LGBTAI+ Questions, Information and Discussion thread!

[Gwynfrid]

I see this article, and especially the links in it, as relevant to many questions on this thread. I note, for example, that the author presents the definition of terms like "cisgender" as a well-established thing.

[Serpentine]

People who are female until puberty and then suddenly pop out male genitalia? Where can I learn about this? That sounds fascinating.

A related question: what is... Well, everything about intersex? I know literally nothing and people tend to dance around the details, because depth needed to explain clearly is almost vulgar. Is it just a catch all for everything not clearly binary?

Re. The first: I'm not sure. We watched a doco about it for my sex ed class. I think it was something like an island near Africa or Madigascar or something like that.

Re. The second: intersex is when someone is not unambiguously male or female, when a doctor cannot confidently say "this is a boy" or "this is a girl". It's usually when their genitals are ambiguous, not clearly a penis and vagina - and too often (hopefully decreasingly) surgery is performed to unambiguise them, with no thought for the child's potential preferences (I don't think I've even heard of a chromosome test being performed first, it's just done by the whim of the parents or doctors. Ugh.). I think it also covers other cases as well, such as where genotype doesn't match phenotype or one part of the body is typicalish for one sex and another part is typicalish for the other. I've heard an argument that transsexuality is a kind of intersex condition (which would be that the brain is one sex and the body is another, or they're artificially made so during the physical transition process), but I don't think there's a particularly strong push for that socially or scientifically.
The Wikipedia article on intersexuality would be able to give you more, and more reliable, info than any of us.

[golentan]

Re. The first: I'm not sure. We watched a doco about it for my sex ed class. I think it was something like an island near Africa or Madigascar or something like that.

I saw that one! I remember that the local term for it was hidden eggs or some such, but that's no help on a google search and the article on intersex in wikipedia doesn't seem to have the specific condition.

[Jaycemonde]

.....
No.

as well as other phrases such as "I’m a male girl" which would allow to clearly and easily point out trans* status without needing to go into a discussion about it.

That is the single easiest possible way to offend 96% of all trans* people.

Just specify that you're talking about biological sex and not mental/emotional gender. End of problem.

[Draconi Redfir]

Aaaalllrighty then, pretend i didn't say anything then.

post deleted.

[golentan]

Aaaalllrighty then, pretend i didn't say anything then.

edit: aaaand i can't delete the post for some reason. lovely.

Part of the problem is that it preys hard on dysphoria, and in some interpretations can be seen as an implication that a transperson is less a representative of their gender than a cis person. Sex is probably a less important measure of someone than gender in most circumstances, and focusing on someone's sex and ignoring gender as you mentioned offhandedly in your post before requesting the definitions really gets to the heart of a lot of transphobic discrimination.

[Draconi Redfir]

All i was doing was asking for a pair of pronouns for discussing sex only, as a geneticist, i tend to do that a lot, so being able to avoid unneeded trans* involvement when i am reffering purely to sex would be a wonderful boon to have. i'm not trying to offend anyone here so i'm sorry, it was just a simple request with no intention of being offensive so yeah. not looking for a lecture or an arguement, so i'm sorry.

[golentan]

All i was doing was asking for a pair of pronouns for discussing sex only, as a geneticist, i tend to do that a lot, so being able to avoid unneeded trans* involvement when i am reffering purely to sex would be a wonderful boon to have. i'm not trying to offend anyone here so i'm sorry, it was just a simple request with no intention of being offensive so yeah. not looking for a lecture or an arguement, so i'm sorry.

I get that, I was just trying to explain why you hit a nerve.

[SiuiS]

Yeah. The Internet is too vague. I fear I will just have to move forward unable to grok. I would like to think my personal understanding is worth a little bit of unease for some people, but then I would like to think a lot of things. I know better.

.....
No.

Sorry. :(

Part of the problem is that it preys hard on dysphoria, and in some interpretations can be seen as an implication that a transperson is less a representative of their gender than a cis person. Sex is probably a less important measure of someone than gender in most circumstances, and focusing on someone's sex and ignoring gender as you mentioned offhandedly in your post before requesting the definitions really gets to the heart of a lot of transphobic discrimination.

Yes. See my thing about how it's a bigger issue for the offended person than it is for the offender; we are so used as a culture to the idea of objectivity that we miss how much emotional baggage can imbed into who we are. For some people, on some topics, objectivity does not exist.

All i was doing was asking for a pair of pronouns for discussing sex only, as a geneticist, i tend to do that a lot, so being able to avoid unneeded trans* involvement when i am reffering purely to sex would be a wonderful boon to have. i'm not trying to offend anyone here so i'm sorry, it was just a simple request with no intention of being offensive so yeah. not looking for a lecture or an arguement, so i'm sorry.

Unfortunately, as recently discussed, we don't have that as a species. There's sexual dimorphic presentation, but we know IS people exist who look one sex and are not that sex. There's gender, with similar issues. There's transsexuality with similar issues.

I think we have to accept that on a grosse mechanical level even, the idea of "there are two sexes" is wrong and that continuing to force everything into that context because our grandfather's grandfather's grandfather's grandfather's grandfather spoke about sexes that way is stupid.

I mean, how many people believe there are just men and women not because of any proof or study, but because they were told so and never bothered challenging it?

[Draconi Redfir]

while i've got a response to that i'm going to avoid it and leave the thread, i'm affraid i'm outside my element here, like a man of fire entering a waterpark. i asked my question i got my awnser, it's a shame it couldn't work out but oh well, i'd rather not push the issue, least of all with an entire thread against me. so yeah, sorry for the interruption, we now return to your regulerly scheduled LGBTAI+ discussion.

[SiuiS]

... Against you? I just said biology isn't as neatly ordered as lay folk like to think. O.ô

[Jaycemonde]

Sorry. :(

Huh? That was directed at the original "sex-only 'pronouns'" post.

And ironically, I seem to represent the entire thread now. Despite everybody else actually bothering to discuss the issue and me just giving a straight answer and a simple solution.

[Draconi Redfir]

as a geneticist biology baisically IS my order i veiw things from a broad angle that ignores individaul details such as personal opinions or self-identities, wich is all this thread is about

[Delusion]

as a geneticist biology baisically IS my order i veiw things from a broad angle that ignores individaul details such as personal opinions or self-identities, wich is all this thread is about

If you really really need to talk about individuals "biological sex" (I really hate that phrase) the best phrases for that are AMAB (Assigned Male At Birth) and AFAB (Assigned Female at Birth). Because drawing distinct lines between "biologically female" and "biologically male" is not only oversimplification and untrue it also supports the system that is often very violent to trans people.

I am a trans woman. I am AMAB. I am also a human female. Deciding to refer to me as biologically male achieves nothing but being insulting to me.

[Draconi Redfir]

wich again is completely outside my experteise, so yeah. not gunna post here again, sorry for any unintended offense.

[Serpentine]

as a geneticist biology baisically IS my order i veiw things from a broad angle that ignores individaul details such as personal opinions or self-identities, wich is all this thread is about

Your timing with this is interesting, since we just then had a nice little discussion about what "biological sex" really means beyond genetics (the "gynomorphic chickens" article I linked to) and cases where the typical human sex binary doesn't apply at all.
A lot of the time, especially in places like the LGBT context, we already do consistently differentiate between sex and gender, including male/female vs. man/woman. Regarding your original context, I have to wonder in what situation a character's sex would be of crucial importance and their gender completely irrelevant, especially in the process of creating the character. Unfortunately your post has been deleted and I can't remember it enough to discuss the specifics of that, but the question remains at least.
I can comment on your "I'm a male girl" thing, though: aside from being a manner of manners and not needlessly hurting people who are already hurt daily in all sorts of ways, it also isn't necessarily accurate, especially if that person has already started transitioning. As the "gynomorphic chickens" article explains, if a trans woman has XY chromosomes*, penis and testicles, but female-typical hormones, bone structure, natural breasts, female-consistent hair patterns etc etc etc, it is no more accurate to call her "biologically male" than "biologically female". Throw in a woman who has been on hormones for decades and has gone through with the surgery and everything, calling her "male" on the basis of two of her chromosomes, which are almost completely irrelevant to her everyday and even medical reality, despite her being very objectively female in every other way, is absurd.
This is, I should tell you, a concept I've only fairly recently become reconciled with, and as I mentioned I still think the complete wholesale casting out of the idea of Homo sapiens as being a species with two typical sexes is excessive, but trying to reduce it all down to two chromosomes and insisting on that as the be-all and end-all is scientifically inaccurate and needlessly hurtful.
I'd need to read your situation again to comment on the specifics any more.


*Which, given the aforementioned weirdness intersex stuff isn't necessarily guaranteed anyway (although that might be more likely for female-bodied XY people).

[Amaril]

Alright, I'm anticipating some hostility in response to this, but I consider the risk worth it to have my questions answered. Please understand, it's never my intention to offend anyone.

I see a lot of people here arguing that we should only consider a person's gender and ignore their biology in essentially all situations (with some exceptions for medical issues) because there's no context in which the latter will be important. That seems a little surprising to me, though, because for me personally, in contexts relating to sex and relationships, the biology of my potential partner is far more important than their gender--it's the only one of the two that matters to me. There are certain parts I like, and certain ones I don't; if you have the ones I like, and we're emotionally and intellectually compatible, then I don't care whether you call yourself male, female, trans*, genderfluid, whatever. Is that an uncommon or strange way of looking at this issue? Am I somehow wrong for having the priorities I do? Does this imply anything about my sexuality that could have life-changing consequences?

[noparlpf]

In a relationship, openness is important. It's a good idea to let a potential partner know what's what at some point before you take off your pants and surprise them. That can be very messy. But that's a private thing, not a public thing. Same with medicine. In any public context, genitalia and chromosomes and stuff don't matter.

[Serpentine]

Sexual relationships and medical contexts are among the places where it might be relevant - if only so, you know, you know what to expect, in terms of happyfuntime activities and/or long-term relationship outcomes. As long as you're not a jerk about it, a person's sex influencing your likelihood of falling for them isn't, as far as I'm aware, an issue.

[Amaril]

Fair enough. I guess the amount of importance I place on gender in relationships is probably lower than is common (I personally think gender is an entirely harmful social construct that has no place in modern culture, but I don't expect most people to agree). Thanks, you've been very helpful

[Delusion]

Alright, I'm anticipating some hostility in response to this, but I consider the risk worth it to have my questions answered. Please understand, it's never my intention to offend anyone.

I see a lot of people here arguing that we should only consider a person's gender and ignore their biology in essentially all situations (with some exceptions for medical issues) because there's no context in which the latter will be important. That seems a little surprising to me, though, because for me personally, in contexts relating to sex and relationships, the biology of my potential partner is far more important than their gender--it's the only one of the two that matters to me. There are certain parts I like, and certain ones I don't; if you have the ones I like, and we're emotionally and intellectually compatible, then I don't care whether you call yourself male, female, trans*, genderfluid, whatever. Is that an uncommon or strange way of looking at this issue? Am I somehow wrong for having the priorities I do? Does this imply anything about my sexuality that could have life-changing consequences?

But genitals don't determinate person's sex? At least not alone. Not everyone with a penis is male afterall.

Fair enough. I guess the amount of importance I place on gender in relationships is probably lower than is common (I personally think gender is an entirely harmful social construct that has no place in modern culture, but I don't expect most people to agree). Thanks, you've been very helpful

I disagree with gender being entirely harmful. I think its only harmful when people start enforcing gender roles and/or punishing certain gender roles and identities.

[Amaril]

But genitals don't determinate person's sex? At least not alone. Not everyone with a penis is male afterall.

The only time I used the term sex (unless I used it again by accident), I was referring to the act of sex; I was trying to only say biology otherwise, since that's more accurate to what I meant. If I used it somewhere else, would you mind quoting my post again and bolding it so I can fix it? Thanks

I disagree with gender being entirely harmful. I think its only harmful when people start enforcing gender roles and/or punishing certain gender roles and identities.

Yeah, I completely understand. I hadn't meant to turn that into a discussion, although I guess it can be if you're interested in hearing my opinion (though I doubt anyone is ).

[Delusion]

The only time I used the term sex (unless I used it again by accident), I was referring to the act of sex; I was trying to only say biology otherwise, since that's more accurate to what I meant. If I used it somewhere else, would you mind quoting my post again and bolding it so I can fix it? Thanks

Oh, I completely misread that then, sorry. >.>

[Serpentine]

Fair enough. I guess the amount of importance I place on gender in relationships is probably lower than is common (I personally think gender is an entirely harmful social construct that has no place in modern culture, but I don't expect most people to agree). Thanks, you've been very helpful

I disagree with gender being entirely harmful. I think its only harmful when people start enforcing gender roles and/or punishing certain gender roles and identities.

I think there's several different definitions of gender, and you're each using a different one. In terms of the anachronistic, outdated and arbitrary culturally constructed expectations and "rules" associated with particular sexes, I absolutely agree that gender needs to go the way of the dinosaur. In terms of scientific observations about traits and tendencies that tend to be more or less associated with different sexes, disproportions in which might be explained by evolutionary theory and the like, gender is just an observation of patterns across populations. As a way of distinguishing a trans person (in particular)'s "mental sex" from their "birth/physical sex" in discussions of LGBT-related subjects, gender's a useful communication tool. In terms of identity, well, I guess I'd tend to associate it with the first but when mixed in with the third and the unfortunate reality in which we reside, it's sort of inevitable and necessary for dialogues. Although I'd still prefer to get rid of the whole lot completely, except the observation and the convenient communication tool variants.

[Amaril]

I think there's several different definitions of gender, and you're each using a different one. In terms of the anachronistic, outdated and arbitrary culturally constructed expectations and "rules" associated with particular sexes, I absolutely agree that gender needs to go the way of the dinosaur. In terms of scientific observations about traits and tendencies that tend to be more or less associated with different sexes, disproportions in which might be explained by evolutionary theory and the like, gender is just an observation of patterns across populations. As a way of distinguishing a trans person (in particular)'s "mental sex" from their "birth/physical sex" in discussions of LGBT-related subjects, gender's a useful communication tool. In terms of identity, well, I guess I'd tend to associate it with the first but when mixed in with the third and the unfortunate reality in which we reside, it's sort of inevitable and necessary for dialogues. Although I'd still prefer to get rid of the whole lot completely, except the observation and the convenient communication tool variants.

My contention is that any differences observed between how men and women behave due to biology and brain chemistry are either negligible, or products of the studies being conducted by people who have themselves been raised with society's biases regarding gender. I strongly suspect that if we simply stopped telling our children that they naturally will or should act a certain way based on their genitals and associated characteristics, the idea would never occur to them. As for gender being a useful tool in allowing trans* people to express their identity, while I understand that our current reality makes it necessary, I think in an ideal world without restrictive gender roles (this is where my opinion may upset some people, so I apologize in advance for that), there would be no trans* people, because no-one would feel pressured to make any kind of statement about differentiating their behavior and thought processes from any expectation based on biology--there would be no such expectations in the first place.

(Please understand, I'm not trying to disparage anyone's identity as a trans* person--obviously we don't live in the world I'm describing, or anything even remotely close to it, and I understand the necessity of the forms of identification we currently have. I simply think it's regrettable that that necessity exists. If that makes any sense.)

[Astrella]

I think you're misunderstanding a bit why trans people transition (those reasons vary a lot of course), but like, we're not dupes of gender. I transition because I feel dysphoria with regards to my body (my body feels alien, and the disconnect often hurts a lot), and my transitioning helps me deal with that. Sure, I identify as a woman cause that's the label I'm most comfortable with, in a genderless society I wouldn't identify anyway, but the way I feel about my body would still be the same and I would still transition.

[Amaril]

I think you're misunderstanding a bit why trans people transition (those reasons vary a lot of course), but like, we're not dupes of gender. I transition because I feel dysphoria with regards to my body (my body feels alien, and the disconnect often hurts a lot), and my transitioning helps me deal with that. Sure, I identify as a woman cause that's the label I'm most comfortable with, in a genderless society I wouldn't identify anyway, but the way I feel about my body would still be the same and I would still transition.

Alright, that makes sense. If I might hazard a related question, though...would you agree that in a genderless society, the idea of wanting to change one's body would be much less of a big deal than it is in our current one? The way I see it, right now, if a person mentions to their friend that they wanted to undergo some medical procedure to change their sexual characteristics, said friend would immediately assume any number of things about that friend's internal identity and the kind of person they wanted to be. On the other hand, if we lived in a society divorced from any concept of gender, such a suggestion would be met with a much more casual reaction, and there would be no risk of hostility arising from the situation. Does it seem reasonable to assume that?

[Astrella]

Oh, yeah, it would definitely be way less of a big deal, cause there wouldn't be a whole pile of gender nonsense associated with certain body types etc...

[Amaril]

Oh, yeah, it would definitely be way less of a big deal, cause there wouldn't be a whole pile of gender nonsense associated with certain body types etc...

Exactly, and that's all I meant. The gender nonsense does nothing but hurt people, and should be done away with. I know that even without gender, there would still be people who were uncomfortable with their bodies and wanted to change them, but such a decision should be seen as exactly what it is--unconnected to anything about who that person is inside or how they're expected to act.

[Kesnit]

Exactly, and that's all I meant. The gender nonsense does nothing but hurt people, and should be done away with. I know that even without gender, there would still be people who were uncomfortable with their bodies and wanted to change them, but such a decision should be seen as exactly what it is--unconnected to anything about who that person is inside or how they're expected to act.

Prior to starting transition, I was an out butch lesbian for about 10 years. I also live in a liberal, urban environment. Since society does not view masculine women as all that negative, I was not treated all that poorly because I had short hair and wore men's clothes outside the office. (I wore women's pant suits to work.) There was no external pressure for me to transition, and in fact the idea never really crossed my mind until I met and became friends with a transwoman. Meeting her and hearing about her experience pre- and post-transition made me reconsider a lot of things (and look at myself differently). But again, there was no external pressure on me to transition; I did so because I realized it was the right thing for me.