LGBTAI+ Question and Discussion Thread IV: [Citation Needed]

[Jormengand]

It does sound like that, now that you mention it. And thank you

Just the truth.

That makes sense. I'm guessing gender-neutral pronouns are best for referring to Legion holistically?

We prefer it/it/its/its pronouns holistically, much to the unneccessary rage of large numbers of people, even other LGBT people, and even other trans people and sometimes even other nonbinary people. We're not always one big happy family - for some people, there's always gotta be someone lower on the ladder.

Well, that was unexpected. It sounds like it would be really important to get along and have similar goals.

Yeah, it is. And of course when you're four people cooped up in an enclosed space arguments are bound to happen - not that anyone else can necessarily hear them - but we manage, just about. Though we do have problems when some of us want to do something and the others don't (guy-me and girl-me had such a massive argument about transitioning - incidentally, this may be the sole recoded instance of a trans person's transition having any negative impact on a cis person literally ever - that the other two had to spend ages calming them both down). [BoyMe]It doesn't bother me so much any more, and honestly... I'm sorta curious enough to try out what it would be like anyway. Maybe soul-crushing dysphoria, maybe just this weird new body. But I think it's my turn to take a share of the pain anyway if it does come to that.*[/BoyMe]

But in general, we get along. Or, rather, more than get along.

(Wanting to do it with your alters has gotta be one of the weirdest things ever, right? )

"Tumblr words" are fine, but thanks for the definitions

When you say "I," do you mean all of your personalities?

In the three instances in that paragraph, yes. We tend to fall for the same kinds of people, just with different levels of sexual intensity. Girl-me has the most, followed by Both-me, then Boy-Me, with Neither-Me having no sexual attraction at all, but still enjoying the act of sex... so long as it gets to go on top!

Well, thanks for your answers!

You're welcome. Honestly, it's quite nice to be able to explain this stuff once in a while, and just get my thoughts down on the page.

*Incidentally, weird question: does anyone know what the interaction is between œstrogen growing your breasts and trying to bind? [BoyMe]Obviously, I'm potentially going to be wanting to bind when they grow,[/BoyMe] [GirlMe]but I don't want him ruining the growth up there.[/GirlMe] Is it better to just wait until they're basically done growing?

Another question is that I've heard about a possible surgery which can essentially form a vagina without having to use up the material from the penis: apparently not medically sanctioned yet but possible. It's not a question that really Googles well; does anyone know if this is a real thing and what exactly the result is? It sounds ideal, but probably too ideal to be true.

[Florian]

The question is interesting food for thought.

Florian is my given name and the female version is Floriane (While latin-based, Florianus and Flora are not used - based on the goddess of spring). As both versions are commonly shortened down to Flori or Flo, making those agender, it would be easy as well as obvious to understand and introduce myself as Flo and be done with it.

Pet peeve: I've used to introduce me as Flo for maybe the first 20 years of my life. Business life changed that, as german customs generally expect the full version of a name to be spelled out. So if your name is Joseph or Michael, shortening it to Joe and Mike won't do, so I've been accustomed to Florian to such a time now, I wouldn't consider to change that in any way, it´s the core of my identity.

Edit: As Juniper tried to, but failed at, point out, names and usage of names carries a deeper meaning in german-speaking countries and their societies.

[AuthorGirl]

We prefer it/it/its/its pronouns holistically, much to the unneccessary rage of large numbers of people, even other LGBT people, and even other trans people and sometimes even other nonbinary people. We're not always one big happy family - for some people, there's always gotta be someone lower on the ladder.

Pronouns duly noted. I usually think of "it" as a horribly disrespectful thing to call somebody, but I guess in this case it's the opposite.

snipped - thanks for the answers, but there's not much reason to put them in here without having something to say to them.

You're welcome. Honestly, it's quite nice to be able to explain this stuff once in a while, and just get my thoughts down on the page.

I know what you mean about explaining

*Incidentally, weird question: does anyone know what the interaction is between œstrogen growing your breasts and trying to bind? [BoyMe]Obviously, I'm potentially going to be wanting to bind when they grow,[/BoyMe] [GirlMe]but I don't want him ruining the growth up there.[/GirlMe] Is it better to just wait until they're basically done growing?

Guessing that bit wasn't aimed at me, but: if it's anything like growing cis girl breasts, it'll probably really hurt to have pressure on them for a while. I don't know how it affects the actual growth.

[Jormengand]

Pronouns duly noted. I usually think of "it" as a horribly disrespectful thing to call somebody, but I guess in this case it's the opposite.

Yeah. It's just when people tell me "Oh, we couldn't refer to you by your preferred pronouns! That would be disrespectful!" that I find the nearest wall and metaphorically bang my head against it multiple times.

Guessing that bit wasn't aimed at me, but: if it's anything like growing cis girl breasts, it'll probably really hurt to have pressure on them for a while. I don't know how it affects the actual growth.

Yes, it does. But I don't know how it affects growth either...

[Lycunadari]

*Incidentally, weird question: does anyone know what the interaction is between œstrogen growing your breasts and trying to bind? [BoyMe]Obviously, I'm potentially going to be wanting to bind when they grow,[/BoyMe] [GirlMe]but I don't want him ruining the growth up there.[/GirlMe] Is it better to just wait until they're basically done growing?

I know I have read something about that before, let me look it up...

Yep, here it is:

Can I bind if my chest is still growing?

Yes, it’s safe to bind if you’re afab and going through an estrogen-based puberty and your chest is still developing, and it’s safe to bind if you’re amab and on estrogen and want to hide your breast development. Binding shouldn’t interfere with breast development or cause them to grow less, and it shouldn’t harm them if you bind safely even if they’re still growing. But- you do want to periodically re-measure yourself periodically to make sure you haven’t outgrown your binder and need a bigger size. If your binder starts feeling too tight or uncomfortable, you’ll need to buy a larger one.

So you should be fine.

Edit: As Juniper tried to, but failed at, point out, names and usage of names carries a deeper meaning in german-speaking countries and their societies.

I didn't fail to point it out, because I didn't try to say anything about that. Please don't say I failed at something I didn't even do, it's weird. I was exclusively speaking about my own experience with my names.
That said, I don't really think names are more important in Germany than in other countries, I think it varies too much from person to person to make generalisations like that. But I could be wrong about that, I don't really know enough about other cultures to know details like that, I only have anecdotes.

[Jormengand]

I know I have read something about that before, let me look it up...

Yep, here it is:



So you should be fine.

Neat! Thanks.

[ve4grm]

If we're up for a sillier question, my wife and I were discussing something recently.

She is a:

• Canadian
• bisexual
• soft-butch (-ish)
• punk rock
• farmer's daughter
• whose teen years were the 90s.

What percentage of her wardrobe should be plaid/flannel?

(I think the only big flannel-demographic she's missing is hipster.)

[2D8HP]

...What percentage of her wardrobe should be plaid/flannel? ...

The part that isn't denim, leather, or military surplus, obviously.

[Iruka]

I know I have read something about that before, let me look it up...

Yep, here it is:

So you should be fine.

I would be a bit ... hesitant ... to rely on medical advice from a tumbler. On the other hand, more conclusive stuff just seems not available. At least there are no reports out there about it being detrimental. In general, there seems barely anything that can stop breasts from growing once they have started.
There ist a study about binding in general, don't know if you have heard about it. Doesn't mention binding during growth however.

[halfeye]

In general, there seems barely anything that can stop breasts from growing once they have started.

I am on Finasteride, I once switched to soya milk, started growing breasts, dropped the soya, breasts went away again.

[-Sentinel-]

Yeah. It's just when people tell me "Oh, we couldn't refer to you by your preferred pronouns! That would be disrespectful!" that I find the nearest wall and metaphorically bang my head against it multiple times.

I really want to use people's preferred pronouns, but my main issue with "it" would be fear of perceived disrespect when using this pronoun in the presence of people who don't know you. It's like when lesbians refer to themselves as d*kes: it's their right to reclaim that word for themselves, but there's no way they're getting me to use it, sorry gals, nothing personal. I don't want to have to hurriedly explain to random bystanders how "I'm not bigoted, really, I was actually asked to use that word". Not to make it all about me, but it's just very awkward.

If we're up for a sillier question, my wife and I were discussing something recently.

She is a:

• Canadian
• bisexual
• soft-butch (-ish)
• punk rock
• farmer's daughter
• whose teen years were the 90s.

What percentage of her wardrobe should be plaid/flannel?

Ha ha ha ha ha

She sounds cool. (Mind, I'm Canadian too, and therefore biased.)

[ve4grm]

Ha ha ha ha ha

She sounds cool. (I'm Canadian too, and therefore biased.)

I think so, too! I married her after all.

[Jormengand]

I really want to use people's preferred pronouns, but my main issue with "it" would be fear of perceived disrespect when using this pronoun in the presence of people who don't know you.

And every time you have to explain it is a time where the member of the minority group doesn't have to be the one who undergoes the stress of justifying their own existence for a change. Every time you have to explain it is explaining my right to exist. I'm not sure what kind of universe that isn't worth it in.

[-Sentinel-]

And every time you have to explain it is a time where the member of the minority group doesn't have to be the one who undergoes the stress of justifying their own existence for a change. Every time you have to explain it is explaining my right to exist. I'm not sure what kind of universe that isn't worth it in.

It's just that some gender-neutral alternatives such as the singular "they" have been gaining traction and acceptance, whereas "it" has not... and unlike "they", can carry undertones that are offensive to some. Since I'm not convinced that "they" users and "it" users belong to fundamentally different genders, I'll be inclined to play it safe and default to "they" when dealing with a nonbinary person. I am far more likely to offend a "he/she/they" user by saying "it" than I am to offend an "it" user by using the singular "they".

Until we develop some kind of telepathy or mind-reading, social interactions will always have to require some shortcuts and assumptions; either to take the "path of least offense" (which often involves less-precise vocabulary) or to get around the inherent limitations of language. Describing the world using language is like doing paint-by-number: you have only so many colors available and so many areas to paint, so the end result will never be anywhere near picture-perfect.

[The_Snark]

I am far more likely to offend a "he/she/they" user by saying "it" than I am to offend an "it" user by using the singular "they".

While this is true in general, it seems demonstrably not the case when talking to Jormengand. Defaulting to "they" when you don't know is definitely the right pick, but that isn't the case here either. I can understand the "it" pronoun feeling awkward in some contexts, but right here - a thread where its preference has just been thoroughly explained - doesn't seem like one of them.

[-Sentinel-]

While this is true in general, it seems demonstrably not the case when talking to Jormengand. Defaulting to "they" when you don't know is definitely the right pick, but that isn't the case here either. I can understand the "it" pronoun feeling awkward in some contexts, but right here - a thread where its preference has just been thoroughly explained - doesn't seem like one of them.

Indeed! Context is key. If I had a friend who preferred "it" pronouns, I'd use "it" in that friend's presence. However, if I were talking about that friend (in its absence) with people who aren't familiar with my friend and its preferred pronouns, I would likely use "they" in order to avoid passing for a transphobe/nonbinaryphobe (is that a word?), as most people consider "it" to be dehumanizing.

The problem with spoken conversation is that it cannot include footnotes.

[Jormengand]

It's just that some gender-neutral alternatives such as the singular "they" have been gaining traction and acceptance, whereas "it" has not...

Which is exactly why I would like it to gain that acceptance, such as if people used it.

Since I'm not convinced that "they" users and "it" users belong to fundamentally different genders,

You are literally speaking with an it user and a they user who have fundamentally different genders and can read each other's minds to determine the exact parameters of the difference.

Indeed! Context is key. If I had a friend who preferred "it" pronouns, I'd use "it" in that friend's presence. However, if I were talking about that friend (in its absence) with people who aren't familiar with my friend and its preferred pronouns, I would likely use "they"

Please don't use the wrong pronoun for people behind their back to save your own face. It's not nice.

[Iruka]

Indeed! Context is key. If I had a friend who preferred "it" pronouns, I'd use "it" in that friend's presence. However, if I were talking about that friend (in its absence) with people who aren't familiar with my friend and its preferred pronouns, I would likely use "they" in order to avoid passing for a transphobe/nonbinaryphobe (is that a word?), as most people consider "it" to be dehumanizing.

The problem with spoken conversation is that it cannot include footnotes.

If you absolutely cannot get yourself to use certain pronouns, how about using the name in these circumstances?

[-Sentinel-]

Please don't use the wrong pronoun for people behind their back to save your own face. It's not nice.

Well, as I mentioned, there's the whole thing about navigating the path of least offense.

Chance that word will reach you that I used your wrong pronouns in your absence = almost nil.
Chance that my using your "it" pronouns will cause people to think that I view nonbinary people as subhuman = considerably higher.

If you absolutely cannot get your to use certain pronouns, how about using the name in these circumstances?

Seems sensible.

[Jormengand]

Well, as I mentioned, there's the whole thing about navigating the path of least offense.

Chance that word will reach you that I used your wrong pronouns in your absence = almost nil.
Chance that my using your "it" pronouns will cause people to think that I view nonbinary people as subhuman = considerably higher.

Just because someone might not find out that you've done something not-okay doesn't stop it being not-okay. And if someone thinks you're calling me a subhuman, then (quite apart from the literally-a-quarter-of-a-human thing) they'll probably mention it and you can explain.

[ve4grm]

Just because someone might not find out that you've done something not-okay doesn't stop it being not-okay. And if someone thinks you're calling me a subhuman, then (quite apart from the literally-a-quarter-of-a-human thing) they'll probably mention it and you can explain.

Does the fact that "they" is a generic pronoun, used for male, female, nongendered, as well as plural, not change this a bit? I mean, I definitely understand being upset if someone used "he" or "she" to refer to you, but just as I as a male wouldn't be upset if someone referred to me as "they", it feels like it might be an ok substitute when "it" isn't appropriate?

I don't want to tell you how you should feel about it, of course. But I know sometimes people don't even have the energy to fully explain their own preferences to everyone, let alone a third party's.

I don't know. As previously discussed, your particular situation seems very complex.

[YossarianLives]

This exact same discussion keeps coming up. I really think it might be best to just leave Jormengand alone, I can only assume it has first hand experience in this subject and knows what it is talking about.

[AuthorGirl]

This exact same discussion keeps coming up. I really think it might be best to just leave Jormengand alone, I can only assume it has first hand experience in this subject and knows what it is talking about.

Yes please! Jormengand's made its preference clear, and I don't see why an etiquette discussion has to circle around to "but why don't you prefer this?"

[Jormengand]

Does the fact that "they" is a generic pronoun, used for male, female, nongendered, as well as plural, not change this a bit? I mean, I definitely understand being upset if someone used "he" or "she" to refer to you, but just as I as a male wouldn't be upset if someone referred to me as "they", it feels like it might be an ok substitute when "it" isn't appropriate?

I don't want to tell you how you should feel about it, of course. But I know sometimes people don't even have the energy to fully explain their own preferences to everyone, let alone a third party's.

I don't know. As previously discussed, your particular situation seems very complex.

I mean, I wouldn't mind if the type of person who calls everyone "They" called me "They", nor someone who didn't know any better, nor indeed would I mind being called "They" in any of the circumstances where you might call a cis person "They". There's the added complication of actually being multiple people, and "They" might be appropriate ("Did Legion seem enthusiastic about your plan?" "Yeah, all four of them were really looking forward to it!").

It's specifically calling someone "They" because you can't bear to use their actual preferred pronoun that gets me, and I doubt most binary trans people would be happy if their pronouns and/or name were evaded because people couldn't bear to get it right, either.

[EternalMelon]

Indeed! Context is key. If I had a friend who preferred "it" pronouns, I'd use "it" in that friend's presence. However, if I were talking about that friend (in its absence) with people who aren't familiar with my friend and its preferred pronouns, I would likely use "they" in order to avoid passing for a transphobe/nonbinaryphobe (is that a word?), as most people consider "it" to be dehumanizing.

The problem with spoken conversation is that it cannot include footnotes.

Context is key. Which would probably get you off the hook for using improper pronouns if the context predicated hurtful or dangerous; if the person in question is not out to the recipient or if the person in question is intentionally abusing pronouns for an intolerant approch. However, if we read the context with Jor:

And every time you have to explain it is a time where the member of the minority group doesn't have to be the one who undergoes the stress of justifying their own existence for a change. Every time you have to explain it is explaining my right to exist. I'm not sure what kind of universe that isn't worth it in.

Jormengand seems to prefer the usage of this "problematic" pronoun in attempt to legitimize it. Using Jor's pronouns* creates a situation where one has to then further explain its gender and pronouns usage to the audience. This is affirming speech.

*or, this pronoun for this specific person. Gah, I'm sorry if I said anything problematic to your personal situation Jormengand.

EDIT: It took me long enough to type this out it seems others have posted before me, suggesting that this topic might be better off un-discussed. feel free to ignore me.

[ve4grm]

I mean, I wouldn't mind if the type of person who calls everyone "They" called me "They", nor someone who didn't know any better, nor indeed would I mind being called "They" in any of the circumstances where you might call a cis person "They". There's the added complication of actually being multiple people, and "They" might be appropriate ("Did Legion seem enthusiastic about your plan?" "Yeah, all four of them were really looking forward to it!").

It's specifically calling someone "They" because you can't bear to use their actual preferred pronoun that gets me, and I doubt most binary trans people would be happy if their pronouns and/or name were evaded because people couldn't bear to get it right, either.

Ok, cool. I understand you better now, then.

This exact same discussion keeps coming up. I really think it might be best to just leave Jormengand alone, I can only assume it has first hand experience in this subject and knows what it is talking about.

Yes please! Jormengand's made its preference clear, and I don't see why an etiquette discussion has to circle around to "but why don't you prefer this?"

Jor has indicated that it is ok with questions in good faith, but even if everything's ok we have definitely veered out of LGBTQAI+ to just discussing Dissociative Identity, so this thread is probably not the right thread for further discussion, you are right.

The topic does probably have some meaning for other nonbinary folks, too, though. I don't know.

Either way, I'm done with my questions. Thanks Jormengand!

[Jormengand]

Jor has indicated that it is ok with questions in good faith, but even if everything's ok we have definitely veered out of LGBTQAI+ to just discussing Dissociative Identity, so this thread is probably not the right thread for further discussion, you are right.

The topic does probably have some meaning for other nonbinary folks, too, though. I don't know.

I will say that people with DID being genderfluid (or at least the same type of multi-gender that I am, if that has its own name outside of genderfluidity) is apparently fairly common. It's also apparently common for the personalities to have different ages, but given that age is just a measure of how long we've existed, I'd not take that literally so much as a "Young at heart" kind of thing. That said, it does mess with my perception of my age in a variety of ways*, so maybe there's something to that.

Uh, anyway, the point is that DID might be more related to LGBT issues than you'd think, because it does seem to be related to at least one specific type of genderfluidity.

*I was going to be explicit about this, but... uh, I'll leave the weirder details to your imagination**. The more normal things are sorta "Wishing I could relive my childhood". Although, of course, since I deliberately blanked out most of my childhood memories**, that's not surprising - I barely lived it the first time.***

**This is really, really not the thread to elaborate about either of these, though I could make a coherent argument for either of them.***

***This whole "Explain my tragic backstory" stuff is kinda therapeutic, to be fair... >.>

[Lissou]

I do know someone else with DID who identifies as gender neutral and has identities of different genders and orientations too, like you do.

[Florian]

@Jorm:

The interesting question is, what would happen and remain if your personality fragments can be reintegrated into a whole and form a new core personality?

[Jormengand]

I do know someone else with DID who identifies as gender neutral and has identities of different genders and orientations too, like you do.

Yeah, I think it's fairly common for people with DID to have that.

@Jorm:

The interesting question is, what would happen and remain if your personality fragments can be reintegrated into a whole and form a new core personality?

I don't know.

I know, that sounds kinda boring, but... I really don't know. My previous holistic self certainly wasn't entirely cis, because the signs that I might have been a woman were already there, if only obvious in retrospect. I wasn't entirely straight, either, whatever "Straight" might have meant for me, because I was falling for boys and girls with reckless abandon. But I don't know exactly what I was - I assumed (for all of the year between actually developing an interest in relationships at all and becoming literally four people) that I was just a bisexual boy but it obviously wasn't the case.

Of course, you asked what would happen if they "...can be reintegrated", not "...are reintegrated", to which the answer is that I wouldn't go through with it. There are lots of fundamental parts of who I are which I wouldn't give up if I could, including my gender and sexuality among other things. And honestly, being four people is actually quite cool when you get used to it.