Men wearing dresses

[Loren Pechtel]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[DrZoidberg]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.