|
|
Post by Morgana on Jun 17, 2020 10:34:06 GMT
In general I agree, though there are hermaphrodites that are a combination of the two.
|
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jun 18, 2020 9:16:04 GMT
Prove that two genders is fact first. Male gender is fact - check any biology reference book. Female gender is fact - check any biology reference book. The human species reproduce sexually via two genders - biological fact. And that's it. You do have anomolous examples of people with chromosome disorders, but those do not constitute their own genders as their extra chromosomes represent a defect, not a feature of our species. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jun 18, 2020 9:58:55 GMT
Gender has always been understood as being defined by our biological sex, which is why I can see how it can be confusing for people to understand gender being defined this way. I also find that very interesting about transgender brains. Though I also think there could be some people who don’t want to identify as their gender defined by their biological sex because they don’t like or believe they fit in with the stereotypes associated with that certain gender. For example, a girl who likes more boyish things wouldn’t necessarily mean they should identify as a boy for that reason. This however could be confused with what actually being transgender is. I don’t fully understand it so maybe transgender people already understand this difference, but can be confusing to know who you are. Actually, that's not quite true. Long before gender had anything to do with biological sex it was just a grammatical term. The use of gender to refer to biological sex happened some time in the 20th century as "sex" took on erotic connotations, so people used gender as a non-erotic metaphor. In 1926, the lexicographer Henry Watson Fowler said this of the term: "Gender...is a grammatical term only. To talk of persons...of the masculine or feminine g[ender], meaning of the male or female sex, is either a jocularity (permissible or not according to context) or a blunder." The use of "gender" to talk about masculine/feminine traits happened not long after this, and I think the first attestation was from 1945. Basically, those trying to argue that gender has always referred to/meant biological sex and that those using it to mean masculine/feminine psychological/social traits are guilty of "changing the meaning of the word" are completely ignorant of the history of the word itself. Both uses--gender as sex VS gender as masculine/feminine psychological/sociological traits--are from the early-to-mid 20th century. It's not that gender-as-sex is what the term always meant, it's just that that usage became more popular common. However, science and other academic disciplines now recognize the usefulness of having two different words to denote biological sex VS masculine/feminine traits that are psychological and social in nature. As for you last paragraph, I agree that there should be distinctions between girls and boys who identify the same as their sex but have traits or interests more common in the opposite sex, and actual transgender people who genuinely feel like they're the wrong biological sex because of how they psychologically identify. The concept of "tomboy" girls and "sensitive" guys is nothing new. I don't know where you got the above from, but it is demonstrably false. Gender comes from Latin via French, and was originally used to describe persons, animals or objects with similar characteristics. The grammatical meaning of "gender" borrows from the biological, not the other way around. "Generation" comes from the same Latin word, ie. "genus". And we know that the word "gender" has been used in the sense of biological gender since at least the 15th century. As a verb, synonymous with "beget" or "give birth to", "gender" has been used since at least a century prior. www.etymonline.com/search?q=genderAlso, in German the word for gender is "Geschlecht", the original meaning of which has to do with genealogy, ancestry and familial ties. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jun 18, 2020 10:02:32 GMT
Male gender is fact - check any biology reference book. Female gender is fact - check any biology reference book. The human species reproduce sexually via two genders - biological fact. And that's it. You do have anomolous examples of people with chromosome disorders, but those do not constitute their own genders as their extra chromosomes represent a defect, not a feature of our species. You've proven there are two sexes...I'll not disagree, but I don't think sex necessarily defines gender. Can you support your claim that it is. And otherwise, I wouldn't care, but too, too many in our society...and in particular mine...will use biological facts in order to fuck people up. It is not for me to prove that there are only two genders. On the contrary, if you wish to claim there are more genders, it is your burden to prove it. |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 18, 2020 10:32:42 GMT
Male gender is fact - check any biology reference book. Female gender is fact - check any biology reference book. The human species reproduce sexually via two genders - biological fact. And that's it. You do have anomolous examples of people with chromosome disorders, but those do not constitute their own genders as their extra chromosomes represent a defect, not a feature of our species. You've proven there are two sexes...I'll not disagree, but I don't think sex necessarily defines gender. Can you support your claim that it is. And otherwise, I wouldn't care, but too, too many in our society...and in particular mine...will use biological facts in order to fuck people up. India legally recognizes three genders. Male, female and Transgender. Any form you fill in India will have three options for gender. As a matter of fact Hinduism reconsises three genders since as long as it has existed. Even homosexuality was recognised widely as not a sin but then Islamists came and later imposition of Victorian morality created homophobic society like the rest of the world. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jun 18, 2020 11:11:38 GMT
It is not for me to prove that there are only two genders. On the contrary, if you wish to claim there are more genders, it is your burden to prove it. I'm just fine with being a male queer...or should I be forbidden to have "sex" with men, because, you know, that's biological impossibility too. However, please read what I posted above. Since I'm not a biologist, all I can do is reference experts who do study gender and sex. I can't prove it, but I have supported my claim. And I don't want to get into an argument with you because you're a nice guy whom I respect, so...over and out. Same-sex relations is obviously not a biological impossibility, and is a different discussion altogether. It tends not to produce any offspring, but so what? We do lots of things nature didn't strictly intend. Smoking, for example. Or bungee jumping. But nature may actually have intended for some people to be more drawn to its own sex than others. The chance of a boy turning out to be gay increases with each older brother he has, which suggests that it might be a way to brake population growth. Either way, while sexuality can be altered through experience, but the basic male/female attraction is almost always innate. But that still doesn't affect the discussion of gender itself. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jun 18, 2020 12:51:17 GMT
Same-sex relations is obviously not a biological impossibility, and is a different discussion altogether. It tends not to produce any offspring, but so what? We do lots of things nature didn't strictly intend. Smoking, for example. Or bungee jumping. But nature may actually have intended for some people to be more drawn to its own sex than others. The chance of a boy turning out to be gay increases with each older brother he has, which suggests that it might be a way to brake population growth. Either way, while sexuality can be altered through experience, but the basic male/female attraction is almost always innate. But that still doesn't affect the discussion of gender itself. Can sex between two males produce offspring? Note I used the adverb biologically above. That's reproduction - reproduction is not necessary for sex relations to take place. Penetration is a biological function of the penis, and if you are able to penetrate something with the one you've got, it stands to reason that you are biologically able to do so. "Biological" does not pertain to procreation unless specified. All sex involving biological entities must necessarily be biological sex. Sex is a biological function of reproduction in all sexual species, yes, but in many species it also has secondary functions. In primates, in particular, it is also used socially, to establish one's place (or the other's) in the hierarchy. Sex is very frequently used as a way of dominating other individuals. We have evolved to associate the act of penetration with not merely seeding, but with domination, and the passive act of being penetrated with submissiveness. In other words, when A penetrates B - regardless of either's gender - A is making B his or her bitch, so to speak. This, too, is a biological function. And this is also the reason why in historical societies, like feudal Japan or ancient Rome/Greece, there was no shame for a man who penetrated other men - but great shame for an adult male who allowed himself to be penetrated. And in point of fact, you still find this attitude today in microcosms such as prisons. Why, thank you kindly, and I'll return the compliment. And indeed, if I know someone's preference for address, then I will comply unless I have reason to do otherwise. However, if it is a stranger, I will naturally address them based on appearance. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2020 13:26:08 GMT
How I see it there are 2 biological sexes or 3 if including intersex. But gender seems more subjective, and from what I understand there is cis male, cis female, trans male, trans female, gender fluid, and non-binary (which is an umbrella term for many other types ) There are others but don’t understand what they are or know the difference between the ones mentioned. Gender is "kind" born out of latin term genus. In that sense, the origins of its meaning are subjective because it can describe what kind of relationship one has with a complete, as gender nouns.
Those of us born post WWII have had "gender" squandered off as relating to biological birth sex, but this is also largely rooted in masculine and feminine characteristics and intentionally attributed to boy or girl, so that is understandable. What goes on in the mind is only for each person to claim for themselves, but it is only fair for most still alive today to perceive gender as being interchangeable with the term "sex" due to the conditioning of the term. It appears what the term "gender" can represent has become contrived and convoluted, when the majority of humans and even what is projected largely in nature, in and of itself, operates on male\female characteristics biologically. There are some exceptions.
Whatever the mind does, can turn things into chaos and madness and most people can't be expected to understand someone else's mental state or even disorder regarding what "gender" flux they want to relate too. Visually, male\female can be easily identified at a glance, even when attempting to look like the opposite.
I view it as sex being biological, or how you appear to be based on female/male characteristics as how you said. But gender being based on how you feel and in your mind, where you can change your gender or be more than one gender or not have one at all whenever you feel you should be. I think this allows people to understand who they are more and be able to express that instead of only feeling only limited to the labels male or female. I don’t see it as a mental disorder or anything negative. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jun 18, 2020 16:23:52 GMT
Gender is "kind" born out of latin term genus. In that sense, the origins of its meaning are subjective because it can describe what kind of relationship one has with a complete, as gender nouns.
Those of us born post WWII have had "gender" squandered off as relating to biological birth sex, but this is also largely rooted in masculine and feminine characteristics and intentionally attributed to boy or girl, so that is understandable. What goes on in the mind is only for each person to claim for themselves, but it is only fair for most still alive today to perceive gender as being interchangeable with the term "sex" due to the conditioning of the term. It appears what the term "gender" can represent has become contrived and convoluted, when the majority of humans and even what is projected largely in nature, in and of itself, operates on male\female characteristics biologically. There are some exceptions.
Whatever the mind does, can turn things into chaos and madness and most people can't be expected to understand someone else's mental state or even disorder regarding what "gender" flux they want to relate too. Visually, male\female can be easily identified at a glance, even when attempting to look like the opposite.
I view it as sex being biological, or how you appear to be based on female/male characteristics as how you said. But gender being based on how you feel and in your mind, where you can change your gender or be more than one gender or not have one at all whenever you feel you should be. I think this allows people to understand who they are more and be able to express that instead of only feeling only limited to the labels male or female. I don’t see it as a mental disorder or anything negative. That's something I don't get, though. A person in a male body but who "feels like" a woman? How does he know what it's like to feel like a woman? |
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Jun 18, 2020 17:26:44 GMT
You didn't specify that you wanted us to confine our 'discussion' to humans. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HermaphroditeEven then there are humans who are true hermaphrodites, and some with abnormal DNA, with either additional or missing chromosomes. You are either trolling, or stupid, or both. 'Hermaphrodite' isn't a gender genius. ..that's why there's a different word for it. It's a biological abnormality. Biological abnormalities are not genders. Amazing that you call other people stupid... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2020 18:53:10 GMT
I view it as sex being biological, or how you appear to be based on female/male characteristics as how you said. But gender being based on how you feel and in your mind, where you can change your gender or be more than one gender or not have one at all whenever you feel you should be. I think this allows people to understand who they are more and be able to express that instead of only feeling only limited to the labels male or female. I don’t see it as a mental disorder or anything negative. That's something I don't get, though. A person in a male body but who "feels like" a woman? How does he know what it's like to feel like a woman? Either feels like a woman, neither or both. It can possibly be because of differences in the brain. But it’s all subjective. I can see where it can be difficult to understand because it’s not something meant to make sense out of for people who can’t relate to the feeling. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 18, 2020 21:16:58 GMT
Prove that two genders is fact first. Male gender is fact - check any biology reference book. Female gender is fact - check any biology reference book. The human species reproduce sexually via two genders - biological fact. And that's it. You do have anomolous examples of people with chromosome disorders, but those do not constitute their own genders as their extra chromosomes represent a defect, not a feature of our species. Strictly speaking scientifically you must be correct, however try explaining that to the perhaps millions of people over time who are 'defective', according to your definition. Your definition also does not apply, then to those who fee that they are of the opposite gender to the one assigned them either by nature or 'defective' nature. They still aspire to be one of the two genders, just the opposite one. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 18, 2020 21:24:00 GMT
I view it as sex being biological, or how you appear to be based on female/male characteristics as how you said. But gender being based on how you feel and in your mind, where you can change your gender or be more than one gender or not have one at all whenever you feel you should be. I think this allows people to understand who they are more and be able to express that instead of only feeling only limited to the labels male or female. I don’t see it as a mental disorder or anything negative. That's something I don't get, though. A person in a male body but who "feels like" a woman? How does he know what it's like to feel like a woman? Is it a requisite for you to 'get' why other people think the way that they do, and if they don't think like you to call them 'mentally ill'? I look at it statistically as well though there are no absolute or studied stats to my knowledge, however there are anecdotally sufficient numbers of such people, to at least take them seriously and not add to any perceived confusion you and they might feel about something so personal |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jun 18, 2020 21:45:55 GMT
Male gender is fact - check any biology reference book. Female gender is fact - check any biology reference book. The human species reproduce sexually via two genders - biological fact. And that's it. You do have anomolous examples of people with chromosome disorders, but those do not constitute their own genders as their extra chromosomes represent a defect, not a feature of our species. Strictly speaking scientifically you must be correct, however try explaining that to the perhaps millions of people over time who are 'defective', according to your definition. Those with chromosome disorders are usually not the ones who feel conflicted with regards to gender identity. The vast majority of trans people have perfectly normal male or female bodies. One can feel any way one likes. I actually do not see how that changes one's gender, ethnicity or anything else. When they have made the transition physically, then I do not have a problem viewing them as members of their new gender. However, the "male trapped in a female's body" or the other way around is a matter of their subjective opinion - not one of biological fact. Hormones, more than anything, dictates what it feels like to be a man or a woman. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Jun 18, 2020 21:53:55 GMT
That's something I don't get, though. A person in a male body but who "feels like" a woman? How does he know what it's like to feel like a woman? Is it a requisite for you to 'get' why other people think the way that they do, and if they don't think like you to call them 'mentally ill'? I didn't call them mentally ill, you were the one who said they just liked to play dress-up. Oh, you don't like it when I put words in your mouth? Anyway, I put it to you that if you have never been a man, then you cannot possibly know what it is like to feel like a man. Just like if you have never been a woman, then you cannot possibly know what it is to feel like a woman. If you think otherwise, I am all ears as to how you can feel like something you've never been, with the added obstacle of never having been burdened with the hormone balances of the opposite sex. Of course they should be taken seriously. I think it should be anyone's right to make a sex transition, if that is what they desire. But that is no reason to refuse realities in an effort to shield their feelings - that is a path that can lead to nowhere good. |
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Jun 18, 2020 22:03:54 GMT
The sad thing is the OP needs to mention what used to go without saying. just shows you how insane some people are getting where they question everything, even common sense. lol
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 18, 2020 22:30:25 GMT
Strictly speaking scientifically you must be correct, however try explaining that to the perhaps millions of people over time who are 'defective', according to your definition. Those with chromosome disorders are usually not the ones who feel conflicted with regards to gender identity. The vast majority of trans people have perfectly normal male or female bodies. One can feel any way one likes. I actually do not see how that changes one's gender, ethnicity or anything else. When they have made the transition physically, then I do not have a problem viewing them as members of their new gender. However, the "male trapped in a female's body" or the other way around is a matter of their subjective opinion - not one of biological fact. Hormones, more than anything, dictates what it feels like to be a man or a woman. You are usually one of the most sane posters on this Board, however in this matter I find you 'unempathetic' to others' and their rights to think and feel differently to you or me. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 18, 2020 22:31:42 GMT
The sad thing is the OP needs to mention what used to go without saying. just shows you how insane some people are getting where they question everything, even common sense. lol Is that what Christ would do? |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 19, 2020 3:14:47 GMT
Actually, that's not quite true. Long before gender had anything to do with biological sex it was just a grammatical term. The use of gender to refer to biological sex happened some time in the 20th century as "sex" took on erotic connotations, so people used gender as a non-erotic metaphor. In 1926, the lexicographer Henry Watson Fowler said this of the term: "Gender...is a grammatical term only. To talk of persons...of the masculine or feminine g[ender], meaning of the male or female sex, is either a jocularity (permissible or not according to context) or a blunder." The use of "gender" to talk about masculine/feminine traits happened not long after this, and I think the first attestation was from 1945. Basically, those trying to argue that gender has always referred to/meant biological sex and that those using it to mean masculine/feminine psychological/social traits are guilty of "changing the meaning of the word" are completely ignorant of the history of the word itself. Both uses--gender as sex VS gender as masculine/feminine psychological/sociological traits--are from the early-to-mid 20th century. It's not that gender-as-sex is what the term always meant, it's just that that usage became more popular common. However, science and other academic disciplines now recognize the usefulness of having two different words to denote biological sex VS masculine/feminine traits that are psychological and social in nature. As for you last paragraph, I agree that there should be distinctions between girls and boys who identify the same as their sex but have traits or interests more common in the opposite sex, and actual transgender people who genuinely feel like they're the wrong biological sex because of how they psychologically identify. The concept of "tomboy" girls and "sensitive" guys is nothing new. I don't know where you got the above from, but it is demonstrably false. Gender comes from Latin via French, and was originally used to describe persons, animals or objects with similar characteristics. The grammatical meaning of "gender" borrows from the biological, not the other way around. "Generation" comes from the same Latin word, ie. "genus". And we know that the word "gender" has been used in the sense of biological gender since at least the 15th century. As a verb, synonymous with "beget" or "give birth to", "gender" has been used since at least a century prior. www.etymonline.com/search?q=genderAlso, in German the word for gender is "Geschlecht", the original meaning of which has to do with genealogy, ancestry and familial ties. You're going back much farther than I was, but your link doesn't support the claim that the grammatical meaning came from the biological usage for sex. What it says is: "kind, sort, class, a class or kind of persons or things sharing certain traits," from Old French gendre, genre "kind, species..." So it may have had a biological usage, but it wasn't about sex. According to that link, the earliest usage for sex in English was from the early 15th century, but it says nothing about how common it was, and the very next sentence suggests that usage WASN'T common as it says precisely what I said above: "As sex (n.) took on erotic qualities in 20c., gender came to be the usual English word for "sex of a human being," in which use it was at first regarded as colloquial or humorous." Most of my information came from Wikipedia: "The term gender had been associated with grammar for most of history and only started to move towards it being a malleable cultural construct in the 1950s and 1960s." and "Before (John Money's) work, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories. For example, in a bibliography of 12,000 references on marriage and family from 1900–1964, the term gender does not even emerge once. Analysis of more than 30 million academic article titles from 1945–2001 showed that the uses of the term "gender", were much rarer than uses of "sex", (and) was often used as a grammatical category early in this period." The quote I posted from lexicographer Henry Fowler was from 1926, and it very much suggests that, before then at least, the usage of "gender" to mean "sex" was so uncommon to the point of being considered either incorrect or a joke. I'll also say that, anecdotally, I've read a ton of classic English literature and I don't ever remember coming across the word gender to refer to biological sex, though the word sex was quite common. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 19, 2020 3:19:21 GMT
I view it as sex being biological, or how you appear to be based on female/male characteristics as how you said. But gender being based on how you feel and in your mind, where you can change your gender or be more than one gender or not have one at all whenever you feel you should be. I think this allows people to understand who they are more and be able to express that instead of only feeling only limited to the labels male or female. I don’t see it as a mental disorder or anything negative. That's something I don't get, though. A person in a male body but who "feels like" a woman? How does he know what it's like to feel like a woman?Probably thanks to mirror neurons. People just feel how they feel, but they observe a likeness between how they feel/act and how others feel/act VS how they identify as. So if someone observes that likeness more in people of the opposite sex, they probably conclude they feel like a woman despite being biologically male or vice versa. As I posted earlier, the science bears this out considering that transgender brains tend to be more typical of the gender they identify with rather than the sex they were born as. |
|
