How Is This "Misgendering"? *Resurrected

[FA_Q2]

Intellect isn't something I worry about when I walk through a poor black neighborhood. Isn't this thread about homosexuals? When I walk through a gay neighborhood, I feel safe and I love their landscaping. I would rather live with gays than poor heterosexual blacks. Gunshots late at night, and their homes look like like Berlin after it was carpet bombed. And the fear and loathing and paranoia in poor black neighborhoods? Take a knee. That solves everything.

....

Just poor black neighborhoods...

 

[emilynghiem]

Being an asshole isn't going to win you anything. Why not accept that this person wishes to called be a "female". How will it hurt you?

In a country and culture where people make an issue of referring
to the Democrat or Democratic Party, yes,
once politics gets involved, anything can become an issue.

How does it hurt to have a cross on a teacher's memorial on the grounds of a public school?
Some people have sued to have such removed, based on principle.

Whether cheerleaders cite Bible passages as cheers on school game banners,
also became the basis of a lawsuit in court. What does it hurt to cite a Bible passage?

If people don't believe in something, that's one thing.
But to try to impose that on them by either govt,
or bullying or guilt tripping them into doing or saying something they don't believe in,
then human nature kicks in and people object, resist and refuse.

ScienceRocks I appreciate how you at least ask and try to understand
what is going on with people's thinking on the other side.

With issues like this which involve deep personal and spiritual beliefs,
the best way I know to influence change is to identify
what is the equivalent change on your side and the other person's side.
If you can find something you are asked to change
that the other person doesn't think causes any harm,
but you refuse on principle, that might demonstrate
a close equivalent of why that feels so wrong to them
because in a similar case it would feel wrong and imposing on you.

One of my friends wants me to be open to the theory
that the earth is flatter than it is spherical. Because I have
personally never seen the earth from space, it is equally
faith based which way it is. That is an extreme example
I can give of being asked to change how I say things to
be open minded it could be another way to accommodate someone else.

I have asked atheist friends would they be okay with equating God with Nature.
some nontheists are okay with substituting Life or Nature in palce of God.
Or the universe. But some say NO, God is not the same as Nature.
If that's not their way of saying or translating things from one
system to another, then it just doesn't work for them. So I find something else
that does work. So accommodating both people doesn't have to impose
change on one person more than another. Usually the solution is mutual,'where both
people equally stretch to meet the other halfway.

Thanks for being here and reaching out to others.
I hope your efforts pay off, and you influence as many people
to understand ways of thinking outside their own
as people here may help explain the thinking behind their beliefs as well.

Keep up the great work and intelligent posts, where I hope you continue to make the most of challenging conflicts in beliefs, turning them into opportunities to share greater insights and diversity of thoughts and experiences. Thank you ScienceRocks for sharing here!

 

[Wyld Kard]

Being an asshole isn't going to win you anything. Why not accept that this person wishes to called be a "female". How will it hurt you?

Why accept something that isn't what is claimed?

Expecting others to regard a delusional lifestyle as being "normal" when it's clearly not, is ridiculous.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Gender is not necessarily biological.

Sex is biological, determined by chromosomal process.

"Gender" is a structural language term requisitioned to validate the idea of a fluid sexual identity defined by subjective emotional feelings.

Your political views are subjective. Does that make them illegitimate?

It does allow someone such as yourself to see them as incorrect and disregard them in favor of a position that you see as valid.

Hence your analogy falls apart and supports Billy's point far more than yours.

Billy tried to dismiss 'gender' outright as 'subjective' and 'emotional'.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

View attachment 157318

gen·der
ˈjendər/
noun
noun: gender; plural noun: genders

1. 1.
   the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

Nope. Yours is a recent insert, added for strictly political purposes.

Definition of gender
1 a :a subclass within a grammatical class (such as noun, pronoun, adjective, or verb) of a language that is partly arbitrary but also partly based on distinguishable characteristics (such as shape, social rank, manner of existence, or sex) and that determines agreement with and selection of other words or grammatical forms
b :membership of a word or a grammatical form in such a subclass
c :an inflectional form (see inflection 3a) showing membership in such a subclass

lolol are you trying to argue that the only definition of gender is its grammatical usage,

such as whether you say 'le' or 'la' in French?

goddam that's funny.

Only to the uneducated.

How did you get so stupid?

And why have you been using the word gender to apply to humans if you believe no such definition exists?

Those voices in your head are really annoying, I bet.

I did not say no such definition exists. It is an accepted though very-late-addition to the definition. I use it sparingly being inclined to use more specific words, like sex.

 

[NYcarbineer]

gen·der
ˈjendər/
noun
noun: gender; plural noun: genders

1. 1.
   the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

Nope. Yours is a recent insert, added for strictly political purposes.

Definition of gender
1 a :a subclass within a grammatical class (such as noun, pronoun, adjective, or verb) of a language that is partly arbitrary but also partly based on distinguishable characteristics (such as shape, social rank, manner of existence, or sex) and that determines agreement with and selection of other words or grammatical forms
b :membership of a word or a grammatical form in such a subclass
c :an inflectional form (see inflection 3a) showing membership in such a subclass

lolol are you trying to argue that the only definition of gender is its grammatical usage,

such as whether you say 'le' or 'la' in French?

goddam that's funny.

Only to the uneducated.

How did you get so stupid?

And why have you been using the word gender to apply to humans if you believe no such definition exists?

Those voices in your head are really annoying, I bet.

I did not say no such definition exists. It is an accepted though very-late-addition to the definition. I use it sparingly being inclined to use more specific words, like sex.

No you claimed the more modern definition only exists for political purposes, aka, your way of trying to delegitimize it.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Nope. Yours is a recent insert, added for strictly political purposes.

Definition of gender
1 a :a subclass within a grammatical class (such as noun, pronoun, adjective, or verb) of a language that is partly arbitrary but also partly based on distinguishable characteristics (such as shape, social rank, manner of existence, or sex) and that determines agreement with and selection of other words or grammatical forms
b :membership of a word or a grammatical form in such a subclass
c :an inflectional form (see inflection 3a) showing membership in such a subclass

lolol are you trying to argue that the only definition of gender is its grammatical usage,

such as whether you say 'le' or 'la' in French?

goddam that's funny.

Only to the uneducated.

How did you get so stupid?

And why have you been using the word gender to apply to humans if you believe no such definition exists?

Those voices in your head are really annoying, I bet.

I did not say no such definition exists. It is an accepted though very-late-addition to the definition. I use it sparingly being inclined to use more specific words, like sex.

No you claimed the more modern definition only exists for political purposes, aka, your way of trying to delegitimize it.

Au contraire. The definition of "gay" was once "lighthearted and carefree". The primary definition - added much later - currently relates to homosexuality.

It is in this time a legitimate definition.

 

[NYcarbineer]

lolol are you trying to argue that the only definition of gender is its grammatical usage,

such as whether you say 'le' or 'la' in French?

goddam that's funny.

Only to the uneducated.

How did you get so stupid?

And why have you been using the word gender to apply to humans if you believe no such definition exists?

Those voices in your head are really annoying, I bet.

I did not say no such definition exists. It is an accepted though very-late-addition to the definition. I use it sparingly being inclined to use more specific words, like sex.

No you claimed the more modern definition only exists for political purposes, aka, your way of trying to delegitimize it.

Au contraire. The definition of "gay" was once "lighthearted and carefree". The primary definition - added much later - currently relates to homosexuality.

It is in this time a legitimate definition.

So you get that gender is a social/cultural construct not strictly limited to the composition of a human beings genital area?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Only to the uneducated.

How did you get so stupid?

And why have you been using the word gender to apply to humans if you believe no such definition exists?

Those voices in your head are really annoying, I bet.

I did not say no such definition exists. It is an accepted though very-late-addition to the definition. I use it sparingly being inclined to use more specific words, like sex.

No you claimed the more modern definition only exists for political purposes, aka, your way of trying to delegitimize it.

Au contraire. The definition of "gay" was once "lighthearted and carefree". The primary definition - added much later - currently relates to homosexuality.

It is in this time a legitimate definition.

So you get that gender is a social/cultural construct not strictly limited to the composition of a human beings genital area?

I'm not interested in your social/cultural constructs, except for chuckles.

They ask me my "gender" on official forms. I do not have "gender". Should I put none, even though my sex is male?

Also, I do not have "gender" with my wife. We have in all our years of marriage never had "gender". In my entire life, I've never once had "gender".

I do what I can to keep you people from blurring clear communication by butchering the language with Newspeak and filling it with puerile euphemisms.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How did you get so stupid?

And why have you been using the word gender to apply to humans if you believe no such definition exists?

Those voices in your head are really annoying, I bet.

I did not say no such definition exists. It is an accepted though very-late-addition to the definition. I use it sparingly being inclined to use more specific words, like sex.

No you claimed the more modern definition only exists for political purposes, aka, your way of trying to delegitimize it.

Au contraire. The definition of "gay" was once "lighthearted and carefree". The primary definition - added much later - currently relates to homosexuality.

It is in this time a legitimate definition.

So you get that gender is a social/cultural construct not strictly limited to the composition of a human beings genital area?

I'm not interested in your social/cultural constructs, except for chuckles.

They ask me my "gender" on official forms. I do not have "gender". Should I put none, even though my sex is male?

Also, I do not have "gender" with my wife. We have in all our years of marriage never had "gender". In my entire life, I've never once had "gender".

I do what I can to keep you people from blurring clear communication by butchering the language with Newspeak and filling it with puerile euphemisms.

So now you're back to claiming there's no such thing as gender, despite you're having accepted the legitimacy of the more modern definition.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Those voices in your head are really annoying, I bet.

I did not say no such definition exists. It is an accepted though very-late-addition to the definition. I use it sparingly being inclined to use more specific words, like sex.

No you claimed the more modern definition only exists for political purposes, aka, your way of trying to delegitimize it.

Au contraire. The definition of "gay" was once "lighthearted and carefree". The primary definition - added much later - currently relates to homosexuality.

It is in this time a legitimate definition.

So you get that gender is a social/cultural construct not strictly limited to the composition of a human beings genital area?

I'm not interested in your social/cultural constructs, except for chuckles.

They ask me my "gender" on official forms. I do not have "gender". Should I put none, even though my sex is male?

Also, I do not have "gender" with my wife. We have in all our years of marriage never had "gender". In my entire life, I've never once had "gender".

I do what I can to keep you people from blurring clear communication by butchering the language with Newspeak and filling it with puerile euphemisms.

So now you're back to claiming there's no such thing as gender, despite you're having accepted the legitimacy of the more modern definition.

Errr ...

“If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.” (Marcus Aurelius)

 

[emilynghiem]

How Is This "Misgendering"?

Campaign flier paid for by Virginia GOP ‘misgenders’ Democratic candidate

By Faiz Siddiqui October 28 at 6:35 PM

A new campaign mailer paid for by the Republican Party of Virginia repeatedly refers to Danica Roem, a transgender woman seeking election to the state House of Delegates, as a man and accuses her of making her identity part of the race.

The fliers, authorized by Roem’s opponent for the 13th District seat, Del. Robert G. Marshall (R-Manassas), include a section titled “Danica Roem In His Own Words” and a header reading “Danica Roem, born male, has made a campaign issue out of transitioning to female.”

Marshall has repeatedly used male pronouns to refer to Roem, who is running to be the first openly transgender politician elected in Virginia.

Roem, who could not immediately be reached by phone, confirmed in an email that she had received the mailers at her home on Friday."


Campaign flier paid for by Virginia GOP ‘misgenders’ Democratic candidate

Apparently, the offender "mistranstakenly" must have "misunderestimated" how much offense would be "overinterpreted" by failing to "transcommunicate" the candidate's choice of gender, pronoun, and other interesting word choices.

 

[emilynghiem]

Those voices in your head are really annoying, I bet.

I did not say no such definition exists. It is an accepted though very-late-addition to the definition. I use it sparingly being inclined to use more specific words, like sex.

No you claimed the more modern definition only exists for political purposes, aka, your way of trying to delegitimize it.

Au contraire. The definition of "gay" was once "lighthearted and carefree". The primary definition - added much later - currently relates to homosexuality.

It is in this time a legitimate definition.

So you get that gender is a social/cultural construct not strictly limited to the composition of a human beings genital area?

I'm not interested in your social/cultural constructs, except for chuckles.

They ask me my "gender" on official forms. I do not have "gender". Should I put none, even though my sex is male?

Also, I do not have "gender" with my wife. We have in all our years of marriage never had "gender". In my entire life, I've never once had "gender".

I do what I can to keep you people from blurring clear communication by butchering the language with Newspeak and filling it with puerile euphemisms.

So now you're back to claiming there's no such thing as gender, despite you're having accepted the legitimacy of the more modern definition.

Dear NYcarbineer
There are two different definitions of gender: (1) one is based on biological chromosomal differences, to determine male as XY and female as XX. (2) the other is either a spiritual or personal identity INTERNALLY which may or may not be determined by differences in the brain, so this is not agreed on yet.

Would it help to have different terms for these two ways of determining gender? such as "chromosomal gender" vs. "neurological gender"

Since the LGBT community is so BIG on creating distinct terms for different genders, from transfemale to cismale; why not specify what people are using SPECIFICALLY as their definition of gender. Is it "spiritual gender" where it isn't physically determined at all? Is it neurological or in the brain or mental/personality patterns where the "difference in gender" does show up physically in ways that may not change? Or is it in the chromosomes or genetics where it cannot change on that level.

Apparently the terms cis and trans aren't specific enough, and this is still causing arguments over definitions of gender.

How about specifying the method or source of determining gender? would that help?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Apparently the terms cis and trans aren't specific enough, and this is still causing arguments over definitions of gender.

Sane people do not use these terms. They have no meaning, except to those who are so deeply f•••ed-up in the head that they don't even know the difference between men and women.

 

[emilynghiem]

Apparently the terms cis and trans aren't specific enough, and this is still causing arguments over definitions of gender.

Sane people do not use these terms. They have no meaning, except to those who are so deeply f•••ed-up in the head that they don't even know the difference between men and women.

Now now Bob Blaylock
Maybe these "snowflakes" are just more evolved than the rest of us!

Innuit tribes have over 50 different terms for "snow" --
There really are 50 Eskimo words for ‘snow’

Why can't we have 50 different terms for "snowflake"???
Here's a List of 58 Gender Options for Facebook Users

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Apparently the terms cis and trans aren't specific enough, and this is still causing arguments over definitions of gender.

Sane people do not use these terms. They have no meaning, except to those who are so deeply f•••ed-up in the head that they don't even know the difference between men and women.

Now now Bob Blaylock
Maybe these "snowflakes" are just more evolved than the rest of us!

Innuit tribes have over 50 different terms for "snow" --
There really are 50 Eskimo words for ‘snow’

Why can't we have 50 different terms for "snowflake"???
Here's a List of 58 Gender Options for Facebook Users

Male, female and anomalous are the only options. Anything else is fantasy or wishful thinking.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Male, female and anomalous are the only options. Anything else is fantasy or wishful thinking.