HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:39 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
Keep in mind that non-binary (ze, etc.) isn't the same as trans. My understanding is that trans people generally still want to play one of the two gender roles (man or woman). If you're a trans guy, you want to look like any other guy and be treated like any other guy. I've met guys and girls who I had no idea were trans, and you probably have too. And that's kinda the point - they don't want special treatment or to be set apart. Calling him 'ze' would defeat that.
Not having to use gendered pronouns would side step this issue then - those that see a lot of attention seeking with this subject (which tbh, I feel to some extent) could just avoid the trap of using the wrong pronoun. And those that could be misgendered would avoid having it happen, regardless of what the potential misgenderer thinks of the subject.
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:42 PM
jamincan jamincan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: KW
Posts: 1,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
It doesn't exactly fit though, it does sound natural when referring to an individual to say something like "they did this", which sounds like you are talking about multiple people. We could just ignore that for a bit though and have those be the gender neutral singular terms and it would sound normal eventually.
Is it really strange? I use it in the singular form all the time and it's had common use that way since the 14th century, according to wikipedia. It's really only Victorian grammarians who chafed against its use that way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:42 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
But being gay or straight isn't substantially diminished by not being in a relationship. It's primary a question of internal feelings like attraction and desire. If a straight man never marries... he's still straight.

Gender is primarily a social category. So not having it recognized in society substantially diminishes it. .
Again, I don't think gender is necessarily a societal silo or a prison that we're stuck in (based on what we are and also how society sees us) at least not necessarily any more than sexual orientation, race, or any number of other characteristics.

Especially not in today's society.

I do wonder where the current gender fluidity and redefinition push will lead us, and have to admit I am not sure that place is necessarily going to be one with fewer gender-related barriers.
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:46 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamincan View Post
Is it really strange? I use it in the singular form all the time and it's had common use that way since the 14th century, according to wikipedia. It's really only Victorian grammarians who chafed against its use that way.
I'd guess around 10% of my friends have non-standard pronouns. I don't know about strange but even people in communities that have a lot of people with those pronouns get it wrong or get confused regularly. "They" can often be confusing because it sounds plural sometimes.

I don't have a problem with English evolving but I think it would be good to have a true third person singular pronoun, or simply shift away from using gender in the language how we do. But I don't think it's true that the current system is completely effortless and that people who find it odd must be behind the times or secretly resistant due to prejudice.
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:46 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is offline
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 5,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
I worded it the way I did because there isn't "a" narrative, but I am responding to what I have commonly seen and not a made up perspective.

One quote from this thread (not blaming Aylmer, just pointing it out):



What's the transition process? Is Elliott Page going to physically transition to the point where an average person without background knowledge would identify him as male? How many people know that bottom surgery is actually pretty rare and has mediocre outcomes? There's a high chance that Elliott will be a male-identified individual with a vagina, which will be a relevant consideration for sex partners or health in the future.
It was presumptuous of me to assume what his transition will look like, you're right. But woah, I think you read a bit far into what I'm saying.

I actually really don't think that bottom surgery has any bearing on gender. Gender is a complex interplay of identity (how you feel) and communication (what you indicate to others). Bottom surgery doesn't help with the latter, because your genitals generally aren't on display. It may help with the former if you feel it will help you feel more male or female, but that's totally private and personal and no one else's business.
__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:48 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
I worded it the way I did because there isn't "a" narrative, but I am responding to what I have commonly seen and not a made up perspective.

One quote from this thread (not blaming Aylmer, just pointing it out):



What's the transition process? Is Elliott Page going to physically transition to the point where an average person without background knowledge would identify him as male? How many people know that bottom surgery is actually pretty rare and has mediocre outcomes? There's a high chance that Elliott will be a male-identified individual with a vagina, which will be a relevant consideration for sex partners and health in the future.
.
This is a very good point. We don't know what Elliott Page's future plans are with respect to this (if he has any, and anyway it's none of our business) but I think it's inaccurate to view him as simply a temporary outlier.

If we look at the choices and life paths of many trans people, it's highly plausible that Elliot Page will remain physically the same he is today going forward.

All of which is entirely his free choice of course.

(And of course we're only speculating on someone's very personal intimate life choices because this is a celebrity who chose to make this very public.)
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:49 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
It may help if you feel it will help you feel more male or female, but that's totally private and personal.
This is a pretty weird take on genitals. They're a thing that only the owner ever knows about and are a kind of private thematic element to life? Just about every human's life in history has involved not totally private genitals.

Let's say you're at a party and you meet somebody. You might have sex with them eventually. You are a very attractive female-presenting individual. Does it matter if you have a penis? Is it better for everybody to basically know or better for you to explain it to acquaintances or potential sex partners on a case-by-case basis at some point? I don't have a right or wrong answer in mind for this.
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:51 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamincan View Post
Is it really strange? I use it in the singular form all the time and it's had common use that way since the 14th century, according to wikipedia. It's really only Victorian grammarians who chafed against its use that way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
Well, I don't think the need to clarify he/she or replace with ze would need to be discussed if they was 1:1 substitute.
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 6:56 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is offline
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 5,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
This is a pretty weird take on genitals. They're a thing that only the owner ever knows about and are a kind of private thematic element to life? Just about every human's life in history has involved not totally private genitals.
Private doesn't mean "no one ever sees them". Sex is a private act between people. Hey, maybe I'm the outlier prude, but other than sex and like 30 seconds while changing at the pool, my genitals are generally not on display

(I think this is officially my favourite post on this forum)

Quote:
Let's say you're at a party and you meet somebody. You might have sex with them eventually. You are a very attractive female-presenting individual. Does it matter if you have a penis? Is it better for everybody to basically know or better for you to explain it to acquaintances or potential sex partners on a case-by-case basis at some point? I don't have a right or wrong answer in mind for this.
What I'm saying is precisely that no, the question of what's under the skirt doesn't have an impact on whether I'll see that person as a lady. As for the disclose vs discover question, I guess it depends on what you feel most comfortable with.
But again, sex is a private act. You don't have sex with most people you interact with on a daily basis. For the primarily social purpose of gender, sex is a relatively minor aspect.
__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 7:07 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aylmer View Post
As for the disclose vs discover question, I guess it depends on what you feel most comfortable with.
It also depends on the other people involved. If 99% of society agrees that you are female and you have a penis and conventionally date guys, you will be eventually rejected by partners almost every time, after having invested a lot of effort. Historically this also involved huge personal risk.

The people who assert that there's no difference with trans individuals and none of it's anybody's business would not generally enter into a long-term relationship with somebody who had plumbing that violated their expectations (and possibly could not produce children with them). So it's a somewhat false stance. People are only fully on board with it when it's low stakes.

Quote:
But again, sex is a private act. You don't have sex with most people you interact with on a daily basis. For the primarily social purpose of gender, sex is a relatively minor aspect.
I disagree. I don't think we would have gender without sexual reproduction, and gender norms are essentially a part of ceremony that's designed to broadcast sexual desirability.

Open question whether asexuals are equally likely to wear mini skirts and get boob jobs or take steroids, etc. I'd guess no, and that they'd on average be perceived as a bit less sexually dimorphic yet also don't care much about it.
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 7:24 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Quebec
Posts: 42,021
Amusingly, the person I know who gets misgendered the most regularly and with no hope of things improving would be my friend "Johnny" who's in a managing position at the Montreal office of an extremely big American corporation and deals with strangers all the time over the phone or email; everyone (new) assumes he's a woman and pronounce his name "Jeen".

Not a huge deal but I'm sure it does get old and he wouldn't miss it if it stopped! (which it won't, unless he changes jobs).
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 7:25 PM
Aylmer's Avatar
Aylmer Aylmer is offline
Still optimistic
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal (C-D-N) / Ottawa (Aylmer)
Posts: 5,383
I mean, I'm gay and am unlikely to reproduce, but I still identify as male and communicate gender to the wider world. And as you pointed out earlier, many cultures have third genders, and those don't serve a reproduction purpose either.

I don't know if "why gender" has such a straightforward Darwinian answer. It's an interesting question which I'm certain much smarter people have explored.
__________________
I've always struggled with reality. And I'm pleased to say that I won.
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 7:26 PM
Pavlov's Avatar
Pavlov Pavlov is offline
Khan
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 4,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
It also depends on the other people involved. If 99% of society agrees that you are female and you have a penis and conventionally date guys, you will be eventually rejected by partners almost every time, after having invested a lot of effort. Historically this also involved huge personal risk.

The people who assert that there's no difference with trans individuals and none of it's anybody's business would not generally enter into a long-term relationship with somebody who had plumbing that violated their expectations (and possibly could not produce children with them). So it's a somewhat false stance. People are only fully on board with it when it's low stakes.
I don't understand your argument here at all. As a heterosexual male, I don't have a pre-existing policy of entering into long-term relationships with every person that I recognize as a "woman". There are a whole host of factors which would make me choose not to enter into a long-term relationship with a woman (yes, including the general condition of her genitals). It isn't because "she isn't a real woman", its because I'm not attracted to penises (or various other genital characteristics that I might personally find unattractive).
__________________
Confucius says:
With coarse rice to eat, with water to drink, and my bended arm for a pillow - I have still joy in the midst of these things. Riches and honors acquired by unrighteousness are to me as a floating cloud.
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 7:34 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Quebec
Posts: 42,021
I would agree there's no universal, correct answer to "disclose or discover".

I used to be 100% for "disclose early and fully" then I happened to learn about a couple situations of people I know where that would just not work - typically it's a "flaw" that would send 99%+ of potential partners running away immediately but that can actually be managed decently well, so it's understandable that they can't just start with that.

However, the "disclose" moment should come at some point though. In all cases.

JMO of course.
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 7:43 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
I used to be 100% for "disclose early and fully" then I happened to learn about a couple situations of people I know where that would just not work - typically it's a "flaw" that would send 99%+ of potential partners running away immediately but that can actually be managed decently well, so it's understandable that they can't just start with that.
I would point out that the disclosure is difficult in part because it carries an unnecessary potential social penalty. Some people are not accepting of trans individuals, a lot of people are kind of narrow minded about what they think they want personally (with weak distinctions between what could make them happy and what society promotes), and a lot of people are squeamish or prudish.

I think a world in which you could be totally open about your genital configuration without concerns beyond the sexual interests of potential partners is much better than the one we are in right now, where lots of people broadcast a sort of "genitals are none of anybody's business!" message, which can easily function as a kind of "don't ask, don't tell" for trans people.

I'm personally pro trans rights. But I notice that some pro trans rights folks on social media have some pretty regressive ideas, and are not always sex positive. And often the most aggressive people are not trans themselves, may not know trans people, and probably wouldn't even have identified as "allies" a few years ago. I question how informed and nuanced their beliefs are.

Last edited by someone123; Dec 2, 2020 at 7:58 PM.
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 7:49 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov View Post
It isn't because "she isn't a real woman", its because I'm not attracted to penises (or various other genital characteristics that I might personally find unattractive).
This is just a case of redefining terms in a way that's convenient. The reality, based on what you wrote, is that you wouldn't consider most trans women suitable sex or possibly romantic partners, though you may be on board with identifying them as female in a low stakes public setting. Most males are like you, so this is the typical person a trans woman would encounter without some kind of filtering. Hence filtering may be beneficial. That was one part of my argument.

The other part is simply that people who say something along the lines of "trans women are just women, plain and simple, BUT a woman having a penis is a total dealbreaker for me sexually/romantically" are in a state of cognitive dissonance.
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 7:51 PM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
♒︎ Empirically Canadian
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 🍁 Canada
Posts: 11,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Discuss!
What are your views here Acajack?

Wokeism or woketarianism is yet another iteration of the concatenation of liberated peoples, and why not? History has seen the liberation of serfs, slaves, women, gays, lesbians, disabled, people of colour, etc., and why not the transgendered? It falls neatly into place as a continuation on the spectrum of the historically liberated, the recently liberated, the almost liberated, and the yet to be identified as needing to be liberated. It's just another hue in the spectrum of humanity. Any who protest will be duly cancelled.
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 8:02 PM
Pavlov's Avatar
Pavlov Pavlov is offline
Khan
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 4,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
This is just a case of redefining terms in a way that's convenient. The reality, based on what you wrote, is that you wouldn't consider most trans women suitable sex or possibly romantic partners, though you may be on board with identifying them as female in a low stakes public setting. Most males are like you, so this is the typical person a trans woman would encounter without some kind of filtering. Hence filtering may be beneficial. That was one part of my argument.

The other part is simply that people who say something along the lines of "trans women are just women, plain and simple, BUT a woman having a penis is a total dealbreaker for me sexually/romantically" are in a state of cognitive dissonance.
Agree with the non-bolded. Disagree with the bolded.

I'm a superficial person. Obesity is also a total deal-breaker for me sexually/romantically. I have a number of other deal-breakers as well. In all cases, this doesn't mean that I don't see the subject-person as less of a woman. I just seem that person as less of a potential sexual/romantic partner.

Where is my cognitive dissonance?
__________________
Confucius says:
With coarse rice to eat, with water to drink, and my bended arm for a pillow - I have still joy in the midst of these things. Riches and honors acquired by unrighteousness are to me as a floating cloud.
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 8:02 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
This is a pretty weird take on genitals. They're a thing that only the owner ever knows about and are a kind of private thematic element to life? Just about every human's life in history has involved not totally private genitals.

Let's say you're at a party and you meet somebody. You might have sex with them eventually. You are a very attractive female-presenting individual. Does it matter if you have a penis? Is it better for everybody to basically know or better for you to explain it to acquaintances or potential sex partners on a case-by-case basis at some point? I don't have a right or wrong answer in mind for this.
I'd think that things either being obvious or at least frank would probably lead to more harmonious outcomes in almost all situations.

While I understand the point you made earlier about alienating 99% of potential partners if you're too open about that (ie having genitals that don't correspond to the rest of your "look"), I am not sure what the end-game would be there anyway.

To get someone to fall in love with you (or perhaps desire you) so much that they would come to not give a damn about what the plumbing is down below?

I know there are romances of this nature that exist, but thinking it could become significantly more generalized sounds like a huge stretch. (Pardon the pun.)
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2020, 8:05 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
It also depends on the other people involved. If 99% of society agrees that you are female and you have a penis and conventionally date guys, you will be eventually rejected by partners almost every time, after having invested a lot of effort. Historically this also involved huge personal risk.
.
The game of romance isn't ever a fair one, though. Lots of people have a high rate of rejection due to a variety of factors: obesity, height, ugliness, behavioural tics, speech impediments, etc.
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time

Last edited by Acajack; Dec 2, 2020 at 8:15 PM.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:29 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.