Trans Discussion Thread: Catgirls Don't Need Litterboxes

[Gongsi]

Am Mormon, can confirm. An extremely conservative and xenophobic culture has been brewed in Utah/Idaho(Utah2) Mormonism that spits in the face of its own core principles. Mormons outside of Utah are hit-or-miss, some basically crave becoming part of the Utah conglomerate while others have little to no connection with Utah Mormonism and are some of the most accepting people I know. The key aspects of Mormon doctrine are actually fairly progressive (and there is even a slight tie to full-on socialism imbedded within, believe it or not), but being in a Utah-sized echo chamber has led a large portion of Utah Mormons to become holier-than-thou bigots who do not believe it is in their right to question leadership. From a non-Utah Mormon standpoint it is abhorrent.

I am sure there are also plenty of completely nice Mormons in Utah as well, they just get overshadowed severely. But, as ZN has said above me, they (Utah Mormons) quietly reject the notion of "separation of church and state" and try to culturally and religiously convert any area under their control. Any pockets of social progression within Utah territory I do not expect to last indefinitely. So no, I would say Utah is one of the biggest places to avoid if one is trans.

But again, this mainly pertains to Utah-centric Mormonism, which unfortunately is the most centralized and gets the most publicity. And again, this is from my limited viewpoint and understanding. So I may, in fact, be wrong...

...but from the outside it certainly doesn't seem like I am.

bruh what I have been seeing the Mormon church has lost some control over utah. espenially in the SLC area.

That is probably true, and if so, I am glad. Hopefully a break in LDS monopoly over Utah will help shake the culturalism in the area.

[Gongsi]

Am Mormon, can confirm. An extremely conservative and xenophobic culture has been brewed in Utah/Idaho(Utah2) Mormonism that spits in the face of its own core principles. Mormons outside of Utah are hit-or-miss, some basically crave becoming part of the Utah conglomerate while others have little to no connection with Utah Mormonism and are some of the most accepting people I know. The key aspects of Mormon doctrine are actually fairly progressive (and there is even a slight tie to full-on socialism imbedded within, believe it or not), but being in a Utah-sized echo chamber has led a large portion of Utah Mormons to become holier-than-thou bigots who do not believe it is in their right to question leadership. From a non-Utah Mormon standpoint it is abhorrent.

I am sure there are also plenty of completely nice Mormons in Utah as well, they just get overshadowed severely. But, as ZN has said above me, they (Utah Mormons) quietly reject the notion of "separation of church and state" and try to culturally and religiously convert any area under their control. Any pockets of social progression within Utah territory I do not expect to last indefinitely. So no, I would say Utah is one of the biggest places to avoid if one is trans.

But again, this mainly pertains to Utah-centric Mormonism, which unfortunately is the most centralized and gets the most publicity. And again, this is from my limited viewpoint and understanding. So I may, in fact, be wrong...

...but from the outside it certainly doesn't seem like I am.

You know it's tragic really, Mormonism is fascinating to me, makes me almost want to convert.

But the irony is that it's this same attitude that almost had them be exterminated by the Protestant United States and keeps them out of most of the Senate today. I feel like having one or two more Mormon senators would be great... But the Republican Party doesn't want them and they only accept Mitt Romney begrudgingly.

The actual doctrine and theology is great, and is the main reason I have stayed. But yeah, its this kind of behavior that got an extermination order put on them in Missouri, and yet nothing seems to have been learned.

[The Rich Port]

You know it's tragic really, Mormonism is fascinating to me, makes me almost want to convert.

But the irony is that it's this same attitude that almost had them be exterminated by the Protestant United States and keeps them out of most of the Senate today. I feel like having one or two more Mormon senators would be great... But the Republican Party doesn't want them and they only accept Mitt Romney begrudgingly.

The actual doctrine and theology is great, and is the main reason I have stayed. But yeah, its this kind of behavior that got an extermination order put on them in Missouri, and yet nothing seems to have been learned.

The tragedy of abuse, is that abuse victims can often end up becoming abusive as a defense and coping mechanism.

I wouldn't even mind polyamory at all, 1860s America was a big fat L =_=

[Sincluda]

Sadly Vic darling... If there's one thing I've learned about being a minority in several ways, nowhere is really 100% safe. We must brave the storm and waves.

Keep yourself safe, and make safe places for your loved ones.

It's up to us to make safe havens and pockets of resistance in the world.

I've heard Colorado is pretty liberal.



You really gotta wonder though just how tolerant they are.

The Mormons are a secretive bunch. Granted, they are so because they've been persecuted, but that's the thing about people who are even marginally conservative: they never learn lessons from history. They're friendly now because they have to, it's the only way to gain more followers, but IMO, once they gain enough power, they'll start abusing their power, if they haven't already, from things I have heard about people trying to leave the church.

The Jehovah's Witnesses for example are ostensibly progressive and have made key strikes in the Civil Rights Movement but their hostile attitudes towards both outsiders and insiders keeps them small, while the LDS church keeps it's influence regional and contained to Utah. Shockingly, I expected there to be more Mormons but somehow they're out-paced by the Witnesses: 16 million+ Mormons vs. 17 million JW's.

Am Mormon, can confirm. An extremely conservative and xenophobic culture has been brewed in Utah/Idaho(Utah2) Mormonism that spits in the face of its own core principles. Mormons outside of Utah are hit-or-miss, some basically crave becoming part of the Utah conglomerate while others have little to no connection with Utah Mormonism and are some of the most accepting people I know. The key aspects of Mormon doctrine are actually fairly progressive (and there is even a slight tie to full-on socialism imbedded within, believe it or not), but being in a Utah-sized echo chamber has led a large portion of Utah Mormons to become holier-than-thou bigots who do not believe it is in their right to question leadership. From a non-Utah Mormon standpoint it is abhorrent.

I am sure there are also plenty of completely nice Mormons in Utah as well, they just get overshadowed severely. But, as ZN has said above me, they (Utah Mormons) quietly reject the notion of "separation of church and state" and try to culturally and religiously convert any area under their control. Any pockets of social progression within Utah territory I do not expect to last indefinitely. So no, I would say Utah is one of the biggest places to avoid if one is trans.

But again, this mainly pertains to Utah-centric Mormonism, which unfortunately is the most centralized and gets the most publicity. And again, this is from my limited viewpoint and understanding. So I may, in fact, be wrong...

...but from the outside it certainly doesn't seem like I am.

You're pretty much correct, but SLC comes in as a surprising exception. Honestly: don't go to Utah. SLC may be a diverse haven with things like LoveLoud and co., but that is where it ends. Yes, I am reversing my position on this. It is overall safer to be somewhere else because of the rest of the state and the presence of the LDS church in places it shouldn't.

[Drew Durrnil]

Do you have any information on attacks per million?

uhhhhhhhh
for where
for california

[Lady Victory]

This isn't the Mormon Discussion Thread, people. Please stay on topic.

[Forsher]

Older people have no reason to, don't believe in it even being possible, or choose not to for whatever reason.

I think, in some cases, there's a shift where "masculine" and "feminine" have become narrower ideas over time... being butch, for example, isn't, um, non-female even if isn't feminine, but now you might take that as a sign "maybe I'm not female" whereas in the past it's "oh, I'm butch, I guess". If true, I don't think it's a good thing. We should be disposing of the idea that sets of behaviours and tastes are relevant to gender identity.

Of course, there's a massive jump from "okay, I'll suppose that's true" to "ah, this is why young people are more LGBT than older people".

Related: to what extent is gender identity actually the same as "these are the behaviours I have and these are my tastes and these things are coded [gender] therefore I am [gender]"? I feel like it's more than that, e.g. more "I am a [gender identifier] who does these things and has these tastes" but I can't really say what the basis for identity is then. Perhaps it's as simple as looking like gender physically? But that's just the same...as behaviours.

Also, this is more directed to TRP specifically than the thread as a whole as with the above, I just noticed your signature... would you say "they" is generally the best pronoun to refer to a fictional genderfluid person? (Context.)

[Kowani]

And, Louisiana

A proposal to ban transgender athletes in Louisiana from competing on girls' sports teams in schools will be debated by the full Senate after sailing through the chamber's education committee Thursday without opposition.Sen. Beth Mizell, the Senate's second-ranking Republican, said her bill would “protect girls in sports." She suggested transgender women would have an automatic, built-in advantage.

“Nobody wants to treat anyone with inequity, but there is not an equal situation physically,” Mizell said.

LGBTQ advocates and other opponents called such a ban discriminatory, said it could harm transgender children's mental health and would run afoul of federal anti-discrimination laws. Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, opposes the bill and other measures targeting transgender youth.

“It perpetuates more unfairness whether it intends to or not,” said Clifton Mixon, a child and adolescent psychologist.

Senate Education Chairman Cleo Fields, a Baton Rouge Democrat, questioned the need for the bill, but didn’t vote in opposition. The only other Democrat on the committee, Sen. Katrina Jackson of Monroe, joined the Republicans in supporting the measure.

Jackson vigorously defended her position as protecting students against an “unfair advantage” that she said transgender females could have.

“I'm going to vote for the bill. I’m going to very transparent. But I don’t want to be called transphobic,” she said.

Conservative lawmakers across the country have pushed similar bills limiting transgender people's participation in sports, and Mizell said 20 states have adopted them so far.

But Mizell acknowledged she couldn't offer an example of a specific problem or situation in Louisiana.

The Louisiana High School Athletic Association, which supports the legislation, already has taken a position that student athletes “shall compete in the gender of their birth certificate unless they have undergone sex reassignment." That prompted Fields to ask whether the bill was even needed to accomplish Mizell's goal.

“This is a bill in search of a problem,” said Melissa Flournoy, with Louisiana Progress, which opposed the bill.

The proposal would require that athletic events and teams sponsored by a school that receives state funding “shall be expressly designated, based upon biological sex,” and it would specifically spell out that athletic teams or sports events “designated for females, girls or women shall not be open to students who are not biologically female.”

Mixon said puberty blockers and other medical treatments can keep transgender women from developing the athletic advantages that supporter of the bill cited. He said athletes have different body types and different genetic backgrounds that can give them advantages.

“We’re overly focused on competitiveness and not humanity,” he said.

Rep. Kirk Talbot, a River Ridge Republican, cited an example in Connecticut where he said two transgender females broke multiple state records in track events. Allowing them to play on women's teams “will most definitely kill women’s sports,” Talbot said.

Advancement of Mizell's bill came a day after another lawmaker, Republican Sen. Mike Fesi of Houma, shelved his proposal to add new restrictions on transgender youth access to medical care and counseling. Fesi faced widespread opposition and claims that the measure was discriminatory.

Edwards and others worry that proposals to add transgender restrictions could bring economic damage to the state, chasing away events like the NCAA’s Final Four basketball tournament scheduled for New Orleans in 2022. The NCAA has declared its support for transgender student athletes and said it will choose locations for its championships where hosts commit to an environment “free of discrimination.”


The bill is filed as Senate Bill 156.

Bill passes Senate with no debate (29-6)

[The Rich Port]

Older people have no reason to, don't believe in it even being possible, or choose not to for whatever reason.

I think, in some cases, there's a shift where "masculine" and "feminine" have become narrower ideas over time... being butch, for example, isn't, um, non-female even if isn't feminine, but now you might take that as a sign "maybe I'm not female" whereas in the past it's "oh, I'm butch, I guess". If true, I don't think it's a good thing. We should be disposing of the idea that sets of behaviours and tastes are relevant to gender identity.

Of course, there's a massive jump from "okay, I'll suppose that's true" to "ah, this is why young people are more LGBT than older people".

Related: to what extent is gender identity actually the same as "these are the behaviours I have and these are my tastes and these things are coded [gender] therefore I am [gender]"? I feel like it's more than that, e.g. more "I am a [gender identifier] who does these things and has these tastes" but I can't really say what the basis for identity is then. Perhaps it's as simple as looking like gender physically? But that's just the same...as behaviours.

Also, this is more directed to TRP specifically than the thread as a whole as with the above, I just noticed your signature... would you say "they" is generally the best pronoun to refer to a fictional genderfluid person? (Context.)

I think you're over-thinking it XD You have to also remember, the idea of gender is sometimes being actively corrupted or sabotaged by conservative agents. The reason all of these assumptions about gender exist in the first place is because strict gender roles according to sex or even just physical looks has been going on for millennia uninterrupted. I think people forget that there's been massive strides in sexual and gender liberation in only the last 50 or so years, which is absolutely ridiculously fast considering the Bronze Age lasted for a thousand years and we were hunter gatherers for hundreds of thousands of years.

We're only just discovering this stuff for ourselves, myself included.

Which yeah, I'm no expert, not at all, so I dunno why you asking me XDDD Um, I suppose if it's not explicitly discussed or talked about, I think it is pretty safe to assume their pronoun based on how they're presenting, because, yeah, that's kind of the whole point of presenting in the first place. For real people you can just ask but IMO fictional characters are more open to interpretation, which, yeah... No shit, it's fiction, it's open to interpretation from any angle. You just need justification for your interpretation to become valid and/or sound. It's also a good neutral pronoun to use in general, whether the person's gender is obvious or not, so it's useful to be sneaky about not knowing what people's gender is before you can ask XD

Although yeah, it is very important to just... Talk to people in general, sincerely. Which is really hard for me because I'm very introverted and I hate small talk so I like to jump immediately to horrific topics that make you question yourself DD

And well yeah, I dunno why behaviors are inherently problematic in some way to you. Critical thinking and philosophy are behaviors, divinity is a behavior, rejection of divinity is a behavior, exercise is a behavior, blah blah. Is O-KEH.

[Lady Victory]

Older people have no reason to, don't believe in it even being possible, or choose not to for whatever reason.

I think, in some cases, there's a shift where "masculine" and "feminine" have become narrower ideas over time... being butch, for example, isn't, um, non-female even if isn't feminine, but now you might take that as a sign "maybe I'm not female" whereas in the past it's "oh, I'm butch, I guess". If true, I don't think it's a good thing. We should be disposing of the idea that sets of behaviours and tastes are relevant to gender identity.

Of course, there's a massive jump from "okay, I'll suppose that's true" to "ah, this is why young people are more LGBT than older people".

Related: to what extent is gender identity actually the same as "these are the behaviours I have and these are my tastes and these things are coded [gender] therefore I am [gender]"? I feel like it's more than that, e.g. more "I am a [gender identifier] who does these things and has these tastes" but I can't really say what the basis for identity is then. Perhaps it's as simple as looking like gender physically? But that's just the same...as behaviours.

Also, this is more directed to TRP specifically than the thread as a whole as with the above, I just noticed your signature... would you say "they" is generally the best pronoun to refer to a fictional genderfluid person? (Context.)

I really don't know much about this stuff, but since realizing I'm trans I've felt the need to be more stereotypically 'feminine' in some ways. Not every way, mind, just some. I never really had the urge before that point.

[Riviere Renard]

Older people have no reason to, don't believe in it even being possible, or choose not to for whatever reason.

Also, this is more directed to TRP specifically than the thread as a whole as with the above, I just noticed your signature... would you say "they" is generally the best pronoun to refer to a fictional genderfluid person? (Context.)

As you can see I am not The Rich Port, but, because I don't know why you asked him specifically, I will answer too.

It depends on the context. In the context that you linked, when specifically talking about them gender retrospectively, they is probably best if neither in story characters or the authors clarified pronouns. However, if you are watching, for example, a film with a genderfluid person, and, at the moment in the film you are currently viewing, they present as male and people call them he/him pronouns, it may be wise, when talking during that section or about that section, to use he/him.

Its complicated by the fact that that person cannot, by the laws of the universe, be offended by the pronouns you use for them, nor can they correct you (this also, in general, applies to genderfluid celebrities). Using correct pronouns is no less important, mind you, but it becomes a hassle when its unclear and that can make people avoid using pronouns altogether, and that is not good, so, my advice, when in doubt; if you don't know what pronouns to use (for anyone, fictional or not) just use they and let people advise you from there.

---

I actually do have a problem with The Rich Port's signature because I like to use they for people in general, for me its always been the most natural pronoun, but she encourages me to gender him, which gives me a lot of stress, especially because you can't have a gender presentation on a forum, so I'm supposed to assign her a pronoun based on what gender her text looks like. he say "If you use they to refer to [her] you're a coward", and frankly, that is true and I am okay with that. He doesn't seem to be offended by 'they', though, so it should be fine.

Being genderfluid, I've thought about adding 'they/them', or something to my sig, but I think they mainly just waste space, so I've opted not to have one.

---

Edit: The Rich Port's pronouns.

[The Blaatschapen]

I use they for a lot of people on the forums because I can't be bothered to learn more about them.

Nothing to do with transgender issues, just sheer laziness

[The Rich Port]

Also, this is more directed to TRP specifically than the thread as a whole as with the above, I just noticed your signature... would you say "they" is generally the best pronoun to refer to a fictional genderfluid person? (Context.)

As you can see I am not The Rich Port, but, because I don't know why you asked them specifically, I will answer too.

It depends on the context. In the context that you linked, when specifically talking about their gender retrospectively, they is probably best if neither in story characters or the authors clarified pronouns. However, if you are watching, for example, a film with a genderfluid person, and, at the moment in the film you are currently viewing, they present as male and people call them he/him pronouns, it may be wise, when talking during that section or about that section, to use he/him.

Its complicated by the fact that that person cannot, by the laws of the universe, be offended by the pronouns you use for them, nor can they correct you (this also, in general, applies to genderfluid celebrities). Using correct pronouns is no less important, mind you, but it becomes a hassle when its unclear and that can make people avoid using pronouns altogether, and that is not good, so, my advice, when in doubt; if you don't know what pronouns to use (for anyone, fictional or not) just use they and let people advise you from there.

---

I actually do have a problem with The Rich Port's signature because I like to use they for people in general, for me its always been the most natural pronoun, but they encourage me to gender them, which gives me a lot of stress, especially because you can't have a gender presentation on a forum, so I'm supposed to assign them a pronoun based on what gender their text looks like. They say "If you use they to refer to [them] you're a coward", and frankly, that is true and I am okay with that. They don't seem to be offended by 'they', though, so it should be fine.

Being genderfluid, I've thought about adding 'they/them', or something to my sig, but I think they mainly just waste space, so I've opted not to have one.

---

I encourage The Rich Port to telegram me if they would rather me use another pronoun.

Well I am sorry for causing you stress darlin' but... They is my least preferred pronoun, so, I dunno what you want me to do about that. Does it offend me? Nah, I'm a tough cookie, I have very thick skin, you can call me they if it really bothers you that much but um... Well yeah, them's the breaks when it comes to me. Sowwy. :DDDD

It's partly a joke, but I am sincere when I say I prefer to be called either he or she (I am genderfluid after all... I dunno if I am non-binary since I do identify strongly along binary lines... But if that's a contradiction then yeah, story of my fuckin' life), but I don't mind people calling me whatever they prefer, not according to "what my text looks like" (entirely) but rather to how they feel what I am and how they want to make me feel.

I only TG for personal discussions I can't otherwise have on the forum... Sure I'll TG you XD

[Zarnicovia nova]

As you can see I am not The Rich Port, but, because I don't know why you asked them specifically, I will answer too.

It depends on the context. In the context that you linked, when specifically talking about their gender retrospectively, they is probably best if neither in story characters or the authors clarified pronouns. However, if you are watching, for example, a film with a genderfluid person, and, at the moment in the film you are currently viewing, they present as male and people call them he/him pronouns, it may be wise, when talking during that section or about that section, to use he/him.

Its complicated by the fact that that person cannot, by the laws of the universe, be offended by the pronouns you use for them, nor can they correct you (this also, in general, applies to genderfluid celebrities). Using correct pronouns is no less important, mind you, but it becomes a hassle when its unclear and that can make people avoid using pronouns altogether, and that is not good, so, my advice, when in doubt; if you don't know what pronouns to use (for anyone, fictional or not) just use they and let people advise you from there.

---

I actually do have a problem with The Rich Port's signature because I like to use they for people in general, for me its always been the most natural pronoun, but they encourage me to gender them, which gives me a lot of stress, especially because you can't have a gender presentation on a forum, so I'm supposed to assign them a pronoun based on what gender their text looks like. They say "If you use they to refer to [them] you're a coward", and frankly, that is true and I am okay with that. They don't seem to be offended by 'they', though, so it should be fine.

Being genderfluid, I've thought about adding 'they/them', or something to my sig, but I think they mainly just waste space, so I've opted not to have one.

---

I encourage The Rich Port to telegram me if they would rather me use another pronoun.

Well I am sorry for causing you stress darlin' but... They is my least preferred pronoun, so, I dunno what you want me to do about that. Does it offend me? Nah, I'm a tough cookie, I have very thick skin, you can call me they if it really bothers you that much but um... Well yeah, them's the breaks when it comes to me. Sowwy. DDD

It's partly a joke, but I am sincere when I say I prefer to be called either he or she (I am genderfluid after all... I dunno if I am non-binary since I do identify strongly along binary lines... But if that's a contradiction then yeah, story of my fuckin' life), but I don't mind people calling me whatever they prefer, not according to "what my text looks like" (entirely) but rather to how they feel what I am and how they want to make me feel.

I only TG for personal discussions I can't otherwise have on the forum... Sure I'll TG you XD

I call u 'comrade'

[The Rich Port]

I call u 'comrade'

That's not how pronouns work... even then that would be clunky as hell your tongue is going to get tired.

---

In relation to how to correctly gender fictional characters

I think it's important to also remember that gender is a construct possible only in social species such as humans, or at least that's the only evidence we can approach to... I think?

I mean I'm sure there might be transgender animals but we can't really know, and even if we could know via biological or neurological studies, we can't really ask them to confirm or read minds. There definitely are androgynous and hermaphroditic animals that can change their sex at will so it's certainly possible?? There is at least precedent for non-binary sexual life in nature... And asexual but yeah XD

[Kowani]

Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) signs bill banning transgender athletes from girls sports

Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte approved legislation Friday barring transgender youth from participating on sports teams that correspond with their gender identity.

Backed the Republican state lawmakers, the bill requires athletic teams at public schools to limit participation based on "biological sex." The measure also contains explicit language dictating that girls' or women's sports teams "may not be open to students of the male sex."

The bill generated a heated debate in Montana’s GOP-controlled state legislature prior to its passage in April. Lawmakers eventually passed the bill alongside an amendment that would void the law if the government withheld federal funding in response to the ban and state efforts to appeal failed.

[Riviere Renard]

As you can see I am not The Rich Port, but, because I don't know why you asked them specifically, I will answer too.

It depends on the context. In the context that you linked, when specifically talking about their gender retrospectively, they is probably best if neither in story characters or the authors clarified pronouns. However, if you are watching, for example, a film with a genderfluid person, and, at the moment in the film you are currently viewing, they present as male and people call them he/him pronouns, it may be wise, when talking during that section or about that section, to use he/him.

Its complicated by the fact that that person cannot, by the laws of the universe, be offended by the pronouns you use for them, nor can they correct you (this also, in general, applies to genderfluid celebrities). Using correct pronouns is no less important, mind you, but it becomes a hassle when its unclear and that can make people avoid using pronouns altogether, and that is not good, so, my advice, when in doubt; if you don't know what pronouns to use (for anyone, fictional or not) just use they and let people advise you from there.

---

I actually do have a problem with The Rich Port's signature because I like to use they for people in general, for me its always been the most natural pronoun, but they encourage me to gender them, which gives me a lot of stress, especially because you can't have a gender presentation on a forum, so I'm supposed to assign them a pronoun based on what gender their text looks like. They say "If you use they to refer to [them] you're a coward", and frankly, that is true and I am okay with that. They don't seem to be offended by 'they', though, so it should be fine.

Being genderfluid, I've thought about adding 'they/them', or something to my sig, but I think they mainly just waste space, so I've opted not to have one.

---

I encourage The Rich Port to telegram me if they would rather me use another pronoun.

Well I am sorry for causing you stress darlin' but... They is my least preferred pronoun, so, I dunno what you want me to do about that. Does it offend me? Nah, I'm a tough cookie, I have very thick skin, you can call me they if it really bothers you that much but um... Well yeah, them's the breaks when it comes to me. Sowwy. DDD

It's partly a joke, but I am sincere when I say I prefer to be called either he or she (I am genderfluid after all... I dunno if I am non-binary since I do identify strongly along binary lines... But if that's a contradiction then yeah, story of my fuckin' life), but I don't mind people calling me whatever they prefer, not according to "what my text looks like" (entirely) but rather to how they feel what I am and how they want to make me feel.

I only TG for personal discussions I can't otherwise have on the forum... Sure I'll TG you XD

This is confusing and frustrating, which, historically speaking, has been the most common experience for me with gender fluidity, so I should have expected that lol.

Based on what I've read here, you are fine with they/them, but appreciate he and she, correct? See, darling, I'm... really bad at making choices, especially with forum posts where I have to deal with another person. It usually takes me about 20 minutes to post a small post. I will, and always will, do my best to coincide with preferred pronouns of a person, and the dislike you have for they/them is far more real than I had thought, so I intend to correct my mistake as best I can, but, and this has always been true, I cannot assign a gender to you. Gender of people has always been visual for me, and, because I cannot see you, I cannot gender you. Thus, they/them are the most natural pronouns I have for you because they are genderless. You seem to imply that they/them are non-binary pronouns, but that isn't true, at least not for me, they are pronouns I can use for anyone. Xe/Xir are non-binary pronouns, as are it/its, but not they/them.

To solve both problems (your dislike for they/them and my inability to pointlessly gender you) I propose a solution: I can swap back and forth between he and she at random. Is that okay?

---

On another note, we seem to experience genderfluidity very differently. In general, I only use he when I feel male and she when I feel female (with some nuance for complicated reasons), but your use of both may either be the fact this is text or on the basis that your gender doesn't have... how can I describe it... seasons?... like I do, but rather, seems to be in a state of... liquid that only solidifies into a gender when a gender is prescribed to you, either by yourself or by someone else. At least, if I were given the information I have accessed in a lab and asked to describe your gender, that is what I would say. I could be very wrong. I am probably very wrong. I don't have anything to say about it I just think its interesting how, under my assumption, my gender changes over time and your gender seems to change without the passage of time.

Mind you, its not entirely foreign to me as I have had my days where my gender only exists when someone pretends it exists.

[Kowani]

Texas House may be blocking a trans sports ban

A bill that would prevent transgender Texas children from joining school sports teams that match their gender identity failed to advance out of a House committee Tuesday, signaling potential trouble for one of several anti-LGBTQ bills in the Legislature.

The Senate has advanced a handful of bills that LGBTQ advocates say threaten the rights and mental health of transgender children in Texas, including restricting their access to school sports and medical care. Senate Bill 29, the sports bill, is the first anti-trans Senate bill to get a committee vote in the lower chamber.

House legislation banning gender confirmation health care for children, signed by 45 Republicans, was passed out of the lower chamber’s Public Health committee last week but has yet to reach the full House floor. Senate-approved legislation labelling the treatment as child abuse is set to go before the same committee, which is made up of six Republicans and five Democrats. When members of the House Public Education committee — made up of six Democrats and seven Republicans — took up sports bill SB 29 on Tuesday, it failed to garner enough votes to advance to the full chamber.

Opponents of the legislation were relieved by vote.

“We thank the members of the House Public Education committee for their votes today against SB 29,” said Zeph Capo, president of the Texas American Federation of Teachers. “We did the right thing today for all the children of Texas by standing up for trans kids.”

Jamey Harrison, deputy director of the University Interscholastic League, told the House Public Education committee that the bill codifies current UIL rules, though there is one key distinction. The UIL mandate students in K-12 schools to compete on the team that aligns with the sex listed on their birth certificate. SB 29 adds that it must be the sex listed at or around birth. The change targets transgender Texans, who may change the sex listed on their birth certificate.

Never mind, a Democrat brought it back

An effort to ban transgender student athletes from competing in sports within their gender identity gained new traction in a last-minute House public education committee meeting Friday. The legislation, Senate Bill 29, had been narrowly voted down in the House committee earlier this week, but in a meeting Friday morning, lawmakers approved a committee substitute of the bill in an 8-5 vote. Committee Chair Rep. Harold Dutton, (D), and Rep. Dan Huberty (R), voted in favor of the bill after not participating in the previous vote.

At around midnight Thursday, Dutton called the committee meeting after one of his bills seeking to allow the state to take over Houston's school board was killed on the House floor and sent back to the committee. "The bill that was killed last night affected far more children that this bill ever will," Dutton said during the Friday morning meeting, justifying his vote for SB 29.

Fellow Democrats expressed disappointment and anger at Dutton's response, which they said came at the expense of transgender children.

"Senate Bill 29 is a terrible bill, and I’m severely disappointed it came out of committee," said Rep. Chris Turner of Grand Prairie, chair of the Texas House Democratic Caucus. "The bill should move no further in the process, and the Texas House should be allowed to focus on common-sense policies that benefit Texans, not discriminatory legislation that attacks our children." The committee substitute can now head to the full House and back to the Senate, which has to approve amendments, before potentially reaching Gov. Greg Abbott's desk.

The Senate version of Dutton's bill on state power over local school boards also was taken up by the House Public Education Committee twice on Friday. After being voted down during the Friday morning meeting, it was narrowly approved by committee members huddled on the House floor.

Dutton did not respond to a request for comment from the American-Statesman.

SB 29 would prevent schools from allowing students to participate in sports of the opposite sex, unless a sport, such as football, is not available to female students.

Students would have to prove their sex through a birth certificate or government record, but amended birth certificates for transgender students would no longer be accepted by the University Interscholastic League, which oversees extracurricular athletic events. The committee substitute removed the word "biological" from the legislation to align with state standards on birth certificates, and added an expiration date for the legislation of September 2027.

"We want to make sure that the rules that we have for Texas and what UIL has adopted are what we're operating under," Huberty said, stating that the bill is aimed against the federal government.

[Kowani]

Biden administration reverses Trump decision that allowed discrimination against LGBTQ+ people in health care

The federal government will protect gay and transgender people against sex discrimination in health care, the Biden administration declared Monday, reversing a Trump-era policy that narrowed rights at the intersection of changing social mores and sensitive medical decisions.

It marked the latest step by President Joe Biden to advance the rights of gay and transgender people across society, from military service, to housing, to employment opportunities.

The policy announcement by the Department of Health and Human Services affirms that federal laws forbidding sex discrimination in health care also protect gay and transgender people. The Trump administration had defined “sex” to mean gender assigned at birth, thereby excluding transgender people from the law’s umbrella of protection. “Fear of discrimination can lead individuals to forgo care, which can have serious negative health consequences,” said HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra. “Everyone — including LGBTQ people — should be able to access health care, free from discrimination or interference, period.”

Both opponents and supporters of Biden’s action said it’s likely to lead to litigation.

Speaking for the medical community, the American Medical Association said in a statement the Biden administration “did the right thing” by ending “a dismal chapter which a federal agency sought to remove civil rights protections.” But some conservatives warned that doctors could be forced to perform gender reassignment procedures against their professional judgement.

Becerra said HHS will now be aligned with a landmark 6-3 Supreme Court decision last year in a workplace discrimination case, which established that federal laws against sex discrimination on the job also protect gay and transgender people. [...] Monday’s action means that the HHS Office for Civil Rights will again investigate complaints of sex discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Hospitals, clinics and other medical providers can face denial of Medicare and Medicaid payments for violations of the law.

Since the Trump transgender rule had been blocked by a federal judge, the Biden administration action essentially restores a policy established during the Obama years. The Affordable Care Act prohibited sex discrimination in health care but did not use the term “gender identity.” The Obama administration interpreted the law as shielding gay and transgender people as well.

[Lady Victory]

So what's this I hear about Jenner being outed as a fucking hypocrite who plays in women's sports yet doesn't want young trans girls doing the same?

The GOP truly is incapable of consistency.

[North Washington Republic]

So what's this I hear about Jenner being outed as a fucking hypocrite who plays in women's sports yet doesn't want young trans girls doing the same?

The GOP truly is incapable of consistency.

I cannot decide who is worse, Blair White or Caitlyn Jenner.

[North Sonovia]

I call u 'comrade'

That's not how pronouns work... even then that would be clunky as hell your tongue is going to get tired.

---

In relation to how to correctly gender fictional characters

I think it's important to also remember that gender is a construct possible only in social species such as humans, or at least that's the only evidence we can approach to... I think?

I mean I'm sure there might be transgender animals but we can't really know, and even if we could know via biological or neurological studies, we can't really ask them to confirm or read minds. There definitely are androgynous and hermaphroditic animals that can change their sex at will so it's certainly possible?? There is at least precedent for non-binary sexual life in nature... And asexual but yeah XD

Clownfish. I'm surprised Marlin didn't get eaten instead of Coral in Nemo.

[Lady Victory]

So what's this I hear about Jenner being outed as a fucking hypocrite who plays in women's sports yet doesn't want young trans girls doing the same?

The GOP truly is incapable of consistency.

I cannot decide who is worse, Blair White or Caitlyn Jenner.

At least Blair White is attractive.

[Blue Nagia]

I call u 'comrade'

That's not how pronouns work... even then that would be clunky as hell your tongue is going to get tired.

Online, where comrade can copy and paste, it's easy for comrades to refer to other comrades as comrades, if that is what said comrade chooses to do.

...at least "comrade" is a noun. As a Non Biney myself, I always get a little grammar-nerdy when people say "if you disrespect trans people your pronouns will be was/were". I understand the sentiment, but was/were aren't pronouns or even nouns! We say "he was, she was, they were", not "was was, was was, were were"...

[Zarnicovia nova]

That's not how pronouns work... even then that would be clunky as hell your tongue is going to get tired.

Online, where comrade can copy and paste, it's easy for comrades to refer to other comrades as comrades, if that is what said comrade chooses to do.

...at least "comrade" is a noun. As a Non Biney myself, I always get a little grammar-nerdy when people say "if you disrespect trans people your pronouns will be was/were". I understand the sentiment, but was/were aren't pronouns or even nouns! We say "he was, she was, they were", not "was was, was was, were were"...

yeah It goes 'comrade (name) were/was' which goes a lot better then 'they were' anyways