Non-binary genders

[The Steel Magnolia]

I fail to see what make Trans-Grender any more or less important to Trans-Identity.. or whatever Artcurus is trying to convey. While some think that being Trans-Gender is a stronger issue than Trans-Identity, I fail to see where one can belittle the other.

Its a simple fact of hipocracy from one to claim that either belittles the other based on a circular logic and reasoning.

E.I.

I'm believe, or think, or feel that I'm a different gender therefor I am- However, no one else can use that reasoning and logic because "I" dont believe your issue is worthy of the same level of attention.

This is complete and utter bull. If you base your entire existence based on this style of thinking it should and must be open for other to exploit or you will in turn invalidate your own extistence. Arcturus is using the same logic and reasoning for Trans-Identity as those who argue for Trans-Genders, yet for all I can see, all Trans-Gender supporters do not afford the same freedom to Arcturus which is one of the purist form of hipocracy.

I'm sure this will gain me ire with a great many people and will garner a number of harsh ill-witten responses, but facts are fact.

Perhaps because they're two entirely different and entirely unrelated phenomena, hm? shocking, I know. Two, on the surface similar things are actually totally different.

[Hobbeebia]

.... How is Trans-Gender a "Physical " thing?

If you are a male, but Identify as female the dangler and friends say your a male... Being female until surgrey is entirely in one head.- Fact

Refusing to identify as a person is also in one head- Fact

So please tell me how different they really are?

[Bottle]

.... How is Trans-Gender a "Physical " thing?

If you are a male, but Identify as female the dangler and friends say your a male... Being female until surgrey is entirely in one head.- Fact

Refusing to identify as a person is also in one head- Fact

So please tell me how different they really are?

Somewhere, an English teacher is weeping softly.

[Chinese Regions]

Link to where I've said it was a medical term. It is a biological term, if it were misused it might be offensive but it in it self is not. I take offence to being called Japanese, does that mean Japanese is inherently derogatory? No, its misuse was.

Except there is functionally no situation, when hermaphrodite is applied to groups of people in any broad sense, when it's not offensive.

It's like 'tranny'. Yeah, some people reclaim it but if you try and claim it's not offensive then you're just a transphobic shithead.

It's the exact same thing here, so tell me, Chinese Regions, what is it? Is it still not offensive?

I'm not sure what words are used to describe your "tactics" but they are something along the lines of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leading_question

[Hobbeebia]

.... How is Trans-Gender a "Physical " thing?

If you are a male, but Identify as female the dangler and friends say your a male... Being female until surgrey is entirely in one head.- Fact

Refusing to identify as a person is also in one head- Fact

So please tell me how different they really are?

Somewhere, an English teacher is weeping softly.

Way to avoid the arguement...

[Susurruses]

But I never said I was trans*. Why is that coming up? I'm saying that my identity is being attacked and labelled as "bullshit", and saying that that's the same line of argument that many people have used to dismiss trans* people in the past. You accept my lack of gender identity, but not my lack of human identity. Why? They are both thoroughly interrelated to each other, and if you negate one, you negate the other.

They're not though. Not in the slightest.

No one lacks human identity. People reject labels, but that's a very different phenomenon and is fundamentally incomparable. Like 'transethnic' or 'transspecies' - it's a myth, and literally the only reason why people claim those identities is to troll and dehumanize actually transgender people.

So forgive me if I'm unsympathetic.

That's hyperbole.
I guarantee you that some people literally believe such things, & actually do consider it part of their identity.
(I'd personally consider that to be symptomatic of underlying issues, but then that would seem rather akin to the way gender dysphoria was initially approached too so *shrugs* )
I'm not denying a significant amount are people trolling, but there are at least some for whom it is genuine.
(Of note is that ethnicity is actually a form of cultural grouping rather than anything explicitly tied to genetic groups, much like "race" isn't tied to genetics either. So in that manner, someone identifying with a culture different to that they are considered to be a part of could actually legitimately argue for being "transethnic". The difference would be that gender identity is innate, whereas culture is external.)

Which is irrelevant because that's not what's being discussed here.
What you're attempting to state is that someone must identify with other people as "human" even though there's not really a full definition of "what it means to be human".
It makes perfect sense for someone to consider their ever-shifting human body with their mutable human brain to be little more than a housing for a collection of likewise-shifting ideas, does it not?
I mean, it's at least logical & has a fair basis in reality...

Also, to consider the root of "trans" to be "across", the argument could be made that such an identity is "transcendent" of traditional identities.
(There is actually plentiful correlation between gender identity & personal identity, even if you don't consider {just guessing at word creation here:} "ahuman" to be legitimate.)
Although, actually, on that note... I'm struck by the notion that such individuals would probably be amongst the first to sign up for transferral of consciousness, since they wouldn't consider their human body & brain to be a necessary part of their identity.
(Would they technically be transhuman, or is that limited to modified humans?)
[Ignoring the question of "how much modification renders someone non-human?" for a moment]

[Bottle]

Somewhere, an English teacher is weeping softly.

Way to avoid the arguement...

Good god, there's an ARGUMENT buried under that grammar and punctuation carnage??!! Someone call for the jaws of life, we've got to get him out of there before he smothers!!!!

[Zweite Alaje]

No one lacks human identity.

And you know this because you are everyone.

I'm sorry, I don't think I can forgive you at this point no matter how much I would like to. Maybe at some point down the road, but not right now. And I think I've made my decision. Arguing with you is obviously not going to change anything, so I'm bowing out.

Here you go with the "I'm not a human" crap again. You are mentally and genetically a human, you cannot be anything else.

Whatever your idea is, it is nothing like gender identity, it is ridiculous to make a comparison.

[Susurruses]

Somewhere, an English teacher is weeping softly.

Way to avoid the arguement...

You do realise the brain is a physical object, right?
That alone nukes your entire misguided assumption that "a real trans* person has to get surgery & they aren't legitimately trans* until then".

[Hobbeebia]

I'll take you lack of response as you dont have one....

[Bottle]

Except there is functionally no situation, when hermaphrodite is applied to groups of people in any broad sense, when it's not offensive.

It's like 'tranny'. Yeah, some people reclaim it but if you try and claim it's not offensive then you're just a transphobic shithead.

It's the exact same thing here, so tell me, Chinese Regions, what is it? Is it still not offensive?

I'm not sure what words are used to describe your "tactics" but they are something along the lines of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leading_question

Good grief. If you insist on playing semantic games then you're going to reap what you sow.

It's this simple:

Most English-speaking intersex people are probably going to be really put off if you call them "hermaphrodites" to their faces. Now you know that. So, if you choose to do it, you are choosing to be rude.

You can choose to be rude if you want. Watch:

"I think people who toss around the term 'hermaphrodite' are acting like poorly-trained puppies and should be put out in the yard until they learn to stop peeing on the rug."

I knew that was going to be rude. So when people (like you) who want to use 'hermaphrodite' with impunity see my words, they're likely to go, "Hey, that's rude!" And you know what I won't do? I won't sit here and argue that puppies are literally adorable and really they aren't being logical by taking offense and after all it's often an affectionate compliment to compare someone to an adorable small animal and therefore I clearly wasn't being rude.

Because I'm not an infantile rug-piddler.

See how that works?

[The Steel Magnolia]

That's hyperbole.
I guarantee you that some people literally believe such things, & actually do consider it part of their identity.

Some people literally believe they're a cat and do consider it part of their identity.

That doesn't suddenly make it not transphobic.

I'm not denying a significant amount are people trolling, but there are at least some for whom it is genuine.

Still doesn't mean it's not appropriation and transphobic though, intentionally or not.

(Of note is that ethnicity is actually a form of cultural grouping rather than anything explicitly tied to genetic groups, much like "race" isn't tied to genetics either. So in that manner, someone identifying with a culture different to that they are considered to be a part of could actually legitimately argue for being "transethnic". The difference would be that gender identity is innate, whereas culture is external.)

Falls into the same pitfalls as the other stuff and is racist to boot.

What you're attempting to state is that someone must identify with other people as "human" even though there's not really a full definition of "what it means to be human".

Not quite. What i'm saying is that I don't believe for a goddamn second that someone not identifying as human is in any way shape or form to the lack of identification one might have with their birth sex, for reference.

It makes perfect sense for someone to consider their ever-shifting human body with their mutable human brain to be little more than a housing for a collection of likewise-shifting ideas, does it not?
I mean, it's at least logical & has a fair basis in reality...

Relatively, sure. Not at all related to the trans umbrella though.

[Rocopurr]

I'll take you lack of response as you dont have one....

Give it a few minutes...

And uh, am I the only one who isn't sure what his argument is? I couldn't understand his post. :unsure:

[Hobbeebia]

Way to avoid the arguement...

You do realise the brain is a physical object, right?
That alone nukes your entire misguided assumption that "a real trans* person has to get surgery & they aren't legitimately trans* until then".

So is my arm....

This is not what I'm trying to convey. Both have a thought and this thought makes them another gender or something else entirely. However, biologically they are what they are until they take steps to change this physically. A Trans-Geneder person can scream that they are the opposite all day, but in the end when you take their jimmies off the truth comes out. A thought is not a physical object... it is not tangible.

Trans-Gender people "think" they are another gender but this thought will not change biology. We as a society accept their stated desire out of tolerence and respect for life, so why should we deny people like Arcturus the chance to exercise the same? If you argue for one, you must argue for the other, if you don't you only invalidate yourself.

[The Steel Magnolia]

You do realise the brain is a physical object, right?
That alone nukes your entire misguided assumption that "a real trans* person has to get surgery & they aren't legitimately trans* until then".

So is my arm....

This is not what I'm trying to convey. Both have a thought and this thought makes them another gender or something else entirely. However, biologically they are what they are until they take steps to change this physically. A Trans-Geneder person can scream that they are the opposite all day, but in the end when you take their jimmies off the truth comes out. A thought is not a physical object... it is not tangible.

Trans-Gender people "think" they are another gender but this thought will not change biology. We as a society accept their stated desire out of tolerence and respect for life, so why should we deny people like Arcturus the chance to exercise the same? If you argue for one, you must argue for the other, if you don't you only invalidate yourself.

Actually that's not true.

There are, more or less, three definitions of sex used in biology: genetic sex, gonadal sex, and phenotypic sex.

Genetic sex is the ~chromosomes~ one. In mammals, the Y chromosome normally contains a gene named SRY, which is the main trigger that causes a fetus to begin developing along a male pathway. Occasionally, due to random errors in the process of copying DNA, an SRY gene can fall off a Y chromosome or even jump over to an X chromosome: this is one of the ways you get people with XX chromosomes who develop physically as male, or people with XY chromosomes who develop physically as female. (There are other ways too, related to other genetic or environmental factors.) Now, the thing about genetic sex is that it's not actually used all that often by working biologists outside of the field of molecular genetics -- there's usually no point looking at chromosomes if what you're interested in is anatomy or biochemistry. So chromosomal sex is by no means the final word on whether we call an organism "male" or "female".

Gonadal sex is probably the one that gets used most often by biologists when they're identifying whether the unfortunate little critter they've just dissected is male or female: it's whether an animal has testes, ovaries, or something in between. While we don't yet have the technology to give trans women ovaries or trans men testes, long-term hormone therapy does render the birth gonads mostly non-functional, and of course they can also be surgically removed.

Phenotypic sex is the one that's of most interest to you and me in our daily lives. It refers to the development of sexually dimorphic characteristics, such as genital organs, and facial and body hair. It's mostly influenced by sex hormones, and there's a great deal that modern medicine can do to bring a trans person's sexual characteristics closer to their target sex than their birth sex. Phenotypic sex is just as biologically valid a definition of sex as the other two, and unless you're planning to either perform medical procedures on someone or have kids with them, it's the only one that's likely to have much relevance to you when you interact with other people.

Finally, we humans add an extra layer on top of all this, which we call gender. Gender includes all of the standards that are used in a society to differentiate men from women (and other genders, in cultures or subcultures that recognise more than two genders). Some of the characteristics by which people are categorised into one gender or another are related to phenotypic sex, but others are purely behavioural -- dress, grooming and so on. There are differences between gender expression and gender, but we won't get into that now.

So when it comes to how we decide whether to call someone a man or a woman, chromosomes are really a very small part of the story. After all, societies were categorising people into genders long before chromosomes were even discovered, and we easily discern whether people are men or women every day without it even occurring to us to look at their chromosomes first.

[Furious Grandmothers]

You do realise the brain is a physical object, right?
That alone nukes your entire misguided assumption that "a real trans* person has to get surgery & they aren't legitimately trans* until then".

So is my arm....

This is not what I'm trying to convey. Both have a thought and this thought makes them another gender or something else entirely. However, biologically they are what they are until they take steps to change this physically. A Trans-Geneder person can scream that they are the opposite all day, but in the end when you take their jimmies off the truth comes out. A thought is not a physical object... it is not tangible.

Trans-Gender people "think" they are another gender but this thought will not change biology. We as a society accept their stated desire out of tolerence and respect for life, so why should we deny people like Arcturus the chance to exercise the same? If you argue for one, you must argue for the other, if you don't you only invalidate yourself.

Potassium and sodium ions aren't physical objects? That's news.

[Hobbeebia]

So is my arm....

This is not what I'm trying to convey. Both have a thought and this thought makes them another gender or something else entirely. However, biologically they are what they are until they take steps to change this physically. A Trans-Geneder person can scream that they are the opposite all day, but in the end when you take their jimmies off the truth comes out. A thought is not a physical object... it is not tangible.

Trans-Gender people "think" they are another gender but this thought will not change biology. We as a society accept their stated desire out of tolerence and respect for life, so why should we deny people like Arcturus the chance to exercise the same? If you argue for one, you must argue for the other, if you don't you only invalidate yourself.

Actually that's not true.

There are, more or less, three definitions of sex used in biology: genetic sex, gonadal sex, and phenotypic sex.

Genetic sex is the ~chromosomes~ one. In mammals, the Y chromosome normally contains a gene named SRY, which is the main trigger that causes a fetus to begin developing along a male pathway. Occasionally, due to random errors in the process of copying DNA, an SRY gene can fall off a Y chromosome or even jump over to an X chromosome: this is one of the ways you get people with XX chromosomes who develop physically as male, or people with XY chromosomes who develop physically as female. (There are other ways too, related to other genetic or environmental factors.) Now, the thing about genetic sex is that it's not actually used all that often by working biologists outside of the field of molecular genetics -- there's usually no point looking at chromosomes if what you're interested in is anatomy or biochemistry. So chromosomal sex is by no means the final word on whether we call an organism "male" or "female".

Gonadal sex is probably the one that gets used most often by biologists when they're identifying whether the unfortunate little critter they've just dissected is male or female: it's whether an animal has testes, ovaries, or something in between. While we don't yet have the technology to give trans women ovaries or trans men testes, long-term hormone therapy does render the birth gonads mostly non-functional, and of course they can also be surgically removed.

Phenotypic sex is the one that's of most interest to you and me in our daily lives. It refers to the development of sexually dimorphic characteristics, such as genital organs, and facial and body hair. It's mostly influenced by sex hormones, and there's a great deal that modern medicine can do to bring a trans person's sexual characteristics closer to their target sex than their birth sex. Phenotypic sex is just as biologically valid a definition of sex as the other two, and unless you're planning to either perform medical procedures on someone or have kids with them, it's the only one that's likely to have much relevance to you when you interact with other people.

Finally, we humans add an extra layer on top of all this, which we call gender. Gender includes all of the standards that are used in a society to differentiate men from women (and other genders, in cultures or subcultures that recognise more than two genders). Some of the characteristics by which people are categorised into one gender or another are related to phenotypic sex, but others are purely behavioural -- dress, grooming and so on. There are differences between gender expression and gender, but we won't get into that now.

So when it comes to how we decide whether to call someone a man or a woman, chromosomes are really a very small part of the story. After all, societies were categorising people into genders long before chromosomes were even discovered, and we easily discern whether people are men or women every day without it even occurring to us to look at their chromosomes first.

And this is where you and I differe.

I see things as black and white. Your Biology is biology and that for me is ultimately what I will regard you as. If you have a penis you are a male, if you dont your a female. I dont like to complicate matters with If, and maybe's.

[Hobbeebia]

So is my arm....

This is not what I'm trying to convey. Both have a thought and this thought makes them another gender or something else entirely. However, biologically they are what they are until they take steps to change this physically. A Trans-Geneder person can scream that they are the opposite all day, but in the end when you take their jimmies off the truth comes out. A thought is not a physical object... it is not tangible.

Trans-Gender people "think" they are another gender but this thought will not change biology. We as a society accept their stated desire out of tolerence and respect for life, so why should we deny people like Arcturus the chance to exercise the same? If you argue for one, you must argue for the other, if you don't you only invalidate yourself.

Potassium and sodium ions aren't physical objects? That's news.[/quote

Put a thought into my hand.... and not the peices which make the thought.

[The Steel Magnolia]

And this is where you and I differe.

I see things as black and white. Your Biology is biology and that for me is ultimately what I will regard you as. If you have a penis you are a male, if you dont your a female. I dont like to complicate matters with If, and maybe's.

The sun is green! The grass is red!

Fear me, sanity, for my name is Hobbeebia!

[Furious Grandmothers]

Potassium and sodium ions aren't physical objects? That's news.[/quote

Put a thought into my hand.... and not the peices which make the thought.

Irrelevant to the point that a thought is a physical object. Which informs you more about gender identity.

[Bottle]

Put a thought into my hand.... and not the peices which make the thought.

Put circulation into my hand. And not the pieces that make up circulation.

[Ivory Record]

Put a thought into my hand.... and not the peices which make the thought.

Put circulation into my hand. And not the pieces that make up circulation.

Damn, you beat me to the metaphor!

Edit adds: Thought is a physical process, governed by the interactions of the "pieces which make the thought", not some mystical hoodoo and extra-temporal puppetry. You had might as well ask me to put building a rocket in your hand, as opposed to the components or the rocket itself.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Once again, knock off the personal snarking and attack the argument, not the poster. You folks know the drill by now, this shouldn't be a surprise. Honestly. This gets tiring after a while.

[Bottle]

I'll take you lack of response as you dont have one....

Give it a few minutes...

And uh, am I the only one who isn't sure what his argument is? I couldn't understand his post.

It was an incoherent jumble of words including "male," "female," "thing," and a lot of repetition of the word "Fact."

Based on the thread subject, you can safely assume that it was a heterosexual cisdude desperately attempting to lay down the law about binary gender before any of us non-conformists make his head hurt with intangible thinky-thoughts.

EDIT: I posted after the modwarning. I'll delete this if I'm told to. However, I find the behavior of the heterosexists and transphobes on this thread far more offensive than any of the snark they are receiving in response, and am rather disgusted by the fact that it is apparently more acceptable to slur an entire group than to direct one's scorn at specific individuals and their specific behavior.

[Susurruses]

That's hyperbole.
I guarantee you that some people literally believe such things, & actually do consider it part of their identity.

Some people literally believe they're a cat and do consider it part of their identity.

That doesn't suddenly make it not transphobic.

I'm not denying a significant amount are people trolling, but there are at least some for whom it is genuine.

Still doesn't mean it's not appropriation and transphobic though, intentionally or not.

(Of note is that ethnicity is actually a form of cultural grouping rather than anything explicitly tied to genetic groups, much like "race" isn't tied to genetics either. So in that manner, someone identifying with a culture different to that they are considered to be a part of could actually legitimately argue for being "transethnic". The difference would be that gender identity is innate, whereas culture is external.)

Falls into the same pitfalls as the other stuff and is racist to boot.

What you're attempting to state is that someone must identify with other people as "human" even though there's not really a full definition of "what it means to be human".

Not quite. What i'm saying is that I don't believe for a goddamn second that someone not identifying as human is in any way shape or form to the lack of identification one might have with their birth sex, for reference.

It makes perfect sense for someone to consider their ever-shifting human body with their mutable human brain to be little more than a housing for a collection of likewise-shifting ideas, does it not?
I mean, it's at least logical & has a fair basis in reality...

Relatively, sure. Not at all related to the trans umbrella though.

So your "literally the only reason" is false by your own agreement.
(I was correcting the hyperbole more than disagreeing that people thinking they are cats is aberrant rather than abnormal)

I mean, you've been making excellent points all the way through.
Then you throw "transphobic" and "racist" at things despite their not actually being related to either (by your own admission in the former case, & by simple logic in the latter).
[As I already pointed out: Ethnicity has bugger all to do with race which has bugger all to do with genetics. Ethnicity is just whatever cultural group one feels they "belong" to.]
{Again, as I already pointed out, that's actually irrelevant though because cultural identity isn't innate in the manner that gender is.}

Could you explain how such things are:
(A) Appropriation?
& (B) Transphobic?
(Would be likewise appreciated if you could justify the stance of accepting transgender identities yet vetoing others. It doesn't seem congruent with the previous statements of acceptance. If your issue is in comparison, that doesn't seem an entirely logical basis to reject someone's rejection of human identity.)
[Rejection here being the same as describing an agender person as rejecting gender, or an asexual as rejecting sexuality. If we consider it a function of that specific person's neurology & biochemistry at least.]