Taco's Unofficial Guide to All-Things Gender/Sex/Sexuality

[MeChaNiZ3D]

You had me until two spirit.

It is a very nice, concise list, but I can't help but look at these terms and think some people just want to be little snowflakes, in the same way some people consider themselves an animal in a human body.

 

[Evil Moo]

I still fail to understand the concept of gender identity, and also I suppose the term gender when not used as a synonym of sex, which seems to amount to pretty much the same thing. It seems to often be referred to as something outside of wherever an individual ends up on the grey line of gender as determined by biological factors. This leaves it defined by the remaining arbitrary cultural standards, which to me seems like a odd thing to have as the basis of such an apparently fundamental part of one's identity.

On which note I'll also mention that I don't feel the need to define my gender beyond the simplest biology, and even then, only when it seems relevant, which it rarely is. I have left my Facebook gender unselected and I expect it to remain that way. Even if I did feel the need to 'genderfy' myself, I would happily not give Facebook yet more information they can use for their own purposes, however small.

Interesting list, even if some of them sound more like the gender identity manifestation of 'hipster' than actual phenomena.

 

[Taccer]

Pansexual needs to be taken out, it's a sexual orientation, not a gender identity.

As for everyone who thinks that a lot of terms on the list are redundant: Yeah, some of them are, but that doesn't mean that the whole concept or gender-variance doesn't exist. What you've got to remember is that a lot of these terms have been originated from people who have spent their lives trying to explain themselves to a society who demanded explanations, often with no role models or peer support, for why they didn't happen to conform to arbitrary social norms.

We've spent so many years fighting our own, often solo, battles to be recognized and understood in some way, in any way. Are you really surprised that terminology is fragmented at this point?

TLR - If I've got an adam's apple or stubble, and happen to be wearing a denim skirt or ankle boots, I don't give a shit if how good your trans vocabulary is, all I care about is that you treat me with the same dignity and respect as any other person.

 

[Something Amyss]

no. and really because you and me we both know what hetero means.

Hetero is a recent term in terms of human sexuality and only exists for the same reason the term cis now exists. I'm sorr you you feel that simply questioning your claim of "edgy bs" was sufficient to count as a flame war, but I think this is an important point. And I think examining why people think "this time, it's different" is an important issue.

it's just a delusion of choice to me. a redundant one at that.

But you don't feel the same way about someone being called "straight." Why? And try and go beyond knowing what the word means.

your gender and or sex or definition of it don't have to cater to my definition and just because i think 15+ terms for a bunch of ways to see who you are are basically too much.

There's a difference between "it's too much" and "it's bullshit." This isn't a primary language issue, either.

or let me put it this way: who really needs to know all of this?

Who really needs to know your sex in the first place? For that matter, who needs to know your sexuality?

let's meet and you look me straight in the eye and tell me that's not a least bit redudant.

Well, that's not what cis means, but ignoring that and going by the actual definition....

No more redundant than calling one's self a heterosexual.

I mean, if you'd like to come to Vermont and have a chat on it, well....That'd be interesting. Knock yourself out. I have trouble believing you'd convince me of anything or that I could convince you to stop trying to strawman the term. I think it'd be a waste of both our times.

If the form has 50 poorly thought out options, most having at least one synonym, that's a huge blow, not only to "forms" but common sense.

I've already addressed redundancy in language, so I'm not sure why it needs more cleaning up than the rest of the language. It's a drop-down on a webpage anyway, who cares. Is it that much of a nightmare that you might have to scroll down a little?

I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because I have nothing to say on it, however as a genderfluid person who has never felt comfortable with people always referring to them as a girl and not really feeling like a boy either, it is a feeling of relief to know that there are people who feel like you do.

Which, incidentally, applies to anyone who isn't "standard issue." I'm not saying you were saying otherwise, just pointing out it sucks to feel specifically isolated in the world because of something nobody talks about or defines.

Pansexual needs to be taken out, it's a sexual orientation, not a gender identity.

Pansexual is someone who identifies as a satyr. But seriously, PT said this is a gender/sex/sexuality thread in both the title and description. So it fits.

 

[Something Amyss]

You had me until two spirit.

It is a very nice, concise list, but I can't help but look at these terms and think some people just want to be little snowflakes, in the same way some people consider themselves an animal in a human body.

The concept of two-spirits dating back to Pre-Columbian North Americans and having a widespread acceptance there, I'm curious as to how it's a "special snowflake" thing.

"Special snowflake" really just looks like a way to come down on people, rather than any legit criticism.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Man, those are hard to keep track of!

I use the words gender and sex interchangeably because I thought it referred to the same thing...

Gotta learn the lingo I guess, I take pride in my effort to not piss people off for stupid reasons.


[small]Stupid reasons in this case meaning I didn't tread lightly enough on a topic that people care deeply about.[/small]

 

[Objectable]

It would all be so much more simple if we could all just breed via mitosis.

 

[username sucks]

Well, Taco, I'm impressed. I usually avoid your threads because I go in hoping for a somewhat serious discussion and then notice that it is a joke thread. I've been avoiding this thread, but I just accidentally clicked on it and it happened to be completely serious.

Now, back on topic, I don't care much for labels of any kind. I admit that some of them are necessary, such as sexual orientation or sex, but gender identity just seems like an attempt to sum up someone's personality in just one term. People are dynamic, even the 50 terms just added to facebook couldn't get even close to representing a person. I think that if people just be whatever they want to be then having a term to label them wouldn't matter.

Sadly, it is true that society doesn't really tolerate certain people being themselves, but ideally these labels should not be needed.

 

[Sarah Kerrigan]

You go, big bro Taco. I'm glad you're doing something like this.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

You had me until two spirit.

It is a very nice, concise list, but I can't help but look at these terms and think some people just want to be little snowflakes, in the same way some people consider themselves an animal in a human body.

The concept of two-spirits dating back to Pre-Columbian North Americans and having a widespread acceptance there, I'm curious as to how it's a "special snowflake" thing.

"Special snowflake" really just looks like a way to come down on people, rather than any legit criticism.

I've honestly never heard of it before and it strikes me as ridiculous, but I don't dispute it could be an actual feeling that some people do have. But is it not a legitimate criticism to suggest that someone is only identifying themselves as an unusual gender group for attention, or to feel unique/different, or to play the persecution card? Because I also have no doubt that that happens in some cases. In what percentages I don't know.

 

[Thaluikhain]

But is it not a legitimate criticism to suggest that someone is only identifying themselves as an unusual gender group for attention, or to feel unique/different, or to play the persecution card? Because I also have no doubt that that happens in some cases. In what percentages I don't know.

It is a criticism to be used with care, stuff like that is very, very often used to mean "your persecution isn't real, because I say so".

 

[Something Amyss]

Because I also have no doubt that that happens in some cases. In what percentages I don't know.

So some people might be doing it for the wrong reason?

 

[Raikas]

You had me until two spirit.

It is a very nice, concise list, but I can't help but look at these terms and think some people just want to be little snowflakes, in the same way some people consider themselves an animal in a human body.

The concept of two-spirits dating back to Pre-Columbian North Americans and having a widespread acceptance there, I'm curious as to how it's a "special snowflake" thing.

"Special snowflake" really just looks like a way to come down on people, rather than any legit criticism.

I've honestly never heard of it before and it strikes me as ridiculous, but I don't dispute it could be an actual feeling that some people do have. But is it not a legitimate criticism to suggest that someone is only identifying themselves as an unusual gender group for attention, or to feel unique/different, or to play the persecution card? Because I also have no doubt that that happens in some cases. In what percentages I don't know.

As a random data point about that particular term, in Canada at least, it's actually frowned upon for non-Aboriginal people to claim "two spirit" as an identity. It's considered cultural appropriation for anyone else, regardless of whether or not the concept matches their feelings.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

You know what? Fuck it. I'm done.

Screw gender, screw my poorly formed opinions, screw the bigots and screw obtuse terminology be it self-assigned or not.

From now on, gender gets the same amount of thought from me as MLP. Only enough brain processing to be mildly irritated before moving on to other things.

People I meet will be referred to by sex.

Redundancy, goofiness and pointless labels. Hooray and good riddance.

Thank you Taco for clearing my mind.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

But is it not a legitimate criticism to suggest that someone is only identifying themselves as an unusual gender group for attention, or to feel unique/different, or to play the persecution card? Because I also have no doubt that that happens in some cases. In what percentages I don't know.

It is a criticism to be used with care, stuff like that is very, very often used to mean "your persecution isn't real, because I say so".

Or even "your condition isn't real, because I say so". Yes, it should be used carefully and on a case-by-case basis.

Because I also have no doubt that that happens in some cases. In what percentages I don't know.

So some people might be doing it for the wrong reason?

Pretty much. That reason being the same reason some people claim to have been abducted, or vampires. The difference being that a number of minority genders actually are those.

 

[Something Amyss]

But is it not a legitimate criticism to suggest that someone is only identifying themselves as an unusual gender group for attention, or to feel unique/different, or to play the persecution card? Because I also have no doubt that that happens in some cases. In what percentages I don't know.

It is a criticism to be used with care, stuff like that is very, very often used to mean "your persecution isn't real, because I say so".

Or even "your condition isn't real, because I say so". Yes, it should be used carefully and on a case-by-case basis.

Because I also have no doubt that that happens in some cases. In what percentages I don't know.

So some people might be doing it for the wrong reason?

Pretty much. That reason being the same reason some people claim to have been abducted, or vampires. The difference being that a number of minority genders actually are those.

Seems almost pointless to bring up, then, if the conditions are real and the special snowflakes are hypothetical.

 

[Nosferatu2]

The last one is dumb. There is no evidence that any body manifests any "spirit."