Leelah Alcorn, transgender teen, commited suicide

[Giordano]

I don't see how it is broken, unless you impose a particular definition on it and then say "look it doesn't fit the definition". Hurtful, sure.

Broken, in this sense, means wrong, non-functional, does not fit reality.

For the many reasons I explained. To grossly exaggerate to make my point: a definition that claimed gender is defined as to whether you wear lapels that open on the left or right would be broken. Yes, there is often a close relationship between how one's lapels open and one's gender (at least in the USA). But the lapels in a very real sense do not define the gender. You appear to be stuck on the concept that the genitalia alone define the gender. This too is a broken definition. Genitalia often relate to gender, but here too there exist poor matches. This is not just some attempt to fit a political agenda: it is a biological fact in many animals: gender, in a very real sense, is much more complicated than the shape of one's genitalia at birth, is not a simple binary, and takes into account multiple aspects, including how one's brain is wired to think of one's identity.

 

[Giordano]

It depends on the context who falls into what category. People still seem to be able to use these words to communicate and be understood.

In fact, they are very likely to be misunderstood by using them.

 

[ThunderChunky]

Evidence? What is being used to identify a trans child? There is a difference between an effeminate boy and a transgirl who always want to wear dresses and be called by a female name.

Definition of "transgender children", please?

These are diagnosed children. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21216800

Definition of "gay in terms of gender identity", please?

I meant is attracted to the same gender they identify with. I'm not saying they don't exist, but that they are proportionally more rare than cisgender gays (ETA: and I should note I am just guessing on this based on proportion of transgender children that desist and turnout to be gay, so I could be mistaken.)

 

[Giordano]

The issue is that people don't like the usage for political/ethical reasons, or is this actually an exercise in pedantry?

Neither. It is an effort to help people understand that the reality is a bit different from what they may have thought. Is it pedantry to state that light can be both a particle and a wave; or is that important to know if you intend to make decisions based on it being one or the other?

I don't even understand why this matters so much, and I sense that the political reasons are really behind the "your gender is between your legs" rather than the "biology indicates that gender is a mix of different things" side of the issue. In most cases, no one cares, or in some cases even knows, what gender the person in front of them is. If you are describing a sexual encounter in particular, then there are so many personal preferences as to physical traits, some of which may or may not have been altered by medical intervention, that I would not presume to dictate one over another.

 

[shuttlt]

Broken, in this sense, means wrong, non-functional, does not fit reality.

The meaning of the word is how it is used. People seem to be able to use it just fine. If it isn't describing the thing you want it to describe, then you either need a new word, or to persuade everybody else to change how they use the current word. You clearly want everybody else to change the current common meaning of the word, which is fine. The word is clearly functional since the overwhelming majority of people have no problem using it every day.

 

[Belz...]

It's a very difficult situation for all concerned: when your son announces he wants to live his life as a female. It's easy to condemn the parents in this case but it's a wrenching experience and one I'm glad I never had to wrestle with it.

Why ?

Yes, the mother said:

And ? Parents who beat their children with leather straps regularily also claimed to love them. What's your point ?

As far as I'm concerned nature makes no mistakes

How do you explain mutation ?

Ran into traffic. Tramitizes some poor driver for life. Their last act was an extremely self-centered one. And that's how they should be remembered.

Your compassion is heartwarming.

 

[Giordano]

The meaning of the word is how it is used. People seem to be able to use it just fine. If it isn't describing the thing you want it to describe, then you either need a new word, or to persuade everybody else to change how they use the current word. You clearly want everybody else to change the current common meaning of the word, which is fine. The word is clearly functional since the overwhelming majority of people have no problem using it every day.

If I said, "Light is exclusively a wave" then am I using the term "just fine?" Other people may understand what I am saying, but the sentence would be wrong. Even though many, many people would agree with it.

Do I need to make up a different word for "light" or "wave" or do I just need people to understand that the word "light" means a bit more than some people may have thought?

 

[Belz...]

They decided to selfishly ruin some drivers life by walking in front of their car Skeptic

Will you ever learn to use the quote function ?

There are many things to say about suicide but selfish isn't one of them, unless it's selfish the way buying shoes is selfish. These people are depressive and lose and emotional. They are not necessarily thinking rationally are they need support, not nonsense like this.

 

[shuttlt]

Neither. It is an effort to help people understand that the reality is a bit different from what they may have thought. Is it pedantry to state that light can be both a particle and a wave?

No, because this is making a concrete claim. If you insist that this means we start changing common everyday speech, then that might be pedantic.

Or is that simply important to know if you intend to make decisions based on it being one or the other?

The decisions are different to the word. If tomorrow you got all the world to change the word as you want, you wouldn't make you average man/woman in the street consider being a trans-sexual a minor trait of no consequence in considering potential partners.

I don't even understand why this matters, and I sense that the political reasons are really behind the "your gender is between your legs" rather than the "biology indicates that gender is a mix of different things" side of the issue.

I'm saying that the words "male" and "female" have a well defined meaning for most people. It may not map on to a scientific concept, or a gender studies concept, but it has a meaning. I'm not saying it should be defined by what is between ones legs, I'm saying that for most peoples usage of the words it does in fact map to what was between your legs when you were born and what is between your legs now. The less clear it is what was between your legs when you were born, or the further you move from that, the more problematically you sit in one, or the other, or neither category. I fail to see how that definition is defective. If one were to decide that it had to map onto some scientific concept of gender, sure... I can see it might be defective. But it doesn't.

 

[shuttlt]

If I said, "Light is exclusively a wave" then am I using the term "just fine?" Other people may understand what I am saying, but the sentence would be wrong. Even though many, many people would agree with it.

You are making a scientific claim here about light. The use of the terms man and woman in every day life aren't scientific claims. They are more like social, cultural terms.

 

[Giordano]

No, because this is making a concrete claim.

So is the biological fact that gender is more than genitalia.

I am not attempting to redefine commonly used words, only to help people realize that they often mean more than people may already know, and that gender is not as completely separate or simple a category as some think. One can always state the particular genitals a given person "owns" if you think that is particularly important in a given situation. That might provide more clarity to the listener in a medical situation. But that alone does not define their gender.

Why does this sound to me a bit like,"Gays are attempting to redefine the word 'marriage?'" As if words are somehow sacred and aren't routinely expanded, contracted or altered to reflect reality. Kids often use the term "owned" to indicate someone won an argument; should it matter to me if no deed of ownership is indeed passed from one to the other?

 

[Giordano]

You are making a scientific claim here about light. The use of the terms man and woman in every day life aren't scientific claims. They are more like social, cultural terms.

I thought it was you who was claiming that they are scientific terms relating to their genitals. If you are relating to social or cultural, then how/who someone presents themselves in public appears to be the most important issue.

I no longer expect to convince you, because I think you have very strong views as to how to define gender. But you should consider that it is not as simple as you've been led to believe.

 

[Belz...]

Absolutely. There is a push to allow men who feel they are women to enter women's bathrooms.

You have got to be kidding.

It is not simply about equality

Yes, yes it is. If I dislike broccoli, and you like it, it's fair that you ask me to allow you to like and eat broccoli, and for me to ask you to allow me to dislike and not eat broccoli. Same thing about gender identity, marriage, sex, etc.

 

[shuttlt]

Why does this sound to me a bit like,"Gays are attempting to redefine the word 'marriage?'" As if words are somehow sacred and aren't routinely expanded, contracted or altered to reflect reality.

I'm not arguing against changing the meaning. But you are changing the meaning.

 

[Tony]

This is one question someone asked that I would like to see answered:

Okay... but can you name any other examples of situations where someone's beliefs about what they are trump what others can observe scientifically?

 

[shuttlt]

I thought it was you who was claiming that they are scientific terms relating to their genitals. If you are relating to social or cultural, then how/who someone presents themselves in public appears to be the most important issue.

I no longer expect to convince you, because I think you have very strong views as to how to define gender. But you should consider that it is not as simple as you've been led to believe.

In this most recent digression, I have not been making claims about the nature of gender. I'm perfectly happy to assume for the sake of argument that the desire/need to be a man or a woman is written into our brains by God and is completely independent of penises and vaginas. I do not believe the current common meaning maps cleanly onto the concept you are referring to as gender. I am making claims about the everyday usage of words. I am saying that I do not see that the current usage of the word "male" and "female" are any more internally inconsistent than a great many other words. I am not against trying to modify the common meaning of these words, though I think it will be hard work. I just don't think the current definitions can be said to be incorrect. I think people prefer to say that they are incorrect rather than that they simply don't like them and want to change them.

 

[Belz...]

I find it far more selfish to insist that someone conform to another person's conception of who they are, and demand that they keep their pain and desperation hidden from everyone else.

Indeed, and it's not just about sex, though it's certainly more prevalent with it. People expect others to conform to their conceptions of everything, from politics to sports to sex to movies and food.

In other words, feeling like a woman or man is invisible to cis people, because everything is consistent, from physical appearance to socialzation.

I think you're right. Reading this thread I was thinking about gender identity and it occured to me that I never once thought about mine. I'm just what I am. I was born a man and that's it. My identity is the sum total of my preferences and ideas and goals, and it never felt out of place for me. I can't begin to understand the plight of someone for whom this isn't the case.

 

[Belz...]

The gender question was already settled. She was female.

Not that simple, though.

Biological sex: male
Gender identification: female
Sexual preferences: unknown
etc.

Meanwhile 50 odd more teenagers kill themselves. No one notices. They managed to do it without permanently traumatising strangers

Is your position that we shouldn't talk about any deaths, or about all of them ? Should we not talk about those deaths that touch on important issues ?

Some suicides are incredibly selfish.

Older people who do it through debt and leave their wife and kids to deal with it being an obvious example.

That's because you are not considering the whole situation.

Yes, and I attempted a pithy summary of the rash of posts on this suicide. Perhaps brevity isn't always welcome.

Yours was probably a summary of a different thread.

 

[Belz...]

I suffer from depression and while its effect on me is primarily a pretty extreme lack of energy and motivation, I do occasionally have periods where I feel like suicide is the only long-term solution. In those times, I often consider how I have failed, or am currently failing, people who rely on me and how much of a burden I am on others.

Please do stick around, man.

 

[Butter!]

I think you're right. Reading this thread I was thinking about gender identity and it occured to me that I never once thought about mine. I'm just what I am. I was born a man and that's it. My identity is the sum total of my preferences and ideas and goals, and it never felt out of place for me. I can't begin to understand the plight of someone for whom this isn't the case.

Good points.