't think it's "fun" when people crash and burn - I seem to have been absent the day they handed out shadenfreude.

That said... There is a bit of a problem in the feminist community. On the whole, white women have made considerably more progress toward social equality than hispanic of black women have. There's a whole different level of misogyny involved in those communities, that white women are mostly unaware of - we simply aren't exposed to it in our everyday lives.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
For fuck's sake, it's not about you! I am not interested in demeaning or insulting you. I don't know you well enough to be bothered by you either way or to feel the slightest bit challenged by your temper tantrums about how your irrelevant perspective must be respected on the topic of human beings who actually are disrespected far beyond just having their insecurities triggered by strangers on the internet. AND in an internet community that does not allow for you to be treated with actual abuse or bullying or threats.

But please, continue the demonstrations!

"Temper tantrums" Sheesh.

You know what? If it makes you feel virtuous to white knight this, go right ahead. Be the gatekeeper for language. Go ahead and pick up your banner and loudly exclaim that everyone should alter their language in order to avoid hurting the feelings of a very few whose internal image of themselves doesn't align with stereotypes of men and women in society. Go for it.

Just make sure you're on board with calling yourself a "uterus haver" and "cervix owner" and a "birthing parent" and a "menstruator". And referring to your female birthing parent as your "chest feeder". And all of your female relatives. And every female that you meet out in the wild. So... you know - half of the entire global population. Because being 'inclusive' of this minute segment of the population who have souls that don't match their bodies requires you to dehumanize and demean everyone else. And somehow, for some reason, this price seems to be borne almost exclusively by women.

So hey - if your "compassion" is so strong that you're happy to jump on board with reducing half the fucking population to their reproductive organs and stripping them of their humanity, go for it. Because yeah - that's *true* progress!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Alternatively... maybe you could take a step down from your podium and actually engage in a complex discussion about a difficult topic and treat the posters in this thread - especially the female posters in this thread that you seem most angered by - with a modicum of basic civility and respect?

I understand that it’s really hard to hear that your personal discomfort with using a gender neutral pronoun with non -cis persons is less important than how it makes them feel to be continually characterized as something and someone they are not. But it’s true. Hurting people’s feelings by calling them something they are not is more hurtful than feeling uncomfortable because you have to learn something new or might make a mistake and feel foolish.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
For fuck's sake, it's not about you! I am not interested in demeaning or insulting you. I don't know you well enough to be bothered by you either way or to feel the slightest bit challenged by your temper tantrums about how your irrelevant perspective must be respected on the topic of human beings who actually are disrespected far beyond just having their insecurities triggered by strangers on the internet. AND in an internet community that does not allow for you to be treated with actual abuse or bullying or threats.

But please, continue the demonstrations!

"Temper tantrums" Sheesh.

You know what? If it makes you feel virtuous to white knight this, go right ahead. Be the gatekeeper for language. Go ahead and pick up your banner and loudly exclaim that everyone should alter their language in order to avoid hurting the feelings of a very few whose internal image of themselves doesn't align with stereotypes of men and women in society. Go for it.

Just make sure you're on board with calling yourself a "uterus haver" and "cervix owner" and a "birthing parent" and a "menstruator". And referring to your female birthing parent as your "chest feeder". And all of your female relatives. And every female that you meet out in the wild. So... you know - half of the entire global population. Because being 'inclusive' of this minute segment of the population who have souls that don't match their bodies requires you to dehumanize and demean everyone else. And somehow, for some reason, this price seems to be borne almost exclusively by women.

So hey - if your "compassion" is so strong that you're happy to jump on board with reducing half the fucking population to their reproductive organs and stripping them of their humanity, go for it. Because yeah - that's *true* progress!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Alternatively... maybe you could take a step down from your podium and actually engage in a complex discussion about a difficult topic and treat the posters in this thread - especially the female posters in this thread that you seem most angered by - with a modicum of basic civility and respect?

I understand that it’s really hard to hear that your personal discomfort with using a gender neutral pronoun with non -cis persons is less important than how it makes them feel to be continually characterized as something and someone they are not. But it’s true. Hurting people’s feelings by calling them something they are not is more hurtful than feeling uncomfortable because you have to learn something new or might make a mistake and feel foolish.

Don't make stupid assumptions.

I don't have a problem using singular they - in most cases. And seriously, do you actually think this is about feeling uncomfortable making a mistake? No, it's not about that at all. I make mistakes all the time!

Seriously, Toni - are you actually okay with being referred to as a "uterus haver" and a "cervix owner" and a "chestfeeding birthing parent"? Do you genuinely feel that being referred to in such a way is *less* painful than when a 6' person with a beard and giant feet gets referred to as "he"?

You mention calling people something they are not. So let's go for the very basic question: How do you know what a person really is? And is that what they are a reflection of their apparent sex class or a reflection of their internal belief about themselves?
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I understand that it’s really hard to hear that your personal discomfort with using a gender neutral pronoun with non -cis persons is less important than how it makes them feel to be continually characterized as something and someone they are not. But it’s true. Hurting people’s feelings by calling them something they are not is more hurtful than feeling uncomfortable because you have to learn something new or might make a mistake and feel foolish.

Don't make stupid assumptions.

I don't have a problem using singular they - in most cases. And seriously, do you actually think this is about feeling uncomfortable making a mistake? No, it's not about that at all. I make mistakes all the time!

Seriously, Toni - are you actually okay with being referred to as a "uterus haver" and a "cervix owner" and a "chestfeeding birthing parent"? Do you genuinely feel that being referred to in such a way is *less* painful than when a 6' person with a beard and giant feet gets referred to as "he"?

You mention calling people something they are not. So let's go for the very basic question: How do you know what a person really is? And is that what they are a reflection of their apparent sex class or a reflection of their internal belief about themselves?

Of course I vehemently dislike uterus haver cervix owner chestfeeding birthing parent (which is highly inaccurate) or just plain birthing parent. This is not the same thing as using a third person gender neutral pronoun.

As for referring to someone as they are: One must take people as they present themselves and accept them for who they say they are.

There are all sorts of assumptions that have always been made:

Playing sports is not feminine, is not something girls would do. Girls who like to play sports are not really girls.
Liking math and science is not feminine, is not something girls really like or do. Girls who like math and science are not 'really' girls.
Girls like pink.
Girls like to cook and are neater and tidier than are boys.
Girls are soft spoken and polite. They do not put themselves forward.
If you have a flat chest, how much of a girl are you, anyway?

Absolutely every single one of those is something I have had hurled at me, often by people who purportedly loved me and wanted what was best for me.

So, if a 6'5" person stands before me, black stubble on their chin, wearing a tutu and a plaid lumberjack shirt and asks me to call them MaryAlice and use the pronoun they, them, I will bloody well do it. Or Jeff and she/her.

And if a fine boned five feet nothing 98 lbs soaking wet person wearing a wetsuit asks to be called Karl, I will do that. I will use they/them, he/him, she/her as they ask. To the very best of my ability to remember to do so correctly and will apologize if I make an error.

And If I run into the young man who I knew as a little girl, I will try very hard to not use their deadname, although it will be challenging for me, because I knew them only before their transition--and knew when they were five years old and declared that they were a boy that they were not a tomboy as I was but really, deep inside, were a boy, whatever their chromosomal array or genital or gonadal configuration, which I had zero reason to know or be curious about. Because they moved away from this small town, I haven't seen them since they were a child and so my brain has not caught up with the reality, although there is zero and I mean ZERO doubt in my mind that living as male was exactly how this child was intended to be. It can be hard to see people in new lights and who use a different name than the one they used to go by. Trust me: there was never a doubt in my mind that the little blonde, blue eyed child before me was transgender. It was, however, the moment when I personally realized that it was really possible for someone to be transgender and not simply 'confused' or pretending and that my earlier denial was just my own discomfort, which was actually bigotry about something I did not understand.
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,171
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
That's why it's so fun when white middle-aged feminists crash and burn online trying to tell black women how they feel about being oppressed, completely unaware that they are also talking from a now defunct white priviliged position.
Love the mention of white middle-aged feminists and how they are all talking from a now defunct white privileged position.

I'm going to go with some middle ground here. I don't think it's "fun" when people crash and burn - I seem to have been absent the day they handed out shadenfreude.

That said... There is a bit of a problem in the feminist community. On the whole, white women have made considerably more progress toward social equality than hispanic of black women have. There's a whole different level of misogyny involved in those communities, that white women are mostly unaware of - we simply aren't exposed to it in our everyday lives.

I don't think their problem is misogyny. It's money. As far as I've read there's a very close connection between how high tech a culture is and women's rights. Basically, the more well educated you need to be to get the most basic middle class job the more progressive it is.

Or to put it even more simply. The less time you need to worry about your basic survival the better shape women's causes will be. Or even more simply. The more engineers. The more female freedom.

The only reason white women are more progressive than black or Hispanic women is because industrialisation started in England.

The risk with ignoring the causal relation between industrial wealth and power AND women's rights is that it very quickly becomes very mystical and convoluted.

I don't know why so many leftwing feminists are resistant to seeimg the (to me blindingly obvious) connection between access to washing machines, dishwashers, refrigerators, supermarkets and cars and their political freedoms.

The word "patriarchy" and "patriarchal oppression" has become so overused (and abused) in feminist texts that it's stopped being meaningful IMHO. I increasingly get the impression it's used in place of having to make any actual argument. Like some mystical force of prime evil emanating from footballs.

In the 80'ies there was a sharp split between third world feminism and feminism in the devoloped world. The women from the poor part of the world couldn't get a word in edgewise and couldn't relate one iota to the western women's, from their perspective, luxury problems. They were more concerned with not getting beaten to death. So they ignored western feminism and started their own networks and conferences.

Anyway... that's what I managed to glean from what I have read on it
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Of course I vehemently dislike uterus haver cervix owner chestfeeding birthing parent (which is highly inaccurate) or just plain birthing parent. This is not the same thing as using a third person gender neutral pronoun.

As for referring to someone as they are: One must take people as they present themselves and accept them for who they say they are.

There are all sorts of assumptions that have always been made:

Playing sports is not feminine, is not something girls would do. Girls who like to play sports are not really girls.
Liking math and science is not feminine, is not something girls really like or do. Girls who like math and science are not 'really' girls.
Girls like pink.
Girls like to cook and are neater and tidier than are boys.
Girls are soft spoken and polite. They do not put themselves forward.
If you have a flat chest, how much of a girl are you, anyway?

Absolutely every single one of those is something I have had hurled at me, often by people who purportedly loved me and wanted what was best for me.

So, if a 6'5" person stands before me, black stubble on their chin, wearing a tutu and a plaid lumberjack shirt and asks me to call them MaryAlice and use the pronoun they, them, I will bloody well do it. Or Jeff and she/her.

And if a fine boned five feet nothing 98 lbs soaking wet person wearing a wetsuit asks to be called Karl, I will do that. I will use they/them, he/him, she/her as they ask. To the very best of my ability to remember to do so correctly and will apologize if I make an error.

And If I run into the young man who I knew as a little girl, I will try very hard to not use their deadname, although it will be challenging for me, because I knew them only before their transition--and knew when they were five years old and declared that they were a boy that they were not a tomboy as I was but really, deep inside, were a boy, whatever their chromosomal array or genital or gonadal configuration, which I had zero reason to know or be curious about. Because they moved away from this small town, I haven't seen them since they were a child and so my brain has not caught up with the reality, although there is zero and I mean ZERO doubt in my mind that living as male was exactly how this child was intended to be. It can be hard to see people in new lights and who use a different name than the one they used to go by. Trust me: there was never a doubt in my mind that the little blonde, blue eyed child before me was transgender. It was, however, the moment when I personally realized that it was really possible for someone to be transgender and not simply 'confused' or pretending and that my earlier denial was just my own discomfort, which was actually bigotry about something I did not understand.

Okay, let me take a few steps back and have a bit of a do-over. I think you and I have gone off track somewhere, because I am about 98% certain that our general views are in very close alignment.

This isn't a surface level topic, and there's a lot more involved than social courtesy. When it comes to courtesy, I'm perfectly happy to use a person's preferred pronouns. Not a problem, happy to do so.

There are some cases where I disagree. I'm sorry if it hurts their feelings, but I cannot bring myself to refer to Jessica Yaniv or Alex Drummond or Eddie Izzard as "she". I do not have a perception of any of them as being female, and I really don't think that my courtesy toward them is required. If I'm talking about them in the third person on here, I'm not going to use female pronouns, and I don't think it's reasonable for anyone to demand that I do so.

I don't think this is bigotry on my part. I know a small handful of transgender people. Most of them have gender dysphoria, and most of them have persistently had gender dysphoria throughout their lives. They're all wonderful people. Krypton Iodine Sulfur on here is a wonderful person, and I've enjoyed my interactions with her.

But when I step back from the personal courtesy aspect... there are placed that I draw the line. Courtesy is great, I support courtesy. But I don't think that courtesy implies entitlement. And I do think there are some conflicts between the prerogatives being sought by trans lobbying groups and activists and the rights of women.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I don't think their problem is misogyny. It's money. As far as I've read there's a very close connection between how high tech a culture is and women's rights. Basically, the more well educated you need to be to get the most basic middle class job the more progressive it is.

Or to put it even more simply. The less time you need to worry about your basic survival the better shape women's causes will be. Or even more simply. The more engineers. The more female freedom.

The only reason white women are more progressive than black or Hispanic women is because industrialisation started in England.

The risk with ignoring the causal relation between industrial wealth and power AND women's rights is that it very quickly becomes very mystical and convoluted.

I don't know why so many leftwing feminists are resistant to seeimg the (to me blindingly obvious) connection between access to washing machines, dishwashers, refrigerators, supermarkets and cars and their political freedoms.

The word "patriarchy" and "patriarchal oppression" has become so overused (and abused) in feminist texts that it's stopped being meaningful IMHO. I increasingly get the impression it's used in place of having to make any actual argument. Like some mystical force of prime evil emanating from footballs.

In the 80'ies there was a sharp split between third world feminism and feminism in the devoloped world. The women from the poor part of the world couldn't get a word in edgewise and couldn't relate one iota to the western women's, from their perspective, luxury problems. They were more concerned with not getting beaten to death. So they ignored western feminism and started their own networks and conferences.

Anyway... that's what I managed to glean from what I have read on it

Mmm... My experience and impression from talking to lots and lots of real life black women - several of whom are related to me - is that there's a lot more misogyny than you seem to think. I've got several very accomplished professional black women in my family, but I also see a persistent expectation that they do all of the cooking and cleaning and child care, and that they need to be constantly dressed up for their spouses. I have witnessed the sexist things said to them by their spouses.

I'm not talking about the lack of progress in developing nations - that's a completely different issue. I'm talking about the level of sexism and sex-based mistreatment faced by hispanic and black women in the US right now.
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,138
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
For fuck's sake, it's not about you! I am not interested in demeaning or insulting you. I don't know you well enough to be bothered by you either way or to feel the slightest bit challenged by your temper tantrums about how your irrelevant perspective must be respected on the topic of human beings who actually are disrespected far beyond just having their insecurities triggered by strangers on the internet. AND in an internet community that does not allow for you to be treated with actual abuse or bullying or threats.

But please, continue the demonstrations!

"Temper tantrums" Sheesh.

You know what? If it makes you feel virtuous to white knight this, go right ahead. Be the gatekeeper for language. Go ahead and pick up your banner and loudly exclaim that everyone should alter their language in order to avoid hurting the feelings of a very few whose internal image of themselves doesn't align with stereotypes of men and women in society. Go for it.
This fantasy is completely inaccurate. I'm doing no such thing. Read my posts.


Just make sure you're on board with calling >snip<
Why? I have no need to use any of those. I haven't even heard those terms until this thread and have not responded to the topic. They're not relevant to my comments on the topic of non binary people preferring the pronouns "they/them" in the singular.

Unless you feel that any ideas about using different terms for things are all the same in some way other than just they are different terms people have suggested for things. There's no reason to lump those in with my comments on the topic of non binary people preferring "they" in the singular.

I'm guessing your objections to those - and I haven't read those posts and don't plan to - are the same objections to non binary people preferring the pronoun "they" in the singular. Either way, I don't have any comment about those other terms or their usage.

So hey - if your "compassion" is so strong that you're happy to jump on board with reducing half the fucking population to their reproductive organs and stripping them of their humanity, go for it. Because yeah - that's *true* progress!
Not at all accurate.

Alternatively... maybe you could take a step down from your podium
No one's on a podium. This is just a thread in an internet forum. I'm just not coddling people who insist on inserting themselves into a topic that requires listening to people who have never had a mainstream podium. And working to give them one doesn't take anything away from cis het white people or anyone else.

and actually engage in a complex discussion about a difficult topic
I am engaged in a complex discussion, but very little of relevance to non binary people preferring the pronoun "they" in the singular has been put forth. The grammar and usage objections have been debunked many times in this thread and others.

If you had something new to add to the discussion, you would have done so already.

and treat the posters in this thread - especially the female posters in this thread that you seem most angered by - with a modicum of basic civility and respect?

Calling out ignorant, dismissive views isn't disrespect. Anyway, you don't need my respect to have a discussion about anything, and if you think coddling people who can't be bothered to respect the marginalized people about whom they are perpetuating ignorant, dismissive attitudes amounts to disrespect, then you'll just have to feel disrespected. It's not my intention, and most people I've ever engaged in this community have not insisted that their emotions be the arbiter of reason or morality or anything else, even when emotions get high.

And by the way, I have a truckload of respect for Toni, especially after reading her posts in this thread. I don't know if I agree with her every point, but I haven't read much of the side discussions or continuing arguments about things I've already posted my own thoughts on. But that doesn't really matter. What does matter in regard to my respect for Toni is that she does not express flippant, dismissive views of people who are not like her. In fact, go back to one of her earliest posts in this thread where she lays out her prejudices or possible subconscious prejudices and her commitment to honesty, self reflection, willingness to change her mind, and continuing effort to better understand whatever topic she feels is important.

And I know it's hard to tell from just text, but irritation is not the same as anger, and I'm just not nearly as emotional about this thread as you seem to think. I do get angry that people so flippantly disregard the very people they claim they are not helping to marginalize by the dismissive views they perpetuate, and their inability to notice that, if they are not a non binary individual, their own experience is not relevant to non binary people preferring the pronoun "they" in the singular. But I have no ill will toward anyone here. I'm just not going to respect views that perpetuate ignorance and callousness toward non binary people, whether intentional or just thoughtless.

There is no good reason to be dismissive and disrespectful toward non binary people just for preferring the pronoun "they" in the singular. I haven't seen any objections to that here that don't dismiss non binary people right from the start. Binary people posing their own experiences as objections or argument is not in the least bit "complex discussion." So that shit gets no respect from me, even from people who I do like and respect in general. Die mad about it.

Again, if you have new perspective that has nothing to do with you OR me personally on the topic of non binary people that hasn't been posted already, please do.
 

southernhybrid

Contributor
Joined
Aug 13, 2001
Messages
6,449
Location
Georgia, US
Basic Beliefs
atheist
This post is just a summary of a shitload of articles that I have read over the past few days. Sorry, I don't have links so if you are interested, I suggest that you do your own DD.

First of all, yes there is evidence for both transgender ( not that I ever denied that ) and non binary gender. In the case of trans, a trans female has the same brain patterns as a female, while having the body parts of a male, and vice versa for a trans male.

As far as non binary folks go, there are some people who are born with an XX XY chromosome combination instead of XX or XY. The assumption here is that such individuals may not adhere to one gender. However, the percent of people with this pattern is believed to be about .4%, which makes it very rare.

Then I looked into why SOME, not all trans folks have some issues with non binary folks. I think it's because among younger Americans, about 3% are identifying as non binary. Trans folks feel that this takes away from the fact that they have suffered from gender dysphoria, which makes them feel as if some people are using this ID to be cool or to seek attention. I'm not judging them one way or the other.

Then I found a list of actors who have decided that they are non binary. Most of them appeared to be women and when asked which pronouns they preferred, the majority wanted to be called by female pronouns. A few had no preference and a few wanted to be addressed as they. That made me a little bit skeptical of their claims but I honestly don't care. It's not my problem.

Next I read several reports written by folks who identify as non binary. Most seemed to have a sense of humor, unlike most of us who participated in this thread. They preferred to be called “they” but they were not insulted if they were addressed by the gender that they appeared to be. They said that they knew this was something relatively new to most people and that progress took time. I'm sure there are probably some who disagree but that is the impression I got from what I read and was able to find online. I have never met anyone who was openly non binary so I have no idea what pronoun such a person prefers. My earlier posts were simply suggesting that non binary folks choose one of the newer non binary pronouns since using they in the way that some are using it, can be confusing. I realize that "they" has been used in the singular, but it's been used that way in a very different context. For example, until recently, I've never heard anyone say, “Pat is coming to dinner and they are bringing their dog with them.” Of course, if this becomes more acceptable perhaps it won't sound so confusing.

Change takes time and I personally think it's important to have a sense of humor, even in the face of tragedy or when feeling attacked by words. But, then I grew up during a time where we were all taught not to ever let anyone hurt us by attacking us with words or calling us names. It's not always easy but it can be done, and you'll feel much stronger when you reach that point. Being referred to by the wrong pronoun should never make one feel like a victim.

I also read a few articles from the more intellectual right wing publications. As might be expected, they mostly denied that non binary identification was based on biology. I also read some contradictory science articles, that said it was still unknown whether this ID was biological or sociological. Maybe it shouldn't matter.

Then I read at least one article that suggested that we are all somewhat non binary since there aren't really any strictly male or female qualities, and gender isn't about physical sex parts. Girls are not naturally drawn to pink and boys to blue. That's just cultural, just like more important myths like boys are better at math and science compared to girls. So, maybe we are all a little bit non binary, at least in the cultural sense.
This post is just a summary of a shitload of articles that I have read over the past few days. Sorry, I don't have links so if you are interested, I suggest that you do your own DD.

First of all, yes there is evidence for both transgender ( not that I ever denied that ) and non binary gender. In the case of trans, a trans female has the same brain patterns as a female, while having the body parts of a male, and vice versa for a trans males.

As far as non binary folks go, there are some people who are born with an XX XY chromosome combination instead of XX or XY. The assumption here is that such individuals may not adhere to one gender. However, the percent of people with this pattern is believed to be about .4%, which is very rare.

Then I looked into why SOME, not all trans folks have some issues with non binary folks. I think it's because among younger Americans, about 3% are identifying as non binary. Trans folks feel that this takes away from the fact that they have suffered from gender dysphoria, which makes them feel as if some people are using this ID to be cool or to seek attention. I'm not judging them one way or the other.

Then I found a list of actors who have decided that they are non binary. Most of them appeared to be women and when asked whick pronouns they preferred, the majority wanted to be called by female pronouns. A few had no preference and a few wanted to be addressed as they.

Then I read several reports written by folks who identify as non binary. Most seemed to have a sense of humor. They preferred to be called “they” but they were not insulted if they were addressed by the gender that they appeared to be. They said that they new this was something relatively new to most people and that progress took time. I'm sure there are probably some who disagree but that is the impression I got from what I read and was able to find online. I have never met anyone who was openly non binary so I have no idea what pronoun such a person prefers. My earlier posts were simply suggesting that non binary folks choose one of the newer non binary pronouns since using they in the way that some are using it, can be confusing. I realize that they has been used in the singular, but it's been used that way in a very different context. For example, until recently, I've never heard anyone say, “Pat is coming to dinner and they are bringing their dog with them.” Of course, if this becomes more acceptable perhaps it won't sound so confusing.

I also read a few articles from right wing publications. As might be expected, they mostly denied that non binary identification was based on biology. I also read some contradictory science articles, that said it was still unknown whether this ID was biological or sociological.

Then I read at least one article that suggested that we are all somewhat non binary since there aren't really any strictly male or female qualities, and gender isn't about physical sex parts.

I had hoped that we could discuss this interesting topic without attacking or making assumptions about anyone's beliefs or views on the subject. I thought that's what rational people do, but perhaps such thinking was irrational itself.


Since I was referred to as a southern lady in this thread, let me end by wishing you all a "blessed day". That's what a real southern lady says. A Jersey girl just says, "Have you guys had enough of this shit yet"?
 

Shadowy Man

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
3,276
Location
West Coast
Basic Beliefs
Rational Pragmatism
First of all, yes there is evidence for both transgender ( not that I ever denied that ) and non binary gender. In the case of trans, a trans female has the same brain patterns as a female, while having the body parts of a male, and vice versa for a trans male.

How distinct are these "brain patterns" between male and female? How much variation is there within a given sex versus the amount of differential between sexes?
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Overall good post, I have a few discussion elements.

This post is just a summary of a shitload of articles that I have read over the past few days. Sorry, I don't have links so if you are interested, I suggest that you do your own DD.

First of all, yes there is evidence for both transgender ( not that I ever denied that ) and non binary gender. In the case of trans, a trans female has the same brain patterns as a female, while having the body parts of a male, and vice versa for a trans male.
There is just as much evidence for gendered brains as there is for black people having lower IQs than white people. Which means: oh, sure, the reasearch is out there, but it's not very good research, and it tends to be refuted by neurologists.

Neurosexism: the myth that men and women have different brains

That said, our brains are sexed. At a fundamental level, the cells in our brains are based on either male (XY) or female (XX) genetics. More nuanced, our brains are subjected to different hormone combinations. Our pituitary gland sends slightly different signals in females than in males. Male brains are exposed to considerably higher levels of testosterone, and female brains are exposed to considerably higher level of estradiol. Both of those hormones drive behavioral patterns. The hormones activate parts of the brain that are correlated with sex-differentiated behaviors, such as being maternal or being aggressive. If a male brain is exposed to estrogen, the parts of the brain associated with maternal behavior are activated, and the emotional responses tied to empathy are amplified. If a female brain is exposed to testosterone, the parts of the brain associated with aggression are activated, and the emotional responses tied to defensiveness are amplified.

There is no fundamental difference between the brain of a cisgender male and a transgender identified male prior to the application of estrogen. The differences are solely a result of exogenous hormone exposure.

There are also differences as a result of plasticity. Our brains are conditioned throughout our lives, and that conditioning affects our behaviors to a degree. Little girls are taught and learn "how to be a girl" in a social sense. Little boys are indoctrinated into "how to be a boy" socially. That behavioral conditioning alters our thought patterns. As children (and even as adults), we're all subjected to classical, operant, and observational conditioning. As a result, in a society with strict behavioral and role division on the basis of sex, there will be observable differences in the cognitive patterns between males and females.

There are also, btw, functionally observable differences between homosexual and heterosexual people. There's an area of the brain that is responsible for sexual responses, and that area is activated on the basis of sex. We can actually observe the brain responding to sexual signals from males in homosexual men, and vice versa for homosexual women.

At the end of the day, there are no material differences between members of the same sex on the basis of their gender identity. All observed differences are either 1) so minute as to be completely meaningless or 2) the result of exogenous hormone exposure or 3) potentially the result of neural plasticity.

As far as non binary folks go, there are some people who are born with an XX XY chromosome combination instead of XX or XY. The assumption here is that such individuals may not adhere to one gender. However, the percent of people with this pattern is believed to be about .4%, which makes it very rare.

This chromosomal make-up is reflective of a disorder of sexual development, not with a nonbinary gender identity. The overwhelming majority of people with DSDs (also colloquially referred to as Intersex) are not transgender or nonbinary, they are in alignment with their physical sex. Similarly, the overwhelming majority of people who identify as trangender or nonbinary do not have a DSD condition at all.

Then I read at least one article that suggested that we are all somewhat non binary since there aren't really any strictly male or female qualities, and gender isn't about physical sex parts. Girls are not naturally drawn to pink and boys to blue. That's just cultural, just like more important myths like boys are better at math and science compared to girls. So, maybe we are all a little bit non binary, at least in the cultural sense.

That's the view held by most classical feminists, including me. For all intents, I completely qualify as nonbinary, and from her description, so does Toni. I'd guess that most humans would be considered nonbinary under that view of gender. Most also, however, hold that pronouns, intimate spaces, sports, prisons, etc. are divided on the basis of sex, not the basis of gender. Which is where a bit of the conflict comes into play.

Some people believe that sex doesn't matter and is completely irrelevant. As a woman who has been the victim of sexual assault and attempted rape... I rather strongly disagree.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
First of all, yes there is evidence for both transgender ( not that I ever denied that ) and non binary gender. In the case of trans, a trans female has the same brain patterns as a female, while having the body parts of a male, and vice versa for a trans male.

How distinct are these "brain patterns" between male and female? How much variation is there within a given sex versus the amount of differential between sexes?

There is considerably greater variation in the individuals within a sex than there are between the sexes. Envision a bimodal distribution where the means of the categories differ by 0.01... but the standard deviation of each distribution is 10. I don't know the actual numbers, just getting across the concept.
 

Shadowy Man

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
3,276
Location
West Coast
Basic Beliefs
Rational Pragmatism
First of all, yes there is evidence for both transgender ( not that I ever denied that ) and non binary gender. In the case of trans, a trans female has the same brain patterns as a female, while having the body parts of a male, and vice versa for a trans male.

How distinct are these "brain patterns" between male and female? How much variation is there within a given sex versus the amount of differential between sexes?

There is considerably greater variation in the individuals within a sex than there are between the sexes. Envision a bimodal distribution where the means of the categories differ by 0.01... but the standard deviation of each distribution is 10. I don't know the actual numbers, just getting across the concept.

I am a scientist so I get the concept and it is why I asked. So, there is no "correct" way to feel being male or feel being female, right?
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,171
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I don't think their problem is misogyny. It's money. As far as I've read there's a very close connection between how high tech a culture is and women's rights. Basically, the more well educated you need to be to get the most basic middle class job the more progressive it is.

Or to put it even more simply. The less time you need to worry about your basic survival the better shape women's causes will be. Or even more simply. The more engineers. The more female freedom.

The only reason white women are more progressive than black or Hispanic women is because industrialisation started in England.

The risk with ignoring the causal relation between industrial wealth and power AND women's rights is that it very quickly becomes very mystical and convoluted.

I don't know why so many leftwing feminists are resistant to seeimg the (to me blindingly obvious) connection between access to washing machines, dishwashers, refrigerators, supermarkets and cars and their political freedoms.

The word "patriarchy" and "patriarchal oppression" has become so overused (and abused) in feminist texts that it's stopped being meaningful IMHO. I increasingly get the impression it's used in place of having to make any actual argument. Like some mystical force of prime evil emanating from footballs.

In the 80'ies there was a sharp split between third world feminism and feminism in the devoloped world. The women from the poor part of the world couldn't get a word in edgewise and couldn't relate one iota to the western women's, from their perspective, luxury problems. They were more concerned with not getting beaten to death. So they ignored western feminism and started their own networks and conferences.

Anyway... that's what I managed to glean from what I have read on it

Mmm... My experience and impression from talking to lots and lots of real life black women - several of whom are related to me - is that there's a lot more misogyny than you seem to think. I've got several very accomplished professional black women in my family, but I also see a persistent expectation that they do all of the cooking and cleaning and child care, and that they need to be constantly dressed up for their spouses. I have witnessed the sexist things said to them by their spouses.

I'm not talking about the lack of progress in developing nations - that's a completely different issue. I'm talking about the level of sexism and sex-based mistreatment faced by hispanic and black women in the US right now.

It doesn't matter that these black and hispanic women live in USA. Racism is a thing and if your social group is poor you won't have access to all the middle-class benefits somebody white living right across the street from you. It could very well be that your black and hispanic friends have the same problems of women in the developed world even though they live in USA. I'd say that's highly likely.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I don't think their problem is misogyny. It's money. As far as I've read there's a very close connection between how high tech a culture is and women's rights. Basically, the more well educated you need to be to get the most basic middle class job the more progressive it is.

Or to put it even more simply. The less time you need to worry about your basic survival the better shape women's causes will be. Or even more simply. The more engineers. The more female freedom.

The only reason white women are more progressive than black or Hispanic women is because industrialisation started in England.

The risk with ignoring the causal relation between industrial wealth and power AND women's rights is that it very quickly becomes very mystical and convoluted.

I don't know why so many leftwing feminists are resistant to seeimg the (to me blindingly obvious) connection between access to washing machines, dishwashers, refrigerators, supermarkets and cars and their political freedoms.

The word "patriarchy" and "patriarchal oppression" has become so overused (and abused) in feminist texts that it's stopped being meaningful IMHO. I increasingly get the impression it's used in place of having to make any actual argument. Like some mystical force of prime evil emanating from footballs.

In the 80'ies there was a sharp split between third world feminism and feminism in the devoloped world. The women from the poor part of the world couldn't get a word in edgewise and couldn't relate one iota to the western women's, from their perspective, luxury problems. They were more concerned with not getting beaten to death. So they ignored western feminism and started their own networks and conferences.

Anyway... that's what I managed to glean from what I have read on it

Mmm... My experience and impression from talking to lots and lots of real life black women - several of whom are related to me - is that there's a lot more misogyny than you seem to think. I've got several very accomplished professional black women in my family, but I also see a persistent expectation that they do all of the cooking and cleaning and child care, and that they need to be constantly dressed up for their spouses. I have witnessed the sexist things said to them by their spouses.

I'm not talking about the lack of progress in developing nations - that's a completely different issue. I'm talking about the level of sexism and sex-based mistreatment faced by hispanic and black women in the US right now.

It doesn't matter that these black and hispanic women live in USA. Racism is a thing and if your social group is poor you won't have access to all the middle-class benefits somebody white living right across the street from you. It could very well be that your black and hispanic friends have the same problems of women in the developed world even though they live in USA. I'd say that's highly likely.

There are lots of middle class black and hispanic people in the United States. In most of the US, poor people and middle class people do not live across the street from one another. In the US, racism dramatically affects middle and upper class black and Hispanic people just as it dies poor or working class black and Hispanic people.

Regardless of their educational and professional and socioeconomic levels, parents of black and brown children face serious, well founded worries about how their children will be treated by whites people, especially those in positions of authority, such as police officers. As a white mother of white sons, I did worry about them being safe when they were old enough to drive cars and hang with friends. But I NEVER worried that they’re lives would be at risk if their car broke down or they were pulled over by the police.

As far as expectations that women are responsible for housekeeping and childcare—yeah, that was my generation and persists into current generations of shite folks including women with advanced degrees. It’s better than my generation - d mine was better than my mother’s, but there is a persistent lag. Some of this seems to be dependent on how recently be a family moved into middle/upper middle or professional class.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
There is considerably greater variation in the individuals within a sex than there are between the sexes. Envision a bimodal distribution where the means of the categories differ by 0.01... but the standard deviation of each distribution is 10. I don't know the actual numbers, just getting across the concept.

I am a scientist so I get the concept and it is why I asked. So, there is no "correct" way to feel being male or feel being female, right?

It's the internet - I never know how much mathematical background any given person has, so I tend to include explanations as a default :)

To my understanding, reading through multiple works of research, the opinion from neurologists and neuroscientists is that there's no way to "feel" being male or female as a feeling in one's mind.

Anatomically, I'm guessing there are some pretty apparent ways to "feel" oneself to be male or female. If nothing else, I can factually observe that my vulva feels different to my hands than my spouse's penis does. :p
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
There is considerably greater variation in the individuals within a sex than there are between the sexes. Envision a bimodal distribution where the means of the categories differ by 0.01... but the standard deviation of each distribution is 10. I don't know the actual numbers, just getting across the concept.

I am a scientist so I get the concept and it is why I asked. So, there is no "correct" way to feel being male or feel being female, right?

It's the internet - I never know how much mathematical background any given person has, so I tend to include explanations as a default :)

To my understanding, reading through multiple works of research, the opinion from neurologists and neuroscientists is that there's no way to "feel" being male or female as a feeling in one's mind.

Anatomically, I'm guessing there are some pretty apparent ways to "feel" oneself to be male or female. If nothing else, I can factually observe that my vulva feels different to my hands than my spouse's penis does. :p

Really?

So your mind doesn't allow you to feel happy? Sad? Hungry? Fatigued? Pretty? Ugly? Smart? Funny? Strong? Weak? Assertive? and so on....

My mind, in conjunction with my body and my circumstances, told me I wanted to have a baby in conjunction with and actually counter to all of the various practicalities involved---and also told me I was done having babies long before my ovaries did.

Of course all of those things originate in your mind and in your brain. So does feeling feminine or masculine. Or old or young. Confident, insecure. and so on. With amply data supplied by all of your entire nervous system.

I've said that when I was young, I was frequently told that what I was doing or what I liked wasn't appropriate for girls and that I must be a boy. I thought hard about it but nope, there was nothing that my brain told me that made me think that I was a boy or that I wanted to be a boy although I certainly did appreciate the convenience of being able to easily pee on a tree and I sure did wish that I got some of the preferential treatment that I saw boys get. That's a lot different than feeling like I was a boy or wishing I was a boy. Which some individuals who externally appear to be girls do feel.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,131
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Really?

So your mind doesn't allow you to feel happy? Sad? Hungry? Fatigued? Pretty? Ugly? Smart? Funny? Strong? Weak? Assertive? and so on....

:confused:

I don't really know where to start here. It seems like we're speaking separate languages altogether. There are multiple meanings to the word "feel". You're conflating several of them above. Some of the things you've listed are emotions (sad), some are actually physical and chemical signals being accepted by the brain (hungry, fatigued).

Some are more esoteric, and it gets complicated depending on whether the self-perception bears any connection to reality. Is a person who "feels" funny actually funny? What do they mean when they say that they "feel" pretty? Does that mean that they are interpreting an actual image of themselves (mirror, photo, etc.) as being unattractive? Or is it a mental state that is completely disconnected from observation? Or is it a mental construct based on the opinions and expressions of other people?

I've said that when I was young, I was frequently told that what I was doing or what I liked wasn't appropriate for girls and that I must be a boy. I thought hard about it but nope, there was nothing that my brain told me that made me think that I was a boy or that I wanted to be a boy although I certainly did appreciate the convenience of being able to easily pee on a tree and I sure did wish that I got some of the preferential treatment that I saw boys get. That's a lot different than feeling like I was a boy or wishing I was a boy.
Sure, the same was fairly true for me, although my parents were very unconcerned about gender roles, so I got to climb trees and play with cars. At least until puberty hit, and then I couldn't sit cross-legged because someone (read: an adult male) might stare at my crotch. But that's a whole different aspect of the cultural indoctrination of girls.

Did you "feel like a girl"? Or did you observe that you were a girl?

Which some individuals who externally appear to be girls do feel.
What does that actually mean though? What do those girls feel that leads them to conclude that they "feel like a boy"? How do they even have a baseline for what a boy feels like?

I want to step back and draw a distinction here. Gender dysphoria is a real thing, certainly. but a lot of people over the last decade who have declared that they "feel" like a woman or a man or something in between or outside of the sex-binary do not have gender dysphoria. I've been provide with descriptions of how a person with gender dysphoria feels, what their perceptions are, how they relate to their own bodies... provided to me by people with gender dysphoria. I'm certain I don't have a complete expert understanding, but I have just enough to grasp the concept of something that is very much outside of my own experience. Although it's a small sample, none of them have expressed that they "feel" like the opposite sex. They've explained it as feeling uncomfortable in their own skin, feeling like there's something missing, being surprised to see their own genitalia, being repulsed by their genitals, being traumatized by their reflection in the mirror, because their mental construct of their bodies, and how those bodies relate to the world around them doesn't match their reality.

A whole lot of people self identifying as transgender recently do not express any gender dysphoria, they don't express any discomfort with or disconnect from their sexed bodies. Rather, they express themselves as being "socially" dysphoric. The want other people to treat them as if they're the opposite sex (or both or neither). Those tend to be the people who are most vocal about "feeling" like a girl or a boy. And I genuinely have no idea what they mean when they say that. None of them have been able to explain what "feeling like a boy" means in any way that is NOT exactly what you described above - a rejection of confining gender roles.

If you have a different experience or a different take on it, I'd love to hear it.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,705
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
:confused:

I don't really know where to start here. It seems like we're speaking separate languages altogether. There are multiple meanings to the word "feel". You're conflating several of them above. Some of the things you've listed are emotions (sad), some are actually physical and chemical signals being accepted by the brain (hungry, fatigued).

Some are more esoteric, and it gets complicated depending on whether the self-perception bears any connection to reality. Is a person who "feels" funny actually funny? What do they mean when they say that they "feel" pretty? Does that mean that they are interpreting an actual image of themselves (mirror, photo, etc.) as being unattractive? Or is it a mental state that is completely disconnected from observation? Or is it a mental construct based on the opinions and expressions of other people?

Indeed. You, yourself utilized more than one meaning of 'to feel' in the post I responded to. I did as well. And that is actually the point.

The ability to experience emotions is dependent on the functional integrity of a set of neural systems, predominately the limbic system and the amygdala. It's not magic.

Your ability to 'feel' yourself as female (I'm making the assumption here) is not in the least dependent upon your ability to touch and feel your genitals or to compare/contrast with what it 'feels' like to touch your partner's penis. Indeed, I would imagine that there is the sensory sensation of touching a penis and then there are the emotions that may (or may not) arouse within you, with lots of different feedbacks, etc.
Sure, the same was fairly true for me, although my parents were very unconcerned about gender roles, so I got to climb trees and play with cars. At least until puberty hit, and then I couldn't sit cross-legged because someone (read: an adult male) might stare at my crotch. But that's a whole different aspect of the cultural indoctrination of girls.

For a time when I was a girl, I was sometimes told, often by a sibling or cousin or sometimes just a neighborhood child or someone unpleasant at school that I wasn't 'really' a girl. Not that I didn't 'act like a girl.' I knew that I didn't necessarily act like I was told girls were supposed to act--and frankly, I vehemently disagreed with the notion that what I did or didn't do/like/behave was not something a girl would do or would like: I was girl, I was doing it, I liked it. QED. It was easy to simply shrug off.

Being TOLD I wasn't a girl: that was different. To me, that was an insult--not because being male was better/worse but because someone was fundamentally refusing to recognize me as who I was/am. That was the insult. Refusing to know me because they thought they knew something better or rather, it was actually an attempt to insult me and to get me to conform to some silly, insipid view of what a girl likes/does/is.

Did you "feel like a girl"? Or did you observe that you were a girl?

I felt like myself. I felt like the person I was, who had a female body. For the most part, as a child, I did not assign behaviors or thoughts or preferences, etc. to boy or girl. I knew my father left the house to go to work. I knew my mother did work around the house. I did not assume that all fathers left the house to go to work or that all mothers cooked and cleaned. And I did not assume that I would do ...anything at all the way either of my parents did.

I did not feel like a boy. I did not feel as though I did not belong in my body, even during early adolescence, when my body began to change. Even when I did not always welcome those changes, some of which seemed to bring restrictions on my actions (imposed by my mother).

I wasn't confused by any of this. I was irritated that I was being expected to stop doing things I liked because someone else said that girls couldn't or shouldn't do them. I thought that was a silly notion. I was a girl. I wanted to do those things. I liked doing those things. Clearly the statement that girls didn't do this or that was factually incorrect. I did not feel incorrect. I felt the box people wanted to force me into was too constricting and who needed to sit in a box anyway?

As for body differences, I never really noted them until I observed two boys peeing on a fire hydrant and wanted to be able to do the same instead of having to stop playing to go inside to use the bathroom. Penises looked to me like, except for urination, they would get in the way when you ran or climbed trees. I also didn't like boys' haircuts much. For the most part, aside from school and when my mother thought I should be dressed up, I was allowed to run around in pants and a tshirt. And to play with trucks and rocks and sticks and insects and to roller skate and ride a bicycle, and to get dirty. I thought and still think this is normal. I did enjoy dolls as they were more likely to go along with whatever my plans for an adventure were than my siblings. I think my parents, or my mother, was reassured by the doll playing. My father seemed to enjoy whatever my siblings and I liked to do.

As I grew older and imagined my life and my career, I imagined all sorts of things, some reality based, some not. I wanted to be a pirate. I wanted to be Tarzan --not Jane because Jane had to stay home and Tarzan got to swing on grape vines and have adventures. I wanted to be an astronaut. I wanted to go on digs and learn about rocks and dinosaurs and ancient civilizations. I wanted to write stories and books and draw. I wanted to design houses. I wanted to have children, and to be their mother. I wanted to be a magical creature with wings to fly, a pouch like a kangaroo, able to run like a horse and to have a unicorn horn in the middle of my forehead. I wanted to be invisible so that I could observe without being noticed or bothered. Only one of those was in my mind associated with any gender.

Which some individuals who externally appear to be girls do feel.
What does that actually mean though? What do those girls feel that leads them to conclude that they "feel like a boy"? How do they even have a baseline for what a boy feels like?

I actually have no idea. I don't associate being a girl/woman/female with feeling any particular thing. It's just who I am.

The closest I can come--and I think of it differently, is knowing whether your are right handed or left handed.

A young man who grew up with my kids is dyslexic. He's really smart and creative but because he went to the local parochial school, his dyslexia wasn't identified and he just thought he was 'slow.' He's definitely not. Anyway, at some point, I was visiting my daughter who lived in the same city along with some of her friends, one of my sons, and we included this young man who was friends with all of them. He knew the neighborhood best, so he was riding in the front seat with me. I asked whether I should turn left or right at the next corner. He said he didn't know-- he had never learned to tell left from right. So I asked him to show me which hand he wrote with. He showed me his right hand. I told him that was his right hand. Anything on that side was 'right.' Somehow, no one had ever explained that to him--which I still find shocking. HIs parents are lovely people. intelligent and devoted, caring parents. But that led to a discussion: how do I know which hand is my right hand and which is my left? My right hand feels different to me. Not better or worse, just different. My right leg/foot as well, although I am ambidextrous with my feet.

And so it is with my sex and my gender: I feel female. I just do. I have often wished I had some of the conveniences and some of the opportunities that boys had when I was growing up that girls/I did not. I still wish I had had some of those opportunities. But I didn't actually want to be a boy.

I want to step back and draw a distinction here. Gender dysphoria is a real thing, certainly. but a lot of people over the last decade who have declared that they "feel" like a woman or a man or something in between or outside of the sex-binary do not have gender dysphoria. I've been provide with descriptions of how a person with gender dysphoria feels, what their perceptions are, how they relate to their own bodies... provided to me by people with gender dysphoria. I'm certain I don't have a complete expert understanding, but I have just enough to grasp the concept of something that is very much outside of my own experience. Although it's a small sample, none of them have expressed that they "feel" like the opposite sex. They've explained it as feeling uncomfortable in their own skin, feeling like there's something missing, being surprised to see their own genitalia, being repulsed by their genitals, being traumatized by their reflection in the mirror, because their mental construct of their bodies, and how those bodies relate to the world around them doesn't match their reality.

This is how I understand being transgender.

A whole lot of people self identifying as transgender recently do not express any gender dysphoria, they don't express any discomfort with or disconnect from their sexed bodies. Rather, they express themselves as being "socially" dysphoric. The want other people to treat them as if they're the opposite sex (or both or neither). Those tend to be the people who are most vocal about "feeling" like a girl or a boy. And I genuinely have no idea what they mean when they say that. None of them have been able to explain what "feeling like a boy" means in any way that is NOT exactly what you described above - a rejection of confining gender roles.

If you have a different experience or a different take on it, I'd love to hear it.

Well this is something I had to google. I very broadly agree that there is little or no reason to assign feelings or behaviors to a sex or gender. I don't quite understand people identifying as transgender when what they really object to is acting in some stereotypically gendered fashion. To me, that seems like something not transgender but as simply being unconventional. But this is not something I have even read much about, much less know anyone who feels transgender because they like to do things that stereotypes associate with the other gender? I'm not sure I get it.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,813
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
There are lots of middle class black and hispanic people in the United States. In most of the US, poor people and middle class people do not live across the street from one another. In the US, racism dramatically affects middle and upper class black and Hispanic people just as it dies poor or working class black and Hispanic people.

While I do agree the poor and the middle class generally do not live across the street from each other (for good reason, actually--you are less likely to be a victim of property crime if those around you are at least at your economic level.) However, that doesn't translate into racism against middle and upper class nonwhites. Our block is majority non-white. Nobody's trying to keep them out. (Ironically, the next block along, a different development and at a lower price point, appears to be entirely white although I am by no means certain of that.)
 

steve_bank

Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Joined
Nov 10, 2017
Messages
9,420
Location
seattle
Basic Beliefs
secular-skeptic
First of all, yes there is evidence for both transgender ( not that I ever denied that ) and non binary gender. In the case of trans, a trans female has the same brain patterns as a female, while having the body parts of a male, and vice versa for a trans male.

How distinct are these "brain patterns" between male and female? How much variation is there within a given sex versus the amount of differential between sexes?

There is considerably greater variation in the individuals within a sex than there are between the sexes. Envision a bimodal distribution where the means of the categories differ by 0.01... but the standard deviation of each distribution is 10. I don't know the actual numbers, just getting across the concept.

There is a saying there are no straight lines in nature.

Everything in humans appear to have distributions and variations. Noses, eyes, mouths, heights, vocal quality.

There are hetero men with high pitched voices and hetero women with masculine voices. It stands to reason that sexuality will also have a distribution and variation.

Not a well known fact, General George Patton had a high pitched voice he tried to change.
 
Top Bottom