Transgender woman correctly buried as man?

[WestRedMaple]

1.Very difficult to raise animals without understanding sex. 2. Lot of time would be wasted on cervical cancer screenings, prostate cancer screenings, etc if people didn't differentiate the sexes. It is very useful for a number of things.

1. Elaborate please, keeping in mind we are discussing humans here.
2. This is ridiculous. This is like saying we should categorize based on limb numbers, because if we didn't, people might get X-rays on limbs they don't have.

Humans get the same classifications as similar species. Why should new categories be created for things already described?

Your second argument is simply ridiculous, and is not a rational analogy.

Why should they not be classified? We know that classification is useful, as things can be written, said, and understood more easily and quickly by using them.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Why iss it anyone who agrees with this either didn't read the OP or is trolling. We also have different opinions you know

It's a lot better for our general faith in humanity to assume that people are misunderstanding or playing a game than genuinely believing that it is okay to abrogate a relative's bodily sovereignty and basic sense of self for their own sick and immoral gratification.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Humans get the same classifications as similar species. Why should new categories be created for things already described?

Because intersex and trans people matter a lot, given how 2% + ?% (at least ~1%) doesn't question the legitimacy of our reality as a statistically dimorphic species, but does so when it comes to the generalization of traits used to describe them that might overlook socially significant language.

[Lost heros]

1. Elaborate please, keeping in mind we are discussing humans here.
2. This is ridiculous. This is like saying we should categorize based on limb numbers, because if we didn't, people might get X-rays on limbs they don't have.

Humans get the same classifications as similar species. Why should new categories be created for things already described?

Your second argument is simply ridiculous, and is not a rational analogy.

Why should they not be classified? We know that classification is useful, as things can be written, said, and understood more easily and quickly by using them.

1. I'm still not seeing your point.

2. You said we should categorize as to prevent medical mistreatments. Categorizing based on limb numbers would prevent medical mistreatments. Some classifications are poorly defined and not accurate. Furthermore why should a medical classification of existence of a prostate or uterus, extend into a completely unrelated field such as sports?

[WestRedMaple]

Humans get the same classifications as similar species. Why should new categories be created for things already described?

Because intersex and trans people matter a lot, given how 2% + ?% (at least ~1%) doesn't question the legitimacy of our reality as a statistically dimorphic species, but does so when it comes to the generalization of traits used to describe them that might overlook socially significant language.

Irrelevant to my post. Other species already have various intersexes.

[The Silver Bloods]

I know it is sad but it was left up to the discretion of the family and they had the legal right to do what they did.

Saying "they had the legal right" is like the worst excuse for any action ever.

It means the best argument you can come up with for taking an action is that it is not specifically illegal.

Well does it truly matter if its an excuse because it is the law.. You can argue all you want with the law but what's legal is legal and what's illegal is illegal. The thing that happened here was that there was no will written which stated the procedure of how she would want to be treated post-mortem therefor the family had the discretion to do what they wanted. If her family thought it was right then okay, they did what they did. This will just serve as a reason as to have these plans listed in your will so something like this doesn't happen. We are merely stating our opinions here and we can't change the law so it is fruitless to tell me that saying the family had the right, legally, to do what they did is the "worst excuse for any action ever".

[WestRedMaple]

Humans get the same classifications as similar species. Why should new categories be created for things already described?

Your second argument is simply ridiculous, and is not a rational analogy.

Why should they not be classified? We know that classification is useful, as things can be written, said, and understood more easily and quickly by using them.

1. I'm still not seeing your point.

2. You said we should categorize as to prevent medical mistreatments. Categorizing based on limb numbers would prevent medical mistreatments. Some classifications are poorly defined and not accurate. Furthermore why should a medical classification of existence of a prostate or uterus, extend into a completely unrelated field such as sports?

You aren't addressing my actual post. What on Earth do sports have to do with it?

[WestRedMaple]

I'm tired of your threadjacking. The case at hand is the handling of remains of this person.

They chose to leave it to their family, and the family made the decision. Everything worked the way it is designed and should.

If you want your remains handled in a particular way, then it is easy to arrange.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Irrelevant to my post. Other species already have various intersexes.

It's not irrelevant.

Animals can be statistically dimorphic and we can overlook the exceptions.

Humans can be statistically dimorphic but we need to treat intersex [and trans] people with respect and validation through appropriate language like with all other human beings and admit that our limited, culturally constrained views of the sex-gender system (also known as dyadic superstructure) is not the sole way of defining knowledge about our anatomy or the best way to let social relations coming from this arise (if we should label people according to sex for social purposes to start with).

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

I'm tired of your threadjacking. The case at hand is the handling of remains of this person.

People said that the transphobic attitude taken was entirely understandable or even correct based on wrongful definitions of so-called vital categorizations of human beings.

We dismissed it over and over.

Not threadjacking.

[Pope Joan]

You may as well spit upon and trample her corpse.

Some loving family that was, right?

May their own remains be displayed, at funeral, with appropriate disfigurement.

[WestRedMaple]

Irrelevant to my post. Other species already have various intersexes.

It's not irrelevant.

Animals can be statistically dimorphic and we can overlook the exceptions.

Humans can be statistically dimorphic but we need to treat intersex [and trans] people with respect and validation through appropriate language like with all other human beings and admit that our limited, culturally constrained views of the sex-gender system (also known as dyadic superstructure) is not the sole way of defining knowledge about our anatomy or the best way to let social relations coming from this arise (if we should label people according to sex for social purposes to start with).

Other animals have the same sexes we find in humans. Can you find any reason to create entirely new categorization for one species?

You keep bringing up gender even though it has nothing to do with the posts to which you are responding. Gender has nothing to do with the post.

When did I mention labeling them according to sex for social purposes?

What does sex have to do with how someone is dressed?

[Simply Tyrone]

You may as well spit upon and trample her corpse.

Some loving family that was, right?

May their own remains be displayed, at funeral, with appropriate disfigurement.

Is that really necessary?

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Other animals have the same sexes we find in humans. Can you find any reason to create entirely new categorization for one species?

You keep bringing up gender even though it has nothing to do with the posts to which you are responding. Gender has nothing to do with the post.

When did I mention labeling them according to sex for social purposes?

What does sex have to do with how someone is dressed?

This just in: you don't get to call people who aren't male "males" and don't get to call people who aren't female "females".

It doesn't need to be a human-only term. In fact, it'd be lovely if we could extirpate gendered language completely from biology.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

I forgot to add that, in opposition to French (and English), calling women "hembra" in Spanish and "fêmea" in Portuguese is an epitome of dehumanizing sexist language. Much like "macho" is seen as a silly chauvinist thing.

It'd be lovely if we expanded that sentiment by making biology use even more technical terms and getting English speakers to stop using male and female to animals, but rather other constructs...

[WestRedMaple]

I'm tired of your threadjacking. The case at hand is the handling of remains of this person.

People said that the transphobic attitude taken was entirely understandable or even correct based on wrongful definitions of so-called vital categorizations of human beings.

We dismissed it over and over.

Not threadjacking.

And yet, over and over, it has been discussed in ways that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. I've had enough of that, and am not interested.

Sex doesn't even have much to do with the issue, though gender does.


I feel it would have been more appropriate for the parents to dress her as she preferred and use the name she used, but
A) plenty of people get buried in suits who did not wear them while alive
B) it isn't my call any more than it is your call
and
C) why should someone else be outraged about how someone is buried when that person didn't even think it important enough to specify?

[WestRedMaple]

Other animals have the same sexes we find in humans. Can you find any reason to create entirely new categorization for one species?

You keep bringing up gender even though it has nothing to do with the posts to which you are responding. Gender has nothing to do with the post.

When did I mention labeling them according to sex for social purposes?

What does sex have to do with how someone is dressed?

This just in: you don't get to call people who aren't male "males" and don't get to call people who aren't female "females".

It doesn't need to be a human-only term. In fact, it'd be lovely if we could extirpate gendered language completely from biology.

So more irrelevancies from you. I don't call non-males 'male' and I don't call non-females 'female'

So.....why make your utterly useless statement?

Female and male refer to sex, not gender, so they aren't really examples of what you describe.

Any chance you'll ever get around to answering the questions?

[WestRedMaple]

I forgot to add that, in opposition to French (and English), calling women "hembra" in Spanish and "fêmea" in Portuguese is an epitome of dehumanizing sexist language. Much like "macho" is seen as a silly chauvinist thing.

It'd be lovely if we expanded that sentiment by making biology use even more technical terms and getting English speakers to stop using male and female to animals, but rather other constructs...

Why should English speakers stop using English words describing sexes when describing the sexes of animals in English?


And what does that and French/Spanish/Portuguese have to do with the ceremony for the deceased?

[Simply Tyrone]

I forgot to add that, in opposition to French (and English), calling women "hembra" in Spanish and "fêmea" in Portuguese is an epitome of dehumanizing sexist language. Much like "macho" is seen as a silly chauvinist thing.

It'd be lovely if we expanded that sentiment by making biology use even more technical terms and getting English speakers to stop using male and female to animals, but rather other constructs...

What, use xe/xu/xum for animals?

"That cat is a xe, you cishet!"

"What? My cat is a he-"

"GET OUT OF MY ZOOLOGY CLASS!"

[Murkwood]

You have to feel sorry for people who are so confused in life that they mix up their sex. It's sad, really. If this person was a he at birth, they are a he at death.

No.

That's the only response your post is worthy of.

I seem to get that a lot around here...

[Murkwood]

I forgot to add that, in opposition to French (and English), calling women "hembra" in Spanish and "fêmea" in Portuguese is an epitome of dehumanizing sexist language. Much like "macho" is seen as a silly chauvinist thing.

It'd be lovely if we expanded that sentiment by making biology use even more technical terms and getting English speakers to stop using male and female to animals, but rather other constructs...

Oh my God you people aren't happy with anything! Now we have to make Biology PC?

[Murkwood]

You may as well spit upon and trample her corpse.

Some loving family that was, right?

May their own remains be displayed, at funeral, with appropriate disfigurement.

You are just a constant ball of compassion, aren't you?

[Anglo-California]

I forgot to add that, in opposition to French (and English), calling women "hembra" in Spanish and "fêmea" in Portuguese is an epitome of dehumanizing sexist language. Much like "macho" is seen as a silly chauvinist thing.

It'd be lovely if we expanded that sentiment by making biology use even more technical terms and getting English speakers to stop using male and female to animals, but rather other constructs...

To the engineering department! Feminists and SJWs will never find us there!

[Murkwood]

I forgot to add that, in opposition to French (and English), calling women "hembra" in Spanish and "fêmea" in Portuguese is an epitome of dehumanizing sexist language. Much like "macho" is seen as a silly chauvinist thing.

It'd be lovely if we expanded that sentiment by making biology use even more technical terms and getting English speakers to stop using male and female to animals, but rather other constructs...

To the engineering department! Feminists and SJWs will never find us there!

Engineering? What if someone's trigged by alcohol? Huh? Bigot.

[Simply Tyrone]

To the engineering department! Feminists and SJWs will never find us there!

Engineering? What if someone's trigged by alcohol? Huh? Bigot.

muh triggur rites