I have been over harsh. I'm sorry Inf.

falling on deaf ears
 

"...there is a good deal of medical evidence to suggest that gender is less simple that we have previously considered. Quite aside from those people who are born physically male but 'feel' female."

Thing is: as pointed out up-thread, 'feeling' like a girl doesn't alter the fact that he is a boy. Reality trumps self-definition (or feelings of a bleeding heart).

#

"There are all sorts of variations on the theme. Differences in hormonal makeup for instance. Sexuality and sexual orientation are extraordinarily complex psychologically. It is a fundamental part of every person's identity, it is a fundamental part of everybody's psychological and physical development."

Indeed it is complex and Ibram should indulge his notions about his gender as he likes. The universe, however, doesn't care how he views himself. I take my cues from 'it', not him.

#

"The colour of one's skin is pretty much set from birth. The only psycholotgical impact of skin colour is where it places you in the world. Skin colour does not bring with it an ever shifting, ever developing hormonal stew. Skin colour and 'race' do not show any differences in brain structure or function.'

Er, that he has a cock and you a pussy is also pretty much set from birth.

DNA does not lie and it isn't altered by 'hormonal stew'. As posted up-thread, a significant number of folks who identify as transsexual may have been exposed to xenoestregens(sic). This makes, at least for those folks, their 'feeling' a disorder.

Again: not suggesting such folks need fixing...am suggesting such folks -- regardless of how they each go with or against those 'feelings' -- need to stop demanding obvious contradictions (he as she) be embraced by others.

"It is known that longer versions of the androgen receptor gene are associated with less efficient testosterone signalling"

I read this as disorderd.

Why?

Even if the above applies to Ibram: he still has male DNA, 'is' male, is 'he'.

Henry, you are absolutely entitled to your opinion of what that all means in practice, as we all are.

I'm just having a hard time understanding why you had to start a whole thread to discuss someone else's gender. Y'know, you want to tackle this shit when Ibs pulls you up for saying 'he' well that's just fine. Don't like it, but hey, when have either of ever particularly liked the other's point of view? But starting a thread about this was cruel. Unecessarily cruel.

Ibs is strident and a tad precious about it all at times, but one reason for that is the journey she has gone on to arrive at this point. She is also still young. With all the brazen zeal of the young. But the young, and particularly those who have struggled to such a degree with their sense of identity are also fragile.

This thread is cruel. Your views are your views, but this thread is unnecessry and cruel.

"you are absolutely entitled to your opinion"

But, Dana, that's (one of my) point(s): that he is 'he' is not an opinion, it 'is' fact.

He may 'feel' like a she, but he is not a 'she'.

#

"I'm just having a hard time understanding why you had to start a whole thread to discuss someone else's gender."

Strictly speaking this thread is about appropriate use of pronouns.

Gender (Ibram's) is just the specific example of misuse.

#

"...starting a thread about this was cruel. Unecessarily cruel."

Eye of the beholder.

#

"Ibs is strident and a tad precious about it all at times, but one reason for that is the journey she has gone on to arrive at this point. She is also still young. With all the brazen zeal of the young. But the young, and particularly those who have struggled to such a degree with their sense of identity are also fragile."

All possibly true. All irrelevant.

#

"This thread is cruel. Your views are your views, but this thread is unnecessry and cruel."

Again: eye of the beholder.

Your participation (as well as Ibram's) is solely your (and his) responsibility.

If you view this as an exercise in cruelty: then opt out or defend him with fact.

Again: appeals to courtesy are irrelevant.

Yep. I got that.

*shrug*
 

:neutral:

Dana - I agree with you - it was Ibs posting which "sparked" the thought of starting this thread.
Calling me a "cheerleader for IM - Are you high? seriously! Have you not been around the last few YEARS? ferfuxache :headshake
Moving along...
Where we part ways is that it was cruel... unnecessary.. whatever. Why? How?
I think the cellar is a fantastic place and this is EXACTLY what we should be doing. Ibs came out to us all freely. Fine. No we are done with that/him/her/shim/whatever. Lets actually talk, share thoughts, discuss the issue. If not here, where? Again - the OP was:
I'll try and start with something you posted. Again - leave ibs out of it. Lets try to keep it GENERAL, not specific.
One's gender is also. To the rest of your post - Really? One's psyche is not affected by skin color? Oh please share with me how that works. I have zero proof, but my initial reaction is to disagree wholeheartedly.

Perhaps. But because it is not worth it to you does not make them wrong.

#

Just because you consider something "absurd", that does not make it wrong. You can be the author of your own reality; so can Ibram. Your definitions lose potency the farther you extend them from yourself. Especially in this case, when you try to project them onto other who have greater, dare I say, more intimate knowledge of what they're talking about.

"...because it is not worth it to you does not make them wrong"

If you actually read both of those folks' most recent posts in this thread you'll find neither actually says anything. That's why neither is worth responding to (in this thread).

#

"Your definitions lose potency the farther you extend them from yourself."

I see: so this applies to Ibram as well, yes?

If not: why?

Keep in mind: over and over and over I've said I don't care how Ibram self-defines, I simply refuse to participate in that self-definition by calling him 'her'.

#

"...greater, dare I say, more intimate knowledge of what they're talking about."

What 'greater' knowledge?

He feels like she...fine by me...not disputing the depth or veracity of his feelings...am disputing that he actually 'is' she.

I see now. Ya know, it never was about her.

You want some evidence about the fact that Ok, a quick (0.41 seconds) google search on the word "gender" turned up this:

You opened this thread with a ridiculous and nitpicky complaint about pronoun usage. Ok, let's stick with that. You then try to support your position by introducing statements about Ibram's penis. This quick screenshot of the top hits from google about "gender", your main subject, don't mention penis at all. It's not about penis, hq.

All of our interactions that rely on language depend for their success on a shared understanding of the words we use. You've made clear your understanding of some of these words, like gender and penis. Ok. I don't share your narrow view of these words. Lots of other folks have also indicated the difference between your opinion and theirs. That's ok too. As long as we're talking about grammar and language, sure, plenty of room for our conversation.

But you seem to want to have a definitive ... scientific, absolute certainty about the situation. You bring up hypotheses about penises and dna, etc. I'd like to question your methods here. If they're sound, perhaps they'll stand up. What, exactly, do you know about Ibram's penis? What are your sources. You challenge others for cites of their propositions, I challenge you. And if the discussion is really about Ibram, penis bearer, why are you so wrapped around the axle about pronouns? I just don't see your evidence supporting your claim that "penis equals he". Let's see your cites.

Lotta black and white thinking here, without any room for gray.

It's either/or, can never change or adapt or mutate or be "different"...

Hmmph. I disagree.

Hermaphrodites are both he and she. Are they just nothing then?

Some of what many of you seem to be saying is that we know everything there is to know about gene biology, that once we are born, our genes are set and clearly defined as a simple XX or XY.

And that is simply not the case.

My point is, there is a lot more to gender than just what is between our legs. And I see no reason anyone has to be confined to such simplistic labels as he or she just because humankind has a great deal to learn about genomics.

Genomics

Dana's right, not very many here would purposely start a thread meant to blindside another poster's current struggle.

I dont mind calling Ibram a her, although I probably will stumble a lot and use him by mistake. The science of it doesnt really play into it, either.

I did read them. They do actually say things. Your implication that I hadn't read them makes your argument baseless. Addtionally, I agree with each of them. I agree with Ali's assessment of bullshit, and I think John's on target by asserting that you're messed up in the head as evidenced by his quote of yours. It is conceivable that you haven't read their posts. *shrug*


As for self definition. Sure. Sure it applies to Ibram as well. And if s/he defines as "she", she knows better than you. That greater knowledge is a more reliable source than what I can detect from here. YOU may have greater knowledge about Ibram's gender than I do, perhaps even equal to Ibram's... I doubt it, but if you do, I'd appreciate you sharing your greater ... credentials so I can adjust my understanding accordingly. If you don't, tha's ok, but I'll keep deferring to Ibram on this score until then.

The greater knowledge I spoke of is that Ibram knows Ibram better than you know Ibram. I doubt you dispute this.