Non-binary identities are valid

[arthwollipot]

Typical of the narcissistic mindset of this pseudo-progressive movement.

Note how nobody has said that transgender people should be forced to use any pronouns for themselves they don't want. It's only one side that's arguing that some people should be forced to use some particular pronoun for some particular people, and when other people refuse to obey said demand you frame it as you being "forced" to use the wrong pronouns. Framing a refusal to obey a command as persecution says all that needs to be said.

I think you've grabbed the wrong end of the stick on this one.

If I say that my pronouns are he/him and yet you consistently refer to me as she/her, then you are "forcing" that pronoun on me against my will.

 

[LondonJohn]

Wow.

Out of curiosity, does anyone else think that there's anything wrong with theprestige's post?

Arthwollipot? Upchurch?

I'd be interested in other people's takes here.

Personally theprestige's post seems entirely reasonable to me.

I'll give you a small hint: sexual attraction is based entirely upon biological sex (including presentation which implies a particular biological sex). It has nothing whatsoever per se to do with gender identity.

 

[d4m10n]

There's no question to dodge.

Here it is again:

Are there any parameters which might possibly delimit which gender identities actually exist?

Doesn't seem to me that "the boundaries/limits are 'man' at one end and 'woman' at the other end" is a remotely sufficient response, since it gives us no way to tell what's real from what's made up.

 

[arthwollipot]

Before we go back down the rabbit hole yet again.

WHAT IS THE POINT?

"I identify as an X." What information is this supposed to convey?

If being a pansexual genderfluid lesbian doesn't change how I'm supposed to treat you IN AN OBJECTIVE WAY what... is... the... point?

You're absolutely right. You shouldn't care about how a person identifies. You should care about what pronoun you use.

 

[HansMustermann]

So let's start helping them to support it, rather than pulling supports away.

Oh, I'm all for supporting them. If they need a therapist or anything to figure it out, I'll be proud to pay out of my taxes so they can get that. If they need more anti-discrimination legislation, I'll personally go vote for whatever party promises that.

I'm just not into anyone decreeing that I personally HAVE to be their support.

 

[arthwollipot]

If I'm sexually attracted to women, and I perceive that you are a man, I'm not going to be sexually attracted to you. You telling me that you perceive yourself as a woman isn't going to change my (lack of) sexual attraction. It's 100% what's going on in my head that matters there.

That's true, and that's why such information should be discussed up front, before initiating any kind of sexual encounter.

 

[arthwollipot]

Are there any parameters which might possibly delimit which gender identities actually exist? Seems to me that anyone can claim to be any "alternative gender" (e.g. https://gender.wikia.org/wiki/Xenogender) and that's sort of all that matters.

Yeah, it's a pretty open field at the moment. I expect that it'll settle down somewhat as society gets used to the idea.

 

[HansMustermann]

I'll give you a small hint: sexual attraction is based entirely upon biological sex (including presentation which implies a particular biological sex). It has nothing whatsoever per se to do with gender identity.

Ehhh, honestly, I'd say presentation is more important there by far than what sex you actually are. In fact, I'm not even sure the latter actually plays much of a role at all. I can tell you first hand that a guy with the right make-up can look attractive to other straight guys, and conversely a lot of women can pull off a convincing male act to be attractive to other straight women.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I've seen the hijra referenced as a "third sex." But as far as I can tell, these are basically people who have a ceremonial importance in Hindu beliefs. So not really a third sex, just a culturally specific gender role for men -there are no female hijra.

I've seen eunuchs cited as a "third sex." Again, these are just castrated men. They have a particular role (advisors to royalty, guardians of harems, etc) in a particular society. I can't see how that's a third sex, it's a role for one of the two sexes. There were no female eunuchs -the term makes no sense in that context.

Eunuchs are no more a third sex than are females who've had a hysterectomy. A gelding is still a male horse.

 

[theprestige]

I'll give you a small hint: sexual attraction is based entirely upon biological sex (including presentation which implies a particular biological sex). It has nothing whatsoever per se to do with gender identity.

Which makes it pretty much meaningless.

Your gender identity shouldn't make any difference to how you are treated in employment or in housing. It shouldn't make any difference to how you are treated in matters of sex segregation. It shouldn't make any difference to what clothes or makeup you wear, or what other people think about the clothes and makeup you wear.

Is there any scenario where gender identity should matter anywhere outside the head of the individual, except as a proxy for sexual identity?

 

[Emily's Cat]

What?

First off, you didn't even attempt to address the first part of my post, which dealt with your bizarre claim that there was a link between intersex people and transgender identity.

I think your high-horse is too high for your current ocular capabilities. My point is that there IS NOT A LINK between intersex people and transgender identity. People bringing up intersex people as an argument for transgender issues is dumb and wrong. The two are not related.

And secondly, let's examine your goalpost-shifting record wrt intersex people.

In chronological order, you've stated:

1) "There is no in-between sex."

2) "Intersex people exist"

3) "I in no way at all suggested that intersex people don't exist. They do exist."

4) "Intersex isn't even the appropriate term"

I think this is a case of you not actually reading the entire post and just grabbing a sentence and filling in an assumed meaning. There is no goal post shifting.

1) There is no in-between sex. This is flatly and inarguably true. There are only two sexes, male and female. That is all. There is no third sex, nor are there any in-between sexes. Not a single human (or any other mammal for that matter) has a medium-sized sluggishly mobile gamete.

2) Intersex people exist. Also true. "Intersex" is a colloquial term being used for people who have disorders of sexual development. People with DSDs do actually exist, they are real conditions. Thus, people who are "intersex" do actually exist. But they are still either male or female, no intersex person is anything other than male or female. The term "intersex" is misleading, especially as used by most laypeople. It references sexual characteristics that are malformed or ambiguous, or other medical anomalies that prevent the normal development of sexual characteristics. Thus, even though people with these disorders exist, they are not actually an intermediate sex of any kind.

3) I in no way at all suggested that intersex people don't exist. They do exist. See item 2 above. Like literally - I said they exist in both 2) and 3) so I have no idea why you're considering that even remotely comparable to goal-post shifting.

4) Intersex isn't even the appropriate term. Again, see item 2) above. It's really not an accurate term - people with DSDs aren't actually intersex. They're not some third or half-way sex. They are still only male or female. It's an inaccurate and misleadingly used term.

 

[Emily's Cat]

If a friend of yours phoned you and earnestly stated that they were repeatedly hearing voices in their head telling them to kill people....

.... you're suggesting that it wouldn't be reasonable to infer that your friend might well be experiencing paranoid schizophrenia?

OK. But I disagree.

I don't have enough knowledge to really opine on it. I'd settle for strongly suggesting that they see a doctor.

Interestingly, there are a number of medical conditions that can cause hallucinations, delusions, hearing voices, and all sorts of strange side-effects. Those are actually more common than paranoid schizophrenia is.

Hell, maybe they've simply indulged in a bit too much LSD.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Seems to me this proposition is very much in dispute these days.

https://twitter.com/chasestrangio/status/1349722419179622404

The fact that this viewpoint is coming from a lawyer for the ACLU really causes me concern.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Appeal to false authority, basically.

Just to clarify - Elaedith isn't "appealing" to Strangio. She is pointing out that whether it's pseudo-scientific claptrap or not... it is literally shaping public policy in the real world, with real world effects.

Which makes it something worth being concerned about.

 

[Emily's Cat]

They rarely change because of the usage by a minority. I'd wager most people use "gender", "man" and "woman" in the traditional way.

Personally I have no issue with calling transitioned transwomen "she/her" and transitioned transmen "he/him", and I think transition should be subsidized. And I have no idea how to deal with the restroom issue, but I think trans people should get the same rights and protections from discrimination as anyone else. But I draw the line at forcing me to deny objective reality. There's no issue with calling trans women "trans women". It's not reasonable to ask 99.7% of the population to add "cis-" to their gender. Hell, I'm not even sure a significant proportion of actual trans people even make that request.

It's the same with theists: just because you deeply, truly believe in God doesn't mean I have to agree with you in a discussion about religion. It doesn't mean I have to be a dick to them, either.

I always enjoy your ability to plainly state things, Belz.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Otherwise, all you're doing is the fallacy called the "sophisticated theology defense": postulating that there is some perfectly rational support or explanation somewhere, but never actually managing to show it.

Oooh! Now I have a term for it!

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yes, I’ve said as much myself. I don’t identify as a man, I just am a man because I have a penis, testicles, hairy chest, etc. I grok the idea that, for reasons not currently fully understood, some people have a dysphoria where their internal view of themselves doesn’t match their biological sex. But I understand that only in cases where the person says they feel like the opposite of their biological sex. I can’t wrap my head around people who say they are non-binary...a third sex. I mean, there objectively is no third sex. How can someone feel like something that doesn’t exist?

I honestly don't grok it either... but I have actually for realsies had someone tell me, with a completely straight face and no inkling of satire, that their gender identity is neither male nor female, and in fact is something never before observed in any biological entity on earth.

 

[d4m10n]

Yeah, it's a pretty open field at the moment. I expect that it'll settle down somewhat as society gets used to the idea.

Looking forward to the campaign for quintgender acceptance. With any luck, our pronoun badges will be easily reprogrammable by then.

 

[Emily's Cat]

We can only speak of these traits as the ones society has traditionally assigned to the sexes. Men are strong, confident, breadwinners. Women are caring, weak, homemakers. Men dress one way, women dress another. Men don’t cry. Women have long hair.

Yes, I know that this has changed a lot recently, but probably not as much as we like to think.

Depends on whether you're speaking of social traits or physical traits. There are a host of physical traits that are sexually differentiated for humans.

 

[arthwollipot]

Depends on whether you're speaking of social traits or physical traits. There are a host of physical traits that are sexually differentiated for humans.

And they have no relevance outside of a sexual relationship and should not be brought into conversations that have nothing to do with sexual activity.