[SUBMITTED] Neither Pink Nor Blue

[The Marsupial Illuminati]

Three versions of option 2 here. I'd like to know which one people think I should use, or whether they have suggestions for a better one. The variant bits are in italics.

"Political correctness gone amok!" scoffs @@RANDOMNAME@@, president of the conservative @@CAPITAL@@ Family Values Institute. "You know, if you start showing acceptance to this bunch, you'll only encourage others to join their ranks. Instead, we need to make sure that our school curriculums are clear that a person's gender is either male or female and determined at conception by his or her chromosomes. No need to confuse the kids with details like intersex conditions and what have you."

This version is the best because of its cohesion.

Option 1 is so vanilla. I suggest that the author pepper that option's text with buzzwords. Just some ideas: oppression/oppressive, systemic, cisnormative, cishet, patriarchy, queer, LGBTQIA+, assigned, violence, gender non-conforming, transphobic, inclusive, delegitimize, marginalize, discriminatory, privilege, experience, binary, and exclusionary.

[Chan Island]

Three versions of option 2 here. I'd like to know which one people think I should use, or whether they have suggestions for a better one. The variant bits are in italics.

"Political correctness gone amok!" scoffs @@RANDOMNAME@@, president of the conservative @@CAPITAL@@ Family Values Institute. "You know, if you start showing acceptance to this bunch, you'll only encourage others to join their ranks. Instead, we need to make sure that our school curriculums are clear that a person's gender is either male or female and determined at conception by his or her chromosomes. No need to confuse the kids with details like intersex conditions and what have you."

I think this one is the version that fits the rest of the text better. If you went for option 3, the choice would be much more about costs, and the other one is too legalese more fitting for a lawyer character than a conservative pressure group leader.

[Hediacrana]

Thanks, Marsupial Illuminati and Chan Island, for the feedback; I'm going to go with that version of option 2 then!

Marsupial Illuminati: I'm also looking into your suggestion regarding speaker 1.

[Hediacrana]

Okay, two versions of option 1. Again, I'd like to hear which one people like best (I have a slight preference for the first myself -- it is shorter, and I also think the text flows better). Additions are rendered in italics.

"It's about equality," states androgynous-looking petitioner Jessie Rivera, wearing a purple button that reads "They/Them/Theirs." "The current passport application process requires intersex and nonbinary folks to declare whether they are male or female, even if they don't identify as either! We may be a minority, but that does not mean it's right to sweep us under the rug and force us to hide who we are. It is time for @@NAME@@ to allow third gender designations on its birth certificates, passports and identity cards."

"It's about equality," states androgynous-looking petitioner Jessie Rivera, wearing a purple button that reads "They/Them/Theirs." "The current passport application process is needlessly exclusionary because it requires intersex and nonbinary folks to declare whether they are male or female, even if they don't identify as either! We may be a minority, but that does not mean it's right to sweep us under the rug and force us to hide who we are. It is time for @@NAME@@ to turn away from cisnormative systemic oppression and allow third gender designations on its birth certificates, passports and identity cards."

[Chan Island]

Okay, two versions of option 1. Again, I'd like to hear which one people like best (I have a slight preference for the first myself -- it is shorter, and I also think the text flows better). Additions are rendered in italics.

"It's about equality," states androgynous-looking petitioner Jessie Rivera, wearing a purple button that reads "They/Them/Theirs." "The current passport application process requires intersex and nonbinary folks to declare whether they are male or female, even if they don't identify as either! We may be a minority, but that does not mean it's right to sweep us under the rug and force us to hide who we are. It is time for @@NAME@@ to allow third gender designations on its birth certificates, passports and identity cards."

"It's about equality," states androgynous-looking petitioner Jessie Rivera, wearing a purple button that reads "They/Them/Theirs." "The current passport application process is needlessly exclusionary because it requires intersex and nonbinary folks to declare whether they are male or female, even if they don't identify as either! We may be a minority, but that does not mean it's right to sweep us under the rug and force us to hide who we are. It is time for @@NAME@@ to turn away from cisnormative systemic oppression and allow third gender designations on its birth certificates, passports and identity cards."

I agree with your own assessment. Choice 1 is better. They both say exactly the same thing, only the second choice just needlessly tacks on more words.

[Hediacrana]

All right, thanks Chan Island!

Given that FuF already said this one is good to go, I think I'm actually ready to submit now

[Sacara]

55 comments and you still haven’t submitted?!?!

[Hediacrana]

55 comments and you still haven’t submitted?!?!

It's submitted now!

[Jutsa]

Yay! Good luck.

[Hediacrana]

So I've decided to give this issue another go!

I understand it was initially picked but then dropped by an editor. I received the advise that it needed to include an option to allow many different possible gender markers beyond male and female, and that the whole issue could use a bit more humour to make it more interesting. (It was also pointed out that it might be good to include something on the bureaucratic mess trans people have to go through when they legally transition - but I think that would make a good follow-up issue to this one, so I'm keeping that idea separate for now).

I've introduced a Brancalandian tourist-angle to the whole thing to make room for a fourth perspective (a call for one third gender category, alongside an option that calls for multiple nonbinary genders) while also creating opportunity for more humour. Note that Canada, for which Brancaland is an analogue, is among the countries that allow third gender passports (that is, they have a single 'other' category, like other existing countries - there is currently no RL country I'm aware of that introduces a plurality of legal genders as asked for in the second option of this draft).

So here goes for the second attempt! I look forward to hearing what you think.

[Australian rePublic]

I'd be interested in this issue from the perspective of binary gendered languages- Spanish, Hebrew, Arabic, French, etc. Where there's no such thing as gender neutrality in those languages, all nouns (including inatimate objects) are either male or female

[Hediacrana]

I'd be interested in this issue from the perspective of binary gendered languages- Spanish, Hebrew, Arabic, French, etc. Where there's no such thing as gender neutrality in those languages, all nouns (including inatimate objects) are either male or female

How languages deal with grammatical gender certainly is an interesting topic, but it is not really the same thing as the recognition of legal gender in official identity documents, so I don't think this is the right issue for delving into that.

-----------

I made a couple more edits. Anyone else want to comment?

I'd especially love to hear suggestions from some of the editors regarding the feasibility of this edition of this issue, in light of the feedback I received from USS Monitor earlier (referenced in the first post of this thread). Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance for your time!

[Hediacrana]

Bump!


Any comments on this newest version - especially from editors - would be gratefully received.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

It's a lot better than the original, but I can't help but feel that the first two options all basically just say "yes" in barely discernible ways. I'd say merge the two, and have the one speaker suggesting that all documents should have three options: male, female, or a write-in space.

I think de-emphasising the transgender part is good, and you should be talking more about gender spectrum in this issue. Broadly speaking, most trans people I've met identify as male or identify as female, it's just that their gender identity doesn't match society's phenotype-driven gender expectation. The "other" option is needed for those who don't identify with the gender binary at all.

[Hediacrana]

It's a lot better than the original, but I can't help but feel that the first two options all basically just say "yes" in barely discernible ways. I'd say merge the two, and have the one speaker suggesting that all documents should have three options: male, female, or a write-in space.

I think de-emphasising the transgender part is good, and you should be talking more about gender spectrum in this issue. Broadly speaking, most trans people I've met identify as male or identify as female, it's just that their gender identity doesn't match society's phenotype-driven gender expectation. The "other" option is needed for those who don't identify with the gender binary at all.

Thanks for the feedback! I tried to incorporate each of the points you mentioned - what do you think?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

For sure, looks very solid now.

Can't promise publication, of course, but this is definitely now an issue that is publishable.

[The Marsupial Illuminati]

I disapprove of the removal of the reference to ContraPoints.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Huh, never heard of her till now.

I think the two options still need to be one option, but certainly a good reference should be kept where possible. Can she be worked in as the speaker to #1?

I mean, "the cisheteropatriarchal rug" is a great phrase, while the Jessie Bieber joke isn't that great. After all, poking fun at male pop stars for being effeminate is a bit 1990s, gone the way of mother-in-law jokes, and Justin isn't really an effeminate guy any more anyway. Maybe bring back the Whotuber and her rug, and let Bieber go.

[Hediacrana]

All right, the unisex parka is out and the cisheteropatriarchal rug is back in Some other edits were also made, elaborating on the contrapoints reference. What do you think of the current version? Is this ready for submission?

(I'm rather glad about that little discussion between the two of you, because poking fun at 'feminine males' actually wasn't what I was trying to do in the first place. Good to be alerted to how easily that could be misconstrued.)

[Christian Confederation]

Looks good to me, I pick option 3.

[Kurnugia]

I do think there should be an option to trying to catalogize any gender identity. It could add that extra spice in it.

[Hediacrana]

I'd be very grateful for additional feedback from editors on whether the current version - especially the first option - is ready for submission!

[Hediacrana]

I'd be very grateful for additional feedback from editors on whether the current version - especially the first option - is ready for submission!

Bump

[Jutsa]

I'll try to take one more look at this later today or tomorrow. Been extraordinarily lazy despite all the stuff I've to do so yeah >__>

[Verdant Haven]

I have only two minor things I can see:

1) In the first effect text, it should be @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ rather than just @@DEMONYM@@

2) This one is really a minor personal pet peeve, but is there any particular reason the first speaker has to be a YouTube star? I keep seeing that recently, and I don't understand how or why they keep getting inserted as if they had any business speaking in government without further explanation. Unless I'm holding hearings on the uses of social media or something, both they and their opinions have no business in my office. Is there a way to explain why I should care what they think, or how they are tied to the issue? Make them a stakeholder in some way (give them standing, in legal terms), and their use becomes valid.