# What's your opinion on "Genderfluids"?



## AustinB (Apr 3, 2017)

I don't care what you call yourself. I don't agree with it, but whatever. As long as you're not hurting anyone or acting like a complete cunt about it (like, where you have to constantly correct people about them "misgendering" you) (or insulting "cis" people for oppressing you). I think most of them probably have gender disphoria. But as long as you're happy with yourself, go ahead and be yourself. I could care less about what gender you identify as. Don't be obnoxious about it though.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 3, 2017)

There are people who are born physically intersex, possessing a mosaic of male and female characteristics. Expecting those people to adhere to a gender binary is silly, because their existence shows that intermediate states of physical sex are real, so I don't think it's a massive leap to reason that people's self-conception of gender may not always be binary either.  
Expecting intersex people to adhere to a gender binary may even be harmful in some contexts, because pressure may exist to force intersex people to have surgery they don't really need or want, to 'fix' something that wasn't actually a problem for them.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 3, 2017)

_raises hand_
*H*ey there, I'm one of the mythical creatures referred to as intersex. Despite having had had surgery to 'fix' me, (though it was for medical reasons I'd rather not delve into), I grew up not really having a single clue on what I was for the most part, and I'm still unsure of what I am. I have moments where I feel strongly enough attached to the pink collared things to refer to myself as feminine pronouns, and then other times blue collar enough to refer to myself using masculine pronouns. It's more or less a jumbled mess of not really caring what others refer to me as, and just swapping in and out of pronouns constantly when referring to myself. So, naturally, my opinion on gender fluidity is simply that it's perfectly fine as long as they don't expect everyone else to be able to keep up with how their emotions shift. There's no real 'misgendering' when it comes to gender fluidity, really, and anyone who takes off as though there is kind of ruins the point of what being gender fluid truly is. Hopefully this helps shed a little light on the situation for some involving the whole gender fluidity thing, and also builds on what @Fallowfox said.


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Apr 3, 2017)

I actually agree with how anal some seem to get about their pronouns, they're the equilvent of a firey red-head at a feminist pride rally sometimes (probably triggered someone saying that). If some poor soul makes the mistake of not labeling you properly, just tell them, don't treat those people as if they're worse than Hitler.


----------



## BlueWorrior (Apr 3, 2017)

I knew a dude who was "non-binary". he was a dude, but he said he wanted boobs but keep his genitals and said that he could be either a guy or a girl. it was all in his head, made up for his own sake. It's pretty dumb and doesn't serve much purpose other than to attract attention which this guy very much did constantly. I don't care enough to call anyone out on it myself, but if you go around asserting your ridiculous gender politics in people's faces, don't expect people to care or be immediately accepting of it. I feel like as if many of these people do it for nothing but the attention and to feel special in some way and to those people, I say "I couldn't give a shit even if I tried, so please can you stop?"
So yeah, I guess you could say I'm neutral on the subject, so as long as the ydon't make a big song-and-dance about it :L


----------



## Jarren (Apr 3, 2017)

I personally feel like it reinforces gender stereotypes. Why assign certain aspects of your personality to the expression of one gender or another based on how you feel aligned that day/week/month etc? Doesn't that just foist the actions you are performing onto that particular gender and show you believe they traditionally ought to be doing those things, rather than doing away with gendered performance altogether and treating everyone equally, as most LGBTQ+/other social activists and advocates claim to want? I don't know... Why not just be "you" rather than a label? That said, do what you want as long as it doesn't interfere with being a productive member of society. I really don't care what you think/feel/believe/"know" you are, and it's not my business to.

My two cents.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 3, 2017)

Your perception of your own gender is something intimately your own, and I think allowing people to use whatever label they feel best describes that experience, for them, makes a lot more sense than telling them, essentially, that their perception is invalid. If Sidney feels more male some days and more female others, or depending on social context or time of day or whatever, telling zir that "no, you can't be genderfluid or bigender, you have to choose one!" is nothing but putting your own comfort when being around Sidney (presumably only a relatively small portion of the day) over Sidney's comfort with zir own identity (which zie has to deal with 24/7). Which to me feels pretty shitty.

That said, expecting people to keep up with varying pronoun differences without clear visual cues is not reasonable. And not something any nonbinary individuals I know actually do. I'm happy to try to accomodate you if corrected, as long as you're prepared to be polite in correcting me if I use the pronoun of whatever physical sex you best pass for when first meeting you. (That said, gender is a huge non-issue to me; it's something I give at best cursory attention to for my own part.)


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 3, 2017)

Genderfluids? Your genitals are liquid?

Your genitals don't change the moment you FEEL you are something else. Your sex organs define which sex/gender you are. Whatever you FEEL you are, aka, gender identity, I give zero fucks about, but don't go mixing that shit up with actual physical aspects.


----------



## Jarren (Apr 3, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> Your perception of your own gender is something intimately your own, and I think allowing people to use whatever label they feel best describes that experience, for them, makes a lot more sense than telling them, essentially, that their perception is invalid. If Sidney feels more male some days and more female others, or depending on social context or time of day or whatever, telling zir that "no, you can't be genderfluid or bigender, you have to choose one!" is nothing but putting your own comfort when being around Sidney (presumably only a relatively small portion of the day) over Sidney's comfort with zir own identity (which zie has to deal with 24/7). Which to me feels pretty shitty.
> 
> That said, expecting people to keep up with varying pronoun differences without clear visual cues is not reasonable. And not something any nonbinary individuals I know actually do. I'm happy to try to accomodate you if corrected, as long as you're prepared to be polite in correcting me if I use the pronoun of whatever physical sex you best pass for when first meeting you. (That said, gender is a huge non-issue to me; it's something I give at best cursory attention to for my own part.)


This is the first time I've ever actually seen the z pronouns used unironically.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 3, 2017)

So I'll address these claims because I see them brought up very frequently, even though they are irrelevant.

*'Your genitals determine which gender you are'. *

They don't always; when somebody's gender identity does not match their genitals they are usually described as 'transgender' and an extensive body of research exists on transgender people, showing that their predicament has biological causes, such as ambiguous brain structure, perhaps generated by foetal hormonal imbalances: Causes of transsexuality - Wikipedia

Even if somebody's gender identity always _did _conform to their genitals, some people are born with genitals that are neither fully male or female.
Intersex - Wikipedia

Hence the existence of people who have ambiguous gender identities, that do not conform to the prevailing binary, is completely expected.




Jarren said:


> I personally feel like it reinforces gender stereotypes. Why assign certain aspects of your personality to the expression of one gender or another based on how you feel aligned that day/week/month etc? Doesn't that just foist the actions you are performing onto that particular gender and show you believe they traditionally ought to be doing those things, rather than doing away with gendered performance altogether and treating everyone equally, as most LGBTQ+/other social activists and advocates claim to want? I don't know... Why not just be "you" rather than a label? That said, do what you want as long as it doesn't interfere with being a productive member of society. I really don't care what you think/feel/believe/"know" you are, and it's not my business to.
> 
> My two cents.



I think this is the wrong end of the stick, so I'll use an example of a sex-ambiguous behaviour observed in homosexuals to clarify it. 

It has been widely observed that children who turn out to be homosexual routinely prefer to play with toys associated with the opposite sex: Childhood gender nonconformity - Wikipedia

This observation does not mean that homosexuals support gender stereotypes, and obviously gender roles that apply to children- such as 'boys prefer to play with cars and girls with doll houses' are still socially constructed, by virtue of the fact that cars and houses are literally human constructs- cars and doll houses only exist _because we construct them._ 

What this actually shows is that humans are probably predisposed to produce social constructs of conceptions of gender, and that humans are innately predisposed to take interest in the activities that are designated to their gender role. (the designations are themselves arbitrary- we could imagine a world in which all women wore trousers and all men wore skirts, for example, and then men who wore trousers would be perceived as cross dressers)

Some humans don't fit into this designation, and this can manifest as an innate affiliation with activities and rolls which are normally designated to the opposite gender.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 3, 2017)

@Jarren 

*G*ender roles, blue collar/pink collar, are extremely comforting for some. It's alright for others to not mess with them, and let things be fluid all over the board on what's considered blue/pink, though for others it's a matter of a sense of belonging-- feeling that you're proper, feeling that yes, you _know _who you are and you make it clear. I hope that that makes some sort of sense? No matter how blended society will end up making stuff, there'll always be things that're inherently feminine and masculine, at least in the form of aged traditions. As long as no one's getting hurt, it's alright if someone wants to conform to one or another. At least, that's my two cents on it.

*J*ust basically; yes. It does reinforce some gender stereotypes. But that's alright as long as they don't butt into anyone else's business with trying to shove their perceptions of what's what upon others. It's a personal thing. Though, of course there's some who make it not a complete personal thing and those folks are out of hand minority that make a bad name for the rest.

@Yakamaru 

*G*ender no longer appeals to purely being a term of sex. However, I will agree on when someone claims that they're male when they have female genitalia, they're unfortunately improperly using terms. Only pronouns can be applied, not labels to physical aspects, when announcing oneself as trans or genderfluid of any kind. While as we might disagree for the most part, I'll note that it's kind of ridiculous for someone to demand the labels given to those who attain the _physical _aspects of a sex they're not. On the other hand, when it comes to simply blue collar/pink collar gender role stuff, they're labels to be freely used.


----------



## Jarren (Apr 3, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> *G*ender roles, blue collar/pink collar, are extremely comforting for some. It's alright for others to not mess with them, and let things be fluid all over the board on what's considered blue/pink, though for others it's a matter of a sense of belonging-- feeling that you're proper, feeling that yes, you _know _who you are and you make it clear. I hope that that makes some sort of sense? No matter how blended society will end up making stuff, there'll always be things that're inherently feminine and masculine, at least in the form of aged traditions. As long as no one's getting hurt, it's alright if someone wants to conform to one or another. At least, that's my two cents on it.
> 
> *J*ust basically; yes. It does reinforce some gender stereotypes. But that's alright as long as they don't butt into anyone else's business with trying to shove their perceptions of what's what upon others. It's a personal thing. Though, of course there's some who make it not a complete personal thing and those folks are out of hand minority that make a bad name for the rest.


That makes a fair bit of sense. Thanks for the insight. And like I said, I'm fine with people doing what they want, how the want, if it helps them without causing issues for others, and this falls well into that category of acceptable stuff (not that I'm an arbiter of acceptability).


----------



## ItsBrou (Apr 3, 2017)

I don't participate in that game, but that doesn't mean I dislike them. People are free to live the life the way they want, which is what makes the free world so great, but the world and people outside a person's mind and body does not have to play along with which of the 5345379025389 x 10^17 internet genders exist. They'll surely find like-minded people who are willing to play the game, and good for them.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 3, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> @Yakamaru
> 
> *G*ender no longer appeals to purely being a term of sex. However, I will agree on when someone claims that they're male when they have female genitalia, they're unfortunately improperly using terms. Only pronouns can be applied, not labels to physical aspects, when announcing oneself as trans or genderfluid of any kind. While as we might disagree for the most part, I'll note that it's kind of ridiculous for someone to demand the labels given to those who attain the _physical _aspects of a sex they're not. On the other hand, when it comes to simply blue collar/pink collar gender role stuff, they're labels to be freely used.


Gender/sex have been used interchangably for millennia. It's only recently in the past decade that people suddenly wanted to seperate them. It's in essence, being either male(masculine) or female(feminine). Your Chromosomes are the number 1 factor in deciding your sex/gender. No matter how you feel on the subject, it won't change the facts, nor reality. My mother tongue doesn't seperate sex/gender, and rightly so: They are one and the same.

What you feel you are, aka gender identity, and the gender/sex you are, are two different things.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 3, 2017)

At the start of his comment Yakamaru argues that Gender and Sex are interchangeable. 
By the end of his comment he says that gender identity and sex are two different things. 
If you think that they are two different things, then obviously they _aren't _interchangeable. 

Also, in the interest of actually having an informative discussion about biology, some people with XY chromosomes are born with female genitals:
Androgen insensitivity syndrome - Wikipedia
So this notion that biology is strictly dichotomous isn't really right; it is probably more accurate to say that the biological systems responsible for producing the physical sex binary sometimes do not function as normal and that this can result in humans who do not fit into the usual binary. 

Personally I think that it is obvious that nature sometimes produced organisms that don't fit into their species' usual sex binary, because nature can even produce organisms that are literally half male half female:


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 3, 2017)

@Yakamaru 
*T*hen on that notion, take it as people tend to shorten gender identity as simply gender nowadays. English is a constantly fluid, changing language that borrows from others, and is frankly lazy. 

@Fallowfox 
*T*o some, there is a difference between gender and gender identity. I'll admit, the full term in the end is more applicable, but nowadays more and more people within the mainstream are using the shorter term of simply gender in the end. So they aren't inherently incorrect or hypocritical with what they said there.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 3, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> Gender/sex have been used interchangably for millennia. It's only recently in the past decade that people suddenly wanted to seperate them. It's in essence, being either male(masculine) or female(feminine). Your Chromosomes are the number 1 factor in deciding your sex/gender. No matter how you feel on the subject, it won't change the facts, nor reality. My mother tongue doesn't seperate sex/gender, and rightly so: They are one and the same.


Not strictly true; it may only be in the last few decades that the word "gender" has been claimed for the purpose of referring to gender identity on a large scale, but the concepts have existed independently of one another for far, far longer. Not having a word for something doesn't mean that thing is not real; if a language from an equatorial region doesn't have a word for "snow", does that make snow any less real? No. But it might make snow something either wondrous or terrifying to someone who sees it for the first time and doesn't have a name for it.

(That the word ended up being "gender" makes a lot of sense if you look at linguistics and grammar, where a lot of languages inherently genders words for objects that absolutely, definitely, do not have a physical/biological sex. Or are you telling me that rocks have genitals and chromosomes?)

Giving something a name destigmatizes and demystifies it, but doesn't ultimately change the reality of it. Swedish doesn't have a short/concise word for gender as opposed to sex, either, but that doesn't mean we have an inherent right to tell someone they're not entitled to their own identity.



Jarren said:


> This is the first time I've ever actually seen the z pronouns used unironically.


What pronouns you see used will depend on what company you keep, honestly. I tend to use they/zie/he, in that order, as gender neutral pronouns. Which I use in a given context will usually depend on small variations in intended meaning as well as how fast I'm speaking and what/who exactly is being referred to. (Inanimate objects are most likely to end up as "he" - I am really bad about that and regularly end up confusing people without meaning to.)


----------



## Jarren (Apr 3, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> What pronouns you see used will depend on what company you keep, honestly. I tend to use they/zie/he, in that order, as gender neutral pronouns. Which I use in a given context will usually depend on small variations in intended meaning as well as how fast I'm speaking and what/who exactly is being referred to.


I shared an office for several years with many members of the school LGBTQ+ club, I've met people of most conceivable persuasions, and had just never heard any of them use/request those terms or even write them.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 3, 2017)

Jarren said:


> I shared an office for several years with many members of the school LGBTQ+ club, I've met people of most conceivable persuasions, and had just never heard any of them use/request those terms or even write them.


*I*t's most popularly used around intersex communities than the LGBTQA+ community in general, honestly.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 3, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> Not strictly true; it may only be in the last few decades that the word "gender" has been claimed for the purpose of referring to gender identity on a large scale, but the concepts have existed independently of one another for far, far longer. Not having a word for something doesn't mean that thing is not real; if a language from an equatorial region doesn't have a word for "snow", does that make snow any less real? No. But it might make snow something either wondrous or terrifying to someone who sees it for the first time and doesn't have a name for it.
> 
> (That the word ended up being "gender" makes a lot of sense if you look at linguistics and grammar, where a lot of languages inherently genders words for objects that absolutely, definitely, do not have a physical/biological sex. Or are you telling me that rocks have genitals and chromosomes?)
> 
> Giving something a name destigmatizes and demystifies it, but doesn't ultimately change the reality of it. Swedish doesn't have a short/concise word for gender as opposed to sex, either, but that doesn't mean we have an inherent right to tell someone they're not entitled to their own identity.


I seperate gender and gender identity as they are of two different worlds: One is about the physical aspects, the other is about mental/emotional aspects. One is a physical state, the other an emotional/mental state, aka, what you feel you are, as opposed to what you physically are. Only in English particularly are the words gender and sex used seperately. A lot of other languages, such as in Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, etc, you don't seperate sex/gender. 

As for the word for gender identity: Just use gender identity. It's easy to use, easy to understand, a decent definition, and won't confuse people with the definition of gender itself. It is to seperate sex/gender and gender identity, two completely worlds, from confusing people.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 3, 2017)

English speakers use a different definition to Norwegian speakers.

The English use of the words 'gender' and 'sex' already achieves the distinction that you want 'gender' and 'gender identity' to convey, so there's no reason to complain about it.
...I mean, we're getting to the point that people are complaining that not all languages use words the same way, which is pretty silly.



BittiBones said:


> @Yakamaru
> *T*hen on that notion, take it as people tend to shorten gender identity as simply gender nowadays. English is a constantly fluid, changing language that borrows from others, and is frankly lazy.
> 
> @Fallowfox
> *T*o some, there is a difference between gender and gender identity. I'll admit, the full term in the end is more applicable, but nowadays more and more people within the mainstream are using the shorter term of simply gender in the end. So they aren't inherently incorrect or hypocritical with what they said there.



Yes, I see your point. I think it's simpler for the word 'gender' to assume the meaning conveyed by 'gender identity'. 

After all, the people who want 'gender' to have its own meaning already admit that the word 'sex' does that job.


----------



## Kellan Meig'h (Apr 4, 2017)

Ya know what? If you want to be "Gender Fluid", expect me to call you dOOd. I'm not going to waste my time guessing whether you're male or female that day, I have better things to do. If this gets you attention from your friends, so be it.

Many Native American tribes had those who identified with the other gender but they weren't Gender Fluid. My take on it? Just a way to call out for attention.

Sorry if I'm terse but that's the view of an old, gray-muzzle former soldier.


----------



## Orla (Apr 4, 2017)

As I do not identify as genderfluid, I therefore am not in a place to have an outspoken opinion on it. Hearing people debate whether or not your own identify is valid to people who don't even understand it must be awful, and for any genderfluid people seeing this thread, I'm sorry you can't get away from this b.s..


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 4, 2017)

Kellan Meig'h said:


> Ya know what? If you want to be "Gender Fluid", expect me to call you dOOd. I'm not going to waste my time guessing whether you're male or female that day, I have better things to do. If this gets you attention from your friends, so be it.
> 
> Many Native American tribes had those who identified with the other gender but they weren't Gender Fluid. My take on it? Just a way to call out for attention.
> 
> Sorry if I'm terse but that's the view of an old, gray-muzzle former soldier.


*A*s previously mentioned, at least from someone who's gender fluid such as myself, most who're legitimately gender fluid and aren't doing it for attention don't mind if someone doesn't use whatever pronouns they prefer within that moment. It's simply a personal thing. Such as I'll refer to myself as whatever I feel like the most, though I don't care what others refer to me as, as long as it's not 'it'. 




Orla said:


> As I do not identify as genderfluid, I therefore am not in a place to have an outspoken opinion on it. Hearing people debate whether or not your own identify is valid to people who don't even understand it must be awful, and for any genderfluid people seeing this thread, I'm sorry you can't get away from this b.s..


Folks can comment on it even without an understanding of it, honestly. It's something most I've known, including myself, are used to. Which is why it's not commonly brought up that someone's legitimately gender fluid-- not the tumblrina kind-- when they are, unless to friends.


----------



## Orla (Apr 5, 2017)

Yeah, they "can", but I find it pretty crass to have debates over a person's identity, or orientation, etc. To me, there is nothing to debate. Someone says they're genderfluid? They're genderfluid. It's not my place to figure out if it's a "real thing" or not, and it honestly doesn't affect me. If someone is being bullied for being fluid or trans or gay or whatever, I'll stand up for them. If someone asks me to refer to them by a pronoun that doesn't make immediate sense in my brain, I still use that pronoun. I don't get why people want to deny basic humanity to others, and discuss their reasoning for acting like jerks.


----------



## Orla (Apr 5, 2017)

Like... if someone says "My name is Bob", and other people say "Well, you look like a Susan/Jeff/Gertrude to me, so im gonna call you Susan/Jeff/Gertrude because that's easier for ME..", it'd be rude a f.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 5, 2017)

Orla said:


> Yeah, they "can", but I find it pretty crass to have debates over a person's identity, or orientation, etc. To me, there is nothing to debate. Someone says they're genderfluid? They're genderfluid. It's not my place to figure out if it's a "real thing" or not, and it honestly doesn't affect me. If someone is being bullied for being fluid or trans or gay or whatever, I'll stand up for them. If someone asks me to refer to them by a pronoun that doesn't make immediate sense in my brain, I still use that pronoun. I don't get why people want to deny basic humanity to others, and discuss their reasoning for acting like jerks.


One's opinion is free to mention and debate on however, regardless of what their standing in understanding is. No one here is bullying at all, as the thread _did_ ask for aforementioned opinions.


----------



## Jarren (Apr 5, 2017)

Orla said:


> Like... if someone says "My name is Bob", and other people say "Well, you look like a Susan/Jeff/Gertrude to me, so im gonna call you Susan/Jeff/Gertrude because that's easier for ME..", it'd be rude a f.


To be fair, nobody here is defending that particular stance. The consensus seems to be that, if you are genderfluid/genderqueer/etc. and you point it out, that people are happy to go along with it. Most of the dissent here is based upon the minority (the very obnoxious and vocal minority) who will take any accidental misgendering/slip of the tongue as a personal attack.


----------



## Orla (Apr 5, 2017)

I've seen some rather rude comments on here regarding people who are gq or gf, typical to what I've seen in many other threads of this nature (almost always started by a cis person). I'm queer, so I've had my own identity challenged and dissected by people who had no understanding of anything other than their cis, hetereonormative life. I'm quick to jump to the defensive now, after literal decades of biting my tongue.


----------



## Orla (Apr 5, 2017)

But yes, I agree that people who jump down your throat for slipping up on a name or pronoun can be annoying. I grew up with 5 siblings... I don't think I knew what my actual name was until I was ten, lol.  People who refuse to use a preferred pronoun because they "don't believe in it", however, will always be jerks in my book.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 5, 2017)

Orla said:


> I've seen some rather rude comments on here regarding people who are gq or gf, typical to what I've seen in many other threads of this nature (almost always started by a cis person). I'm queer, so I've had my own identity challenged and dissected by people who had no understanding of anything other than their cis, hetereonormative life. I'm quick to jump to the defensive now, after literal decades of biting my tongue.


And as having had been gender fluid for basically majority of my life due to being intersex, I'm quite used to rather rude remarks on it too, however so I don't really believe anything here has been rude/meant to be. Merely in place they've been blunt upon their own opinions, of which they are fully entitled to. And as the title of the thread itself asks for said opinions, these aren't out of place and there's no need to be defensive. Only explainative (if that's even a word), if need be.


----------



## Orla (Apr 5, 2017)

Well, I'm sorry that you've become so accustomed to people questioning your identity. Also sorry for getting so defensive in an area I don't understand as well as you do. <3


----------



## PoptartPresident (Apr 5, 2017)

Gender isn't important in the slightest. What matters is the personality. 

The thing that has always bothered me though is that humanity does this thing where they give unique priority, rights, privileges, and restrictions to certain genders which is completely unorthodox.


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 5, 2017)

I'm trans, I follow the binary for my identity, but genderfluidity can exist for other people so if that's what makes it work for 'em, I don't care. As long as the person in question doesn't scream at me if I accidentally misgender and instead remind me of what they're using then I'm cool. (Granted, when I first figured out I was trans when I was younger after spending years trying to put the puzzle together I was kinda aggressively defensive when I was misgendered, but I was an insecure kid. Years down the line I'm a lot more mellow, and I like to think that about people with gender stuff; that they'll outgrow the more abrasive social behaviors over time and chill.)


----------



## PlusThirtyOne (Apr 5, 2017)

My policy across the board is, "You do you".
-But if you look (and act) so androgynous that i can't tell at first, you can't get mad at me for making the wrong guess.

in short, *i will happily adhere to your pronouns, so long as you're not a douche about it.*


----------



## Kellan Meig'h (Apr 5, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> *A*s previously mentioned, at least from someone who's gender fluid such as myself, most who're legitimately gender fluid and aren't doing it for attention don't mind if someone doesn't use whatever pronouns they prefer within that moment. It's simply a personal thing. Such as I'll refer to myself as whatever I feel like the most, though I don't care what others refer to me as, as long as it's not 'it'.


I have to deal with a "Gender Fluid" dOOd on a daily basis so it gets kind of annoying to have to observe how they're dressed and acting that particular day to determine which name to use and which gender "He/She" identifies with. That individual gets kind of butthurt when you use the wrong name/gender that day.

I'm sixty, by the way so I've been around the block once or twice. Like I said before, some days I just don't have time for it so "dOOd" is the best it gets. And, I've never referred to him/her as "It" but I've said numerous times, "Fuck it, make up your mind!" He/She has a bad habit of dressing very androgynous so you have no idea where to start. It just makes it a long day.

But you know what? If you can make it work for you, more power to you.

Edit: I'll add this. The dOOd has both "Robert" and Roberta" on their employer-issued badge.


----------



## PlusThirtyOne (Apr 5, 2017)

Kellan Meig'h said:


> I have to deal with a "Gender Fluid" dOOd on a daily basis so it gets kind of annoying to have to observe how they're dressed and acting that particular day to determine which name to use and which gender "He/She" identifies with. That individual gets kind of butthurt when you use the wrong name/gender that day.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


This is the problem.
You'd _think_ that if a person were so "fluid", they simply wouldn't care what gender they are or what pronouns to use. if they haven't picked one, you'd assume they'd be simply indifferent but nooooooo, there are a number of people who choose their gender daily and flippy-flop on a dime. They wear it like an article of clothing and expect others to identify it immediately. Problem is, if it's not obvious or worse yet counter-intuitive like wearing a dress and identifying as "male" for the day, you're going to confuse people. That's like expecting people to know what kind and color of underwear you're wearing and to adjust your pronouns accordingly. if it's not obvious, why is it such a big deal in the first place!?

i know A LOT of people complain about the confusion and problems and yadda yadda yadda but _*i've actually been there*_. i know a few individuals who won't accept "them/they" pronouns because they don't adhere to their identity for that day. i know what it's like to be branded a sexist or trans-phobe or whatever for misgendering someone by accident. it DOES happen! it's not indicative of all trans persons, all gender fluid or all *_insert buzzword here_* but there's an annoying few that are ruining identity politics for everyone. it's not supposed to be confusing. it's not supposed to be that difficult. Be who you want to be and do what you want to do. Peeps just need to relax and forget the semantics and quit playing the victim card.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 5, 2017)

Kellan Meig'h said:


> I have to deal with a "Gender Fluid" dOOd on a daily basis so it gets kind of annoying to have to observe how they're dressed and acting that particular day to determine which name to use and which gender "He/She" identifies with. That individual gets kind of butthurt when you use the wrong name/gender that day.
> 
> I'm sixty, by the way so I've been around the block once or twice. Like I said before, some days I just don't have time for it so "dOOd" is the best it gets. And, I've never referred to him/her as "It" but I've said numerous times, "Fuck it, make up your mind!" He/She has a bad habit of dressing very androgynous so you have no idea where to start. It just makes it a long day.
> 
> ...


Oh dear,.. bless their heart. I'm not envious of you, I'd be driven up the wall myself in dealing with someone like that. It's folks like those who I hear about and just wonder 'who hurt you to make you this way' when they come to mind. You're a trooper for dealing with that kind.


----------



## Generic Fox (Apr 5, 2017)

Fallowfox said:


> There are people who are born physically intersex, possessing a mosaic of male and female characteristics. Expecting those people to adhere to a gender binary is silly, because their existence shows that intermediate states of physical sex are real, so I don't think it's a massive leap to reason that people's self-conception of gender may not always be binary either.
> Expecting intersex people to adhere to a gender binary may even be harmful in some contexts, because pressure may exist to force intersex people to have surgery they don't really need or want, to 'fix' something that wasn't actually a problem for them.


Op didn't mention nonbinary people, only genderfluid people. In no case does a person's body shift from male to female depending on the day, so I would consider it highly improbable that a person's brain can shift in that way. Various structures of the brain are different sizes depending on a person's gender, so how could a person so rapidly gain and lose brain cells in such short periods of time? There are physical and neurobiological differences found in agender or bigender or even demigender people, but genderfluid is just as much bullshit as pixelgender.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 5, 2017)

Generic Fox said:


> Op didn't mention nonbinary people, only genderfluid people. In no case does a person's body shift from male to female depending on the day, so I would consider it highly improbable that a person's brain can shift in that way. Various structures of the brain are different sizes depending on a person's gender, so how could a person so rapidly gain and lose brain cells in such short periods of time? There are physical and neurobiological differences found in agender or bigender or even demigender people, but genderfluid is just as much bullshit as pixelgender.



Eh, intersex presents a case of ambiguous physical sex. A gender identity associated with this could be binary, intermediary or any shade of ambiguous, including transiency, right?
I would like to see those studies on agender, bigender and demigender people, because I was not aware they existed.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 5, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> The thing that has always bothered me though is that humanity does this thing where they give unique priority, rights, privileges, and restrictions to certain genders which is completely unorthodox.


Going to ask for evidence of this.

If you're referring to women winning the vast majority of cases in the family courts on child custody and in divorce cases, I'd agree.



Generic Fox said:


> Op didn't mention nonbinary people, only genderfluid people. In no case does a person's body shift from male to female depending on the day, so I would consider it highly improbable that a person's brain can shift in that way. Various structures of the brain are different sizes depending on a person's gender, so how could a person so rapidly gain and lose brain cells in such short periods of time? There are physical and neurobiological differences found in agender or bigender or even demigender people, but genderfluid is just as much bullshit as pixelgender.


Non-binary is just as much bullshit as genderfluid. Just sayin'.


----------



## PoptartPresident (Apr 5, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> Going to ask for evidence of this.
> 
> If you're referring to women winning the vast majority of cases in the family courts on child custody and in divorce cases, I'd agree.



Uuuh kinda...that's one example.

I mean like how men generally get paid more than women despite experience. Or how women tend to get off the stands of a court with a lot less of a punishment in comparison to a man who committed the same crime.
And how there's this thing where "men are superior to women"...ugh.

I especially want to point the finger at the social norms that try to indicate that men have to be this emotionless, strong, and social man while women have to be this beautiful princess that the men have to win over...

I think it's all a load of crap, and only proves how unequal we continue to be.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 5, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> I mean like how men generally get paid more than women despite experience.


Men get paid more than women because men have jobs that pay more. The more equal a society becomes the more unequal the genders become. It's called the equality paradox.

It is illegal per law to pay someone less, as it is directly discriminatory. Women earn less, they are not paid less. The wage gap is a myth. In the same type of job, the total difference is coming up to a tiny 4.7%. Women, compared to men, negotiate less for wages, paid leave, etc. Men simply do it more often. Women also take more vacations, work less, and have jobs that are safer but have a lower wage. Experience have nothing to do with it. Women earn less because they work less, and other factors that affect their total earnings.

The gender equality paradox explained. Quite frankly, I'd love to slap these "gender studies" morons who seem to challenge SCIENCE with a god damn opinion.







PoptartPresident said:


> Or how women tend to get off the stands of a court with a lot less of a punishment in comparison to a man who committed the same crime.


That is quite literally women's privilege. Less punishment for the same crime. I find this retarded, to be honest. If we are to be an equal society, equality are to be applied to EVERYONE, without exception.



PoptartPresident said:


> I especially want to point the finger at the social norms that try to indicate that men have to be this emotionless, strong, and social man while women have to be this beautiful princess that the men have to win over...


Ah yes, social standards. Quite frankly, they are a load of crap.


----------



## Royn (Apr 5, 2017)

read this thread and...... LOL. Truth is what it is.  Points of view is where the truth lies.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 6, 2017)

Generic Fox said:


> Op didn't mention nonbinary people, only genderfluid people. In no case does a person's body shift from male to female depending on the day, so I would consider it highly improbable that a person's brain can shift in that way. Various structures of the brain are different sizes depending on a person's gender, so how could a person so rapidly gain and lose brain cells in such short periods of time? There are physical and neurobiological differences found in agender or bigender or even demigender people, but genderfluid is just as much bullshit as pixelgender.


Gender fluidity is based upon the notion of not exactly knowing what gender identity you are, so thus you'll have moments of adhering to either or gender identity in the end. It's more common in those with bipolar, or some other disorder. It's not someone simply choosing 'oh hey, I'll be this or that today'.  Not to mention that gender fluidity is common in females with aspergers, at least, that's what my therapist tells me so please don't take this as solid law on it, where their brain is physically different from the norm from the get go.



Fallowfox said:


> Eh, intersex presents a case of ambiguous physical sex. A gender identity associated with this could be binary, intermediary or any shade of ambiguous, including transiency, right?
> I would like to see those studies on agender, bigender and demigender people, because I was not aware they existed.


Well, it could in reality be on a slide of leaning towards either or with the physical sex asides from simply being ambiguous. Asides from that, I wasn't aware that bigender/demigender identities existed either.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

This isn't Wheel of Fortune.
You don't get to spin a wheel every morning and have whatever it lands on be your gender for the day.
You are one or the other, and you remain as such unless you decide to transition. At which point you become transgender.
And sorry (not sorry) to anyone who thinks they can be TRANSgender without making any effort to TRANSition.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> Uuuh kinda...that's one example.
> 
> I mean like how men generally get paid more than women despite experience. Or how women tend to get off the stands of a court with a lot less of a punishment in comparison to a man who committed the same crime.
> And how there's this thing where "men are superior to women"...ugh.
> ...


We're equal in the way that we are all unequal to one another.
Women may have one issue, but men will most certainly have another to match.
And many issues most commonly discussed by modern feminists aren't actually issues at all.
-Women aren't paid less, they statistically *earn* less.
-Women are not sexually objectified. At least not in any way that men aren't. I'm sorry, but for every photo-shopped pair of titties on a magazine, you'll find a photo-shopped, oiled up 6-pack.
Other "social norms" aren't just there because someone way back when decided to expect one thing from one gender and another thing from the other. They're not baseless. They might sometimes cross a line to the point where such things are flat-out expected of each gender, but they aren't entirely socially constructed.


----------



## PoptartPresident (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> We're equal in the way that we are all unequal to one another.
> Women may have one issue, but men will most certainly have another to match.
> And many issues most commonly discussed by modern feminists aren't actually issues at all.
> -Women aren't paid less, they statistically *earn* less.
> ...



I learn more from these forums than actual school SMH...

Gender fluid topics and equality are apparently not taken seriously by my peers.
For instance, today we started a new unit. Gender fluid/equality/feminism stuff.

But to start off, we were watching a documentary on Netflix about how the phrase "Be a man" is quite possibly the most harmful phrase a male child can be told.
(I forgot the name, but it was a pretty neat documentary. And I'm usually the one that falls asleep during these things)
And yet, after the documentary, some of my classmates were making fun of the documentary and some of it's real statistics about rape, murder, drug addiction, suicide, violence, and how it all ties into male children simply being set up to play a role.

It just blows my mind how disrespectful they were today. Most of my classmates would mock the people in the film and would even make dark humor out of the films facts...

And we're an all-senior class that's about to graduate soon...
I think I am seriously going to consider moving out of my city when I graduate


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> This isn't Wheel of Fortune.
> You don't get to spin a wheel every morning and have whatever it lands on be your gender for the day.
> You are one or the other, and you remain as such unless you decide to transition. At which point you become transgender.
> And sorry (not sorry) to anyone who thinks they can be TRANSgender without making any effort to TRANSition.


I believe it's in times like this that people, again, don't put any thought into intersex, nor do they take into consideration things such as females with aspergers-- who have a physically and chemically different brain from neurotypicals of either sex-- and folks with bipolar disorder. Gender identity is free for anyone to lean in however side that they personally feel they are-- as again, it's gender _identity. _Not physical sex.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> I believe it's in times like this that people, again, don't put any thought into intersex, nor do they take into consideration things such as females with aspergers-- who have a physically and chemically different brain from neurotypicals of either sex-- and folks with bipolar disorder. Gender identity is free for anyone to lean in however side that they personally feel they are-- as again, it's gender _identity. _Not physical sex.


Except gender and sex are not entirely independent.
-
And no, we shouldn't be taking into consideration those people with whom something is wrong. The existence of little green men isn't "valid" just because the schizophrenic sees them dancing in their cereal. They aren't real.
-
As to the bit about gender identity...
I'll just defer to Dr. Jordan Peterson for now.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> I learn more from these forums than actual school SMH...
> 
> Gender fluid topics and equality are apparently not taken seriously by my peers.
> For instance, today we started a new unit. Gender fluid/equality/feminism stuff.
> ...


What the hell kind school are you attending?


----------



## Kellan Meig'h (Apr 6, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> ut to start off, we were watching a documentary on Netflix about how the phrase "Be a man" is quite possibly the most harmful phrase a male child can be told.


Hey, in the era I grew up in, you were EXPECTED to be a man, nothing less. My father worked at a steel mill, a manly job. He also expected me to be manly but as misfortune would have it, his manly job caused him to have a brain tumor so he never saw me grow up, get a job and get married. He died before I graduated high school and joined the military but I'm sure he would be proud of the way I turned out. I have a good marriage, a good job, two daughters, three grandchildren and a decent retirement right around the corner.

So, to "Be A Man" didn't seem to hurt me one bit. Sure, I've never held a "Manly Job" like my father, a brick layer in an open hearth steel mill but I did okay.

I'll say this; Never be afraid to be something and never let anyone tell you that you can't be something or do something.


----------



## PlusThirtyOne (Apr 6, 2017)

i may have totally have a dirty mind because EVERY time i see this thread again and again, i read "gender *[SPACE]* fluids".
Honestly, i think a discussion like that would be _a lot more interesting_ but this forum is rated PG13 sooooooo...


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 6, 2017)

PlusThirtyOne said:


> Honestly, i think a discussion like that would be _a lot more interesting_ but this forum is rated PG13 sooooooo...


Least we can all say 'fuck'


----------



## PlusThirtyOne (Apr 6, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> Least we can all say 'fuck'


'Cept pairing it with"-fluids" might cross a line. Prolly not too classy to have a topic on "fuck fluids". LOL
We're better than that! (no we're not) :V


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> Except gender and sex are not entirely independent.
> -
> And no, we shouldn't be taking into consideration those people with whom something is wrong. The existence of little green men isn't "valid" just because the schizophrenic sees them dancing in their cereal. They aren't real.
> -
> ...


*G*ender identity is what people personally consider themselves, so your argument involving schizophrenia cannot be considered valid, as it misses the point. To which, in the end, to say that one cannot take into consideration those who have physically different and chemically different brains from either sex (which is what was previously argued to define one's gender), and to say that you cannot take into consideration those who're bipolar and so thus don't even know their own feelings on things all the time as they're constantly changing simply because they're not neurotypical honestly in the end is discriminatory. Discriminatory, not in the criminal sense of course, though still in play as the definition sense.

*W*ell, I suppose someone ignoring the point on intersex is a step up from last forums I was on, where they went to insisting that intersex folks had to be called 'it'. 

*I*'ll respect your right to have the views you do on the matter, though I'll keep to my own.




PlusThirtyOne said:


> i may have totally have a dirty mind because EVERY time i see this thread again and again, i read "gender *[SPACE]* fluids".
> Honestly, i think a discussion like that would be _a lot more interesting_ but this forum is rated PG13 sooooooo...


Could always make a discord chat to discuss that if you really badly wanted to.


----------



## PlusThirtyOne (Apr 6, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> Could always make a discord chat to discuss that if you really badly wanted to.


i suppose if i reeeeeeeally wanted to. But seeing as how i reeeeeeeally don't, i'll just have to keep making jokes about it here instead. :V


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> *G*ender identity is what people personally consider themselves, so your argument involving schizophrenia cannot be considered valid, as it misses the point. To which, in the end, to say that one cannot take into consideration those who have physically different and chemically different brains from either sex (which is what was previously argued to define one's gender), and to say that you cannot take into consideration those who're bipolar and so thus don't even know their own feelings on things all the time as they're constantly changing simply because they're not neurotypical honestly in the end is discriminatory. Discriminatory, not in the criminal sense of course, though still in play as the definition sense.
> 
> *W*ell, I suppose someone ignoring the point on intersex is a step up from last forums I was on, where they went to insisting that intersex folks had to be called 'it'.
> 
> ...


Discriminatory? I'm not talking about discriminating against the handicapped or so on. I'm just saying that acknowledging and even accepting the product of mental or emotional disorders as "valid" is...  I don't even have a word for it. Lunacy should suffice.
You're pointing at people with mental/ emotional disorders and telling me that what they think and feel is "valid" simply because they think or feel it. Hence that bit about the little green men, which you seem to have completely misunderstood. As far as physical brain differences...  Having a deformed (physically different) arm doesn't make anyone jump up and down, declaring the existence of a 3rd variety of human limb. It's an arm, somethings just wrong with it.
*°*Coming from someone who was diagnosed with Aspergers as a child.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> Discriminatory? I'm not talking about discriminating against the handicapped or so on. I'm just saying that acknowledging and even accepting the product of mental or emotional disorders as "valid" is...  I don't even have a word for it. Lunacy should suffice.
> You're pointing at people with mental/ emotional disorders and telling me that what they think and feel is "valid" simply because they think or feel it. Hence that bit about the little green men, which you seem to have completely misunderstood. As far as physical brain differences...  Having a deformed (physically different) arm doesn't make anyone jump up and down, declaring the existence of a 3rd variety of human limb. It's an arm, somethings just wrong with it.
> *°*Coming from someone who was diagnosed with Aspergers as a child.


*I *had rambled far too long on what was going to be my initial reply to this,.. please remind me to get a life, because obviously I can't remind myself to get one. Here's,.. a bit of it, with a good portion cut out. 

*A*s brains are neurological centers and massively different from an arm, unfortunately comparing that sort of thing makes the comparison lost on me, similar to when people compare the musical ability of a folk singer to a pop singer. 

*F*eel free to view me as being some kind of lunatic for viewing what people feel as being valid emotions, regardless of their mental state, btw. I don't take any offense from that. Emotions and feelings, regardless of the nature in what caused them, in my opinion are fully valid. It's just the actions people may take aren't valid, and there's some emotions which are unjust, but valid nonetheless.

*T*hough again, we're both free to have our own opinions on the subject. Mine will simply stay unmoving, and it's perfectly fine if yours doesn't change either. Discussion is more or less finding an understanding of another person's view point in the end. Honestly I'm genuinely curious on your views on other kinds of subjects-- mind if I send you a PM/DM/Conversation? Don't worry, I won't debate on those asides from ask for clarification on various stuff. Controversy's just something that really interests me, and people's opinions on those kinds of subjects, especially when it comes to a fellow aspie.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> *I *had rambled far too long on what was going to be my initial reply to this,.. please remind me to get a life, because obviously I can't remind myself to get one. Here's,.. a bit of it, with a good portion cut out.
> 
> *A*s brains are neurological centers and massively different from an arm, unfortunately comparing that sort of thing makes the comparison lost on me, similar to when people compare the musical ability of a folk singer to a pop singer.
> 
> ...


I was worried this might devolve into a full-blown altercation (so far as the internet allows xD). But yes, feel free.


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> -Women aren't paid less, they statistically *earn* less.


I feel like you oversimplified this far too much. I can agree that the pay gap is often used in a misleading way and that there is a marginal difference between men and women pay when in the same occupation; however, I cannot agree that the pay gap is just a statistical difference.

The gap is largely the fault of the different occupational paths that men and women go down. Though this can be the result of unequal opportunity for obtaining higher pay jobs due to subtle gender biases (the perception that men are more qualified and competent).
Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

It should also be mentioned that women often must be the caregivers for children - which can limit (women are much more likely to do part-time work) or end their careers. So this plays a role in the gap as well.



PoptartPresident said:


> For instance, today we started a new unit. Gender fluid/equality/feminism stuff.


What class is this for? o.o


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

Lcs said:


> I feel like you oversimplified this far too much. I can agree that the pay gap is often used in a misleading way and that there is a marginal difference between men and women pay when in the same occupation; however, I cannot agree that it's just a statistical difference.
> 
> The gap is largely the fault of the different occupational paths that men and women go down. Though this can be the result of unequal opportunity for obtaining higher pay jobs due to subtle gender biases (the perception that men are more qualified and competent).
> Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students
> ...


And a lot of that can honestly just be boiled down to differences between men and women. There are biological influences, which may have in turn affected what some people expect from either gender. Women are more likely to choose a career dealing with people, men with things and objects. Of course that itself can be viewed as an over-simplification I suppose, but the point stands.
-
And seriously, I need to know what class that is. It doesn't sound like it would be in highschool, but the thought of that being the case is mortifying.


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> And seriously, I need to know what class that is. It doesn't sound like it would be in highschool, but the thought of that being the case is mortifying.


It would make sense if the class was psychology or something.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 6, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> *I *had rambled far too long on what was going to be my initial reply to this,.. please remind me to get a life, because obviously I can't remind myself to get one. Here's,.. a bit of it, with a good portion cut out.
> 
> *A*s brains are neurological centers and massively different from an arm, unfortunately comparing that sort of thing makes the comparison lost on me, similar to when people compare the musical ability of a folk singer to a pop singer.
> 
> *F*eel free to view me as being some kind of lunatic for viewing what people feel as being valid emotions, regardless of their mental state, btw. I don't take any offense from that. Emotions and feelings, regardless of the nature in what caused them, in my opinion are fully valid. It's just the actions people may take aren't valid, and there's some emotions which are unjust, but valid nonetheless.


Just because you feel something it doesn't make it valid, nor does it mean anyone else have to adhere to them, nor validate those feelings. It's none of my business, or anyone elses business, what someone feel. You can't push your feelings as truth, nor can you push feelings as facts. 

There's science and facts, and there's opinions. Matter of fact can't become matter of opinion, and vice versa. And according to science and facts, genderfluid doesn't exist.



PoptartPresident said:


> Gender fluid topics and equality are apparently not taken seriously by my peers.
> For instance, today we started a new unit. Gender fluid/equality/feminism stuff.


The hell kind of school is this? Genderfluid topics aren't taken seriously because it's an argument based upon feelings/emotions. In other words, NOT an actual argument. It's not based on any actual science.


----------



## PoptartPresident (Apr 6, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> The hell kind of school is this? Genderfluid topics aren't taken seriously because it's an argument based upon feelings/emotions. In other words, NOT an actual argument. It's not based on any actual science.



Here in Kentucky, Regular English class is more of a "controversial topics" class. We mainly have lessons and teachings about dystopians,  misinterpretation of things, love, religion, etc. And now we have moved into this unit which is, according to my teacher, the most "exciting" unit because apparently this is the one where most of the students of not all, speak their minds


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 6, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> Just because you feel something it doesn't make it valid, nor does it mean anyone else have to adhere to them, nor validate those feelings. It's none of my business, or anyone elses business, what someone feel. You can't push your feelings as truth, nor can you push feelings as facts.
> 
> There's science and facts, and there's opinions. Matter of fact can't become matter of opinion, and vice versa. And according to science and facts, genderfluid doesn't exist.


*A*nd it's perfectly fine for that to be your belief. It's valid _feelings_, as the feelings exist. I've never claimed that others have to agree with such things. Not to mention I haven't distinguished what I've been saying as fact, as I mentioned it's but my own opinion based upon what I've seen, read, and whatever has been experienced. While you tend to take to purely the factual/logical route, I tend to take to involving more opinions into this matter from the start. I'm personally genderfluid, of which while science may say doesn't exist, it's perfectly fine for others to not address me as such. Science doesn't back any kind of religion-- which is a can of worms we really shouldn't delve into while in public as it's a touchy subject-- either, so in the end, the same course applies. As long as it's not shoved down one's throat, it should be alright for one to indulge in such things, while it doesn't hurt anyone. 

*S*orry if this comes off sounding like some sort of personal thing towards you somehow, btw! It's not. I actually really enjoy seeing you around the forums, all of your views on matters and what not. Which anyone who checked my like statistics knows that, tbh. Noting because of the observation that you're pretty fact based in the end, there's a slight chance it could be taken poorly. Apologies if it does come off as rude.


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 6, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> Here in Kentucky, Regular English class is more of a "controversial topics" class. We mainly have lessons and teachings about dystopians, misinterpretation of things, love, religion, etc. And now we have moved into this unit which is, according to my teacher, the most "exciting" unit because apparently this is the one where most of the students of not all, speak their minds


I'm surprised to hear that coming outta Kentucky tbh


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> Here in Kentucky, Regular English class is more of a "controversial topics" class. We mainly have lessons and teachings about dystopians,  misinterpretation of things, love, religion, etc. And now we have moved into this unit which is, according to my teacher, the most "exciting" unit because apparently this is the one where most of the students of not all, speak their minds


My first year of college, the most liberal instructor I've ever had was teaching English Composition I, and half of it was political. We wrote papers about the elections, the candidates, other political movements if we wanted to (BLM, etc) which is to say nothing of the actual discussions we had in class. He even has a chunk of the Berlin Wall and we talked about that whole situation.
-BTW-
Not liberal and I was probably his best student. I was more than a little surprised.


----------



## PoptartPresident (Apr 6, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> I'm surprised to hear that coming outta Kentucky tbh



I know Kentucky is often looked at by others as some countryish region full of "racist southerners and trump supporters"...but I guess I wouldn't know that. 
To be fair, I'm in an exceptional city where we seem pretty privileged and clean in comparison to some of the outskirts here...


----------



## PlusThirtyOne (Apr 6, 2017)




----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 6, 2017)

BittiBones said:


> *S*orry if this comes off sounding like some sort of personal thing towards you somehow, btw! It's not. I actually really enjoy seeing you around the forums, all of your views on matters and what not. Which anyone who checked my like statistics knows that, tbh. Noting because of the observation that you're pretty fact based in the end, there's a slight chance it could be taken poorly. Apologies if it does come off as rude.


Nah darlin', there's nothing wrong with having an opinion, no matter what that opinion might be. Though if that opinion contradicts facts/science and what is established as truth, it will be acknowledged as an opinion that is wrong. Though if we're talking pure opinion, it's 100% relative and subjective, and 100% dependant on the person who have it/see it. Opinions themselves are neither right, nor wrong, though some topics doesn't allow opinions due to the nature of the topic, and how much it's been researched. In psychology for instance we find new shit every year, due to the complexity and the infinite possibilities of the human mind. 

As for personal attacks/insults, when they actually do occur: I laugh at them. Some of those attacks are done with negative actual research(in essence, purely assumption-based, which also are wrong), making them even more humorous to read/observe.

Science doesn't indulge nor support any religion, because religion is theology and philosophy, two completely different and seperate topics than that of science. Science wants to know everything about everything, be it psychology, physics, gravity, quantum mechanics, you name it. Religion claims to have all the answers, while in reality, have none. 


PoptartPresident said:


> Here in Kentucky, Regular English class is more of a "controversial topics" class. We mainly have lessons and teachings about dystopians,  misinterpretation of things, love, religion, etc. And now we have moved into this unit which is, according to my teacher, the most "exciting" unit because apparently this is the one where most of the students of not all, speak their minds


Wait, what? Now I wanna be younger and in your class, just to see your teacher's reaction to me being a Trump-supporter.


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> Here in Kentucky, Regular English class is more of a "controversial topics" class. We mainly have lessons and teachings about dystopians,  misinterpretation of things, love, religion, etc. And now we have moved into this unit which is, according to my teacher, the most "exciting" unit because apparently this is the one where most of the students of not all, speak their minds


My english class was sort of like that as well, but it was much more awkward because of this one classmate who was a bit of a religious nut.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 6, 2017)

Lcs said:


> I feel like you oversimplified this far too much. I can agree that the pay gap is often used in a misleading way and that there is a marginal difference between men and women pay when in the same occupation; however, I cannot agree that the pay gap is just a statistical difference.
> 
> The gap is largely the fault of the different occupational paths that men and women go down. Though this can be the result of unequal opportunity for obtaining higher pay jobs due to subtle gender biases (the perception that men are more qualified and competent).
> Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students
> ...


It is worth noting, however, that even many conservative economists agree that about 5% of that gap is unaccounted for by certain career paths and unpaid childcare-based leave, and can most likely be attributed to unreported discriminatory practices and discrepancies in pay negotiations. This is a significant margin whatever way you slice it.

As to the earlier discussion of what "gender" and "sex" mean: The distinction in English since the inception of those words' uses has actually been that "gender" refers to markers which are assigned by language, such as _-o_/_-a_ in Romance languages, whereas "sex" refers to the physical biological status of a thing. To speak of gender is to speak of category; to speak of sex is to speak of physical state. Indeed, most languages assign grammatical gender to inanimate objects based on vague cultural concepts, and a number of languages use grammatical genders which bear no relationship to sex whatsoever, Swahili being a particularly interesting example.

Thus, genderfluidity is a fluidity of perception in identity, whereas intersex is an intermediate or non-binary state of the body.

Words!


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)




----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 6, 2017)

Kellan Meig'h said:


> So, to "Be A Man" didn't seem to hurt me one bit. Sure, I've never held a "Manly Job" like my father, a brick layer in an open hearth steel mill but I did okay.


Not everyone will or needs to be harmed for a behavior to be detrimental, mind. Humans are fucking weeds and will often manage to thrive in spite of pretty awful circumstances, to say nothing of more subtle issues like teaching children early on that they need to conform to certain expectations due to their sex. I'm very glad for you that you've turned out okay. For someone else, being expected to "be a man" and e.g. not cry when hurting, may have stunted their emotional growth or lead to them feeling that they couldn't trust the world or couldn't live up to its expectations.



Multoran said:


> And sorry (not sorry) to anyone who thinks they can be TRANSgender without making any effort to TRANSition.


This is incredibly disrespectful to trans* people and particularly to those who may not be able to physically transition due to financial or medical reasons. Non-transition trans* people exist and their identity is no less valid because they have chosen or been forced to not undergo fairly risky surgery.



PoptartPresident said:


> It just blows my mind how disrespectful they were today. Most of my classmates would mock the people in the film and would even make dark humor out of the films facts...


While this may not be the case for all of your classmates, do keep in mind that humor is one of the significant coping mechanisms humans use to deal with things that make us uncomfortable. Some of them may actually be trying to downplay or hide the emotional impact those facts had on them, because acknowledging negative facts can be pretty scary.



Mandragoras said:


> As to the earlier discussion of what "gender" and "sex" mean: The distinction in English since the inception of those words' uses has actually been that "gender" refers to markers which are assigned by language, such as _-o_/_-a_ in Romance languages, whereas "sex" refers to the physical biological status of a thing. To speak of gender is to speak of category; to speak of sex is to speak of physical state. Indeed, most languages assign grammatical gender to inanimate objects based on vague cultural concepts, and a number of languages use grammatical genders which bear no relationship to sex whatsoever, Swahili being a particularly interesting example.


You said this so much better than I did!

Even in Swedish, there are some remnants of grammatical gender (we often refer to clocks/watches as "she" in particular contexts), even though most of those remnants come in the form of our definite articles, which most native speakers don't really reflect over as more than "just the way things are" rather than related in any way to the male/female/neuter gender of objects.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


>


Christina Hoff Summers is the only feminist that anti-feminists cite for a reason. She's a notorious Heritage Foundation shill and pretty much discredited by anyone left of Newt Gingrich.


----------



## DrExodium (Apr 6, 2017)

AustinB said:


> I don't care what you call yourself. I don't agree with it, but whatever. As long as you're not hurting anyone or acting like a complete cunt about it (like, where you have to constantly correct people about them "misgendering" you) (or insulting "cis" people for oppressing you). I think most of them probably have gender disphoria. But as long as you're happy with yourself, go ahead and be yourself. I could care less about what gender you identify as. Don't be obnoxious about it though.


In my opinion I don´t care about them.
Some "genderfluid" people think "cis" people are scum when in reality they are kind of the scummy ones calling random people scum.
They the "genderfuid" people want the "respect" that they want that isn´t right when we the "cis" people give them normal respect  like to anyone they don´t accept that respect and they just want the respect that they never will have.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> This isn't Wheel of Fortune.
> You don't get to spin a wheel every morning and have whatever it lands on be your gender for the day.
> You are one or the other, and you remain as such unless you decide to transition. At which point you become transgender.
> And sorry (not sorry) to anyone who thinks they can be TRANSgender without making any effort to TRANSition.



People who feel they are a different gender to their physical sex have characteristically different brain structures, often resembling the sex they perceive themselves to be.
Hence transgender people exist, even if they have not had sex change surgery.
Causes of transsexuality - Wikipedia
To argue hat transgender people don't really exist unless they undergo surgery is to be a science denialist and it is a harmful suggestion because it forcefully advocates for surgeries that a patient might not actually need. For example physically intersex people shouldn't have to feel pressured to have a surgery to fit in with the sex-binary.

The dichotomous sex binary that you present is already known to be false. We know that not everybody has to be 'one gender or the other', because intersex people who have ambiguous genitals, or have genitals of the opposite sex to those their chromosomes and gonadal tissue would predict, exist.
Human biology even includes examples of some groups of humans where males can be born appearing to be girls, before growing a penis in puberty:
www.bbc.co.uk: The extraordinary case of the Guevedoces - BBC News



Multoran said:


> It may be viewed as being impolite, but respect is something entirely separate. You're not actually trans unless you make an effort to TRANSition.



It's not simply impolite; it's scientifically inaccurate. A transgender person is transgender whether or not they have surgery.
You would be able to predict which people are transgender from their brain scans with impressive accuracy.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 6, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> Christina Hoff Summers is the only feminist that anti-feminists cite for a reason. She's a notorious Heritage Foundation shill and pretty much discredited by anyone left of Newt Gingrich.


Christina Hoff Sommers actually knows her shit. I'll take her words(and actual research) over some random moron at a fucking College campus any day. She's cited often because she's a credible source of the research she's done.

The wage gap is a myth that has been debunked and outright fucked well over a thousand times already. Men and women are equal(with some exceptions, such as mandatory military service) when it comes to rights, liberties and freedoms.


Multoran said:


> It may be viewed as being impolite, but respect is something entirely separate. You're not actually trans unless you make an effort to TRANSition.


Respect is earned, not given. It's also a two-way road.


----------



## Simo (Apr 6, 2017)

As far as genderfluids go, I like the fluids produced by the male gender.

There is one in particular I am especially fond of...

oh...wait...forgot to read the first post....

but joking aside, I don't see why so many people give trans/genderfuid folks such a hard time, when there's so many other issues in life to deal with: Disease, war, just getting by, day to day. I figure, why not do something to make somebody feel better, give somebody a hand, who is feeling down, in a country where suicide is the 2nd leading cause of death among teens.

It seems a petty thing to be so bothered by what gender somebody thinks they are, and after over a decade in the furry community, I have not met anyone who is trans or genderfluid, who has been overly 'sensitive' about being misgendered. Not at cons, not in chat, not even outside the furry community, here in Baltimore, out and about the city. And even if I did, it'd still be no skin off my ass; I'd just get on with things, and shrug it off. I see tons more people who are _not_ trans or genderfluid getting their undies in a knot about this than anything, and complaining to high heavens than I do anyone else. I 'reckon they just must not have enough to complain about. Well, that's my take on the matter, anyway.


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

Simo said:


> It seems a petty thing to be so bothered by what gender somebody thinks they are, and after over a decade in the furry community, I have not met anyone who is trans or genderfluid, who has been overly 'sensitive' about being misgendered. Not at cons, not in chat, not even outside the furry community, here in Baltimore, out and about the city. And even if I did, it'd still be no skin off my ass; I'd just get on with things, and shrug it off. I see tons more people who are _not_ trans or genderfluid getting their undies in a knot about this than anything, and complaining to high heavens than I do anyone else.


So much this.

Outside of sensationalist Youtube videos, I have never seen anyone get angry at someone for misgendering them. I have, on the other hand, seen an almost endless number of posts here and elsewhere of people insulting transgenders and similar groups on the assumption that the Youtube videos were representative of everyone in those groups.


----------



## Tezzy Fur (Apr 6, 2017)

Simo said:


> As far as genderfluids go, I like the fluids produced by the male gender.
> 
> There is one in particular I am especially fond of...
> 
> ...



Oh Simo, you're so bad 

I'm pretty much with you on being very relaxed about trans and gender fluidity. In the last few years we've seen trans people become more visible in society, which I think is a great thing, and it's going to take a little while for everyone to adjust to using more appropriate pronouns and so forth. I think as long as your respectful then the odd mistake should be taken in good spirit. Personally I think our society should do as much as possible to educate kids in school about gender fluidity/transgenderism and they be protected by the law. I think these so called bathroom bills are nothing short of bullying and the product of a vicious mind.

Anyway, happy thoughts


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 6, 2017)

I think it's a bloody stupid concept like the rest of them



Simo said:


> As far as genderfluids go, I like the fluids produced by the male gender.
> 
> There is one in particular I am especially fond of...
> 
> ...



I don't agree with it and I refuse to follow it but if someone wants to do it then that's on them. What I _do _care about is when legislation is drafted that protects that kind of idiocy and limits free speech


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> Except your gender isn't based exclusively upon the structure of your brain. Especially considering you're born with a brain, it's not something you change at a later point. Like your gender, for instance, which makes you transgender. *Transition is a prerequisite to being trans*.



Well, you're a science denialist then. Did you even read the wikipedia article quoted to you, let alone the studies it refers to?

I don't think you have a very good understanding of the science you are rejecting if, when you're presented with the evidence that brain structure is predictive of gender identity, your response is 'But babies have brain, therefore you have to have surgery to be trans'.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

Fallowfox said:


> Well, you're a science denialist then. Did you even read the wikipedia article quoted to you, let alone the studies it refers to?
> 
> I don't think you have a very good understanding of the science you are rejecting if, when you're presented with the evidence that brain structure is predictive of gender identity, your response is 'But babies have brain, therefore you have to have surgery to be trans'.


You have completely misunderstood what I'm saying.


----------



## Zenoth (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> What I _do _care about is when legislation is drafted that protects that kind of idiocy and limits free speech


Out of pure curiosity, exactly how is free speech being limited in this context ? 
www.uscourts.gov: What Does Free Speech Mean?


----------



## sbm1990 (Apr 6, 2017)

I love genderfluid! I drink it everyday after I wake up in the morning! =D


----------



## pidge (Apr 6, 2017)

Don't you guys think its a little strange that the majority of "gender fluid" and non binary" people are young females from tumblr? Have you ever seen an old gender fluid?
Now I'm not saying they don't exist, I mean there's over 7 billion people on earth, I'm sure some of them actually do have a gender identity that isn't male or female, but the fact that there are so many young kids( particularly on tumblr) makes me wonder.


----------



## sbm1990 (Apr 6, 2017)

pidge said:


> Don't you guys think its a little strange that the majority of "gender fluid" and non binary" people are young females from tumblr? Have you ever seen an old gender fluid?
> Now I'm not saying they don't exist, I mean there's over 7 billion people on earth, I'm sure some of them actually do have a gender identity that isn't male or female, but the fact that there are so many young kids( particularly on tumblr) makes me wonder.




Its called a 2010s trend. =p Just a way for tools to hop on the social justice bandwagon.


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 6, 2017)

Zenoth said:


> Out of pure curiosity, exactly how is free speech being limited in this context ?
> www.uscourts.gov: What Does Free Speech Mean?



Canadian here and specifically mentioning bill C-16. The problem is that unlike racism where you're not allowed to say specific words, C-16 limits what you can say and express as it covers two things:

Gender expression which I don't care about as long as you're not wearing clothing that is overtly sexual or near almost exposing yourself. Modesty should be common sense
Gender _identity_ which is what is bothering me. While it's not specifically a hard thing, it can allow for people to bring you to the kangaroo court known as the Human Rights Tribunal by merely refusing to accommodate their specific needs based on "gender identity". Not to mention that it also makes it illegal to call someone otherwise, meaning that a man or woman can say they're the opposite and then force themselves into a shelter for the other gender.

Then there's the issue with locker rooms and such but I'll save that for later

What's worse is that, like motion-103, it paves way for harsher legislation that defends this inane bullshittery


pidge said:


> Don't you guys think its a little strange that the majority of "gender fluid" and non binary" people are young females from tumblr? Have you ever seen an old gender fluid?
> Now I'm not saying they don't exist, I mean there's over 7 billion people on earth, I'm sure some of them actually do have a gender identity that isn't male or female, but the fact that there are so many young kids( particularly on tumblr) makes me wonder.



There's a reason people call it trans*trender *


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

Zenoth said:


> Out of pure curiosity, exactly how is free speech being limited in this context ?
> www.uscourts.gov: What Does Free Speech Mean?


Things are coming to a point where someone's feelings are given priority over someone else's right to express themselves. More than that, we're seeing increasingly violent reactions to speech deemed as "offensive" and one need look no further than UC Berkeley to realise that.


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> Canadian here and specifically mentioning bill C-16. The problem is that unlike racism where you're not allowed to say specific words, C-16 limits what you can say and express as it covers two things:
> 
> Gender expression which I don't care about as long as you're not wearing clothing that is overtly sexual or near almost exposing yourself. Modesty should be common sense
> Gender _identity_ which is what is bothering me. While it's not specifically a hard thing, it can allow for people to bring you to the kangaroo court known as the Human Rights Tribunal by merely refusing to accommodate their specific needs based on "gender identity". Not to mention that it also makes it illegal to call someone otherwise, meaning that a man or woman can say they're the opposite and then force themselves into a shelter for the other gender.
> ...


Bill C-16 criminalises discrimination against people based on gender identity. Discrimination is bad, so this is a good thing, yes? Personally I think it would be uncool if, for example, someone were to deny service or employment to another person because they were transgender.

You're making something out of nothing with Motion 103. It's not even legislation, it's just an expression of opinion.


----------



## pidge (Apr 6, 2017)

Also, are there any gender fluid or non binary people on this thread? I wanna know why you identify as such. I often hear this people say that they sometimes "feel" like a boy or a girl. How do you "feel" like a man or a woman? And I'm not talking about trans people with gender dysphoria, I know what dysphoria is. I've heard some trans men and women say they aren't comfortable with their sex and wish to change it.

But non binary and "trans" kids without dysphoria often times say they "feel" like a certain gender(s).

Not trying to be rude or judgmental, I just wanna know.


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 6, 2017)

Lcs said:


> Bill C-16 criminalises discrimination against people based on gender identity. Discrimination is bad, so this is a good thing, yes? Personally I think it would be uncool if, for example, someone were to deny service or employment to another person because they were transgender.
> 
> You're making something out of nothing with Motion 103. It's not even legislation, it's just an expression of opinion.



I don't care, because that's a business. If they want to lose customers then let them. I see no reason to penalize because something thinks they're something else and they refuse service based on that. Kind of the whole thing with the bakery and gay couples. However, I can agree with stopping discrimination for hiring to an extent as there are times when complete mental health are required such as the army

As I've stated multiple times with motion 103 it's the fact they say "islamophobia" with no definition of it. It opens the door for legislation to be drafted using such vague terms as that


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 6, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> Christina Hoff Sommers actually knows her shit. I'll take her words(and actual research) over some random moron at a fucking College campus any day. She's cited often because she's a credible source of the research she's done.
> 
> The wage gap is a myth that has been debunked and outright fucked well over a thousand times already. Men and women are equal(with some exceptions, such as mandatory military service) when it comes to rights, liberties and freedoms.


I would suggest reading the Congressional Budget Office's reports on the issue, or really any economist not on the payroll of an organisation which thinks welfare is a Satanic affront to the free market. The notion that the wage gap has been "debunked" rather than misrepresented and misunderstood is in itself a myth perpetuated by the right in order to shut down discussion of things like paid family leave and allowing employees to discuss how much they make with one another without penalty—which not only fucks over women, mind you, but a large number of men as well, married and single, with and without children. You are buying into an agenda which seeks to disadvantage employees to the short-term benefit of corporate management, not some flawless rejection of the "feminist agenda," whatever the fuck that even is. And even if it is hokum, what's wrong with giving people paid leave if their kid is sick, or putting laws in place to ensure that people doing the same job are paid the same salary? How is this evil and wrong?

As for whether men and women are equal, well fucking duh. The issue is not the inferiority of one sex or the other, but rather whether one sex is inordinately favoured within modern Western society, specifically within the United States, regardless of ostensible legal protections. And you know what the answer is? Yes! And even if we talk about legal protections and rights, it rapidly becomes clear that the laws here are, at best, based on very dated, frequently bullshit assumptions about what a woman's role is within society. Even laws which benefit women are frequently based on moronic sexist shit; if you know anything about child custody law, this is blindingly self-evident.

Women have the shorter end of the stick. It's fine to disagree about how to fix that issue—certainly there are neoliberal, right-libertarian and conservative feminists in existence, with whom I would not agree on much—but pretending it's not the case just comes off as sticking your head in the sand, and to what end? Are you really afraid that men are being oppressed? Really really?


----------



## sbm1990 (Apr 6, 2017)

Discrimination from hiring certainly does exist! It often happens to white men specifically because they dont fall under that certain demographic a company is looking to hire in order to look like their welcoming diversity. Its quite sad. I guess those god damn white cid-gendered scumbags forgot to check their privledge before looking for employment.


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 6, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> Women have the shorter end of the stick. It's fine to disagree about how to fix that issue—certainly there are neoliberal, right-libertarian and conservative feminists in existence, with whom I would not agree on much—but pretending it's not the case just comes off as sticking your head in the sand, and to what end? Are you really afraid that men are being oppressed? Really really?



Their short end isn't even that short in any modern country. There are failsafes in place to give them equal footing and, in many places like education, are actually given a giant advantage compared to men


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> I don't care, because that's a business. If they want to lose customers then let them. I see no reason to penalize because something thinks they're something else and they refuse service based on that. Kind of the whole thing with the bakery and gay couples. However, I can agree with stopping discrimination for hiring to an extent as there are times when complete mental health are required such as the army
> 
> As I've stated multiple times with motion 103 it's the fact they say "islamophobia" with no definition of it. It opens the door for legislation to be drafted using such vague terms as that


In most (all?) western countries, it's considered a crime to deny service based off race, colour, religion, disability and in some locations, sexuality. So I don't see why discrimination based off gender identity should be any different.

The word islamophobia - which isn't even a bad word to use in the first place - could be used in legislation regardless of the motion.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> Their short end isn't even that short in any modern country. There are failsafes in place to give them equal footing and, in many places like education, are actually given a giant advantage compared to men


"Given a giant advantage compared to men"? What planet do you live on?

And yeah, pretty much any sane country's treatment of women is going to look good compared to Saudi Arabia. Saying the gap is comparatively small doesn't mean it's insignificant; it's just that in some places the difference is the fucking Marianas Trench.

Oh, and for the record:


pidge said:


> Also, are there any gender fluid or non binary people on this thread? I wanna know why you identify as such. I often hear this people say that they sometimes "feel" like a boy or a girl. How do you "feel" like a man or a woman? And I'm not talking about trans people with gender dysphoria, I know what dysphoria is. I've heard some trans men and women say they aren't comfortable with their sex and wish to change it.
> 
> But non binary and "trans" kids without dysphoria often times say they "feel" like a certain gender(s).
> 
> Not trying to be rude or judgmental, I just wanna know.


I've honestly struggled with low-grade dysphoria for a long time. What kind is hard to explain. I don't think I'm just a straight woman in a male body, nor am I particularly certain I'm just a weird gay dude. I stick with male pronouns because it's convenient and asking people to use "they" feels cumbersome at this juncture.

So. Ask me anything, motherfuckers.


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 6, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> "Given a giant advantage compared to men"? What planet do you live on?
> 
> And yeah, pretty much any sane country's treatment of women is going to look good compared to Saudi Arabia. Saying the gap is comparatively small doesn't mean it's insignificant; it's just that in some places the difference is the fucking Marianas Trench.



It's tiny so I see no reason to really see it as significant

There are grants specifically for being a woman
There are colleges who will largely be more apt to hire women due to government incentives

What do men get? Nothing special


Lcs said:


> In most (all?) western countries, it's considered a crime to deny service based off race, colour, religion, disability and in some locations, sexuality. So I don't see why discrimination based off gender identity should be any different.
> 
> The word islamophobia - which isn't even a bad word to use in the first place - could be used in legislation regardless of the motion.


And I think that's stupid. If a company wants to lose business then let them

Problem is that this is the first thing to be recognized by politicians with an undefined term. It only takes something a small as that to set a precedent


----------



## Zenoth (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> Things are coming to a point where someone's feelings are given priority over someone else's right to express themselves. More than that, we're seeing increasingly violent reactions to speech deemed as "offensive" and one need look no further than UC


Um, Free speech is in place mostly to protect us from retribution from the government for speaking ill of it.  People are still free to express their opinions, for better or worse. But, free speech is not a magical shield to protect one from the possible consequences of said expression from their peers. Super simplified example; you are free to say the sky is purple, and on the same token people are free to call that stupid.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> It's tiny so I see no reason to really see it as significant
> 
> There are grants specifically for being a woman
> There are colleges who will largely be more apt to hire women due to government incentives
> ...


There are grants only available to women for the same reason there are grants only available to black folks: Historically speaking, these groups have been massively fucked over on a systematic level. They're not grants *for* being a woman, they're grants for being unusually smart and talented which are only offered to women, just as there are so many more which are offered to literally everyone who might apply and meets the criteria of excellence. That's how scholarships work. Hell, there are endowments for just about *any* group, and plenty based on shit that has nothing to do with a systematic disadvantage.


Zenoth said:


> Um, Free speech is in place mostly to protect us from retribution from the government for speaking ill of it.  People are still free to express their opinions, for better or worse. But, free speech is not a magical shield to protect one from the possible consequences of said expression from their peers. Super simplified example; you are free to say the sky is purple, and on the same token people are free to call that stupid.


Preach, brother!


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> And I think that's stupid. If a company wants to lose business then let them


:/


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 6, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> There are grants only available to women for the same reason there are grants only available to black folks: Historically speaking, these groups have been massively fucked over on a systematic level. They're not grants *for* being a woman, they're grants for being unusually smart and talented which are only offered to women, just as there are so many more which are offered to literally everyone who might apply and meets the criteria of excellence. That's how scholarships work. Hell, there are endowments for just about *any* group, and plenty based on shit that has nothing to do with a systematic disadvantage.
> 
> Preach, brother!



We've elimated most forms of discrimination so much that exist now are usually only in backwater villages/towns and devout religious communities

No they're literally grants for having a vagina. They specifically say shit like "are you a woman? Then you qualify for this grant!" However there _are _grants for women who are intelligent and gifted, but there's also the same for men so that's moot because it doesn't specifically say male or female



Lcs said:


> :/


It's called capitalism


----------



## PoptartPresident (Apr 6, 2017)

Lcs said:


> Wait, what? Now I wanna be younger and in your class, just to see your teacher's reaction to me being a Trump-supporter.



I think she would be chill about it because she's smart enough to respect everyone's opinions. But a looooot of my classmates would have an issue with that.


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

PoptartPresident said:


> I think she would be chill about it because she's smart enough to respect everyone's opinions. But a looooot of my classmates would have an issue with that.


Wait wut, I never wrote that message you quoted.

I'm no Trump supporter, lol


----------



## Sagt (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> It's called capitalism


No it's not, that's called discrimination.

Do you agree that, for example, one should not be allowed to deny service to someone because the customer is black or is this only for gender identity?


----------



## pidge (Apr 6, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> "Given a giant advantage compared to men"? What planet do you live on?
> 
> And yeah, pretty much any sane country's treatment of women is going to look good compared to Saudi Arabia. Saying the gap is comparatively small doesn't mean it's insignificant; it's just that in some places the difference is the fucking Marianas Trench.
> 
> ...


Why don't you think your just a gay dude? What is it that separates you from other men?


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 6, 2017)

pidge said:


> Why don't you think your just a gay dude? What is it that separates you from other men?


Thaaaaaat's super complicated, but I'll put it like this: Imagine, if you will, feeling much of the time like your body is an article of clothing that doesn't suit you, that doesn't quite fit perfectly correctly. It's not bad, you don't necessarily feel ugly or actively uncomfortable, but you don't like what people assume about you from it, you don't like how the cut looks in the mirror, you feel like it would better suit someone else's style, someone else's personality. But it's yours. You wake up in it every day, and that's who people see. That's what you see.

That's what I mean when I say I don't feel entirely male. That's what it feels like.


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 6, 2017)

Lcs said:


> No it's not, that's called discrimination.
> 
> Do you agree that, for example, one should not be allowed to deny service to someone because the customer is black or is this only for gender identity?


If they want to then yes, let them. They're a terrible company and won't prosper but it's on them to do it.

I see no problem denying service or refusing to accommodate needs based on gender identity specifically


----------



## pidge (Apr 6, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> Thaaaaaat's super complicated, but I'll put it like this: Imagine, if you will, feeling much of the time like your body is an article of clothing that doesn't suit you, that doesn't quite fit perfectly correctly. It's not bad, you don't necessarily feel ugly or actively uncomfortable, but you don't like what people assume about you from it, you don't like how the cut looks in the mirror, you feel like it would better suit someone else's style, someone else's personality. But it's yours. You wake up in it every day, and that's who people see. That's what you see.
> 
> That's what I mean when I say I don't feel entirely male. That's what it feels like.


Maybe you have just a little bit of gender dysphoria, but not enough to want to transition into a woman?

Do you think you being attracted to men(or at least I assume you are) has something to do with it? I hear other lgbt people say that gender identity and sexuality aren't related, but I'm not so sure about that. I mean, gender non-conforming people are usually gay, often with fraternal twins, twins who are biologically the same person, if one is trans, the other is gay, and a lot of people label themselves as gay and non binary.

I know being trans and gay are different, but I think there could be a connection.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> If they want to then yes, let them. They're a terrible company and won't prosper but it's on them to do it.
> 
> I see no problem denying service or refusing to accommodate needs based on gender identity specifically


Can't agree with this.  Not really.
Denying service based on someone's made up gender or some weird backwards view of their gender or whatever the hell is still as much a no no (I think) as doing so based on race.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 6, 2017)

pidge said:


> Maybe you have just a little bit of gender dysphoria, but not enough to want to transition into a woman?
> 
> Do you think you being attracted to men(or at least I assume you are) has something to do with it? I hear other lgbt people say that gender identity and sexuality aren't related, but I'm not so sure about that. I mean, gender non-conforming people are usually gay, often with fraternal twins, twins who are biologically the same person, if one is trans, the other is gay, and a lot of people label themselves as gay and non binary.
> 
> I know being trans and gay are different, but I think there could be a connection.


To the first question: Well, yes, but not necessarily in a purely feminine direction. Mostly it's just an absence of attachment to masculinity. I don't mind presenting in a masculine fashion, but being androgynous or neutral is distinctly preferable.

As for the second: I have no doubt that it's made me reflect more on the matter than if I were arrow-straight. Being queer has made me think about a lot of things, in the same way that being half-Jewish, having a younger sister, being poor and being clinically depressed have made me think about a lot of things.

It's worth keeping in mind, though, that the reverse is arguably true: Most transfolk identify as bisexual in some capacity, and I think it's rooted as much in realising that gender is such a flimsy thing from the inside as anything else. One becomes open to a great deal from that angle.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

Zenoth said:


> Um, Free speech is in place mostly to protect us from retribution from the government for speaking ill of it.  People are still free to express their opinions, for better or worse. But, free speech is not a magical shield to protect one from the possible consequences of said expression from their peers. Super simplified example; you are free to say the sky is purple, and on the same token people are free to call that stupid.


Except you've missed the point.
You can't write off violence and vandalism as a simple consequence of expressing a divergent opinion.  You can't justify people's education and livelihood being put at risk as a consequence of expressing a divergent opinion.
Especially when such practices are starting to become a matter of law.
-
But even that aside, silencing voices of dissent is never a good thing, no matter who the hell does it. Its totalitarian. And more than that, when you force that shit down underground, it festers and it spreads like wild fire. You have to allow people to speak openly, and give them an opportunity to express themselves. I'm not talking about protection from social back lash, let them feel it I say, in all its glory. But by forcefully suppressing voices of dissent, all anyone will ever get out of it is something deep, dark, and nasty. 



Because he does a much better job articulating such things than I can whilst multitasking.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

I'd like to just go ahead and cut myself out of this debate.  I don't agree with half of what's being asserted here, but hey. I'm not god,  and I don't know everything there is to know about everything. Whatever gender you "identify" as doesn't really affect me or the way I have to go about living my life. If ever it gets to that point, I might take issue, but we're not there yet.
-Peace


----------



## KimberVaile (Apr 6, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> If they want to then yes, let them. They're a terrible company and won't prosper but it's on them to do it.
> 
> I see no problem denying service or refusing to accommodate needs based on gender identity specifically



I agree and disagree with a couple points made here.

Don't entirely agree, though through a different premise. I'm aware the original premise of the argument was intended more towards an underlying belief in unrestrained Freedom of Speech. Anyways, unregulated capitalism is rarely, if ever beneficial, and the idea behind this particular issue falls into regulated capitalism vs a more objectivist form of capitalism, imo. There is historical precedent that highlights how doomed and fruitless unregulated capitalism is without some sort of broad restrictions pertaining to monopolies, policy and standards. The Tea pot dome scandal, Credit Mobilier scandal and even things as recent as the United States vs Microsoft Lawsuit from a good example of that. That's not even delving into worker rights and the pitiful conditions factory and coal miners dealt with not all too long ago. Further still, The Great Migration happened primarily because prejudice became rooted in American culture, and it affected job opportunities and wages irregardless of the person's qualifications. The Great Migration only ended rather recently, having finally tapered off in the 1970's. 

With that said, there's merit in the argument that social culture has evolved way past the backwards traditionalism of the "Greatest generation" way of thinking. Generally speaking, especially so with today's PC culture, it's hard to imagine anybody would ever revert to being outright racist.
Although, corporate and or/ business culture is still culture, and I believe it can very easily become hateful thanks in no part to elements of peer pressure and groupthink. You get a majority of anybody who is like minded and it's not unlikely you'll start to seeing the office culture reflect that in subtle ways. 
The whole saying of "give a man an inch, he'll take a mile" applies here. If you set the seed for racist, sexist, whatever-ist precedents, it gives it a chance to evolve into something a little more hateful than just refusing service to somebody. 



Sergei Sóhomo said:


> We've elimated most forms of discrimination so much that exist now are usually only in backwater villages/towns and devout religious communities
> 
> No they're literally grants for having a vagina. They specifically say shit like "are you a woman? Then you qualify for this grant!" However there _are _grants for women who are intelligent and gifted, but there's also the same for men so that's moot because it doesn't specifically say male or female
> 
> ...




Is a fair point. It's also easy to go extreme in the other direction, modern feminism and racial quota laws in particular are pretty glaring examples. Hiring should be based on merit and with complete disregard for your skin color, gender or sexuality. Otherwise, it's still racism to prefer a particular member of a race or gender over the other for job opportunities. In fact, it almost feels like in the current social culture you need to apologize for being a white guy and acknowledge the shitty things whites did in the past that had nothing to do with you. Yet, I could mention I'm a fag to a job I am applying to and I'd probably get bumped significantly on the hiring list because of it, which is absolutely retarded.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> You have completely misunderstood what I'm saying.



Okay then. Let's clear things up with some simple yes/no questions, so that I can't possibly get the wrong idea, okay?

Do you recognise that transgender people are transgender, whether or not they have had transsexual surgery?

Do you recognise that  presenting risky surgery as the only means for these folk to be acknowledged is immoral?



Multoran said:


> Things are coming to a point where someone's feelings are given priority over someone else's right to express themselves. More than that, we're seeing increasingly violent reactions to speech deemed as "offensive" and one need look no further than UC Berkeley to realise that.



I didn't realise people were still defending Milo Yiannopoulos after his comments advocating sex with children came to light.

I thought that even the alt right had decided to quietly and conveniently forget about him.




Sergei Sóhomo said:


> We've elimated most forms of discrimination so much that exist now are usually only in backwater villages/towns and devout religious communities
> 
> No they're literally grants for having a vagina. They specifically say shit like "are you a woman? Then you qualify for this grant!" However there _are _grants for women who are intelligent and gifted, but there's also the same for men so that's moot because it doesn't specifically say male or female
> 
> ...




I really don't think western nations have successfully eliminated most forms of discrimination. There are still many US states in which it's legal to fire somebody for being homosexual or transgender, for example, and companies with discriminatory agendas like Chick-fil-A still donate large sums to 'charities' that aim to keep things more or less this way. 

In my own country, England, I am forbidden from being married in any church that belongs to the state denomination, by law. ._. 

Obviously we've made a huge amount of progress challenging prejudice and discrimination in the west since the mid-twentieth century, but describing it as having been 'eliminated' is naive.


----------



## Multoran (Apr 6, 2017)

Fallowfox said:


> Okay then. Let's clear things up with some simple yes/no questions, so that I can't possibly get the wrong idea, okay?
> 
> Do you recognise that transgender people are transgender, whether or not they have had transsexual surgery?
> 
> Do you recognise that  presenting risky surgery as the only means for these folk to be acknowledged is immoral?


This will be my final reply here, as I have already made an effort to "cut myself out of this debate." Just so we're clear.
I never said surgery, so don't put words in my mouth. Blaire White, for example, never had any such surgery. I haven't the slightest issue with referring to her *as* a her. 



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/690662831725752321However slightly unrelated, it may also be worth noting that I find trans men attractive. Sexually speaking.
Now, that's as much an answer as you'll get from me. I wish you the best as far as this thread is concerned.
-Peace.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 6, 2017)

Multoran said:


> This will be my final reply here, as I have already made an effort to "cut myself out of this debate." Just so we're clear.
> I never said surgery, so don't put words in my mouth. Blaire White, for example, never had any such surgery. I haven't the slightest issue with referring to her *as* a her.
> 
> 
> ...



I think other users will see that you avoided giving a straight answer and gave the impression that you will still only acknowledge transgender people if they have transitioned, just not necessarily by surgical means. 
I mean, I guess _some _kudos is awarded to you for not wanting to pressure people into surgery, but you still appear to deny the scientific studies which showed that your comments 'you have to transition to be trans' were wrong.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 6, 2017)

pidge said:


> Don't you guys think its a little strange that the majority of "gender fluid" and non binary" people are young females from tumblr? Have you ever seen an old gender fluid?


I don't know what would be old enough to qualify as "old" for you in this context, nor do I know its exact age, but I do in fact know an individual whose gender identity lies outside the standard gender binary (neuter, in its case) and it is older than I, I believe by a fair margin. 

But there is also the very obvious argument that as ideas get spread wider, people have more of a chance to recognize themselves in concepts. If being trans* is something that is practically never mentioned, only the most dysphoric are likely to end up calling their dysphoria anything related to being born the wrong sex. The rest may still feel out of place and/or miserable, but they may go their entire lives without realizing _what_ is wrong, because never having heard of it the notion that their gender doesn't match their birth sex doesn't occur to them. Similar would apply to non-binary gender identities; it doesn't make an individual's experience any less valid that they didn't have words for it until hearing those words from someone else made everything fall into place.



Mandragoras said:


> Women have the shorter end of the stick. It's fine to disagree about how to fix that issue—certainly there are neoliberal, right-libertarian and conservative feminists in existence, with whom I would not agree on much—but pretending it's not the case just comes off as sticking your head in the sand, and to what end? Are you really afraid that men are being oppressed? Really really?


I don't think "oppressed" necessarily has a place in gender equality debates in the western world. There are areas where either sex is at a disadvantage, for whatever reason. The only short stick I've ever felt I've been handed in the sex/gender department was by biology, in that human sexual dimorphism makes me predisposed to have difficulty reaching the top shelf, and human reproductive biology insists on inflicting a disruptive reproductive cycle on me every few months that I honestly hate. Vis-a-vis my government, I'm not subject to military draft, and can't be frisked by an opposite-sex police officer should I be detained. Socially, I am vastly more likely than a man to be believed should I make allegations of rape, it's seen as at _least_ semi-acceptable for me to hit a male partner, I generally receive a "gentler" address from people, and I'm likely to pay for significantly less than 50% of meals on dates.

This is _my_ personal experience. It won't be the same for everyone, and I'm not saying other people's experiences are any less valid. But I _can_ say that I experience a lot of feminist rhetoric as very antagonistic and hostile towards men, and I don't envy young men growing up in today's social climate, which contains an uncomfortable amount of "if you are a man you should feel bad." No one deserves to be guilt-tripped for how they were born. It's not like they had any choice in the matter.


----------



## PoptartPresident (Apr 7, 2017)

Lcs said:


> Wait wut, I never wrote that message you quoted.
> 
> I'm no Trump supporter, lol



gaaah I hate how the quote system works
My bad


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 7, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> I don't think "oppressed" necessarily has a place in gender equality debates in the western world. There are areas where either sex is at a disadvantage, for whatever reason. The only short stick I've ever felt I've been handed in the sex/gender department was by biology, in that human sexual dimorphism makes me predisposed to have difficulty reaching the top shelf, and human reproductive biology insists on inflicting a disruptive reproductive cycle on me every few months that I honestly hate. Vis-a-vis my government, I'm not subject to military draft, and can't be frisked by an opposite-sex police officer should I be detained. Socially, I am vastly more likely than a man to be believed should I make allegations of rape, it's seen as at _least_ semi-acceptable for me to hit a male partner, I generally receive a "gentler" address from people, and I'm likely to pay for significantly less than 50% of meals on dates.
> 
> This is _my_ personal experience. It won't be the same for everyone, and I'm not saying other people's experiences are any less valid. But I _can_ say that I experience a lot of feminist rhetoric as very antagonistic and hostile towards men, and I don't envy young men growing up in today's social climate, which contains an uncomfortable amount of "if you are a man you should feel bad." No one deserves to be guilt-tripped for how they were born. It's not like they had any choice in the matter.


I was more making a point about the rhetoric coming from the "other side" of this issue in the United States in particular. Anti-feminists tend to frame things like reinforcing anti-discrimination laws and putting paid family leave in place like they have in much of Europe as if it would bring about some great mass disenfranchisement of men, and I'm simply asking whether anyone really believes that, and if so, what evidence they have for it beyond some hurt feelings caused by certain young angry feminists being assholes. And in all candour, much of that antagonism—as with jokes from irritable non-white people about "white genocide" which are really about making fun of the myth itself—is a reaction to that sort of hyperbolic reasoning, as a sort of defence mechanism.

That being said, we probably have different viewpoints based on where we are coming from in a very literal sense. Last I checked, you're from... I believe you said Norway? Apologies if I am mistaken. But the Scandinavian region as a whole (and Finland) tends to be a lot better about legal protections and issues like reproductive rights than this country does, and while culturally far from some magical utopia is more practically egalitarian when it comes to gender and sexuality. Here, basic access to reproductive health services in more conservative areas are under constant threat, and anti-bullying provisions with respect to gender identity and presentation in schools are being rolled back with aplomb.


----------



## Kezi Avdiivka (Apr 7, 2017)

Pic Related.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 7, 2017)

As a transgender individual myself, I find the entire subject a very finicky one. I don't have an issue for people who find themselves floating somewhere in the middle. I don't care how you feel, what you want to do with it. I will never call you a male when you  feel you are not or vice versa. Because I'm transgender I can personally understand and sympathize with the issue. However, I think, as being trans has become a trend where people think you just wake up and feel like you want to be special, gender fluidity is much the same. I also think people put way too much merit in having to have some kind of 'special' label. Because of this, they start to think they NEED to be special, and turn to gender fluidity because it's the easiest thing to try to identify with. Everyone has a 'tomboyish' side or a 'feminine' side or likes something that falls into one stereotype or the other.

Because it's something everyone can relate to on a base level, like how we explore sexuality and its meaning, easily-influenced people (generally a younger, more freshly-introduced-to-liberal-ideas audience) will cling to the term to try to feel included or special, and later on end up falling into unhealthy habits like relying on 'nounself' pronouns to 'cope' with this feeling of aimlessness.

But that's just how I view it. Again, I won't really attack someone for being a certain way or the other, but it's pretty easy to identify the edgy 14 year olds who use it for fun compared to the people it legitimately affects.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 7, 2017)

estiniens said:


> As a transgender individual myself, I find the entire subject a very finicky one. I don't have an issue for people who find themselves floating somewhere in the middle. I don't care how you feel, what you want to do with it. I will never call you a male when you  feel you are not or vice versa. Because I'm transgender I can personally understand and sympathize with the issue. However, I think, as being trans has become a trend where people think you just wake up and feel like you want to be special, gender fluidity is much the same. I also think people put way too much merit in having to have some kind of 'special' label. Because of this, they start to think they NEED to be special, and turn to gender fluidity because it's the easiest thing to try to identify with. Everyone has a 'tomboyish' side or a 'feminine' side or likes something that falls into one stereotype or the other.
> 
> Because it's something everyone can relate to on a base level, like how we explore sexuality and its meaning, easily-influenced people (generally a younger, more freshly-introduced-to-liberal-ideas audience) will cling to the term to try to feel included or special, and later on end up falling into unhealthy habits like relying on 'nounself' pronouns to 'cope' with this feeling of aimlessness.
> 
> But that's just how I view it. Again, I won't really attack someone for being a certain way or the other, but it's pretty easy to identify the edgy 14 year olds who use it for fun compared to the people it legitimately affects.


To be fair to those people, it wouldn't surprise me if the majority of them were dealing with legitimate questions about their gender identity and place in life in a somewhat unproductive and potentially unhealthy fashion, and that age and experience will ultimately help most of them understand what they're feeling, whether they're trans* or non-binary or nonconforming or just a cisgender person going through a healthy period of questioning or ambiguity. But all told, it's probably best to just let the flakier folks be, so long as they aren't hurting anyone or in serious danger from what they're doing.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 7, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> But all told, it's probably best to just let the flakier folks be, so long as they aren't hurting anyone or in serious danger from what they're doing.



Oh absolutely, I agree that for the most part they're just trying to figure themselves out. The only real and demeaning issues comes when they start attacking everybody and making our community look horrendous as a result - but I cannot stop or speak for those people, so my general rule of thumb with these kinds of things is "might as well clean up after their mistakes, 'cause they're sure not."  I personally know multiple adults who are genderfluid but feel uncomfortable expressing that because they don't want to be lumped in with the 'bad crowd', so there's some kind of impact happening on account of them. But again, it's nothing I can stop, so I don't see the point in openly expressing an opinion telling them you don't support them and it's stupid just as much as I don't see the point in giving yourself labels you don't truly believe in for the sake of being cool.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 7, 2017)

estiniens said:


> Oh absolutely, I agree that for the most part they're just trying to figure themselves out. The only real and demeaning issues comes when they start attacking everybody and making our community look horrendous as a result - but I cannot stop or speak for those people, so my general rule of thumb with these kinds of things is "might as well clean up after their mistakes, 'cause they're sure not."  I personally know multiple adults who are genderfluid but feel uncomfortable expressing that because they don't want to be lumped in with the 'bad crowd', so there's some kind of impact happening on account of them. But again, it's nothing I can stop, so I don't see the point in openly expressing an opinion telling them you don't support them and it's stupid just as much as I don't see the point in giving yourself labels you don't truly believe in for the sake of being cool.


Yeah, it's a tricky business, being considerate while drawing clear lines as to what you will and will not accept.

In any case, I feel bad for your friends. I hope they can feel comfortable being open about these things without fearing being attacked by people who misunderstand them moving forward. :\


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 7, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> Anti-feminists tend to frame things like reinforcing anti-discrimination laws and putting paid family leave in place like they have in much of Europe as if it would bring about some great mass disenfranchisement of men, and I'm simply asking whether anyone really believes that, and if so, what evidence they have for it beyond some hurt feelings caused by certain young angry feminists being assholes.


 You appear to have been exposed to a vastly different set of anti-feminism than I have. I've quite honestly no love for feminism as a movement, personally, but as long as you're not trying to trample on the rights and freedoms of other people, or going out of your way to be emotionally abusive to them, I'm not going to tell you you can't feel differently about it. If you're interested in seeing relatively level-headed, sourced criticism of feminism and some of the policies it's spearheaded I can recommend checking out onemv on Tumblr. He can get a bit abrasive about a few of his dearest issues, but overall, he at least can point at specific research, articles, and policies supporting his position.



Mandragoras said:


> That being said, we probably have different viewpoints based on where we are coming from in a very literal sense. Last I checked, you're from... I believe you said Norway? Apologies if I am mistaken. But the Scandinavian region as a whole (and Finland) tends to be a lot better about legal protections and issues like reproductive rights than this country does, and while culturally far from some magical utopia is more practically egalitarian when it comes to gender and sexuality. Here, basic access to reproductive health services in more conservative areas are under constant threat, and anti-bullying provisions with respect to gender identity and presentation in schools are being rolled back with aplomb.


Sweden, but close enough. I've picked up a thing or two about US issues from hanging around online, but my underlying feelings on matters are definitely colored by the culture I grew up in. Ultimately, I tend to lean towards live-and-let-live when possible, and accomodating others when it would not greatly put me out to do so. It seems in the best interest of coexistence to me.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 7, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> You appear to have been exposed to a vastly different set of anti-feminism than I have. I've quite honestly no love for feminism as a movement, personally, but as long as you're not trying to trample on the rights and freedoms of other people, or going out of your way to be emotionally abusive to them, I'm not going to tell you you can't feel differently about it. If you're interested in seeing relatively level-headed, sourced criticism of feminism and some of the policies it's spearheaded I can recommend checking out onemv on Tumblr. He can get a bit abrasive about a few of his dearest issues, but overall, he at least can point at specific research, articles, and policies supporting his position.


He raises some interesting points, from what I'm gathering, but he ignores the answers that a lot of intersectional feminists provide to those questions because of his own biases or because the answers don't suit his worldview or appeal to his personal problems. This is an issue I encounter a lot with anti-feminists who actually have decent points, actually.

That said, most of my interactions with anti-feminism are with the sort of people who get so mad about some mouthy chick pointing out sexist clichés in video games that they send her rape and murder threats, which isn't exactly reasoned. It's just, y'know, misogyny.


quoting_mungo said:


> Sweden, but close enough. I've picked up a thing or two about US issues from hanging around online, but my underlying feelings on matters are definitely colored by the culture I grew up in. Ultimately, I tend to lean towards live-and-let-live when possible, and accomodating others when it would not greatly put me out to do so. It seems in the best interest of coexistence to me.


I mean, so do I, at the end of the day. I just see too much shit happening over here that's hurting people which some folks just want to turn a blind eye to or say the opposite is happening because it doesn't reaffirm the status quo which has so far worked for them or because they actively want a less equal society for whatever ideological reasons. Everyone ultimately deserves the right to live a happy life free from oppression and systematic disadvantage.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 7, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> He raises some interesting points, from what I'm gathering, but he ignores the answers that a lot of intersectional feminists provide to those questions because of his own biases or because the answers don't suit his worldview or appeal to his personal problems. This is an issue I encounter a lot with anti-feminists who actually have decent points, actually.


I can't offhand recall anyone actually offering him much in the way of answers, to be honest, and from where I'm standing any answer to men's problems that boils down to "well men have it bad because of sexism against women" kind of comes off more as lip service crossed with "men should feel bad for being men" than any sincere attempt to address or even seriously consider the problem. The fact that the perception that both rape and domestic abuse are predominantly male-on-female issues is still so widespread is part of this pattern, as well. 

I am not saying that feminism may not have accomplished good things, but it has also done fucked up in some areas and should ideally make an effort to clean those messes up. Which I've seen precious little of.



Mandragoras said:


> That said, most of my interactions with anti-feminism are with the sort of people who get so mad about some mouthy chick pointing out sexist clichés in video games that they send her rape and murder threats, which isn't exactly reasoned. It's just, y'know, misogyny.


_I_ personally get irritated with people hell-bent on seeing sexism in media at every turn; while in some cases it may have merit, in other cases it comes off as trying to be the Fun Police more than anything else. Obviously threats are not a good way of responding to it. But trying to neuter entertainment on the premise that sex appeal is inherently degrading doesn't serve anyone except prudes in the long run, and is likely as not to result in a "cry wolf" effect, by the way I reckon. 



Mandragoras said:


> I just see too much shit happening over here that's hurting people which some folks just want to turn a blind eye to or say the opposite is happening because it doesn't reaffirm the status quo which has so far worked for them or because they actively want a less equal society for whatever ideological reasons.


The funny thing is, I could say much the same thing from the other side of that fence. That, with a side of irritation because the general assumption seems to good as always be that I'm going to side with feminism because I'm a woman, and if I don't it's because of internalized misogyny, not because I might actually have legitimate reasons to disagree with it.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 7, 2017)

I doubt there is any risk that entertainment will be neutered because Anita Sarkesian makes a youtube video that people don't like, lol.

I think there is some cross-purpose discussion here though.
I can tell, for example, that when Mandragoras speaks of the anti-feminist movement, he is not speaking broadly of everybody who might object to _any_ aspect of popular feminism, or who believe that both sexes are presented with different sorts of disadvantages.

He's describing a consorted collection of people who don't really care about fairness in society so long as they're personally okay and who share a similar ideology typified by a fear or immigrants or refugees, support for far-right politicians like LePen, and belief in apocalyptic conspiracy theories.
Unsurprisingly they're often the sort of people who we come across accusing transgender people of identifying as 'attack helicopter', or being 'transtrenders'. 

They often cite the purported self destruction of European countries like England and Sweden as evidence of the evil deeds of an imaginary feminist enemy which has flooded these European countries with nasty invaders pretending to be refugees.

If you want a pertinent example look at the thread another user on the forums madediscussing their wish to leave Saudi Arabia because homosexuality is a potential capital crime there...users responded warning him _not to go to Sweden because it is 'dangerous' there.

That's _the sort of weirdness associated with the popular 'antifem' movement, unfortunately. People who _actually_ think Sweden is a mad-max style dystopic hell-scape, lol.


----------



## BittiBones (Apr 7, 2017)

pidge said:


> Also, are there any gender fluid or non binary people on this thread? I wanna know why you identify as such. I often hear this people say that they sometimes "feel" like a boy or a girl. How do you "feel" like a man or a woman? And I'm not talking about trans people with gender dysphoria, I know what dysphoria is. I've heard some trans men and women say they aren't comfortable with their sex and wish to change it.
> 
> But non binary and "trans" kids without dysphoria often times say they "feel" like a certain gender(s).
> 
> Not trying to be rude or judgmental, I just wanna know.


//raises hand/

*T*hough, I'm intersex. Perhaps gender fluidity is something natural for someone like me, I don't know. It's more so a strong association with either blue or pink collar stuff, and can even manifest in the form of pride in such things. Taking pride over how masculine or feminine one is. Sometimes it can be simply a feeling of belonging with those who come from whichever things, so naturally if you don't have a strong, or any real identity in the first place, you'll associate yourself with the gender roles associated with their sex. That, or it'll be just a casual referring to one's self by whatever pronouns you just feel like it in the time. At least, personally for me that's how things have laid out, including a strong sense of not giving a shit what others call me. What I associate myself by simply depends on how I'm feeling, and a good bit of the time _I _don't even know what I consider myself to be. It's common for me to go 'man woman thing' around friends then go 'shit, I forgot my pronouns'. But then again, I'm intersex who grew up being called either or by others, or 'it' (which please don't call anyone intersex 'it'), so perhaps it's just the 'gender role', or lack of one, that I grew into. Just basically in the end it's a constant state of sticking to whatever I'm feeling, and not giving a shit what others call me. I just want to be considered something as long as it's not it, even if it's simply by myself. 

*I* guess something to take into consideration too is that I don't care what name people address me by? So maybe it's got something to do with my lack of a feeling of identity overall. But at least with the gender thing, I do actually feel strong connection to either or identity/role from time to time so /shrug

*I*'m like,.. 75% asleep still rn so I probably make like 0 sense but hey. I'll probably come back and cry at my lack of understanding of the English language.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 7, 2017)

Fallowfox said:


> I doubt there is any risk that entertainment will be neutered because Anita Sarkesian makes a youtube video that people don't like, lol.
> 
> I think there is some cross-purpose discussion here though.
> I can tell, for example, that when Mandragoras speaks of the anti-feminist movement, he is not speaking broadly of everybody who might object to _any_ aspect of popular feminism, or who believe that both sexes are presented with different sorts of disadvantages.
> ...


Yeah, these are the kind of people I'm talking about, and I honestly don't understand it at all. Being critical of someone like Sarkeesian on the points that she actually makes and taking issue with particular trends or frameworks within feminism are more than fair, they're frequently necessary for the movement to do its job better. The issue is not of criticism, whether within or without, but the perception that arguing for parity on the premise that it has not been achieved is somehow taking away or undermining people's rights and freedoms, or trying to bring the world towards some calamitous moral decline. People are so afraid of losing something, but what even is that something? What evidence is there that something is being taken away rather than made available?


Rykhoteth said:


> Showerthought: A "Fluid Gender" would take the shape of whatever container it's in... which is CISgender.


I kind of feel gross even quoting this, because it so wildly misunderstands the subject on purpose to... what end, exactly? How is people having a different perception of how their own gender identity works from yours a bad thing? I really don't get it. You're being unpleasant for the sake of being unpleasant.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 7, 2017)

Fallowfox said:


> I doubt there is any risk that entertainment will be neutered because Anita Sarkesian makes a youtube video that people don't like, lol.


If I'd been concerned about Sarkeesian in particular I'd have mentioned her by name. To the best of my knowledge she was not yet making Youtube videos when I started seeing attacks on all kinds of games that for one reason or another were deemed "sexist" by an increasingly thin-skinned community of female gamers. That the attempts are unlikely to see widespread success does not mean that they in themselves cannot be obnoxious at best and harmful in other ways at slightly worse - at the very least they are courting sex negativity in a way that _should_ by all rights not be in the best interests of _any_ progressive movement.



Fallowfox said:


> I think there is some cross-purpose discussion here though.
> I can tell, for example, that when Mandragoras speaks of the anti-feminist movement, he is not speaking broadly of everybody who might object to _any_ aspect of popular feminism, or who believe that both sexes are presented with different sorts of disadvantages.





Fallowfox said:


> _That's _the sort of weirdness associated with the popular 'antifem' movement, unfortunately. People who _actually_ think Sweden is a mad-max style dystopic hell-scape, lol.


And I have been quite clear all along that I think those people are every bit as wrong as the feminists who insist on telling women who do not agree with _their_ movement that they must be hating their own gender. However, those feminists have caused me, personally, a lot more frustration and distress than anti-feminist groups with alt-right leanings. They also ostensibly have good intentions with their actions, which means I will hold them to a higher standard, and call their hypocrisy and inconsistencies where I see them.


----------



## KimberVaile (Apr 7, 2017)

Fallowfox said:


> I doubt there is any risk that entertainment will be neutered because Anita Sarkesian makes a youtube video that people don't like, lol.
> 
> I think there is some cross-purpose discussion here though.
> I can tell, for example, that when Mandragoras speaks of the anti-feminist movement, he is not speaking broadly of everybody who might object to _any_ aspect of popular feminism, or who believe that both sexes are presented with different sorts of disadvantages.
> ...



Yes, but the mondern feminist and social justice movement, while done with good intentions, I think? Has gotten to extreme points where it has affected games and movies. Dead or alive xtreme 3 wasn't released in the Us because of the social culture within it. My argument really isn't predicated on a shitty game not being released in the US, because honestly, it does actually look like a shit game, and you know, it's women rather than guys, so not my thing, but I digress.

PC culture has affected what is and isn't acceptable in media, to the point where games have not been released in certain countries. That whole controversy over the xmen movie with the blue girl getting choked, (have no idea what her name is) is another example. There was something else related to Wonderwoman not having shaved pits, and Link not being a girl that have been for whatever reason, considered legitimate talking points and criticism, which has resulted in considerable social pressure on people who create media. It's having a very strong effect on what's being produced. I'm not against this strictly because I don't want to see more races or genders represented, more that, I'd prefer if somebody wants to represent somebody who is Black, gay, a woman, they do so with genuine intent, rather than to pander with what will most likely be a representation that really isn't genuine. I'd rather see a gay dude portrayed with genuine intent, rather than forced in cause corporate wanted to check off a box in their laundry list is what I am trying to say. Let media creators be entitled to their creative vision, even if it still ends up being corporate pandering horseheit. Let's not demand people represent something just cause they are established or what have you. It seems superficial to criticize something soley cause, "this protag aint no woman" or whatever.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Rykhoteth said:


> Showerthought: A "Fluid Gender" would take the shape of whatever container it's in... which is CISgender.



If I'm a fluid then I'm a really viscous one that doesn't quite fit into my container properly and sticks weirdly on the edges and sorta becomes this lumpy -- okay this is a bad analogy...


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

KimberVaile said:


> I'm not against this strictly because I don't want to see more races or genders represented, more that, I'd prefer if somebody wants to represent somebody who is Black, gay, a woman, they do so with genuine intent, rather than to pander with what will most likely be a representation that really isn't genuine. I'd rather see a gay dude portrayed with genuine intent, rather than forced in cause corporate wanted to check off a box in their laundry list is what I am trying to say. Let media creators be entitled to their creative vision, even if it still ends up being corporate pandering horseheit. Let's not demand people represent something just cause they are established or what have you. It seems superficial to criticize something soley cause, "this protag aint no woman" or whatever.



I really like the point made in this, which falls heavily in line with what social justice _advocates_ are trying to stop. It's this belief that the LGBT community, or people of color, or anything else that's """special""" _*can't be considered normal *_ because of people on Tumblr, people on social media, people putting other people under fire for this or that. We're not integrated because of the people within our groups _making _us ostracized. They cause a big mess about us not being represented, so we become a quota instead of just being people cast in a movie, people in a game, people doing this, people doing that.

It's why I don't get in peoples' face when they misinterpret me being trans, or yell at someone who misgenders me, yada yada. I aim to educate first, and then if you decide to be a dickbag, refuse to listen, and insult me, _then _I'll get angry. If more people responded in that manner, I feel we'd lave less pandering and more proper representation.

I've also noticed a trend where you get ostracized if you don't like media with LGBT people in it? For instance I don't like SU and I'm not a massive fan of OINTB [my attention span's too short for episodes that long] and I've actually been hounded for it because 'WE FINALLY GET REPRESENTATION AND YOU ACT LIKE _THIS????_'.  So to a degree I do understand what you're saying, even if I don't agree with all points made in this thread.


----------



## Sagt (Apr 8, 2017)

I think it's unfair to portray feminism in an only poor light since it definitely does challenge a lot of inequality, though to be honest, the usefulness of feminism varies greatly by country.

@quoting_mungo Sweden is a pretty nice country and is often measured as one of the most egalitarian in the world (alongside other scandanavian countries), so I'm not surprised that you see no obvious discrimination - like Mandragoras said. Though if we were to focus on other countries such as Russia, where in January, they decriminalised some forms of domestic violence therefore making wife-beating easier to commit, then we can see that there are problems that persist to today. Women in Russia already have many barriers that limit their ability to report abuse and enforcement of laws to protect women are rare, so the softening of the law is definitely a step backwards. To bring some stats in for perspectives sake on domestic violence over there, Russia has close to 10 times the number of women killed by their partner (as a result of injuries by their partner) than the USA annually despite the USA having 2 to 3 times the population. 

Discrimination against females is drastically more obvious in developing nations where, in many cases, females have limited education, employment opportunities and personal freedoms. Though even in developed countries like the USA, there are still problems regarding subtle gender biases for employment, lack of representation in government and discrepancies in pay between genders. Also in America, abortion is still considered a controversial topic and the currently ruling party's official platform opposes it. So in the case of the USA, inequality is significantly better and much less noticable than in countries like Saudi Arabia or India, but it's still there.



KimberVaile said:


> Yes, but the mondern feminist and social justice movement, while done with good intentions, I think? Has gotten to extreme points where it has affected games and movies. Dead or alive xtreme 3 wasn't released in the Us because of the social culture within it. My argument really isn't predicated on a shitty game not being released in the US, because honestly, it does actually look like a shit game, and you know, it's women rather than guys, so not my thing, but I digress.
> 
> PC culture has affected what is and isn't acceptable in media, to the point where games have not been released in certain countries. That whole controversy over the xmen movie with the blue girl getting choked, (have no idea what her name is) is another example. There was something else related to Wonderwoman not having shaved pits, and Link not being a girl that have been for whatever reason, considered legitimate talking points and criticism, which has resulted in considerable social pressure on people who create media. It's having a very strong effect on what's being produced. I'm not against this strictly because I don't want to see more races or genders represented, more that, I'd prefer if somebody wants to represent somebody who is Black, gay, a woman, they do so with genuine intent, rather than to pander with what will most likely be a representation that really isn't genuine. I'd rather see a gay dude portrayed with genuine intent, rather than forced in cause corporate wanted to check off a box in their laundry list is what I am trying to say. Let media creators be entitled to their creative vision, even if it still ends up being corporate pandering horseheit. Let's not demand people represent something just cause they are established or what have you. It seems superficial to criticize something soley cause, "this protag aint no woman" or whatever.


I can agree with much of this and I think it's mostly fair criticism, but I think you are ignoring a lot of the good that feminists and similar groups do.

Some of the more trivial attempts at encouraging acceptance are probably a bit silly when they affect quality of entertainment though. For example, in the recent Beauty and the Beast movie, where they had both interracial couples and a gay man (admittedly it was very subtle and it added a bit of humour, so I didn't mind it) in the movie despite it not be relevant to the original film. That said, I still managed to enjoy the film quite a lot and the things that people gripe about probably do help normalise gay and interracial marriages for children who watch the film.


----------



## lajm (Apr 8, 2017)

I believe that genderfluid people are VALID and it's ok since gender is just a social construct.

plus it's not like their identity is harming someone jfc


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 8, 2017)

Lcs said:


> discrepancies in pay between genders



Yeah, because women are more apt to go into social careers like teaching, social work and nursing while men are more apt to go for work like trades, mining and IT.

Social jobs pay less while hard sciences, technology and experienced labour pay vastly more. That's also not counting the fact that women have maternity leave which, to my knowledge, is unpaid

And just so you don't think I'm pulling this out of my ass, with a couple of exceptions such as dental hygienist for women and wholesale/retail to an extent for men

www.dol.gov: Women's Bureau (WB) In-Demand Occupations (2010-2020) - Occupations by gender shares of employment(text version)
www.statcan.gc.ca: Employment by industry and sex (number in thousands)

In 2011, women were making $0.64 - $0.66 per dollar men made because they worked lower paying jobs

http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&id=2020102


----------



## Sagt (Apr 8, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> Yeah, because women are more apt to go into social careers like teaching, social work and nursing while men are more apt to go for work like trades, mining and IT.
> 
> Social jobs pay less while hard sciences, technology and experienced labour pay vastly more. That's also not counting the fact that women have maternity leave which, to my knowledge, is unpaid
> 
> ...


Literally scroll back a few pages and you'll see that I wrote something similar regarding the pay largely being the fault of the difference in occupations. 

What I was talking about is the approximately 5% difference which is unaccounted for by the difference in occupations.


----------



## Sergei Sóhomo (Apr 8, 2017)

Lcs said:


> Literally scroll back a few pages and you'll see that I wrote something similar regarding the pay largely being the fault of the difference in occupations.
> 
> What I was talking about is the approximately 5% difference which is unaccounted for by the difference in occupations.


It's probable that it could be due to women being a bit of a liability because of maternity leave and being more apt to leave the work force if they have children


----------



## ZoeDisaster (Apr 8, 2017)

I thought I was for awhile, but then I realized I don't feel like male and female at all so I'm just chillin' in the no gender zone.
People don't use they/them for me unless we're friends and I'm out to them, but idc. There's really nothing good to come from correcting people. It's like I know who I am and that's my biz. People are gonna look at me and see a woman, that's fine. I've known some cool genderfluid people and other non-binary people though. 
I think it gets a real bad rep from tumblr and the fact that while some of them may be serious, some cisgender people can't tell when they ARE making little jokes. (not like 'dis cis scum' or whatever, but I've known people to casually joke like 'yeah my gender is this banana) It just feels a bit malicious when cis people make the kinda jokes.

But eh


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 8, 2017)

Sergei Sóhomo said:


> It's probable that it could be due to women being a bit of a liability because of maternity leave and being more apt to leave the work force if they have children


That's actually already accounted for outside that 5% discrepancy when you look at the raw numbers. I actually brought this up a while back when Christina Hoff Summers came up.


ZoeDisaster said:


> I think it gets a real bad rep from tumblr and the fact that while some of them may be serious, some cisgender people can't tell when they ARE making little jokes. (not like 'dis cis scum' or whatever, but I've known people to casually joke like 'yeah my gender is this banana) It just feels a bit malicious when cis people make the kinda jokes.


Yeah, pretty much. It's like with certain people there's this desire to mock and ostracise what they don't understand because it would require them to slightly rethink certain preconceptions they have about reality, and being obnoxious about it is easier than having to reflect on something for more than thirty seconds.


estiniens said:


> I really like the point made in this, which falls heavily in line with what social justice _advocates_ are trying to stop. It's this belief that the LGBT community, or people of color, or anything else that's """special""" _*can't be considered normal *_ because of people on Tumblr, people on social media, people putting other people under fire for this or that. We're not integrated because of the people within our groups _making _us ostracized. They cause a big mess about us not being represented, so we become a quota instead of just being people cast in a movie, people in a game, people doing this, people doing that.
> 
> It's why I don't get in peoples' face when they misinterpret me being trans, or yell at someone who misgenders me, yada yada. I aim to educate first, and then if you decide to be a dickbag, refuse to listen, and insult me, _then _I'll get angry. If more people responded in that manner, I feel we'd lave less pandering and more proper representation.
> 
> I've also noticed a trend where you get ostracized if you don't like media with LGBT people in it? For instance I don't like SU and I'm not a massive fan of OINTB [my attention span's too short for episodes that long] and I've actually been hounded for it because 'WE FINALLY GET REPRESENTATION AND YOU ACT LIKE _THIS????_'.  So to a degree I do understand what you're saying, even if I don't agree with all points made in this thread.


See, I agree with most of what you're saying here, but I also feel like any representation that isn't super stereotypical or shitty is a good thing overall, even if it's not my cup of tea or it doesn't have "a point." I mean, we exist, and we don't need "a point" to exist, and I feel like people being able to see themselves in media can be quite empowering.

Which doesn't mean I have to like the show or book or comic in question. And I do find people getting up in arms about not being a fan of [insert representative media here] because you're expected to like any instance of representation on principle fairly asinine.


----------



## KimberVaile (Apr 8, 2017)

Lcs said:


> I can agree with much of this and I think it's mostly fair criticism, but I think you are ignoring a lot of the good that feminists and similar groups do.
> 
> Some of the more trivial attempts at encouraging acceptance are probably a bit silly when they affect quality of entertainment though. For example, in the recent Beauty and the Beast movie, where they had both interracial couples and a gay man (admittedly it was very subtle and it added a bit of humour, so I didn't mind it) in the movie despite it not be relevant to the original film. That said, I still managed to enjoy the film quite a lot and the things that people gripe about probably do help normalise gay and interracial marriages for children who watch the film.



There is some good to come out of Third Wave feminism, or modern feminism if you will, but not all that much imo. There are legitimate issues such as Reproductive rights that really should be addressed, and to be fair, they have done _some_ work towards challenging the regressive laws towards them. What bothers me though, is that these more pertinent issues of reproductive rights are often silenced by these over aggressive, looking for any excuse to get offended feminists, who decide the best use of their time is to criticize Wonder Woman for not having hairy pits or Link being a guy in Breath of the Wild.

The first and second wave feminism movements were valid and challenged real issues. Current feminists, who could have decided to tackle a legitimate legislative issue, decide instead to be offended by things that really shouldn't offend them. At least that's my perception of it. I've seen a handful of good sure, but it seems to be getting buried by utterly trivial concerns and topics imo.

Encouraging acceptance is important, of course, let's just try to avoid forcing it and keeping it feeling natural is all I'm saying. Quality of depiction is important, and a good depiction sends a better message. I honestly haven't personally seen the Beauty and the Beast movie, so unfortunately I can't comment on how appropriate the depiction was or it's quality.


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

There are only 2 genders. If you're born with the following:
If you have a penis, you're male. If you have a vagina, then you're female. Why is that so hard? 
This stupid progressive millennial movement takes away attention from real human rights related issues. I'm not going to call you by your imaginary gender, suck it up and stop forcing people to accept it.
Unless in an extreme circumstance where you have both, then you're probably a chimera, which there are only around 40 known in the entire world.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> See, I agree with most of what you're saying here, but I also feel like any representation that isn't super stereotypical or shitty is a good thing overall, even if it's not my cup of tea or it doesn't have "a point." I mean, we exist, and we don't need "a point" to exist, and I feel like people being able to see themselves in media can be quite empowering.
> 
> Which doesn't mean I have to like the show or book or comic in question. And I do find people getting up in arms about not being a fan of [insert representative media here] because you're expected to like any instance of representation on principle fairly asinine.



I don't really think we need a point to exist either, but there seems to be this.. overexaggeration, this over-hype, this stereotyping and generalization of us as a whole that I find damaging because it makes our entire community look pander-y. Not every gay guy is gonna be a SASSY DUDE WITH A LISP WHO LOOOOVES SHOPPING OMG! and not every trans person is going to be as open and blunt as Sophia in OINTB [who is a very well-done trans character, but was just the first example I could come up with off the top of my head, so please don't misinterpret this. I love Laverne.] . And much of it seems to stem from a lot of writers feeling they need to fill a quota and make people happy. It also seems like a lot of companies use us to draw more attention for themselves, because ooh look now new and fresh and unique and edgy it is to have an OPENLY GAY CHARACTER, even if it refuses to showcase them as having any struggle at all - or worse, makes a complete joke out of them.

It's a balance, and I think on both ends there's a lot of push and shove that hurts us as a whole in the media.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> There are only 2 genders. If you're born with the following:
> If you have a penis, you're male. If you have a vagina, then you're female. Why is that so hard?
> This stupid progressive millennial movement takes away attention from real human rights related issues. I'm not going to call you by your imaginary gender, suck it up and stop forcing people to accept it.
> Unless in an extreme circumstance where you have both, then you're probably a chimera, which there are only around 40 known in the entire world.



I mean, my HRT begs to differ, and I'm not asking you to call me a fucking flying fox dog with elephant tusks or something. It's not an imaginary gender. I am a male. Why is that so hard?


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

estiniens said:


> I mean, my HRT begs to differ, and I'm not asking you to call me a fucking flying fox dog with elephant tusks or something. It's not an imaginary gender. I am a male. Why is that so hard?


So what about hormones? The human body is flawed and can give off the wrong hormones. However it doesn't change the sex you were born with. Just like how a person's sex determines which public bathroom they are supposed to use.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> So what about hormones? The human body is flawed and can give off the wrong hormones. However it doesn't change the sex you were born with. Just like how a person's sex determines which public bathroom they are supposed to use.



So you're telling me that if you saw a person with a beard, chest hair, who was muscular and had a deep voice, you would expect that individual to use the female bathroom, and would refer to that person as a woman, supposing you assumed they had a vagina for whatever reason?


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 8, 2017)

estiniens said:


> So you're telling me that if you saw a person with a beard, chest hair, who was muscular and had a deep voice, you would expect that individual to use the female bathroom, and would refer to that person as a woman, supposing you assumed they had a vagina for whatever reason?


How to determine sex/gender:

1. Chromosomes, XX or XY
2. Genitals

You can change your outwards appearance, aka, "sex change", but you can't change your chromosomes.


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

estiniens said:


> So you're telling me that if you saw a person with a beard, chest hair, who was muscular and had a deep voice, you would expect that individual to use the female bathroom, and would refer to that person as a woman, supposing you assumed they had a vagina for whatever reason?


That is a very unrealistic example. No way in biology will you ever see someone like that in real life. Your gender is your genitalia that you were born with. Simple as that.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> That is a very unrealistic example. No way in biology will you ever see someone like that in real life. Your gender is your genitalia that you were born with. Simple as that.



Are you sure about that?
Like, really sure about that?

These are both examples of people with vaginas, but you would tell them to use the female restroom, yes?


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> How to determine sex/gender:
> 
> 1. Chromosomes, XX or XY
> 2. Genitals
> ...



Oh no I absolutely agree with that! I'm not saying your chromosomes miraculously change, I apologize if I came off that way.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 8, 2017)

estiniens said:


> Oh no I absolutely agree with that! I'm not saying your chromosomes miraculously change, I apologize if I came off that way.


Don't worry about it, mate. A decent amount of people deny basic biology and evolution. Fun as hell watching them do it, though.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> Don't worry about it, mate. A decent amount of people deny basic biology and evolution. Fun as hell watching them do it, though.



A decent amount of people apparently skipped out on school and decided to major in Modern Feminism 101 instead of Biology 101 in college.


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 8, 2017)

I just hope trans or non binary people that aren't intersex at least put their biological sex in their health documents. 
Cause y'kno, males and females can get different problems. I lowkey hate it when I have to put 'F' down on my stuff but I'd rather not accidentally die :^T


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> I just hope trans or non binary people that aren't intersex at least put their biological sex in their health documents.
> Cause y'kno, males and females can get different problems. I lowkey hate it when I have to put 'F' down on my stuff but I'd rather not accidentally die :^T



Also this! Absolutely! There's special shit I need to do to stay healthy and have cancer screenings. I hate it when people say 'JUST DON'T FILL IT OUT LIKE THAT XDXD' like? No? Don't be stupid about your identity, be smart about it.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 8, 2017)

estiniens said:


> A decent amount of people apparently skipped out on school and decided to major in Modern Feminism 101 instead of Biology 101 in college.


Gender/racial studies is fucking useless. Period. 

Want a good job? Get into a STEM field.


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 8, 2017)

estiniens said:


> Also this! Absolutely! There's special shit I need to do to stay healthy and have cancer screenings. I hate it when people say 'JUST DON'T FILL IT OUT LIKE THAT XDXD' like? No? Don't be stupid about your identity, be smart about it.


YUP!
Plus, I kno my doc and the insurance company aren't out to be "OMG TRANSPHOBIC!!" they're there to help me. I don't get how that's a hard concept for some people to get.

Edit: Also, seriously lying on forms like that is lowwwww


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

estiniens said:


> Are you sure about that?
> Like, really sure about that?
> 
> These are both examples of people with vaginas, but you would tell them to use the female restroom, yes?


I've encountered people like that before, as well as seeing women with muscular male builds, except for the beard part. Anyway, a sex change doesn't change the sex/gender you were born with. And, yes, I would tell them to use the according bathrooms, though I wouldn't go as far as looking inside their pants and getting labeled a sex offender. I an sticking to my stance and that's how it's going to be. You can look as convincingly as the other sex as possible but you can't change your were truly born as.


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> I wouldn't go as far as looking inside their pants and getting labeled a sex offender.


Then what's the point of telling a transitioned trans person to use the bathroom of their biological sex if y'don't kno they're even trans :^P


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> Then what's the point of telling a transitioned trans person to use the bathroom of their biological sex if y'don't kno they're even trans :^P



Because logic?? Don't you know? Gender dysphoria is a myth??


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> Then what's the point of telling a transitioned trans person to use the bathroom of their biological sex if y'don't kno they're even trans :^P


Then I'd go by their birth certificate. I'm pretty sure it says what sex they were born with.
The looking down their pants part was a joke.


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> Then I'd go by their birth certificate. I'm pretty sure it says what sex they were born with.
> The looking down their pants part was a joke.


When you change your gender marker legally you get a new birth certificate with your new designated sex.

EDIT: at least here in cali, it depends on state.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> When you change your gender marker legally you get a new birth certificate with your new designated sex.
> 
> EDIT: at least here in cali, it depends on state.



You can do this in multiple states, yes.
Apparently some people are willing to go to the extent of standing outside bathrooms and demanding people to show them their birth certificate before they can pee.
Weird... Wonder how many trans people I've peed in the stall next to before. I'm so lucky I'm safe, gosh...


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> When you change your gender marker legally you get a new birth certificate with your new designated sex.
> 
> EDIT: at least here in cali, it depends on state.


I'd have to have access to their medical records if I wanted to know what were they born as. I'd probably get a lawyer to request such information from them. But it was be very expensive and an overly critical waste of time just go through the trouble of that.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> There are only 2 genders. If you're born with the following:
> If you have a penis, you're male. If you have a vagina, then you're female. Why is that so hard?
> This stupid progressive millennial movement takes away attention from real human rights related issues. I'm not going to call you by your imaginary gender, suck it up and stop forcing people to accept it.
> Unless in an extreme circumstance where you have both, then you're probably a chimera, which there are only around 40 known in the entire world.



Some people are born without a penis, but then grow one at puberty. 5-alpha-reductase deficiency - Wikipedia
Some women are born with XY chromosomes and internal testes, but no penis. Androgen insensitivity syndrome - Wikipedia

There are more than 40 of these people in the world, in fact almost 2% of humans may be born with some form of intersex condition:
onlinelibrary.wiley.com: How sexually dimorphic are we? Review and synthesis


I mean, I guess you can still insist that everybody is either male or female if you like..just ignore medical science.


----------



## estiniens (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> I'd have to have access to their medical records if I wanted to know what were they born as. I'd probably get a lawyer to request such information from them. But it was be very expensive and an overly critical waste of time just go through the trouble of that.



If it'd be such a giant waste of time to try to prove someone is one thing or the other, I guess you'll just have to sleep peacefully knowing that you've peed next to a transgender person before, and that it's a giant waste of time to force someone to pee in a certain place - because it's not going to happen.


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

estiniens said:


> If it'd be such a giant waste of time to try to prove someone is one thing or the other, I guess you'll just have to sleep peacefully knowing that you've peed next to a transgender person before, and that it's a giant waste of time to force someone to pee in a certain place - because it's not going to happen.


Mmmm well if they're peeing in a urinal, how'd else they'd be not male? Because you know, how the hell does a woman pee in a urinal while facing it? It's common sense, it wouldn't require much critical thinking to determine if that person in the bathroom you're with is a man or woman.


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> Mmmm well if they're peeing in a urinal, how'd else they'd be not male? Because you know, how the hell does a woman pee in a urinal while facing it? It's common sense, it wouldn't require much critical thinking to determine if that person in the bathroom you're with is a man or woman.


Phalloplasty surgery for trans males exist. A biological female, after receiving a phalloplasty, can piss in a urinal. Stand-to-pee devices that also look like normal dongs exist for pre-op transmen. So you can't just find a transman based on how they pee 100% of the time.

Personally I prefer a closed stall.


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

Fallowfox said:


> Some people are born without a penis, but then grow one at puberty. 5-alpha-reductase deficiency - Wikipedia
> Some women are born with XY chromosomes and internal testes, but no penis. Androgen insensitivity syndrome - Wikipedia
> 
> There are more than 40 of these people in the world, in fact almost 2% of humans may be born with some form of intersex condition:
> ...


"...Individuals with 5-ARD are born with *male gonads*..."
Quoted directly from your own source article.

"A 46,XY female, thus, does not have ovaries or a uterus,[56]and can neither contribute an egg towards conception nor gestate a child."
"Several case studies of fertile 46,XY males with AIS have been published,[4][57][58][59][60] although this group is thought to be a minority.[13] Additionally, some infertile males with MAIS have been able to conceive children after increasing theirsperm count through the use of supplementary testosterone."
Having malformed genitalia or birth defects doesn't affect your sex/gender. There will still be some biological traits that will distinguish you subtly from either/or sexes.

As for the book, it only talks about how dimorphic humans are when it comes to sexes, and I already talked about how looking like the other sex/gender doesn't change your true sex.

*Proofread* and *check* your sources before citing them. Just because a person had some birth defect doesn't change their sex/gender. Unless you're a chimera, you're male or female.


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> Phalloplasty surgery for trans males exist. A biological female, after receiving a phalloplasty, can piss in a urinal. Stand-to-pee devices that also look like normal dongs exist for pre-op transmen. So you can't just find a transman based on how they pee 100% of the time.
> 
> Personally I prefer a closed stall.


Then medical records will say if or if not a person is/was truly a male/female.


----------



## Andromedahl (Apr 8, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> Then medical records will say if or if not a person is/was truly a male/female.


Yes, you're at least right on that :^P

But again, doesn't really matter whether or not there's a trans person pissing in the public bathroom corresponding to what they present as, and you've probably been in the bathroom with a trans person many times without knowing it. Hasn't hurt you any.


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 8, 2017)

Andromedahl said:


> Yes, you're at least right on that :^P
> 
> But again, doesn't really matter whether or not there's a trans person pissing in the public bathroom corresponding to what they present as, and you've probably been in the bathroom with a trans person many times without knowing it. Hasn't hurt you any.


Look, I do not hate trans people nor do I have anything against them. But I have my own stance when it comes to this sort of stuff. Controversial or not, I still find this stuff interesting enough to comment on. Though I'll give you people credit for not being immature or one sided.

I'm only talking about a person's true sex/gender. Not that I'm going to tell them in their face like some wannabe troll.


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 9, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> How to determine sex/gender:
> 
> 1. Chromosomes, XX or XY
> 2. Genitals
> ...


Chromosomes can actually be different from one's genitalia from birth, though. Androgen insensitivity syndrome and mosaicism immediately spring to mind.

Also, again, sex and gender are actually different things. I'm not even talking about identity here, I'm talking about basic vocabulary.

EDIT: Oh, hey, Fallowfox already brought this up. Different examples, though, so I guess this is new?


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 9, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> "...Individuals with 5-ARD are born with *male gonads*..."
> Quoted directly from your own source article.
> 
> "A 46,XY female, thus, does not have ovaries or a uterus,[56]and can neither contribute an egg towards conception nor gestate a child."
> ...



You literally just argued that gender should be based on the genitals that people are born with.
This article shows that some people born with female genitals possess XY chromosomes and internal testes.

Now you are arguing that androgen insensitive women with internal testes are 'really men' even though they have vaginas.
Does this mean you agree that your earlier claim was wrong?



Corrupt-Canine said:


> There are only 2 genders. If you're born with the following:
> *If you have a penis, you're male. If you have a vagina, then you're female. Why is that so hard?*
> This stupid progressive millennial movement takes away attention from real human rights related issues. I'm not going to call you by your imaginary gender, suck it up and stop forcing people to accept it.
> Unless in an extreme circumstance where you have both, then you're probably a chimera, which there are only around 40 known in the entire world.



You also claimed that only 40 people in the world couldn't be classified in this way, even though the articles presented to you showed that as many 1 in 1500-2000 live births have ambiguous genitals that are neither male or female, and as many as 1 in 50 humans are intersex, and therefore cannot be clearly categorised as one sex or the other.



Corrupt-Canine said:


> Look, I do not hate trans people nor do I have anything against them. But I have my own stance when it comes to this sort of stuff. Controversial or not, I still find this stuff interesting enough to comment on. Though I'll give you people credit for not being immature or one sided.
> 
> I'm only talking about a person's true sex/gender. Not that I'm going to tell them in their face like some wannabe troll.



From the looks of it your 'own stance' doesn't even entail a clear definition of what physical sex is. 

You tried to define it as external genitals, but when you realised this didn't work, you tried to redefined it as gonadal tissue, contradicting the first definition. 
You are hence unable to coherently or consistently attribute all intersex people to one sex or the other. 

It is depressing that you've taken your opinions about transgender people so far that you're prepared to mess up biology with inconsistent semantic definitions. 

It's easier just to admit that the male-female sex binary works for most humans, just not all of them. 
I'm not sure why that realisation is so unpalatable to you.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 9, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> Chromosomes can actually be different from one's genitalia from birth, though. Androgen insensitivity syndrome and mosaicism immediately spring to mind.
> 
> Also, again, sex and gender are actually different things. I'm not even talking about identity here, I'm talking about basic vocabulary.


Exceptions does not make the rule, mate. They are basically biological flaws/errors. They are also extremely rare. You can make natural laws/rules as broad and well-defined as you want. There will always pop up exceptions to those laws/rules at some point due to evolution being chaotic in nature.

The chromosomes are the number one factor in determining someone's sex/gender. Genitals are a close second, due to defects/flaws/errors that can occur, thus making it the second determining factor, and not the first. There are other ways of determining which of the two sexes/genders you are, like for instance with seeing whether a baby looks more at a toy or a face at a young age/infancy.

For there to be anything other than a two sexes/genders, we'd need a third determining chromosome, Z. We've evolved for millions of years having only two chromosomes(binary system) that determine sex/gender, and that shit is not going to change anytime soon, if ever.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 9, 2017)

Nobody is arguing that external genitals or chromosomal karyotype are not good proxies for biological sex. They are only recognising that some humans cannot be usefully categorised by these proxies, because nature is, as you recognise, chaotic and consequently not all humans fit into the sex binary. 
Those humans are rare, but more common place than people think- indeed as many as 1 in 50. 

This doesn't mean there is a 'third sex'. It's just recognition that some humans are intersex.


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 9, 2017)

Fallowfox said:


> You literally just argued that gender should be based on the genitals that people are born with.
> This article shows that some people born with female genitals possess XY chromosomes and internal testes.
> 
> Now you are arguing that androgen insensitive women with internal testes are 'really men' even though they have vaginas.
> ...



You try so hard to look for exceptions on how having a *birth defect* equals being the other/opposite gender and sex.
"You tried to define it as external genitals, but when you realised this didn't work, you tried to redefined it as gonadal tissue, contradicting the first definition. You are hence unable to coherently or consistently attribute all intersex people to one sex or the other."
If their genitalia or appearance is so broken that you can't say if they're male or female, their inner biological traits will show. It is not "one or the other," It's both. In their anatomy that will show them as a female or male.

As for thing I said of the people, I was referring to people who were medically classified as a chimera. Around 40 people with that condition. I don't think you even know what a chimera is. A human chimera can carry Y chromosomes from their fathers but be expressly female (by phenotype). Or you just misread that paragraph and assumed I was talking about something else.

If it isn't by sex, then it's by their inner biology and genetic makeup that will.

"It is depressing that you've taken your opinions about transgender people so far that you're prepared to mess up biology with inconsistent semantic definitions."
Or you're just ignoring the stuff I've explained. And if it's so depressing to you, you're taking this whole trans thing to seriously. Gender isn't a social construct, it's biological. Intersex doesn't exist.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Apr 9, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> Intersex doesn't exist.


That's just factually wrong, tho. Are intersex conditions essentially congenital birth defects? Yes, if you're hard-lining it, they would qualify under that. Does this mean that they do not exist? You may as well say that cancer doesn't exist, since some forms of cancer are significantly rarer than intersex births.


----------



## Fallowfox (Apr 9, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> You try so hard to look for exceptions on how having a *birth defect* equals being the other/opposite gender and sex.
> "You tried to define it as external genitals, but when you realised this didn't work, you tried to redefined it as gonadal tissue, contradicting the first definition. You are hence unable to coherently or consistently attribute all intersex people to one sex or the other."
> If their genitalia or appearance is so broken that you can't say if they're male or female, their inner biological traits will show. It is not "one or the other," It's both. In their anatomy that will show them as a female or male.
> 
> ...



Categorising androgen insensitive people, who are born with vaginas but have internal testes, as men isn't really useful. An androgen insensitive may go through their whole life without ever becoming aware that they possess internal testicles. 

In effect they are genotypically male and phenotypically female. There's no use trying to force all of them to be categorised as 'really male' or 'really female'.
That's why biologists describe these people as intersex.

Human chimeras are another type of biological phenomenon, caused by the formation of an organism from two different zygotes (fertilised eggs).
Not all human chimeras are intersex, and human chimerism is actually pretty common. (for example a significant minority of humans are chimeras with two blood types, and a significant minority of humans are chimeras with two different eye colours).
*Some* human chimeras are intersex, but not all intersex humans are chimeric. 

Get it?


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 9, 2017)

So you're saying intersex people are hermaphrodites?


----------



## Mandragoras (Apr 9, 2017)

Corrupt-Canine said:


> So you're saying intersex people are hermaphrodites?


Hermaphroditic animals have fully functioning male and female sex organs. Flatworms are a good example of this, as are slugs. Hermaphroditic vertebrates are, if extant at all, astronomically rare. However, the term "pseudo-hermaphroditism" was used to refer to intersex people with ambiguous genitals back in the day; but I think it's a little dated now, and vaguely offensive outside of narrow medical contexts. It's also a mouthful in a way that "intersex" isn't.


----------



## Corrupt-Canine (Apr 9, 2017)

Mandragoras said:


> Hermaphroditic animals have fully functioning male and female sex organs. Flatworms are a good example of this, as are slugs. Hermaphroditic vertebrates are, if extant at all, astronomically rare. However, the term "pseudo-hermaphroditism" was used to refer to intersex people with ambiguous genitals back in the day; but I think it's a little dated now, and vaguely offensive outside of narrow medical contexts. It's also a mouthful in a way that "intersex" isn't.


Oh, ok.


----------

