Postgender

[Ifreann]

Certain words hurting your feelings is different from other words hurting other people's feelings? I don't see how.

When I avoid quoting certain things, I am regulating my own use of words. If others get upset over my personal preference with wording, they’re trying to regulate someone else’s choice of words.

No they aren't. Asking someone to stop using the wrong pronouns isn't regulation. Getting annoyed at people using the wrong pronouns isn't regulation.

And if I was in a private conversation with a transgender male who wanted me to avoid using male pronouns in the conversation, I would listen to him out of respect. But personally supporting anatomical definitions of gender - it’s just a personal viewpoint that I have a right to.

That's what you say, but I bet you've never asked someone to take their clothes off so you can examine their anatomy.

[Godular]

When I avoid quoting certain things, I am regulating my own use of words. If others get upset over my personal preference with wording, they’re trying to regulate someone else’s choice of words.

No they aren't. Asking someone to stop using the wrong pronouns isn't regulation. Getting annoyed at people using the wrong pronouns isn't regulation.

And if I was in a private conversation with a transgender male who wanted me to avoid using male pronouns in the conversation, I would listen to him out of respect. But personally supporting anatomical definitions of gender - it’s just a personal viewpoint that I have a right to.

That's what you say, but I bet you've never asked someone to take their clothes off so you can examine their anatomy.

To say nothing of the fact that ‘anatomical definition of gender’ is an oxymoron.

[Neutraligon]

Certain words hurting your feelings is different from other words hurting other people's feelings? I don't see how.

When I avoid quoting certain things, I am regulating my own use of words. If others get upset over my personal preference with wording, they’re trying to regulate someone else’s choice of words. And if I was in a private conversation with a transgender male who wanted me to avoid using male pronouns in the conversation, I would listen to him out of respect. But personally supporting anatomical definitions of gender - it’s just a personal viewpoint that I have a right to.

Except earlier you where changing someone else's words when quoting them, thus regulating their words. You where making a very large deal about them cursing. Oh and since gender is in the brain it would be rather hard to support the anatomical definition.

[Ra-Harakhte]

That's what you say, but I bet you've never asked someone to take their clothes off so you can examine their anatomy.

This is part of why I find it particularly silly - concerning the guy I mentioned earlier, I have no idea what his genitalia are like (i.e. surgery or no) because that seems like a pretty weird thing to ask. All I know is that he was born biologically female, but for as long as I've known him has been male.

Calling him "she" based on his chromosomes and birth anatomy when I furthermore have no clue what his genitals look like seems frankly weird.

It seems simpler to me just to call people what they identify with or want to be called. Of all the (openly) trans people I know, it was either obvious what they identified with or I picked it up pretty quick from conversation or hearing about them beforehand, e.g. "Alex called and she wants to meet at the diner."

Realistically, I don't see why people have such a problem with referring to anatomically male people as male and anatomically female people as female.

I don't see why people have such a problem using "he" for people with a male gender/gender-identity, "she" for people with a female gender/gender-identity, and "they" for a person whose gender is unknown, irrelevant to the conversation, or who the person I'm speaking to isn't familiar with.

It's something I do and don't even consciously think about, it's not something I choose to do but just a natural feature of my idiolect.

[R249]

When I avoid quoting certain things, I am regulating my own use of words. If others get upset over my personal preference with wording, they’re trying to regulate someone else’s choice of words. And if I was in a private conversation with a transgender male who wanted me to avoid using male pronouns in the conversation, I would listen to him out of respect. But personally supporting anatomical definitions of gender - it’s just a personal viewpoint that I have a right to.

Just use ‘they’.

I probably would, honestly, but to be fair, “they” is plural.

[R249]

No they aren't. Asking someone to stop using the wrong pronouns isn't regulation. Getting annoyed at people using the wrong pronouns isn't regulation.

That's what you say, but I bet you've never asked someone to take their clothes off so you can examine their anatomy.

To say nothing of the fact that ‘anatomical definition of gender’ is an oxymoron.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender
Definition varies by context, and I’m advocating the biological definition as better.

[Godular]

Just use ‘they’.

I probably would, honestly, but to be fair, “they” is plural.

No it is not.

Usage

The word they (with its counterparts them, their, and themselves) as a singular pronoun to refer to a person of unspecified gender has been used since at least the 16th century. In the late 20th century, as the traditional use of he to refer to a person of either gender came under scrutiny on the grounds of sexism, this use of they became more common. It is now generally accepted in contexts where it follows an indefinite pronoun such as anyone, no one, someone, or a person, as in anyone can join if they are a resident and each to their own. In other contexts, coming after singular nouns, the use of they is now common, though less widely accepted, especially in formal contexts. Sentences such as ask a friend if they could help are still criticized for being ungrammatical. Nevertheless, in view of the growing acceptance of they and its obvious practical advantages, they is used in this dictionary in many cases where he would have been used formerly. In a more recent development, they is now being used to refer to specific individuals (as in Alex is bringing their laptop). Like the gender-neutral honorific Mx, the singular they is preferred by some individuals who identify as neither male nor female.

[Godular]

To say nothing of the fact that ‘anatomical definition of gender’ is an oxymoron.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender
Definition varies by context, and I’m advocating the biological definition as better.

You would be wrong, even looking at your own source.

[R249]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender
Definition varies by context, and I’m advocating the biological definition as better.

You would be wrong, even looking at your own source.

...Did you read the second sentence?

[West Leas Oros]

We all know what gender dysphoria is: it is a medical condition where one's gender identity, which we now know to be hardwired, does not correlate with one's sex. This is a widely documented medical phenomenon.

I argue that postgenderism, "I'm my own gender, " or "no gender" has zero to do with this. Such positions have no medical support, and are basically "I'm a special snowflake, short and stout."

What are your opinions on "postgender" theory?

Who Cares?

[Alvecia]

To say nothing of the fact that ‘anatomical definition of gender’ is an oxymoron.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender
Definition varies by context, and I’m advocating the biological definition as better.

Why not just do as the page says and use it differently in context?

[New Vlada]

i do not care if you identify as a girl or a boy or a goddamn helicopter, just as long as you're not forcing the postgender religion down my throat

[West Leas Oros]

i do not care if you identify as a girl or a boy or a goddamn helicopter, just as long as you're not forcing the postgender religion down my throat

I apply that to most ideologies.

[Godular]

You would be wrong, even looking at your own source.

...Did you read the second sentence?

Why yes I did. Did you read your own damn source?

Maybe if you wanted to catalogue transgenders as some kind of different species of hominid, your ‘biological definition’ might hold more water. But the whole concept of transgender is behavioral in nature, which would SUGGEST that the psychological or sociological definitions would be most appropriate.

But hey, maybe you think alternative lifestyles are some kind of safari, I dunno. That speaks more about you than it does to others.

[Godular]

i do not care if you identify as a girl or a boy or a goddamn helicopter, just as long as you're not forcing the postgender religion down my throat

And what is that ‘religion’?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I think that you, Larin, are Transphobic. I'm not trying to be mean, but this is unjust!!!! It's SOOO rude to say that there are only 2 genders, and everyone should conform to gender roles. I'm a person who was assigned female at birth, but I now identify as Non-Binary. Are you going to be mean to me or hate me because of my chosen identity??? I hope that my story will help you understand how your opinion is yours, but is VERY VERY rude! When I read your post, I had to shut my computer to stop and think and NOT CRY, because I have struggled with gender dysphoria for a very long time, and you made me feel very uncomfortable.

It's not even transphobic, it's just how it basically works in my religion, and also my opinion

Believing in a deity is not an issue of race. By telling you that Allah doesn't exist he wasn't being racist. He was attacking your religion, but that's not being racist. Because religion and race aren't the same thing.

Opinions are also not above criticism. Opinions can definitely be biased and can be challenged.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

I don't see any reason to make transgender people make their gender conform to their sex. I mean, really, all a transgender person is is someone who is behaving differently from normal (for instance, if a transgendered person is born male, they will act like a female, and vice versa). Some people might talk a big game about them being insane, disabled, or (my personal favorite) "degenerate", but there's absolutely nothing rooted in biology that says men or women HAVE to act like X, which means that all they're doing is exercising freedom of expression, and by limiting that, you're forcing arbitrary values on someone for no particular reason other than "they don't act like I expect them to".
If you believe in letting people do what they will as long as they don't harm anyone, which is the case for most non-oppressive countries in the world, then it's hypocritical to fight for those rights and then turn around and say that trans people have to act like you tell them to because they're insane, disabled, or "degenerate" (which I must note seems to mean "something that I don't like"). Someone who's LGBT+ is just someone who'd not doing exactly what society tells them to do (and not harming anyone in the process). Transgendered people are adopting a gender role different from what society has come to expect and agendered people are doing the same thing but taking no gender role instead of taking a different one. Homosexual people are attracted to their own gender, and whether this is rooted in biology or in their own choice, it's their decision to make, and telling them to behave otherwise is essentially the same thing as taking a heterosexual person and forcing them to be homosexual. Same deal with bi, pan, and asexual people. You shouldn't force someone to conform to your preconceived notions about how they should act, how they should dress, and who they should love, since if you do, that means that you believe that they do not have the right to choose how they live their life and you have the right to make that decision for them, which makes you authoritarian and (in my view) a terrible person.

And I wanted to add this: As for electroshock "therapy", if you electrocute someone enough and tell them that it will stop when they do something, they'll probably do whatever you want. That's literally the reason torture works.

[NeoOasis]

And I wanted to add this: As for electroshock "therapy", if you electrocute someone enough and tell them that it will stop when they do something, they'll probably do whatever you want. That's literally the reason torture works.

Also literally the reason torture doesn't work. Torture someone enough, and suddenly the sky is red, grass is blue, and the world was created last Thursday. Just because someone says something under duress doesn't make it true.

Take Alan Turing. Despite the shit they put him through, he was never really "cured." Instead ended up killing himself.

[CITY18]

And I wanted to add this: As for electroshock "therapy", if you electrocute someone enough and tell them that it will stop when they do something, they'll probably do whatever you want. That's literally the reason torture works.

to add:they'll stop doing it and most likely become violently asexual as any arousal entering their system would force a response.

i don't want to know the side effects of doing that horrific piece of classical conditioning on a trans-gendered person seeing as gender is even more complex then arousal though knowing this fucked up world somebodies probably done it. keep the CC for phobias where it actually really helps people form positive memories with the phobia in question.

[Irou]

People are born gay/trans it would make sense to leave them alone and genetically modify gay babies to be straight

[War-torn Kenya]

People are born gay/trans it would make sense to leave them alone and genetically modify gay babies to be straight

Smartest thing I've heard all day.

Go to source, people.

[Sovaal]

People are born gay/trans it would make sense to leave them alone and genetically modify gay babies to be straight

Smartest thing I've heard all day.

Go to source, people.

I would be careful with genetic manipulation people. Seems like a good way to screw over a kid.

[Cedoria]

The number of reality-denying postmodernists in this thread is scary.

Guys, it's not about "well just let them be because it's up to them what they are"

No, it's about reality. If someone said they're a box, you'd be like, no, you're not. I'm not going to humor you into thinking you're one.

It's all fine and dandy to "let people be" until they use the law to use coercive power over you and force you to go along with it. Bill C-16 in Canada shows that this is already happening.

Bill C-16 in Canada does not compel you by law to go along with people's preferred identity..


For reference, please read the full text of the bill.

http://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42 ... yal-assent

And stop listening to Jordan Peterson, the man is a pseudo-intellectual fraud who knows nothing about what he's talking. Parroting his view on this subject will only make you look foolish. Read the bill for yourself and don't believe everything you're told.