LGBTAitp 27: Of Shoes, and Ships, and Sealing Wax

[Saposhiente]

I posted a chart here a thread or two ago. Many people I've shown this to wanted another triangle and descriptions, so I've added those. I figured I'd update it here as well...

People are expected to not identify all the way in a triangle's corner in most cases. They could be close, but it's a fluid scale that's more descriptive than the corners could ever be on their own. (Or at least, that's the goal.) Ideally, everyone should have one dot on each triangle. If you're aware of a case for which that's impossible, I'd like to know of your example, as that may influence adjusting the chart.

Also, better terminology for my definitions or shorter ways to say precisely what I mean are certainly welcome. (As well as other bits of critique/advice/etc...)

Sexuality Chart

The Power Exchange:Switch description is slightly misworded- at the end you want either "or being in control with some partners and *under* control with others" or "or being *controlled by* some partners and being in control with others".

[Serpentine]

Interesting chart. Nice and comprehensive.
Iffy on some of the wording - particularly "masculine/feminine traits". Not sure how you could change it to be less subjective/culturally dependent, though.
A physical/birth sex triangle could be good, too, maybe with the extreme corners being something like "chromosomes, genitalia, hormones etc are all keyed into typically male/female", but it may not be practical (who's checked their chromosomes?), will pretty much be impossible to word and structure in a way that will satisfy everyone, and it doesn't especially matter anyway - there's no way in the chart as-is to determine cis/trans, but that may not be the point. Maybe something like "gender completely aligns with/is opposite to sex"... But again, pretty much no way you could get it right.
Also, is the power thing meant to be in the relationship or in the bedroom? Because that can be very different: I'd be pretty solidly egalitarian in the relationship, but pretty submissive for happyfuntime activities.

[Thajocoth]

Interesting chart. Nice and comprehensive.
Iffy on some of the wording - particularly "masculine/feminine traits". Not sure how you could change it to be less subjective/culturally dependent, though.
A physical/birth sex triangle could be good, too, maybe with the extreme corners being something like "chromosomes, genitalia, hormones etc are all keyed into typically male/female", but it may not be practical (who's checked their chromosomes?), will pretty much be impossible to word and structure in a way that will satisfy everyone, and it doesn't especially matter anyway - there's no way in the chart as-is to determine cis/trans, but that may not be the point. Maybe something like "gender completely aligns with/is opposite to sex"... But again, pretty much no way you could get it right.
Also, is the power thing meant to be in the relationship or in the bedroom? Because that can be very different: I'd be pretty solidly egalitarian in the relationship, but pretty submissive for happyfuntime activities.

I'm not totally happy with the wording of a lot of it myself, but I think a lot of that is the limitations of the English language. Egalitarian does not mean what I wrote it means, for example. Realistically, the entire center column of that triangle is Egalitarian... But it's the closest word I could find to what I mean, so I stuck it there.

I was at a total loss for a word that comes anywhere close to meaning "A person who is equally able to be in committed Monogamous or Polyamorous relationships, without having much of a preference for one or the other". You see I left the middle bottom of the purple triangle blank for that reason. (That's why I didn't initially even make the triangle.)

To answer your question... It's sexuality, not philosophy. What your hormones & heart want more than what your mind wants... So bedroom in this case, with the Dom/sub corners being a 24/7 lifestyle.

[Serpentine]

Aha! I see. Maybe if you put "sexual" in front of "partner" (at least the first time)? Maybe "even outside the bedroom" at the end if you have the space (but that's not really necessary)?

[nersxe]

I think I'll get in on that NaNoWriMo prompt.

Even though I totally have a few hundred thousand word fanfiction I really need to get written.

[SiuiS]

Uhh, wha?

Google turkey baster.

Okay, so looking a the conversation again it makes sense if you retread the whole thing.

Coidzor mentioned having a macabre idea. You said 'I meant artificial insemination' an his response was 'that's much less whacky than my idea' and where he tripped you up is he then elaborated on what that idea was. It actually follows logically, though I didn't get it until I retread it with an eye for sorting it out.

Also turkey baster ewwww

Poul Anderson wrote one once. It still ends with two old people strangling each other to death, but the rest is pretty cheery.

I swear I've heard this joke before
Have we discussed the tenor of science fiction prior?

@Siuis:

Spoiler

Show

Okay, you're right actually, I'm not actually fine with being treated badly just because I am part of a majority, white or cis or whatever. Whenever it happened (only online, fortunately, so walking away and forgetting all about it was an easy option), I felt hurt, because of all the traits I have that could have been criticized, they chose one that I have no control over.
However, I consider that much less distressing than being subjected to the same treatment because I am part of a minority. I also happen to be (ethnically) Jewish. It's rather obvious when one knows my last name (which nobody seems to even bother to spell properly anyway, safe for those few people who have an even more complicated name), and I sometimes wonder worriedly if it's something that you can see on my face, however it is that people might detect that. (That's even more silly given I don't believe, I don't practice, and I consider bacon as a major food group. I'm not flaunting it in anyone's face.) We don't have happy stories on that side of the family. I've already heard slurs that were not directed at me, but that still hurt. I'm not even mentioning the antisemitism that I feel is rising in certain places. Living in a very culturally diverse neighbourhood, the only people who ever actively threatened me were white, and half of them skinheads.

So, I prefer to be insulted for being white than insulted for being Jewish. The two often go together, at least in the Western world, and are equally unchangeable, but the latter has a much more evident history of hate behind it, and an alarming amount of people has the aberrant idea Jewishness is a privilege by itself (see whatever conspiracy theory of your choice). At least it is proven that being white, as opposed to non-white all other things being equal, brings privilege in most case. I don't want to put "Jewish" on the list of things I identify as, but it always gets thrown on my face again whenever relevant bad news or slurs happen, like an ancestral fear. It's a part of me I still have no idea how to deal with, as it is an odd mix of race and religion, and the two don't seem to be able to be separated neatly and completely.

Perhaps I've spent too much time in the presence of SJ fanatics, I wouldn't rule it out. What happened to you shouldn't have happened, and I absolutely did not mean to imply it was okay in any way. Sorry if I upset you.
Well, that must mean that now I've liberated myself from toxic mindsets, I've got to spend some time figuring out by myself what's okay and what's not. It's even more difficult considering I'm the kind to question my values and knowledge constantly.
(I still hate with passion the "die cis scum" thing. That must be a hint I'm not hopeless yet.)

Aye, I've been derided for being a minority too - when all else fails, Americans insult the Irish

I don't know. I was perturbed to find that, if the specific words were blurred just a bit, you were basically agreeing with something... Ugh. I don't even know. Animal farm, where the people and the animals looked the same? I can't convey. It was distressing, and not just for me. I was distressed for you an Astrella. I worry you may become so used to a negative concept it doesn't seem negative anymore. I also worry about what I've accepted that I would deny if presented with fresh.

Anyway, sorry. I know it's not just you, and I know it's rude to single your post out when you were specifically saying its still a bad thing. Friends?

@Siuis: I'm sorry you've had to deal with all that.

Thank you.

I'm just really weary of the notion of male and female bodies and certain bodies being more male / female than others because it creates dangerous dichotomies. I've come into contact with "more trans than thou" arguments a lot more than I feel comfortable with cause of notions like that. Just a general remark, not addressing anyone in particular.

I don't understand. There are male and female bodies. You can look at them as just human, but having more categories is better, because people inherently generalize. Just teach people it's a venndiagram an you'll be alright.

I come from a line of thought that wants diversity over homogenization though. I think the trouble is for you there is a connection between male/female, and how male/female where that connection doesn't exist for me. I find the distinction between sexes meaningful, where a distinction between shades of each sex is much less so. I don't think abolishing the idea of sex would get rid of that holier than thou attitude however.

Am I making any sense? I honestly don't know I I'm in the right ballpark. I'm only vaguely sure we are playing the same sport.

Then again, I also see very little reason for the concept of sex to exist. On a medical level it's far too inaccurate; they'll need more detailed information anyway. On a legal level (at least in a society with marriage equality) it serves no function either.

This has me thinking. Though. I'm not quite sure if I agree that sex as a medical concept is bogus, just that the heuristic of sex does not match up to the actuality. I would hazard that sex is define strictly hormonally, on a medical level, and that knowin this generalization would have value. I know hormones can change how medicine works, but I do not know that hormones can change structures enough to warrant differences except at the gross level of the gonads.

I was at a total loss for a word that comes anywhere close to meaning "A person who is equally able to be in committed Monogamous or Polyamorous relationships, without having much of a preference for one or the other".

I met one of those! Called itself 'SiuiS'

More seriously, I don't have any advice. Sorry. >_<

[Rawhide]

Okay, so looking a the conversation again it makes sense if you retread the whole thing.

Coidzor mentioned having a macabre idea. You said 'I meant artificial insemination' an his response was 'that's much less whacky than my idea' and where he tripped you up is he then elaborated on what that idea was. It actually follows logically, though I didn't get it until I retread it with an eye for sorting it out.

Yeah, I worked it out, hence my later reply. I think that many of the disagreements people have with Coidzor is not because he is actually trying to be antagonistic, but because of miscommunications and misunderstandings on both sides. Which is why I'd like to ask everyone on both sides of the conversation to take the time to ensure that they understand each other correctly, rather than just assuming (politely ask clarifying questions rather than leaping to conclusions and getting all ruffled up).

Also, it is always a good idea to take the time to explain what you mean correctly the first time. If you leap over the place without proper context, things can get very confusing. I know, I have a friend who does it to me in real life... :S

(Note, this isn't to imply that there are many disagreements or to somehow imply that Coidzor has more than average.)

Also turkey baster ewwww

To be fair, that's metaphorical now, people don't actually use a turkey baster all that much. That process is apparently the most common method of artificial insemination, however.

[Saposhiente]

I'm not totally happy with the wording of a lot of it myself, but I think a lot of that is the limitations of the English language. Egalitarian does not mean what I wrote it means, for example. Realistically, the entire center column of that triangle is Egalitarian... But it's the closest word I could find to what I mean, so I stuck it there.

I was at a total loss for a word that comes anywhere close to meaning "A person who is equally able to be in committed Monogamous or Polyamorous relationships, without having much of a preference for one or the other". You see I left the middle bottom of the purple triangle blank for that reason. (That's why I didn't initially even make the triangle.)

To answer your question... It's sexuality, not philosophy. What your hormones & heart want more than what your mind wants... So bedroom in this case, with the Dom/sub corners being a 24/7 lifestyle.

Hm. Been thinking about it, and might not actually want Commitment on there. For me, at least, it is more of a philosophy/lifestyle choice than an innate part of me, something I just am. There are certainly some things where I'd leave it out in describing myself. Thoughts?
(Meanwhile, if you want a word for between Monogamous and Poly, why not "either"?)

[Thajocoth]

I took some of the advice and started to adjust some wording. (I wish I still had Photoshop... MS Paint is not fun.)

I realized when adding "Either" to the Committment triangle that my description for it actually matches most people who call themselves Polyamorous... So I moved that around and created a non-existent word to put on the other end of that triangle.

New Sexuality Chart

For future edits of this, should I continue to make new posts? I don't want anyone to feel like I'm spamming...

EDIT: I'm changing the purple triangle a bunch again... Thought of more relevant possibilities.

[Astrella]

I don't understand. There are male and female bodies. You can look at them as just human, but having more categories is better, because people inherently generalize. Just teach people it's a venndiagram an you'll be alright.

I come from a line of thought that wants diversity over homogenization though. I think the trouble is for you there is a connection between male/female, and how male/female where that connection doesn't exist for me. I find the distinction between sexes meaningful, where a distinction between shades of each sex is much less so. I don't think abolishing the idea of sex would get rid of that holier than thou attitude however.

Am I making any sense? I honestly don't know I I'm in the right ballpark. I'm only vaguely sure we are playing the same sport.

Well, yes, but then you have to completely get rid of the ties between sex and gender. (which is also something that could be done of course.) In my eyes it's just a thing that doesn't really serve a purpose right now and only hurts people, that makes it something that shouldn't be around... I guess you could come with more categories? Cause the problem is sorta that you're trying to fit two categories over like 10 different sliders with various settings. I guess my point is just that male / female body doesn't evoke a completely neutral view; the tie with gender is still very strongly there. And the point is, there is no objective way to make the divide. And then you get into stuff like a woman with AIS (though your average internet bigot likes to call them males as well) has a female body while a post-op trans woman has a male body, despite their bodies being outwardly the same, having the same chromosomes and similar hormone levels; all because one was assigned female at birth and the other male....

*ramble*

This has me thinking. Though. I'm not quite sure if I agree that sex as a medical concept is bogus, just that the heuristic of sex does not match up to the actuality. I would hazard that sex is define strictly hormonally, on a medical level, and that knowin this generalization would have value. I know hormones can change how medicine works, but I do not know that hormones can change structures enough to warrant differences except at the gross level of the gonads.

That would a better way of handling it I guess; but it isn't done like that. The sex on medical information is still the one you get written up as when you are born, which is done by looking at the genitals.

-----

@Thajocoth; you might wanna change the bit about gender a bit; gender identity has little to do with identifying with certain traits. (Especially since there's no such thing as male / female traits; since that distinction is cultural and thus not an objective thing.) In the end all it comes down to is what you identify as.

(So "I identify as male" / "I identify as female" / "I identify as both, something else, neither, my identity shifts, ..." might also just want to replace Genderqueer with non-binary, cause genderqueer is more used to mean a specific identity than as an overlap term, so it would be a bit less confusing. )

[Thajocoth]

@Thajocoth; you might wanna change the bit about gender a bit; gender identity has little to do with identifying with certain traits. (Especially since there's no such thing as male / female traits; since that distinction is cultural and thus not an objective thing.) In the end all it comes down to is what you identify as.

(So "I identify as male" / "I identify as female" / "I identify as both, something else, neither, my identity shifts, ..." might also just want to replace Genderqueer with non-binary, cause genderqueer is more used to mean a specific identity than as an overlap term, so it would be a bit less confusing. )

This part I was especially hoping to get feedback on, as I'm far more familiar with the other 4 triangles. I've adjusted that section. Is it better?

I've also changed the purple triangle to Sharing, with Monogamy being at the top. I realized that doing this allowed me to make more of the triangle be relevant to more people. I think I like the purple triangle now.

Chart revised again

EDIT: I just realized that some people might get the wrong connotation by the use of the word "Family"... And that I can't give a great explanation of what I'm referencing. I do not mean relatives.

[Astrella]

I'd replace masculine / feminine with male / female. Cause the first two still very much carry a connotation of certain traits. There are masculine women / feminine men out there.

I guess you could add another bit with "gender expression" I guess? The thing is once you dig into that it gets really muddled because what's a masculine trait for some people might as well be a feminine for others. Iunno, I'd just keep it as is with the changes above.

[Thajocoth]

I'd replace masculine / feminine with male / female. Cause the first two still very much carry a connotation of certain traits. There are masculine women / feminine men out there.

I guess you could add another bit with "gender expression" I guess? The thing is once you dig into that it gets really muddled because what's a masculine trait for some people might as well be a feminine for others. Iunno, I'd just keep it as is with the changes above.

It's really awesome of those of you responding that you're helping me improve this. Thanks a lot.

Chart

[Serpentine]

Maybe man/woman rather than male/female? Suppose it only really matters if you add a triangle for trans/cissex, though.

[Thajocoth]

Maybe man/woman rather than male/female? Suppose it only really matters if you add a triangle for trans/cissex, though.

Well, trans/cis really only refers to whether or not the orange triangle matches your DNA, right? It seems to make sense to me NOT to add something to separate the two...

Chart (thus far) filled out as myself

[Serpentine]

Like I said, it depends on what your goal is with the chart. If your aim is to cover all the identity categories, then the interaction between gender identity and birth sex is necessary to incorporate the identity categories of cis/trans. If the goal is something more in a vacuum or whatever, then it's not so necessary.
I have my own hang-ups on male/female and gender, but others disagree and it's not relevant, so if the above doesn't apply then, as I said, it doesn't really matter *shrug*

[Castaras]

RE: Discussion on abolishing gender as an ideal.

I suppose one step could be to make separate words more commonly used for gender and biological sex more common, rather than just using Male/Female for both?

RE: Chart

Heh, I'm either near the middle/top or to the right for the majority of those. Interesting. Wasn't there a chart a while ago as a graph which had sexual libido on the y axis and attractive gender on the x axis?

[Serpentine]

That was mine! I may post it again soon (and maybe even update it! ... I almost said that with a straight face) if there's interest. I really like the triangle chart, though. can incorporate a lot more information than I was able to.

[Heliomance]

If we're picking nits, they shouldn't really be triangles but the intersection of three circles. That way you can travel along an edge without getting closer to the opposite point.

[KenderWizard]

Then again, I also see very little reason for the concept of sex to exist. On a medical level it's far too inaccurate; they'll need more detailed information anyway. On a legal level (at least in a society with marriage equality) it serves no function either.

Ooh, I like that! You could have a medical sex code that included genitalia, hormones and chromosome information, and then we'd just have a set of words.

RE: Chart

Heh, I'm either near the middle/top or to the right for the majority of those. Interesting. Wasn't there a chart a while ago as a graph which had sexual libido on the y axis and attractive gender on the x axis?

Awesome chart! I cluster too!

[gunnar11]

Well, trans/cis really only refers to whether or not the orange triangle matches your DNA, right? It seems to make sense to me NOT to add something to separate the two...

Chart (thus far) filled out as myself

Wouldn't it be more useful if you made it into a "trainer chart", like used on so many anime's?
http://i.imgur.com/mwKe4.jpg
something like that.
You would make 15 axis' on which people could put their attributes. In the center would be "non-commited" or "vanilla" or "Asexual" and to the sides the different attributes. If you don't feel like any of them, your chart will come out almost blank, and if you do feel like most of them, your chart will come out almost full:
I filled this one in on my own to give an idea. This is me, Gunnar:

http://i47.tinypic.com/2zocgti.jpg
or if you prefer this one (I'm not sure myself)
http://i47.tinypic.com/2m2xvuo.jpg

Not that I changed it back to non-commited, because I don't believe monogamy and non-commited are the same. Family has been changed into 'Group-Love' and Swinger into polyamorousy again. This is how I view it, though, so no pressure.

Well, yes, but then you have to completely get rid of the ties between sex and gender. (which is also something that could be done of course.) In my eyes it's just a thing that doesn't really serve a purpose right now and only hurts people, that makes it something that shouldn't be around... I guess you could come with more categories? Cause the problem is sorta that you're trying to fit two categories over like 10 different sliders with various settings. I guess my point is just that male / female body doesn't evoke a completely neutral view; the tie with gender is still very strongly there. And the point is, there is no objective way to make the divide. And then you get into stuff like a woman with AIS (though your average internet bigot likes to call them males as well) has a female body while a post-op trans woman has a male body, despite their bodies being outwardly the same, having the same chromosomes and similar hormone levels; all because one was assigned female at birth and the other male....

I believe there is a way to categorize people. I do not, however, believe that it can be done in a way that everyone is at ease and happy of the result. thereby, you shouldn't try to categorize people. The problem with that is that mankind has the innate function to think in boxes. It's a mechanism of survival , so it might have served us in the past.
Now, though, I don't think it's such an improvement. Either way, you can't judge people for generalizing/categorizing, nor can you judge someone else for being generalized/boxed.

[Heliomance]

Wouldn't it be more useful if you made it into a "trainer chart", like used on so many anime's?
http://i.imgur.com/mwKe4.jpg
something like that.
You would make 15 axis' on which people could put their attributes. In the center would be "non-commited" or "vanilla" or "Asexual" and to the sides the different attributes. If you don't feel like any of them, your chart will come out almost blank, and if you do feel like most of them, your chart will come out almost full:
I filled this one in on my own to give an idea. This is me, Gunnar:

http://i47.tinypic.com/2zocgti.jpg
or if you prefer this one (I'm not sure myself)
http://i47.tinypic.com/2m2xvuo.jpg

Not that I changed it back to non-commited, because I don't believe monogamy and non-commited are the same. Family has been changed into 'Group-Love' and Swinger into polyamorousy again. This is how I view it, though, so no pressure.

That's... rather a lot harder to read than the triangles.

[SiuiS]

Yeah, I worked it out, hence my later reply. I think that many of the disagreements people have with Coidzor is not because he is actually trying to be antagonistic, but because of miscommunications and misunderstandings on both sides. Which is why I'd like to ask everyone on both sides of the conversation to take the time to ensure that they understand each other correctly, rather than just assuming (politely ask clarifying questions rather than leaping to conclusions and getting all ruffled up).

Also, it is always a good idea to take the time to explain what you mean correctly the first time. If you leap over the place without proper context, things can get very confusing. I know, I have a friend who does it to me in real life... :S

(Note, this isn't to imply that there are many disagreements or to somehow imply that Coidzor has more than average.)

I agree. Actually, I think the different cultures, with different degrees of jumping allowed, different levels of literality, and differing assumptions on how clauses fit together is a big culprit. I've noticed a trend of Coidzor's writing to be subtly more like speech, and I've had to clarify my own points, as I don't have the luxury of immediate feedback.

To be fair, that's metaphorical now, people don't actually use a turkey baster all that much. That process is apparently the most common method of artificial insemination, however.

Wait, what? They actually did that? I honestly thought it was an off-color metaphor and that's it. Eww!

Well, yes, but then you have to completely get rid of the ties between sex and gender. (which is also something that could be done of course.) In my eyes it's just a thing that doesn't really serve a purpose right now and only hurts people, that makes it something that shouldn't be around... I guess you could come with more categories? Cause the problem is sorta that you're trying to fit two categories over like 10 different sliders with various settings. I guess my point is just that male / female body doesn't evoke a completely neutral view; the tie with gender is still very strongly there. And the point is, there is no objective way to make the divide. And then you get into stuff like a woman with AIS (though your average internet bigot likes to call them males as well) has a female body while a post-op trans woman has a male body, despite their bodies being outwardly the same, having the same chromosomes and similar hormone levels; all because one was assigned female at birth and the other male....

You lost me there. I thought you were talking about how a system could work, but I assume you're actually talking about how the system does work at the end?

I actually, logically, categorize girls with AIS as male, because there is no context involved and I don't have a conception of them seein themselves as female, or even presenting that way. Which is silly. In person, I'm sure I would treat them like I do the trans folks I know, based on presentation. Kind of funny really, since the answer would seem to e obvious, but does a person with AIS consider themselves female?

That would a better way of handling it I guess; but it isn't done like that. The sex on medical information is still the one you get written up as when you are born, which is done by looking at the genitals.

Unfortunately.

I'm trying to think of reasons why doctors would need to know your mechanical sex. The only differences are hormones, and tubing. Do my original idea was to update your sex over time if possible. But then I realize that medicine just doesn't need sex as a stated info. This isn't to say sex is useless very where, just medically. But I do agree it's kind of unwarranted.

Ooh, I like that! You could have a medical sex code that included genitalia, hormones and chromosome information, and then we'd just have a set of words.

That's a good idea!

That's... rather a lot harder to read than the triangles.

Prettier though, I have to say. It's probably a relic of our youth, but I always liked those charts.

[Heliomance]

I actually, logically, categorize girls with AIS as male, because there is no context involved and I don't have a conception of them seein themselves as female, or even presenting that way. Which is silly. In person, I'm sure I would treat them like I do the trans folks I know, based on presentation. Kind of funny really, since the answer would seem to e obvious, but does a person with AIS consider themselves female?

It depends on the degree. With Complete Angrogen Insensitivity Syndrome, they are externally indistinguishable from XX-females, they have a higher-than-average chance of being straight and cis (female identifying), and often the first clue that anyone has that anything strange is going on is when they don't get a period, despite going through puberty otherwise as a normal girl.

[Serpentine]

There are rather a lot of medical conditions more likely to be or exclusively found in (born/physically) males or females, as well as certain conditions (hormones, certain physical features, etc) that would be normal in one sex and abnormal or a sign of disease etc. in the other, thereby rendering sex pretty important to the medical condition. In fact, I'd say that in a lot of ways medicine is one of the places sex is most important to know.
Also biology, reproductive sciences, various sociological and psychological studies, evolution... Though granted those tend not to be relevant to everyday human life (and of course I agree that sex shouldn't be relevant in most practical situations, certainly not to the extent it still is). But there's still plenty of situations where physical/biological/birth (in their various definitions) sex is both real and relevant.

[Astrella]

There are rather a lot of medical conditions more likely to be or exclusively found in (born/physically) males or females, as well as certain conditions (hormones, certain physical features, etc) that would be normal in one sex and abnormal or a sign of disease etc. in the other, thereby rendering sex pretty important to the medical condition. In fact, I'd say that in a lot of ways medicine is one of the places sex is most important to know.
Also biology, reproductive sciences, various sociological and psychological studies, evolution... Though granted those tend not to be relevant to everyday human life (and of course I agree that sex shouldn't be relevant in most practical situations, certainly not to the extent it still is). But there's still plenty of situations where physical/biological/birth (in their various definitions) sex is both real and relevant.

The detailed medical information is needed to know; however, that's not what the current incarnation of legal sex represents. (Which is the exact same one as listed on your medical information.)

[SiuiS]

The detailed medical information is needed to know; however, that's not what the current incarnation of legal sex represents. (Which is the exact same one as listed on your medical information.)

What is the distinction?

[Serpentine]

When you say "In my eyes it's just a thing that doesn't really serve a purpose right now and only hurts people, that makes it something that shouldn't be around" and "I also see very little reason for the concept of sex to exist", what exactly are you talking about?

[Astrella]

You need to know the details. A trans woman who has had a legal gender change still needs to go in for prostate examinations for example. Her legal sex of F says nothing about that. People with any sort of genitals, hormonal levels, gender identity, chromosomes, etc... can end up having an M or F on their legal information.

I just don't see what purpose that M on my license serves except that it's going to out me every time I need to show it until I get SRS. (and that's without getting into how ridiculous that requirement is.) If legal sex stays around it has to at least be possible and easy to make it line up with what gender someone is living as. Because with regards to say social sciences you're interested in (lived) gender, not legal sex anyway.

At the very least I see very little reason for a gender marker to be present on say a driver's license or an id card.

Edit; I guess my point is that the current sex classification system is that you're using a very simple binary system for something that's way to complex to be described as such. And just because a system works for the majority doesn't make it okay. (Heterosexual marriage works for the majority after all.)
It's like trying to describe the entire spectrum of colours we have with just two options. Sure it works to a degree, but it doesn't really do the job well.

[noparlpf]

Well, yes, but then you have to completely get rid of the ties between sex and gender. (which is also something that could be done of course.) In my eyes it's just a thing that doesn't really serve a purpose right now and only hurts people, that makes it something that shouldn't be around... I guess you could come with more categories? Cause the problem is sorta that you're trying to fit two categories over like 10 different sliders with various settings. I guess my point is just that male / female body doesn't evoke a completely neutral view; the tie with gender is still very strongly there. And the point is, there is no objective way to make the divide. And then you get into stuff like a woman with AIS (though your average internet bigot likes to call them males as well) has a female body while a post-op trans woman has a male body, despite their bodies being outwardly the same, having the same chromosomes and similar hormone levels; all because one was assigned female at birth and the other male....

*ramble*

That would a better way of handling it I guess; but it isn't done like that. The sex on medical information is still the one you get written up as when you are born, which is done by looking at the genitals.

I understand why you feel that way. However, from a medical perspective, when talking about potential treatments or side-effects, for example, what would you suggest? A transwoman could clumsily explain to her doctor that she's a woman and that she has a penis and testicles, and all that, or could just fit it all into the handy words "male-bodied" and convey a host of information all in two words. People with intersex conditions, who know which condition it is, also often have names they can tell doctors.
Otherwise, from a social perspective, I don't see any real need for physical sex to be mentioned, except maybe if you're looking for a relationship and it might matter. From a legal perspective, it should really only matter for census records, which should also show gender, and ID should show gender.

It depends on the degree. With Complete Angrogen Insensitivity Syndrome, they are externally indistinguishable from XX-females, they have a higher-than-average chance of being straight and cis (female identifying), and often the first clue that anyone has that anything strange is going on is when they don't get a period, despite going through puberty otherwise as a normal girl.

Yeah, partial AIS also happens, and that leads to a form of intersex if I remember rightly.
Can somebody with complete AIS get pregnant? Producing Y-chromosome eggs might be mildly problematic.