Zero Punctuation: Papers, Please and Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons

[Warachia]

I don't know what you mean by "is on the you don't side of the equation."

If that's the case, then he's still saying someone born male who identifies as female is male, since having sex with her is gay.

I said something to the effect of, "Either you support them, or you don't." I believe razer17 doesn't: therefore, he comes down on the "you don't" side of that binary question.

Yes, that's what they're saying, that physically that person is the gender they were born, any sexual actions taken with another person of the same physical gender would be considered gay (there's NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS), you can have your opinion that they wouldn't or shouldn't be, that's fine, but that's how they see it, and that's how the rest of the world sees it too, and I doubt that's going to change any time soon.

Thanks for clearing that up, but you did assume quite a bit from very little, they said what they thought about the definition of a single act, and you assumed you knew their entire stance on the matter from that.

I want to ask one more question, WHY DOES IT MATTER? If a transsexual person who is physically male has sex with another person who is physically male, why do you care so much that it's called a gay action? I genuinely want to know, does it really have that much impact? Because it seems like we're debating over a really trivial issue.

The rest of this reply is long, so as to not take up a very large section of the page it will be put into a spoiler:

Spoiler

A little while ago I watched an old Jimquisition episode where he was addressing a gay Sheppard in Mass Effect 3 (the episode's called "a Case for a Gay Sheppard"). People were saying that if you want to include gay people, you needed to include pedophiles since otherwise it would be discriminatory, despite the two being entirely different.

If I remember that conversation correctly, the people saying so want to argue that consensual sex between two adults of the same gender is equivalent to an adult preying upon a child, so I don't much care what those people think "inclusion" means.

And I don't think that jokes about a group of people who are offended by the jokes are similar to jokes about a group of people who, to all current evidence, are not offended by them.

You don't remember it correctly then, people were against the possibility of a gay Sheppard, they weren't against the scene itself, that's why they were making a poor argument, trying to connect gays to pedophiles, like you were doing with civilians to criminals.

Making a joke insulting a group, then making a joke where you insult another group is similar, if you shot an intruder in your home for no reason (as in you did it for the sake of doing it, you weren't even concerned about self defence), and then shot a random civilian, that would be similar, the reason your earlier example didn't work is because the person could be doing the shootings for two entirely separate reasons.

What I'm saying is intent is what's important, if there was a joke aimed at one group, and meant to infuriate that group, then the person who made the joke made another one, but this supported a different group of people, these people wouldn't be in the same camp so to speak, it doesn't usually depend on how the group reacts.

They don't have anything to say about gender dysphoria (as far as I remember), because they aren't psychology textbooks.

He's also saying that the selfishness is inherently hypocritical. I don't object to describing the guy as selfish, but the hypocrisy part gets me, and my text that you are responding to is why.

Then I'm not much interested in his cherry-picked evidence.

I never said it does. I asked him to explain in detail what sex is, citing people who have more authority to make those judgments than he does. I personally do not believe chromosomal pairings are enough, because they ignore the complexity of the brain and its interactions with the body. If he wants to convince me otherwise, then he's going to have to do more work than some flip "Every biology book ever, none of which I will reference by name or quote because that's how right I am" crap.

That's why I said I had nothing more to add, I was simply their position, if you want to talk further about it, you would want to talk to them because I don't have anything else on that matter.

That's not cherry picked evidence, biologically if you have one X chromosome, and one Y chromosome, you are male, end of story, how you see yourself is certainly up to you, but you can't ignore your physical characteristics, if you do, then you are the one doing the cherry picking, not to mention, you are getting mad that a textbook includes nothing from an entirely different field of study, that's like getting angry that Math teaches you nothing about English and believing it should because of algebra.

Unfortunately your personal beliefs don't change reality, but since you wanted those citations, here you go:

gender

1. The sex of an individual, male or female, based on reproductive anatomy.
2. Sexual identity, especially in relation to society or culture.
Source: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/gender

There, you can have it both ways depending on how you look at it, everybody's right! Unfortunately I bet you want a definite answer, so let's look some more:

Definition of GENDER

1: sex 1
2: the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex

Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/gender

In this way, it can have the same 2 meanings as the previous one, I guess gender is subjective, so let's look at sex then:

Definition of SEX

1: either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as male or female
2: the sum of the structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of living things that are involved in reproduction by two interacting parents and that distinguish males and females
3a: sexually motivated phenomena or behavior
b: sexual intercourse
Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/sex

All right, so sex isn't subjective, but since this might still be a little vague, how do they define "Male and Females"?

Definition of MALE

1a: a male person : a man or a boy
b: an individual that produces small usually motile gametes (as spermatozoa or spermatozoids) which fertilize the eggs of a female
2: a staminate plant
Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/male

Definition of FEMALE

1a (1) : of, relating to, or being the sex that bears young or produces eggs (2) : pistillate
b (1) : composed of members of the female sex (2) : characteristic of girls or women
2: having some quality (as gentleness) associated with the female sex
3: designed with a hollow or groove into which a corresponding male part fits
Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/female

All right, so now we know, sex isn't subjective, as shown through Sex 1 and 2, Male 1b, and female 1a, though gender is.

Here's a page that could have saved me time with those other pages, though I'm sure you would have asked for it anyway:

"What Is The Difference Between Sex And Gender?"

"The words sex and gender are commonly used interchangeably, but many linguists would argue that their usage is quite distinct. Sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics, while gender refers to behaviors, roles, expectations, and activities in society."

"Sex refers to male or female, while gender refers to masculine or feminine."

"The differences in the sexes do not vary throughout the world, but differences in gender do."
Source: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363.php

And there we have it, now let's ask, what is considered gay/homosexual?

Definition of HOMOSEXUAL

1: of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2: of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex
Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homosexual

Huh, it's based on sex, not gender, so a transsexual man having sex with another man would be gay/homosexual.

I hope that we can now finally leave all of this behind us, unless you have any sources disproving what I said.

 

[JimB]

I want to ask one more question, why does it matter?

I cannot imagine what it feels like to be transsexual; to feel like my body is not right on the most fundamental level and that society is some relentless weight pressing down on me, telling me I have to be and behave as someone and something I'm not all because of the cruel cosmic joke played on me at birth. I have to guess it feels like losing your mind, though. Imagine waking up every day and every internal instinct telling you you're female, while the evidence of your senses insists you're not. At some point, you have to make a choice which of the two conflicting voices to believe, and this choice has to be hard as hell to make for a lot of reasons, not the least of which being that it is still considered okay to hate transsexual people.

So all that is going on, and the transsexual person still has to fight everyone who comes along, none of whom have any fucking stake in the argument at all--seriously, why on Earth should you or I care about whether Person A wants us to use male or female pronouns to describe him?--telling him that he's crazy, he's a deviant, he's a liar. The people attacking the transsexual person gain nothing from it but the cheap thrill of self-righteousness and hatred co-mingling, and as far as I'm concerned, hurting someone for no personal gain other than the pleasure of the act is the best possible definition for evil. I don't intend to leave it unchallenged when I see it, and telling transsexual people that they are not the sex they think they are is exactly that.

You don't remember it correctly, then; people were against the possibility of a gay Sheppard; they weren't against the scene itself.

Scene? What scene? I didn't mention a scene.

Making a joke insulting a group, then making a joke where you insult another group is similar.

If one of the groups gives a toss and the other doesn't, then the similarities end there.

That's not cherry-picked evidence.

How not, if the guy doing it is defining the question according to his own terms and refusing to address or acknowledge current questions in the field about the role the brain plays in determining sexual characteristics?

 

[Warachia]

I want to ask one more question, why does it matter?

I cannot imagine what it feels like to be transsexual; to feel like my body is not right on the most fundamental level and that society is some relentless weight pressing down on me, telling me I have to be and behave as someone and something I'm not all because of the cruel cosmic joke played on me at birth. I have to guess it feels like losing your mind, though. Imagine waking up every day and every internal instinct telling you you're female, while the evidence of your senses insists you're not. At some point, you have to make a choice which of the two conflicting voices to believe, and this choice has to be hard as hell to make for a lot of reasons, not the least of which being that it is still considered okay to hate transsexual people.

So all that is going on, and the transsexual person still has to fight everyone who comes along, none of whom have any fucking stake in the argument at all--seriously, why on Earth should you or I care about whether Person A wants us to use male or female pronouns to describe him?--telling him that he's crazy, he's a deviant, he's a liar. The people attacking the transsexual person gain nothing from it but the cheap thrill of self-righteousness and hatred co-mingling, and as far as I'm concerned, hurting someone for no personal gain other than the pleasure of the act is the best possible definition for evil. I don't intend to leave it unchallenged when I see it, and telling transsexual people that they are not the sex they think they are is exactly that.

You misunderstood me completely, Most likely due to the fact that you didn't read what I wrote, none of what you wrote has anything to do with the question I asked, so here's the section you took out of context: "I want to ask one more question, WHY DOES IT MATTER? If a transsexual person who is physically male has sex with another person who is physically male, why do you care so much that it's called a gay action?" Please read the entire question this time, the part that is bolded is the important bit..

I don't really have anything to add to what you did write, since I am not a transsexual I also have no idea what it feels like, which is why I asked why it the name of their preferred sexuality matters so much. I get that they do have those other issues, and I'm not going to debate that.

You don't remember it correctly, then; people were against the possibility of a gay Sheppard; they weren't against the scene itself.

Scene? What scene? I didn't mention a scene.

You were talking about consensual sex between two adult men, that was the scene, it happens once in the game, and like I said, they weren't against consensual sex between two adult men, they were against Sheppard possibly wanting to have intercourse with the same sex, that's it.

Making a joke insulting a group, then making a joke where you insult another group is similar.

If one of the groups gives a toss and the other doesn't, then the similarities end there.

They don't, because this isn't how the groups feel, this is about the intent of the person who made the alleged attack on the two groups.

That's not cherry-picked evidence.

How not, if the guy doing it is defining the question according to his own terms and refusing to address or acknowledge current questions in the field about the role the brain plays in determining sexual characteristics?

God dammit, I know that you didn't read what I wrote, even though I literally gave you everything you asked for.
You flat out ignored what you didn't like, I gave you all of the sources you wanted, I looked up everything for you because you refused to listen unless you saw sources, but then you ignored those sources when I found them for you, but here's the cliff notes anyway.

HE ISN'T USING HIS OWN TERMS. HE IS GOING BY THE MEDICAL DEFINITION OF MALE AND FEMALE (see the parts in my previous post that you ignored).

SEX ISN'T DETERMINED BY THE BRAIN (for why, see the parts in my previous post that you ignored).

GENDER IS DETERMINED BY HOW YOU SEE YOURSELF (for clarification see the parts in my previous post that you ignored).

razer17 WAS RIGHT! INTERCOURSE BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE OF THE SAME SEX IS A HOMOSEXUAL ACTION (for how see the parts in my previous post that you ignored).

I'm just frustrated with you, I am not going to copy and paste the previous post, I am not going to personally attack you. If you feel that I am being insulting in this part then I am sorry, but if you want to continue this please read my entire previous post, it contains everything that you had asked for, if you don't, I can see that you clearly don't care for this, and as such I'll ignore whatever reply you send.

 

[Wintermute_v1legacy]

I was slowly losing interest in ZP, but this was one of the funniest episodes in a long time, specially since I've already played the game in question for a change (Papers, Please). And people are offended again, imagine that.

 

[JimB]

You misunderstood me completely, most likely due to the fact that you didn't read what I wrote; none of what you wrote has anything to do with the question I asked.

Yes, it does. For the sex to be gay, the transsexual woman has to be a man and not a woman. In order for that to be the case, the transsexual woman has to be either lying or delusional in claiming to be female. I didn't think I needed to spell that out.

You were talking about consensual sex between two adult men; that was the scene.

And I'm not talking about that scene. I am talking about the defining characteristic of homosexuality (the desire to engage in romantic and/or sexual relationships with members of one's own sex) having nothing to do with the defining characteristic of pedophilia (the desire to have sexual and/or romantic relationships with children who by definition cannot consent to such), and why anyone attempting to tell me I have to support both if I support either is being disingenuous at best.

This is about the intent of the person who made the alleged attack on the two groups.

No, it isn't. It is about outcome, not intent. If no one objects to the Holocaust joke, then claiming a person who objects to the transsexual joke is intellectually or morally obligated to also object to the Holocaust joke is petty nonsense that refuses to address the objections actually being tendered in favor of changing the subject to objections no one is offering.

God dammit, I know that you didn't read what I wrote, even though I literally gave you everything you asked for.

Yeah, yeah. I read it. I just discarded it as irrelevant because none of it answered my questions. There are studies, and have been for twenty years, indicating that the brains of transsexual people are more typical of brains belonging to members of their identified sex rather than their biological ones. I want to know what evidence the original guy--and you, I guess, since you have apparently taken it upon yourself to act as his official mouthpiece--has to present about this controversy and whether sex can solely be determined as the result of chromosomes in light of this ongoing question within the medical community, particularly since the DSM 5 refuses to categorize transsexuality as a mental disorder while the ICD-10 CM does.

If you don't, I can see that you clearly don't care for this, and as such I'll ignore whatever reply you send.

Answer my post or don't as seems best to you, but please spare me the hostage negotiations ("Either you do what I tell you or I'll put a bullet in the conversation's head!"). It raises my hackles.

 

[Warachia]

You misunderstood me completely, most likely due to the fact that you didn't read what I wrote; none of what you wrote has anything to do with the question I asked.

Yes, it does. For the sex to be gay, the transsexual woman has to be a man and not a woman. In order for that to be the case, the transsexual woman has to be either lying or delusional in claiming to be female. I didn't think I needed to spell that out.

The transsexual IS PHYSICALLY A MAN. They are not physically a woman. When I said "a transsexual who is physically a man", I meant a person who is physically a man, and they are a transsexual, they were born a man, they have never had a sex change, they have a penis and testicles, so does the other man they have sex with, sorry if that wasn't clear enough.

None of what you wrote answered my question "why do you care so much that it's called a gay action?" If I missed it while you went on about how tough it was for transsexuals, please point it out to me.

You were talking about consensual sex between two adult men; that was the scene.

And I'm not talking about that scene. I am talking about the defining characteristic of homosexuality (the desire to engage in romantic and/or sexual relationships with members of one's own sex) having nothing to do with the defining characteristic of pedophilia (the desire to have sexual and/or romantic relationships with children who by definition cannot consent to such), and why anyone attempting to tell me I have to support both if I support either is being disingenuous at best.

Exactly, that's what I was saying, if you read the rest of my post you would have seen that, the people who were arguing against a gay Sheppard didn't care that at all about consensual sex between two adult men, they were concerned that THEIR Sheppard MIGHT have WANTED to have sex with a man. It's a terrible argument made by closed minded people who were against the inclusion of a Sheppard who could possibly be gay, who didn't think that they could just ignore the choice altogether and therefore have a straight Sheppard who doesn't want to have sex with a man. That's it.

This is about the intent of the person who made the alleged attack on the two groups.

No, it isn't. It is about outcome, not intent. If no one objects to the Holocaust joke, then claiming a person who objects to the transsexual joke is intellectually or morally obligated to also object to the Holocaust joke is petty nonsense that refuses to address the objections actually being tendered in favor of changing the subject to objections no one is offering.

I feel that you are looking at it from the wrong angle, so let's try to find some middle ground with this one, let's assume I tell a terrible holocaust joke and say the Jews deserved it, then let's say I tell a terrible joke against transsexuals and say they deserve the treatment they get, Jews and Transsexuals would be grouped together as people I would have wronged, that's how they saw it, which is why they were a little surprised when the people only objected to the transsexual joke, and not to the holocaust one, which was as bad, if not worse.

God dammit, I know that you didn't read what I wrote, even though I literally gave you everything you asked for.

Yeah, yeah. I read it. I just discarded it as irrelevant because none of it answered my questions. There are studies, and have been for twenty years, indicating that the brains of transsexual people are more typical of brains belonging to members of their identified sex rather than their biological ones. I want to know what evidence the original guy--and you, I guess, since you have apparently taken it upon yourself to act as his official mouthpiece--has to present about this controversy and whether sex can solely be determined as the result of chromosomes in light of this ongoing question within the medical community, particularly since the DSM 5 refuses to categorize transsexuality as a mental disorder while the ICD-10 CM does.

You didn't read it, Just like you didn't fully read the post that I made before this one, if you did you would have seen the part where I pointed out that sexual characteristics are not determined by the brain, you could have read my second post where I said that sexual characteristics are not determined by the brain (only gender ones are), If you read my post you'd have the answer to "I want to know what evidence the original guy--and you, I guess, since you have apparently taken it upon yourself to act as his official mouthpiece--has to present about this controversy and whether sex can solely be determined as the result of chromosomes in light of this ongoing question within the medical community", but don't worry, I'll spell it out, SEX AND GENDER ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS (for sources read the post with the spoiler, the part you ignored). Sex is determined by reproductive organs, which are determined by chromosomes when the egg is fertilized, gender is a completely different matter, razer17, and I have never argued against gender in this long list of conversations you keep ignoring, we've argued about the sex of the person, and that if two same sex people have intercourse, it is a homosexual action regardless of gender.

I do not know why some medical communities classify it as a mental disorder and others do not, I don't have any opinion on that.

Here's the tldr version, if you have male parts, you're sex is a man, if you think of yourself as a woman, then your gender is woman.
If you have female parts, you're sex is a woman, if you think of yourself as a man, then your gender is a man.
That's all there is to it. This is the third time I've said this, the sources are in the post with the spoiler, and I'll bet this will be the third time you'll ignore it.

If you don't, I can see that you clearly don't care for this, and as such I'll ignore whatever reply you send.

Answer my post or don't as seems best to you, but please spare me the hostage negotiations ("Either you do what I tell you or I'll put a bullet in the conversation's head!"). It raises my hackles.

What raises my hackles is when somebody asks a question, I give them the answer, they ignore it, so I give it again, and they ignore it again, I do not want to keep doing this. Very soon, I will need to sleep, then I will need to go to work, if you keep ignoring what I write and cherry picking (hypocritical since you whined that other people were cherry picking) then I will "put a bullet in the conversations head".

 

[RickyChinese]

Wow. Very disappointed by some of the views espoused here. Sometimes jokes do more to dehumanise certain groups than they do to amuse people. I'd like to think that if somebody uttered a racial slur or made a gay joke there would be more backlash against teh joke culprit but I've been disappointed before.

 

[Turbo_ski]

In terms of the dick sucking joke, here's my oppinion: People are offended by the fact that the joke infers that if you suck the dick of a pre-op, you are gay, and as such that a pre-op transexual is still a man, even if she considers herself a woman. That's the offensive part, right? That Yahtzee is saying that she is still a man, at least until she is post op.

Transfolk have to deal with mainstream media cracking jokes on our identities and implying that were perverted freaks. It's never transgenders that are making these jokes either, it's cisgender people. This is the equivalent of white comedian cracking jokes about racial minorities using racial slurs and implying that they are stupid or sub-human in some way. The exception is that this is the only visibility transgender folk are allowed which makes these jokes fact is the eyes of the populace. Which in turn leads to real violence and discrimination against transgenders. Since Yahtzee isn't transgender, I find this ignorant and crude joke as contributing to the negative views society has for transgenders.

Well, homosexuality, as I see it, is to do with sex, and not gender. And a pre-op transexual is still a male, even though they maybe a woman in terms of gender. So I don't think Yatzhee is necessarily
saying that if you have a penis you should be treated like a man (Maybe he thinks that, maybe he doesn't), but that sucking a dick is a gay thing to do. And I tend to agree with that sentiment. But hey, what do I know?

You have it backwards. Sexual orientation is an attraction to a type of gender not sex. When you look at a clothed person you can only see their gender and have no idea what their sex is. It is the gender that cause men and women to be attracted to each other, otherwise everyone would be sniffing each others' crotches to find mates. This is why many straight men will be attracted to a transwoman, but not at all towards a gay man.

 

[Colour Scientist]

Hi Everyone,

Please start behaving yourselves. Discuss civilly. Stay on topic.

If anyone posts anything further in this thread that's worth a warning, then they're going to earn a probation or suspension instead of a warning.

Some of you seem confused about the code of conduct, well, it's right here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct

If something is worth a warning, then shouldn't it just get a warning?
I don't understand why the rules would change specifically for this thread.

 

[Donzacuceron]

What the hell is going on in this comment section?

People are being stupid ... so nothing new.

 

[Batou667]

Greetings,

I was inspired to create this account when I saw the initial post on Tumblr.

Most of you seem like very bright, intelligent individuals. But underlying your words seems to be a cruel streak towards the LBGT, Trans, and Otherkin community.

Stopped reading there.

This is why transexuals don't get taken seriously.

 

[JimB]

If I missed it while you went on about how tough it was for transsexuals, please point it out to me.

Do a Ctrl + F search for the word "evil" on the previous page. You'll find it.

Exactly, that's what I was saying. If you read the rest of my post you would have seen that.

I know you did. I wasn't disagreeing with you. I never said I was disagreeing with you. Stop accusing me of not reading your posts just because you don't understand my responses and are projecting some kind of antagonism onto me. All I said was I don't care what those people think; as in, you can quit bringing them up.

You didn't read it.

I did read it. It did not answer my questions. You have decided to assert that I didn't read it because that makes it easier for you to say this disagreement is my fault.

If you had, you would have seen the part where I pointed out that sexual characteristics are not determined by the brain.

You asserted that without a single reference I could detect to anything more recent or focused on the issue than a dictionary. You never addressed the ongoing discussion in the medical community, nor named an authority who has addressed the discussion.

I'll spell it out: Sex and gender are two different things/i].

Warachia, I get that you're mad at me, okay? I understand that. Since you have made that point clear, I assume it is now out of your system and you will refrain from condescending to me as if I am so ignorant I need your help to understand the hitherto foreign revelation that different words don't mean the same things. I hope venting your spleen has made you feel better.

Of course sex and gender are different things. Sex refers to physical characteristics, while gender refers to social roles. Since our understanding of humanity's construction is increasing, it is possible that the definitions for sex will evolve. Do you have any information to offer which directly addresses the questions I've asked and casts them aside in favor of the old definitions, or are you only going to refer to those that don't address the ongoing debate?

I do not know why some medical communities classify it as a mental disorder and others do not. I don't have any opinion on that.

I am deeply amused that you admit this so plainly after having insisted so many times that you did in fact answer my questions.

 

[JimB]

Normally, a thread as vitriolic and derailed as this would've been locked many pages ago. But because this is a Featured Content thread, it cannot be locked.

I hadn't understood that. My apologies. I will stop contributing to the derail...though may I ask, does this derail differ significantly from those in Jimquisition or the Big Picture threads?

 

[GildaTheGriffin]

How come the video thumbnail is like a broken picture symbol?

 

[SoulkeeperX]

I don't understand how people can be offended by this, but then again, look at the time we're living in. He's YAHTZEE, he makes hundreds of funny video game reviews on the internet, why is he being held to the same standards as say, a politician? He's a guy on the internet, he's not campaigning for votes and someone caught him on tape bashing transsexuals. Context makes a huge difference here, and I bet all the people who were offended won't give a shit about this in a week, if they even still care.

 

[Simca]

There's a difference between playful jokes and ridicule, and when it comes to denying trans people are the gender the identify as in a very popular web show, then it's not a playful joke. Maybe for you it seems like that, but that's because you're in a ridiculously priviliged position in comparison to trans people.

And to think, you would actually have a point if he denied transsexual people, but he didn't.

Actually, he made a joke about how a guy who sleeps with pre op trans girls is gay. Which is saying that pre op trans girls are men. Which is denying that a pre op trans girl is a girl.



Would a picture of me convince you I'm not trolling?

To be fair, the definition of a male is that he A: Produces sperm, and B: Has a Y Chromosome. And until you can eliminate these two criterias from an individual, HE is by all accounts, a physiological male, no matter how much make-up.
And no don't send pics, this isn't craigslist goddammit.

Please don't pretend to be a forum scientist because you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. Both of your criteria listed for being a male are wrong, both are wrong under the sex and gender definitions of 'male' and the first point is still wrong even by the genetic definition of the word 'male'.

That said, I doubt any trans individuals were offended at this. This is incredibly tame compared to the normal shit that they have to deal with.

"How strange, this woman has and was born with a Y chromosone." - Said by no scientist ever.
They aren't wrong, if you want to say that they are you are going to need to point out how, and if you can, you're going to need to post the correct criteria.

This is not remotely an exhaustive list of possible definitions, but I'll post the three I was talking about.

Gender (identity): A person's feeling of self and secureness in their sexual characteristics and in the way they present themselves to the world. The concept of self is reinforced by gender (the social construct), and their secureness in their sexual characteristics is often heavily influenced by gender (their hormonal makeup).

Sex (physical biology): The physical primary and secondary sex characteristics of an individual. These can be changed via surgery to match the opposing sex, or they can be that way from birth due to genetic anomalies (see: intersex conditions).

Sex (genetic): The type and number of sex chromosomes in the majority of an individual's genes. XX is standard female, XY is standard male. This is far less important than people used to think because the Y chromosome's role has been determined to be mostly just influencing hormones, which we can mimic through artificial hormones and hormone replacement therapy.

Intersex conditions (genetic): People with genetic abnormalities exist, such as a single X, XXX, XXY, XXXX, XXXY, and XXXXX. Three sex chromosome mutations are the most common, and thankfully the least impactful. Women with XXX will be stronger and sometimes infertile with a few health conditions. Men with XXY will be weaker, often develop breasts, and have less prominent male sex characteristics. Women with a single X have a significant number of health problems, and several can be fatal. As for XXXX, XXXY, and others, anything past three chromosomes usually results in death. There are survivors... but they probably wished that they died instead.


There are also other physical intersex conditions, resulting in stuff like having multiple vaginas (in rare cases, accompanied by two sets of functioning internal organs, resulting in a bizarre situation where somebody can be pregnant twice at once). Anyway, these are just a few of the definitions you could use; I mention a couple of others as well that you can probably figure out just from context (though the hormonal makeup one is perhaps more complex than it appears). There is no one definition for gender or sex. They're very complex subjects.

 

[Un34rth]

This thread is glorious. Never thought I'd see so people get upset over nothing at all. No one is safe from Yahtzee's wrath, figured people would know that by now.

Untwist your panties and for fucks sake grow some thicker skin. Life isn't long enough to whine about jokes. I don't see Christians up in arms over Jim Jefferies bashing their religion or any black people bitching about a white comic making racially insensitive jokes.

 

[Warachia]

If I missed it while you went on about how tough it was for transsexuals, please point it out to me.

Do a Ctrl + F search for the word "evil" on the previous page. You'll find it.

I'll do that, you said "Evil is a word you use to describe a situation were the morality is absolute.
it's used to justify not trying to understand actions."
"The people attacking the transsexual person gain nothing from it but the cheap thrill of self-righteousness and hatred co-mingling, and as far as I'm concerned, hurting someone for no personal gain other than the pleasure of the act is the best possible definition for evil"

Now, neither of these answer the question: "Why do you care so much that it's called a gay action?" There is nothing wrong with it being called gay, and since the definition of homosexual actions is sexual actions between two members of the same sex, then calling it gay is correct.

If you don't like it because you feel people who call it gay are doing so only to be hurtful towards the other party, then please just say that.

I'll spell it out: Sex and gender are two different things/i].

Warachia, I get that you're mad at me, okay? I understand that. Since you have made that point clear, I assume it is now out of your system and you will refrain from condescending to me as if I am so ignorant I need your help to understand the hitherto foreign revelation that different words don't mean the same things. I hope venting your spleen has made you feel better.

Of course sex and gender are different things. Sex refers to physical characteristics, while gender refers to social roles. Since our understanding of humanity's construction is increasing, it is possible that the definitions for sex will evolve. Do you have any information to offer which directly addresses the questions I've asked and casts them aside in favor of the old definitions, or are you only going to refer to those that don't address the ongoing debate?

Thanks, it did, I have no interest in whatever debate is going on in the medical community, I want to get back to the original reason I started arguing with you, razer17 said that if a person whose sex is male, has intercourse or gives a blowjob to another person whose sex is male, than it is a homosexual action. You disagreed, but I said that this is true, since the definition of a homosexual action is determined exclusively by sex, and not by gender.

If you want to discuss gender, then that is an entirely different, and I am not interested in discussing that, if you still want an answer to how the brain affects a persons sex, then I'll give it to you: it doesn't. It can only affect gender.

I have a feeling that a lot of our argument is because of a lack of understanding of the words we've been using, when you've been asking me about how the brain affects the sex of a person, I'm guessing you mean gender, when I say that the [brain doesn't affect the sexual characteristics of a person, I mean that it does not affect what makes them the sex that they are, sexual characteristics in this case refer to the male reproductive organs, and female reproductive organs, and not gender.

You've said previously I didn't have any references, which is a lie since I've very clearly linked my sources, and the medical definition is more than adequate enough, but if you really want sources again, with authors listed, then here you go: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sex, use CTRL+F, and look up "Word Origin and History" or look up "Douglas Harper". If you wanted to see study links, they are linked in the medical definition that I linked as well as the others I linked. The definition describes the sexual characteristics of a man, as well as a woman, and why they are called that, the brain has nothing to do with any of this.

One more thing: "Do you have any information to offer which directly addresses the questions I've asked and casts them aside in favor of the old definitions" I'm not entirely sure what you meant when you wrote this, but the old definitions are fine, there's good reasons why they've been used for hundreds of years, and why we had to attach secondary definitions of them to clear some things up (gender onto sex for example).

I do not know why some medical communities classify it as a mental disorder and others do not. I don't have any opinion on that.

I am deeply amused that you admit this so plainly after having insisted so many times that you did in fact answer my questions.

Saying I don't know is still an answer. I have answered all of the questions you've asked me, you just haven't accepted some of my answers, so you gave me no indication that you read them. If I missed a question, please point me to it.

 

[Warachia]

Snip.

Thank you, that was exactly what I was looking for, and it was helpful, I didn't really know about many of those intersex conditions, I'd like to say though that there are definitions for gender, and sex, just as there are exceptions to sex, I can't think of how there would be an exception to gender given that's how the person views them self.
I've already linked many in my ongoing argument with JimB, but here you go anyway: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sex, of course everybody does not fall into the categories that they've made.

 

[JimB]

I'll do that, you said "Evil is a word you use to describe a situation were the morality is absolute.
it's used to justify not trying to understand actions."
"The people attacking the transsexual person gain nothing from it but the cheap thrill of self-righteousness and hatred co-mingling, and as far as I'm concerned, hurting someone for no personal gain other than the pleasure of the act is the best possible definition for evil"

As I said at the top of this page, I will not participate further in this discussion with you because I think it would be disrespectful to the mods who wish they could lock the thread. I will, however, point out that I only said one of the above statements which you have attributed to me. I have no idea who made the other.