TET: Surfin' Surfin' WIND Surfin'!

[Thafoo]

I don't like Adobe Dreamweaver. It smells of poo.

[The Truth and Light]

What do you mean what else? Anything else. Find names to describe the nature of the genitals and gonads of each sex, or the hormones associate with each sex. Just because it's established doesn't mean it couldn't be changed to something more practical and more accurate.

Besides, it's just an idea.

I mean, arguably gender should be the one to find new words as I'd argue it's the more recent concept and the one which is, while more relevant to our daily lives, less relevant from a medical (barring psychiatry) and scientific (barring psychology) perspective.

You have two choices here.

Either science makes a concession in the name of social justice, and accuracy of terms and categories, as well as to help clarify the some confusion about the difference superficial, physiological sexes and the pervasive concept of gender, OR; you tell trans* people to change all of their labels, you anger the hell out of cis people, and confound the issue even more.

One is more logical than the other.

[Seitonjin]

Indeed.

What I find to be an entirely hypocritical standard is I don't see males getting called disgusting for having a penis. Yet when a female has a penis, it's suddenly barf-inducing. How the fuck does that work. It doesn't add up.

It's all a matter of age and human attitudes to certain human attitudes. No real biggie, all I see is both you and the kid overreacting as such.

[Astrolinium]

What do you mean what else? Anything else. Find names to describe the nature of the genitals and gonads of each sex, or the hormones associate with each sex. Just because it's established doesn't mean it couldn't be changed to something more practical and more accurate.

Besides, it's just an idea.

It reeks of politicizing science. Which means you'll have more people resisting the change than embracing it.

What needs to be done is to change the connotations of the terms. Which is best achieved by educating people about the difference between sex and gender, and using only terms for sex (male/female) to refer to sex, and only terms for gender (masculine/feminine/androgynous/etc.) to refer to gender.

Thank you for actually managing to say what I've been trying and failing to say. Blegh, I've been having all kinds of trouble getting my ideas formed into coherent thoughts lately.

I mean, arguably gender should be the one to find new words as I'd argue it's the more recent concept and the one which is, while more relevant to our daily lives, less relevant from a medical (barring psychiatry) and scientific (barring psychology) perspective.

You have two choices here.

Either science makes a concession in the name of social justice, and accuracy of terms and categories, as well as to help clarify the some confusion about the difference superficial, physiological sexes and the pervasive concept of gender, OR; you tell trans* people to change all of their labels, you anger the hell out of cis people, and confound the issue even more.

One is more logical than the other.

Science is hard and does (or should, rather) not make concessions in the name of culture and societal values. That is simply what science is.

[Thafoo]

Not at all. I happen to have a main preference for women with penises. That doesn't make them male at all.

If you excuse me, I need to barf. How is that possible?

I know how. That question was rhetorical.

I barf at your apparent intolerance.

[Lordieth]

I don't like Adobe Dreamweaver. It smells of poo.

All you need is notepad++

I never use GUIs for web design. You learn much more by doing all the code by hand, then mucking around with Dreamwever when you become wise and lazy.

[Thafoo]

I don't like Adobe Dreamweaver. It smells of poo.

All you need is notepad++

I never use GUIs for web design. You learn much more by doing all the code by hand, then mucking around with Dreamwever when you become wise and lazy.

I prefer Textwrangler.

[The Truth and Light]

It reeks of politicizing science. Which means you'll have more people resisting the change than embracing it.

What needs to be done is to change the connotations of the terms. Which is best achieved by educating people about the difference between sex and gender, and using only terms for sex (male/female) to refer to sex, and only terms for gender (masculine/feminine/androgynous/etc.) to refer to gender.

Thank you for actually managing to say what I've been trying and failing to say. Blegh, I've been having all kinds of trouble getting my ideas formed into coherent thoughts lately.

You have two choices here.

Either science makes a concession in the name of social justice, and accuracy of terms and categories, as well as to help clarify the some confusion about the difference superficial, physiological sexes and the pervasive concept of gender, OR; you tell trans* people to change all of their labels, you anger the hell out of cis people, and confound the issue even more.

One is more logical than the other.

Science is hard and does (or should, rather) not make concessions in the name of culture and societal values. That is simply what science is.

Does accuracy of terms mean nothing to you guys?

[Seitonjin]

If you excuse me, I need to barf. How is that possible?

I know how. That question was rhetorical.

I barf at your apparent intolerance.

It's not really intolerance just pure discrimination.

Is it weird I differentiate the two?

[Astrolinium]

Thank you for actually managing to say what I've been trying and failing to say. Blegh, I've been having all kinds of trouble getting my ideas formed into coherent thoughts lately.



Science is hard and does (or should, rather) not make concessions in the name of culture and societal values. That is simply what science is.

Does accuracy of terms mean nothing to you guys?

Does it mean nothing to you? We are arguing for accurate terminology. You're arguing that we simply go around and change what words mean.

[Thafoo]

I barf at your apparent intolerance.

It's not really intolerance just pure discrimination.

Is it weird I differentiate the two?

They almost always go together.

[Lordieth]

All you need is notepad++

I never use GUIs for web design. You learn much more by doing all the code by hand, then mucking around with Dreamwever when you become wise and lazy.

I prefer Textwrangler.

I've never tried it, but I shall give it a look. When I'm working with a mix of HTML and PHP, I use Netbeans, as it has nice syntax highlighting. Some of the code completion is a bit annoying, but it''s a nice IDE if you're working on big projects.

[Thafoo]

I prefer Textwrangler.

I've never tried it, but I shall give it a look. When I'm working with a mix of HTML and PHP, I use Netbeans, as it has nice syntax highlighting. Some of the code completion is a bit annoying, but it''s a nice IDE if you're working on big projects.

Textwrangler is great for HTML. I think it's Mac only, however.

[Luveria]

I didn't see any part of me saying I wanted my preferences liked, or expecting him to like my preferences. He was saying it's going too far saying people with a penis are just that, a person with a penis. I gave an example of how it's entirely separate from gender identity.

Is it really called for saying he has to barf?

Not it's not. I certainly wasn't defending his choice of words. Just his entitlement of opinion.

I don't see how that was an opinion when it extends into saying he needs to barf. And as I've explained, it's a psychological double standard since it's not the act of having a penis that is revolting, it's only when it's on a female, so clearly it's not the penis that is disgusting.

I'm easy to forgive people for asshattery like that, but I don't often forget about it.
But him and his ilk... and fundie nutters, are part of the reason why the groups I tend to care about most (I'm not good at showing or expressing it, though, never have been good with emotions) is gay and trans* Christians, because they get absolutely hammered by just about anybody in society with a soapbox and a bullhorn.

On a side note, I'm either very expressive or stone-faced.
But, yeah, that's the biggest reason I shy away from most mainstream LGBT+ orgs - they tend to have a strong bias against faith as a whole and forget that having a non-straight sexuality doesn't mean antitheist.

As if trans people don't already get called disgusting on a daily basis.

[Belligerent Alcoholics]

It reeks of politicizing science. Which means you'll have more people resisting the change than embracing it.
What needs to be done is to change the connotations of the terms. Which is best achieved by educating people about the difference between sex and gender, and using only terms for sex (male/female) to refer to sex, and only terms for gender (masculine/feminine/androgynous/etc.) to refer to gender.

Thank you for actually managing to say what I've been trying and failing to say. Blegh, I've been having all kinds of trouble getting my ideas formed into coherent thoughts lately.

I have that problem all the time.
But, yeah, I can get behind Grenartia's plan. It increases precision of language in an area that's been foggy for a while without bringing the PC Police into it.

[The Truth and Light]

Does accuracy of terms mean nothing to you guys?

Does it mean nothing to you? We are arguing for accurate terminology. You're arguing that we simply go around and change what words mean.

No, you're arguing for conventional terms, not accurate terms. I'm arguing for accurate terms. You seem a tad confused. I think you should look up the definition of "accurate".

[Seitonjin]

Being intolerant of another human due to gender or sexual orientation is just being a dick. This should be fact.

[Thafoo]

Being intolerant of another human due to gender or sexual orientation is just being a dick. This should be fact.

"Should be" implies that that is not already fact.

[Luveria]

I barf at your apparent intolerance.

It's not really intolerance just pure discrimination.

Is it weird I differentiate the two?

There's a difference between intolerance and discrimination.

[Seitonjin]

Being intolerant of another human due to gender or sexual orientation is just being a dick. This should be fact.

"Should be" implies that that is not already fact.

In some people's twisted minds it certainly isn't.

[Astrolinium]

Does it mean nothing to you? We are arguing for accurate terminology. You're arguing that we simply go around and change what words mean.

No, you're arguing for conventional terms, not accurate terms. I'm arguing for accurate terms. You seem a tad confused. I think you should look up the definition of "accurate".

I really don't see what's inaccurate about using the words male and female to refer to sex rather than gender. They are sexual words much more than gendered ones. I rarely if ever see, for example, the terms "transmale" or "transfemale", but I often see "transman" and "transwoman".

[Belligerent Alcoholics]

I don't see how that was an opinion when it extends into saying he needs to barf. And as I've explained, it's a psychological double standard since it's not the act of having a penis that is revolting, it's only when it's on a female, so clearly it's not the penis that is disgusting.

It's the apparent mismatch in the minds of those who don't get it that those people find disgusting. I bet you'd get the same reaction out of him on the concept of a man with a vagina.

You're not disgusting.

Being intolerant of another human due to gender or sexual orientation is just being a dick. This should be fact.

It is fact. Some people just don't like facts.

[Coffee Cakes]

I'm easy to forgive people for asshattery like that, but I don't often forget about it.
But him and his ilk... and fundie nutters, are part of the reason why the groups I tend to care about most (I'm not good at showing or expressing it, though, never have been good with emotions) is gay and trans* Christians, because they get absolutely hammered by just about anybody in society with a soapbox and a bullhorn.

On a side note, I'm either very expressive or stone-faced.
But, yeah, that's the biggest reason I shy away from most mainstream LGBT+ orgs - they tend to have a strong bias against faith as a whole and forget that having a non-straight sexuality doesn't mean antitheist.

Quite honestly, it's the reason I'm not involved with any of them.
George Takei though, despite being Buddhist, has done a good job on his FB page to be mindful that there are a number of Christans/churches that are supportive.

One of my favorite lines I've ever read was an inbox from another NSer back in the day, who's fairly involved in his church and a devout Christian. He told me the reason he still embraces faith is: "God wouldn't create a person to hate them for a trait He built them with. God sees people in need of love, and as a loving deity, it wouldn't be in His nature to condemn a portion of humanity to Hell for a trait which cannot be helped, and He wants to love His children and be loved back, whatever their orientation."
I dunno why, but that quote has really stuck with me over the last 2 years.

Also, oddly, between online and offline, my gay/bi friends are on the whole more proportionately Christian than the straights are. It's like 75% of my gay/bi friends are Christian compared to about 55% of my straight friends.

[Grenartia]

1984 officially has the Bob's 'Worst Ending of the Year' Award.

Also, the creepiest torture scene ever. Room 101 haunts my nightmares

Even more than the one from A Clockwork Orange?

Indeed.

What I find to be an entirely hypocritical standard is I don't see males getting called disgusting for having a penis. Yet when a female has a penis, it's suddenly barf-inducing. How the fuck does that work. It doesn't add up.

I'd argue its sexist.

It reeks of politicizing science. Which means you'll have more people resisting the change than embracing it.

What needs to be done is to change the connotations of the terms. Which is best achieved by educating people about the difference between sex and gender, and using only terms for sex (male/female) to refer to sex, and only terms for gender (masculine/feminine/androgynous/etc.) to refer to gender.

Thank you for actually managing to say what I've been trying and failing to say. Blegh, I've been having all kinds of trouble getting my ideas formed into coherent thoughts lately.

You have two choices here.

Either science makes a concession in the name of social justice, and accuracy of terms and categories, as well as to help clarify the some confusion about the difference superficial, physiological sexes and the pervasive concept of gender, OR; you tell trans* people to change all of their labels, you anger the hell out of cis people, and confound the issue even more.

One is more logical than the other.

Science is hard and does (or should, rather) not make concessions in the name of culture and societal values. That is simply what science is.

Not a problem.

Thank you for actually managing to say what I've been trying and failing to say. Blegh, I've been having all kinds of trouble getting my ideas formed into coherent thoughts lately.



Science is hard and does (or should, rather) not make concessions in the name of culture and societal values. That is simply what science is.

Does accuracy of terms mean nothing to you guys?

Does scientific integrity mean nothing to you? I've already tried to tell you exactly what fucking should be done. It maintains scientific integrity, while offending nobody, save for people who get offended when things can't go their way.

[Seitonjin]

Being intolerant of another human due to gender or sexual orientation is just being a dick. This should be fact.

It is fact. Some people just don't like facts.

I only say should because it is slightly more accurate. In realism.

On a side note, I'm either very expressive or stone-faced.
But, yeah, that's the biggest reason I shy away from most mainstream LGBT+ orgs - they tend to have a strong bias against faith as a whole and forget that having a non-straight sexuality doesn't mean antitheist.

Quite honestly, it's the reason I'm not involved with any of them.
George Takei though, despite being Buddhist, has done a good job on his FB page to be mindful that there are a number of Christans/churches that are supportive.

One of my favorite lines I've ever read was an inbox from another NSer back in the day, who's fairly involved in his church and a devout Christian. He told me the reason he still embraces faith is: "God wouldn't create a person to hate them for a trait He built them with. God sees people in need of love, and as a loving deity, it wouldn't be in His nature to condemn a portion of humanity to Hell for a trait which cannot be helped, and He wants to love His children and be loved back, whatever their orientation."
I dunno why, but that quote has really stuck with me over the last 2 years.

Also, oddly, between online and offline, my gay/bi friends are on the whole more proportionately Christian than the straights are. It's like 75% of my gay/bi friends are Christian compared to about 55% of my straight friends.

Someone should scrap the whole church system and replace it with the more Christian, Liberationist Theology. It's what Jesus most likely intended for.