Gender neutral / Gender Non-Binary

[Finnegan]

21 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Except that then ignores that you can be phenotypically female with an XY karyotype (Swyer syndrome), or phenotypically male with an XX karyotype (De la chapelle syndrome), to say nothing of kleinefelters (XXY - male primary sexual characteristics with some female secondary characteristics), hermaphroditism, and the rest of the intersex conditions. Biological sex is more complicated than cock = bloke, wizards sleeve and you're a woman.

 

And, again, this is you being pedantic to show you've studied science. 

 

You're talking accepted mutations and anomalies which is fine but it's also a distraction from the clear point that biological fact =/= existential self (or societal) identification. 

[Mike Oxlong]

A logic test would resolve any doubts.

[The Doctor]

1 minute ago, Finnegan said:

 

And, again, this is you being pedantic to show you've studied science. 

 

You're talking accepted mutations and anomalies which is fine but it's also a distraction from the clear point that biological fact =/= existential self (or societal) identification. 

No, it's me making the point that even when it comes to biological sex it's not a simple delineation, men on one side, women on in the other - that's even leaving out identification (because frankly I don't understand defining yourself by your sex or the gender you feel like rather than by your interests, hopes and profession - the things that make you you) or the difference between gender and sex.

[Finnegan]

I don't disagree with the crux of what you mean, we're singing from the same chorus. 

 

Limiting what someone can or cannot do by their physical sex (beyond acts of reproduction) IS gender which is exactly what I'm saying doesn't exist, we created it. 

 

But there's no point denying the existence of physical sex or that it's purpose is reproduction and that it typically takes one supplier of an egg and one supplier of sperm.

[Daggers]

Paging Thracian to the thread.

[Finnegan]

4 minutes ago, Daggers said:

Paging Thracian to the thread.

 

I believe he's still banned for his last racist outburst. 

[Daggers]

1 minute ago, Finnegan said:

 

I believe he's still banned for his last racist outburst. 

Shame. I always look for his considered counterbalance on matters such as this. It’s far too easy to adopt an understanding and tolerant position on such topics; knee-jerk, hate-fuelled bigotry serves a valuable purpose. Mainly for comedy, but valuable none the less.

[Alf Bentley]

14 hours ago, MattP said:

The World just gets weirder and weirder doesn't it? 

 

I wanted an ironing board when I was about five, if that happened now I'd probably be having tablets put in me and being assigned something to try and make me a woman. 

 

No wonder most people are ****ed up. 

 

11 hours ago, bovril said:

Forget the debate, I want to hear more about MattP's Fisher Price ironing board.

 

I don't wish to pry into the deep wounds of early childhood (well, maybe a little bit, so long as nobody gets hurt ). But your phrasing suggests that you didn't get the ironing board.

If so, who denied you, why and how did you feel about that? If you got the ironing board, how did it work out and how did family and childhood friends respond?

 

I'm not just taking the piss here. Teasing gently, but serious too. Anyone with an open mind who becomes a parent rapidly becomes aware of the intense "gender enforcement" by society.

When I became a Dad and had to walk the aisles of children's clothes, I couldn't believe how one row was almost entirely pink with motifs of fairies and princesses, the other row almost entirely blue with motifs of action heroes, builders etc.

 

I remember a couple of awkward moments when I was primary school age:

- Once (age 8?), I asked a girl round to play. I usually played with boys and my Dad asked me slightly disapprovingly why I hadn't asked a boy, which made me feel awful. 

- I was in a book club and once (age 9-10?) wanted to order a book called "The wolves of Willoughby Chase", about the friendship and adventures of 2 girls with wicked governesses, wild wolves etc. I just liked the sound of the adventures, had always liked wolves and the heroes being girls not boys was immaterial. Again, my Dad questioned my choice, despite most of my books being about males - though he coughed up for the book.

I should add that my Dad was a lovely bloke and not particularly macho. He was much given to reciting poetry and singing emotional songs. Much later, when it became clear that one of my nephews was gay, he was very accepting but bemused. He once commented that there had been no gay people when he was growing up (in a traditional rural ultra-Catholic community in the west of Ireland - Duh!).

 

I do agree with @Finnegan when he implies that gender (as opposed to biological sex) is largely a social construct. I assume that hormones have some influence so there would probably be more aggressive males and more nurturing females even if there was no social conditioning, but direct and indirect social pressure to conform and to avoid becoming an outcast must play a big part. In a strange way, it did with me as late as my teenage years, I think. As a young child, I was a dreamer and clueless about fitting in socially. Pre-adolescence I was OK as I liked football and was OK at cracking jokes, but in teenage years the fact that I was a misfit, quite sensitive and not a macho conformist became a problem and I was subjected to homophobic abuse (even though I wasn't actually gay). Growing into adulthood, I reacted to that by becoming more aggressive (words and cunning, not physical violence)....a sort of indirect gender conditioning, which has worked very well for me.

 

Oh, my brother.... As a kid, he had a (female) doll, but after a while he took to stabbing and mutilating it. He hasn't grown up to be an extreme mysoginist (and is very accepting of his gay son), but I'd say he's much more macho than me.

[Captain...]

14 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

Where you’re not recognisably male or female, anatomically speaking. It surprised me when I learned the 1 in 2000 stat. I thought it would be a lot more rare.

I've heard from a semi reliable source, that in cases where a child is born with both sets of genitalia doctors will often remove one and basically decide the biological gender for the child at birth. I am skeptical about this, especially in this country, but it would explain why or how something that is 1 in 2000 actually appears much rarer.

 

My general rule of thumb is people should be free to be and act and live how they please as long as it doesn't harm others.

 

The problem is the social construct is so strong that it is hard enough to break as an adult, even if I wanted to wear a dress to work, I really couldn't be arsed with the hassle. When trying to raise your child as "gender neutral", even with the best will in the world, there is the danger of pushing them outside of societies warm embrace. Part of your role as a parent is to prepare them for life, which includes the societal norms we all live within. In deliberately trying to raise your child as gender neutral and actively encouraging the behaviour that goes against societal gender norms you are in danger alienating them from their peers and sending them down a path that neither of you nor your child actually want to go down.

 

When it comes to Sam Smith, good for you, but I don't really care and I'm not going to buy your music, when it comes to raising children and the potentially damaging effects of our societal norms and attempts to use our children to break them, it is a whole other minefield which will be keeping therapists in business for generations to come.

[ozleicester]

3 hours ago, Ross-Kemp said:

But they are, aren't they.

 

If you have a penis, you're scientifically a male. That's factual information.

 

If you have a vagina, you're scientifically a female. 

Again, that's factual information. 

 

 

No... and NO..it is not scientific.nor is it factual

 

If you lose your penis..are you no longer male?

[Realist Guy In The Room]

I cant imagine what it would feel like to think I was trapped in the wrong sex body.  It must be torture, especially when you read and hear some comments that are made.

 

Personally, I observe a very British tradition on this and any other form of a persons sexuality.  I mind my own fvcking business.

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

I cant imagine what it would feel like to think I was trapped in the wrong sex body.  It must be torture, especially when you read and hear some comments that are made.

 

Personally, I observe a very British tradition on this and any other form of a persons sexuality.  I mind my own fvcking business.

Preach.

[James.]

My 2 year old daughter likes dinosaurs, my little ponies, cars and princesses. Should I be worried?

[Bellend Sebastian]

1 hour ago, Daggers said:

Shame. I always look for his considered counterbalance on matters such as this. It’s far too easy to adopt an understanding and tolerant position on such topics; knee-jerk, hate-fuelled bigotry serves a valuable purpose. Mainly for comedy, but valuable none the less.

I often find myself thinking 'if only there were more of this'

[Finnegan]

10 minutes ago, James. said:

My 2 year old daughter likes dinosaurs, my little ponies, cars and princesses. Should I be worried?

 

Yes, you should be worried. 

 

You've only got eleven years left before she becomes more terrifying than any dinosaur. 

[James.]

8 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Yes, you should be worried. 

 

You've only got eleven years left before she becomes more terrifying than any dinosaur. 

She's getting there. If I'm in a different room the first signs of a tantrum are like the scene out of Jurassic Park where the water on the dashboard starts rippling before all hell breaks loose.

[Finnegan]

1 minute ago, James. said:

She's getting there. If I'm in a different room the first signs of a tantrum are like the scene out of Jurassic Park where the water on the dashboard starts rippling before all hell breaks loose.

 

And you can't even hide on the toilet for fear of getting ripped apart where you sit? 

 

I'm never having kids. 

[RonnieTodger]

People can do what they want, but they should also understand that this concept of "non-binary gender" is relatively new to mainstream news and until now, unheard of to millions. It's perfectly reasonable to not understand it, but it's become yet another thing to be outraged by when people just don't get it yet. 

 

On the flip side, I think that the people who do genuinely feel as if they're something else are being undermined by militant idiots jumping on it because it's a fad to them.

I think it'll fade away from the news slowly, and anyone that is serious about it will live their lives as they want, without using it just as something to whinge about.

 

Can't wait for this to become news again when Sam Smith gets outrageously nominated for best male at the Brit Awards. 

[Ross-Kemp]

Part of me only thinks he's come out and said it as he's launching a new album .

[foxy boxing]

taking half and half to a whole new level!. it's bad enough with the scarfs!

[Countryfox]

15 hours ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Surely you’ve either got a knob or a fanny though? 

 

My mates got both ...   its the devils own job to get him to come out for a pint ...  he always wants to have a romantic night in with himself ..    soft music, nice meal, few glasses of wine and an early night ....     

[Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo]

15 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

People should be themselves.  Personally I look forward to a time when this isn’t a matter for discussion.

 

Well there's not giving a shit what other people think, which (in theory) is great, but there's limits surely? 

 

Take for example my colleague played in some rollerderby team (terrible made-up sport) played almost entirely by women. A bloke was allowed to join the ladies team because he "felt like a woman". That's only amateur sports but surely someone is going to contest this in professional sports, and you'll have a bloke thrashing women in the 100m, people up in arms because a women has joined a man's rugby team and was "felt-up" in the scrum etc etc. People going into whatever toilets they want because they feel like the opposite sex

 

This is going to be very dangerous territory and soon

[Finnegan]

17 minutes ago, Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo said:

 

Well there's not giving a shit what other people think, which (in theory) is great, but there's limits surely? 

 

Take for example my colleague played in some rollerderby team (terrible made-up sport) played almost entirely by women. A bloke was allowed to join the ladies team because he "felt like a woman". That's only amateur sports but surely someone is going to contest this in professional sports, and you'll have a bloke thrashing women in the 100m, people up in arms because a women has joined a man's rugby team and was "felt-up" in the scrum etc etc. People going into whatever toilets they want because they feel like the opposite sex

 

This is going to be very dangerous territory and soon

 

Ugghhhhh. 

 

I knew this or the public toilet point would come up eventually. 

 

Sports are categorised by sex, not gender. It doesn't matter if Carly Lloyd or Wayne Rooney suddenly start identifying as gender fluid, genderless or transgender they're provably female and male respectively by their biological make up and they're not swapping teams any time soon. 

 

Nor is anyone proposing that. 

 

With the exception of Large Al's mutant curveballs, the vast majority of the planet can be confirmed as being male or female by fact of DNA and nobody with any sense is disputing that we stop categorising sport those ways.

 

Caster Semenya isn't transsexual, she is - as I understand it - a girl with an unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective)  high testosterone count. That's all. 

 

Sexual reassignment is essentially, to all intents and purposes, a body mod. A balding man gets a hair transplant and his brother gets breast augmentation and a genital rebuild because he feels more comfortable with a woman's body. 

 

All that's really changed here are aesthetics, the people are the same. The second brother probably goes through some hormone replacement therapy which might have some impact on their moods but they don't suddenly get their DNA rewired. 

 

Not really sure how that's dangerous. 

[The Doctor]

3 hours ago, Finnegan said:

I don't disagree with the crux of what you mean, we're singing from the same chorus. 

 

Limiting what someone can or cannot do by their physical sex (beyond acts of reproduction) IS gender which is exactly what I'm saying doesn't exist, we created it. 

 

But there's no point denying the existence of physical sex or that it's purpose is reproduction and that it typically takes one supplier of an egg and one supplier of sperm.

Perhaps I'm missing the point but no-ones arguing that are they, I'd doubt even liberal to the point of parody Oz would, more the argument that it's not an easy and strict dichotomy between man and woman. Could argue that the inbetween is just an oddity, but I'd be reticent to do that - at 1 in 2000 they're only slightly less likely than having two mundane traits like ginger hair and left-handedness (ca. 1 in 1000), and greater probability than being Welsh  (~3 in 7000 globally).

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

I don't wish to pry into the deep wounds of early childhood (well, maybe a little bit, so long as nobody gets hurt ). But your phrasing suggests that you didn't get the ironing board.

If so, who denied you, why and how did you feel about that? If you got the ironing board, how did it work out and how did family and childhood friends respond?

No I got the ironing board, my memory of it is very hazy though (which I'm thankful for) and the only thing I'm certain of is it put me off ironing for life.

 

40 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

Sports are categorised by sex, not gender. It doesn't matter if Carly Lloyd or Wayne Rooney suddenly start identifying as gender fluid, genderless or transgender they're provably female and male respectively by their biological make up and they're not swapping teams any time soon. 

 

Nor is anyone proposing that.

Hasn't this already happened though when we had the absurd spectacle of "female" Renee Richards getting to the US Open third round at the age of 47 in the 1970's? Had she had the full op before then?

 

Either way it was absolutely ridiculous, I'm sure in later life she even said she looked back and realised how unfair it was.