LGBTitp - Part Seven

[Jacklu]

Welcome, one and all.

This is a thread where we Playgrounders, and LGBTitp in particular, gather to discuss, share our experiences, give general advice and support one another in such matters as arise relating to, well, the world beyond heteronormaitivity.

Everyone is welcome. Let's try to keep from seeming otherwise.
Keep this topic free of politics and religion. (so, don't violate the board rules, plz)
It's beyond the scope of this thread to discuss whether LGBT is "Right." (And really, most discussions probably should avoid moralizing too much anyway)
Please refrain from posting sexually explicit content. (Keep it friendly as well as board safe :smallsmile:)

If you would rather be anonymous when asking for advice or sharing your story or views, you can use the address below to send a message to be posted in this thread via proxy.

http://anonmail.smeenet.org/

Keep in mind that content which contain strong language may be filtered (Plus, y'know, the forum-filters), and content that violates the forum rules won't be posted at all.

Here are the links for the last few threads, where much of use or interest may be found:
LGBT people in the playground (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62225)

LGBT people in the playground - part II (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86066)

LGBTitp - part III (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5663140#post5663140)

LGBTitp 4: We are a family? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129235)

LGBTitp - Part Five (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143424)

LGBTitp - Part Six (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147832)

*modified from the original.

[Serpentine]

* scratches head* They have shops with those kind of niches in the United Kingdom? Interesting. I'm kinda unsure how you'd open a clothing shop for that, because 'butch' is either too broad or too narrow of a term to categorize a store to, tho' I'm not entirely sure.I would presume it's "men's" clothes made to fit women a la the SKIRTS FOR MEN! movement, and/or clothes to suit a more specific "butch" style - there's shops for girly girls, guess it makes sense to have one for tomboys.

So. Gay people and the like. Umm... Hrm. I don't know many, nor have any news. A bisexual friend of mine has lost a heap of weight and looks absolutely fabulous.* Does that count?


*I'm sorry. But he does! Also he is just a touch on the "fabulous" side...

[Jokasti]

Kilts? :smallconfused: Those aren't for men. They are for manly men. And women.

[Eloi]

I would presume it's "men's" clothes made to fit women a la the SKIRTS FOR MEN! movement, and/or clothes to suit a more specific "butch" style - there's shops for girly girls, guess it makes sense to have one for tomboys.

So. Gay people and the like. Umm... Hrm. I don't know many, nor have any news. A bisexual friend of mine has lost a heap of weight and looks absolutely fabulous.* Does that count?


*I'm sorry. But he does! Also he is just a touch on the "fabulous" side...

See, the subtle differences between 'tomboy' 'transvestite' and 'butch lesbian', make a store specifically aimed at providing men's clothing for women make it either too broad or too narrow under the label 'butch'. Wouldn't 'Men's Clothing For Women Store' make much more sense as a name?

[Serpentine]

Jokasti: This comes up every time :smallsigh: No, not kilts, not unless the category "kilt" can be expanded to include a variety of styles and colours, and dresses.

Eloi: But think of it in terms of style, rather than "clothing category". If you can have what my mother calls "skinny girl shops" with a particular girl style, and Ally's and the like with girly-girl styles, and Hot Topic with pop-alternative styles, why not have a "butch" store with "masculine" styles designed for women?
I don't know anything about this shop specifically, but the concept makes reasonable sense to me.

[Jokasti]

Well, if you have a very open minded Scotsman, I think it could work.

[Rappy]

Ooh, a new thread, yay! *Free hugs for all who desire them*

Also, I wish I could contribute more to the current discussion, but I am terribly unsavvy with clothing. I don't like "tomboy things" or "pretty things" or any particular type of thing beyond "comfy things".

[Coidzor]

Well, if you have a very open minded Scotsman, I think it could work.

Nah, kilts are regulated as to what they can be and what can be called a kilt. Like German beers or Bourbon Whiskey.

[Quincunx]

That, and a skilled kilter will whack you in the head with your own quick-n-easy pleater should you try to call an inferior product a 'kilt', let alone apply the label to a skirt with no pleats whatsoever.

Amusing story (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/22/swedish-parents-baby-gender): a Swedish child is being raised without any disclosure of its gender. (It's not even being furnished with a unisex wardrobe from the Swedish children's unisex clothing retailer, but with clothing on either end of the spectrum. No word about the toys.) Imagine the coming-out party later in life. [EDIT: To forestall the question of grammar, Swedish has two grammatical genders: neuter and non-. No convolutions are required to strip out references to masculine or feminine.]

[Dogmantra]

Amusing story (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/22/swedish-parents-baby-gender): a Swedish child is being raised without any disclosure of its gender. (It's not even being furnished with a unisex wardrobe from the Swedish children's unisex clothing retailer, but with clothing on either end of the spectrum. No word about the toys.) Imagine the coming-out party later in life.

I find it interesting that the comments on this story all either say "Good for them" or "pretentious *****" in some way or another. Personally, I think it's a neat idea. That's not "neat" in the "quaint" sense, but "neat" in the "fantastic!" sense.

[Phaedra]

Amusing story (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/22/swedish-parents-baby-gender): a Swedish child is being raised without any disclosure of its gender. (It's not even being furnished with a unisex wardrobe from the Swedish children's unisex clothing retailer, but with clothing on either end of the spectrum. No word about the toys.) Imagine the coming-out party later in life.

I don't really know how I feel about this. On one hand, I think it's good to fight gender stereotypes and I can see the point they're trying to make. On the other hand, it just seems a bit pointless because, unless the baby's actually intersex, this will last until the child gets to school and can tell people itself what gender it is, at which point presumably they'll have to stop all the mystery.

[Dogmantra]

On the other hand, it just seems a bit pointless because, unless the baby's actually intersex, this will last until the child gets to school and can tell people itself what gender it is, at which point presumably they'll have to stop all the mystery.

Though I think partly the thing is that by the time Pop gets to school or wants to "come out", people will know Pop as Pop, and not as a gender stereotype, which is how the story comes across to me.

[Phaedra]

Though I think partly the thing is that by the time Pop gets to school or wants to "come out", people will know Pop as Pop, and not as a gender stereotype, which is how the story comes across to me.

But how many people know babies as gender stereotypes anyway? With all the parents I know, gender essentially just determines what colour clothes they wear (and that's more determined by what the stores sell than the parents' actual desire to dress their child in pink or blue, at least for the parents I know). A baby doesn't know what gender it is anyway. It doesn't impact on its life in any way until it gets to about 3 or 4, which is the age at which it will be interacting with other kids and learning the difference between boys and girls. I just don't see the point of this.

[The Rose Dragon]

Besides, most of the differences between males and females are physiological, not psychological or sociological. No matter what you do, nature will find a way to enforce its own stereotypes, and the rest of them aren't related to someone's sex in any way.

((This message brought to you by Feminine Heterosexual Cis-Males Society - i.e. me.))

[Coidzor]

Hm. At first I thought, OK, this might be of SCIENCE! interest.

Then I realize, no, they're just weird Swedes who named their sprog "Pop" of all things.

Then I was sad.

[Serpentine]

Amusing story (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/22/swedish-parents-baby-gender): a Swedish child is being raised without any disclosure of its gender. (It's not even being furnished with a unisex wardrobe from the Swedish children's unisex clothing retailer, but with clothing on either end of the spectrum. No word about the toys.) Imagine the coming-out party later in life.Interesting idea. Although it's pretty much what I intend to do (with a spectrum of toys) with my kids, except for the "no disclosure of gender" bit...

[Quincunx]

It gets worse. From a Swedish name database: "Our daughter was the first in Sweden to be named 'Pop', after an appeal to the naming committee. This was in 2001. At the same time we decided to later have a boy and also name him Pop, to make the name unisex. In 2003 we baptized our son as 'Pop'. Then in 2007 came an even younger Pop. None of them have it as their [everyday] name!"

I suspect that Third Pop is the child in question, and wearing its siblings' hand-me-downs.

[Serpentine]

Yeah, not a fan of the name.

[Phaedra]

It gets worse. From a Swedish name database: "Our daughter was the first in Sweden to be named 'Pop', after an appeal to the naming committee. This was in 2001. At the same time we decided to later have a boy and also name him Pop, to make the name unisex. In 2003 we baptized our son as 'Pop'. Then in 2007 came an even younger Pop. None of them have it as their [everyday] name!"

I suspect that Third Pop is the child in question, and wearing its siblings' hand-me-downs.

So rather than just selecting a well-known unisex name for their little social experiment, they decided to create one by naming three children in the same family the same name? Yes, well, that's not weird at all. I'm sure their children will grow up perfectly adjusted.

[Scorpina]

See, the subtle differences between 'tomboy' 'transvestite' and 'butch lesbian', make a store specifically aimed at providing men's clothing for women make it either too broad or too narrow under the label 'butch'. Wouldn't 'Men's Clothing For Women Store' make much more sense as a name?

I don't see why women need a specific store to buy men's clothing in, when men's clothing stores exist. I, for one, buy at least half of my clothes from such outlets (or from the menswear section of more general shops). I don't see the need for a specific shop that my uterus and I can go into to buy the same pants that boys are buying in the shop down the street.

[Serpentine]

I would imagine that the difference is that these clothes are cut and designed for women. I don't know, but it seems plausible.

[Quincunx]

Your uterus is enclosed in an un-manly shape, most likely, and will be uncomfortable in a pair of jeans cut to go around a manly shape, as well as sport a set of sunburst wrinkles right where you'd rather not have attention focused. Minimizers aren't supposed to be the top layer and that has been true ever since underwear began to be fitted.

I had written and deleted a post on the topic, but I guess the premise still needs to be said: this was a shop selling women's clothing specifically designed to mimic men's clothing. Some 'bad practices' could be forgiven for the sake of camouflaging the body underneath. The 'bad practice' which made a straitjacket out of that tuxedo jacket's sleeves was not forgivable.

[Murdim]

Besides, most of the differences between males and females are physiological, not psychological or sociological. No matter what you do, nature will find a way to enforce its own stereotypes, and the rest of them aren't related to someone's sex in any way.

((This message brought to you by Feminine Heterosexual Cis-Males Society - i.e. me.))
If this was the case, why do the societal roles and presentations associated with each gender vary so much throughout time and place ? Some decades ago, little boys tended to be dressed in pink and little girls in blue. Throughout the ages, men wore make-up. And let's not even talk about dresses and pants. What make you think that our your set of conceptions of what is feminine and masculine is somehow the right, "natural" one ?

Some aspects of gender roles can be somewhat linked to objective factors (e.g men being more often than not the dominant sex throughout societies). But very few of them can be explained by it (e.g women warriors being the exception rather than the rule). And virtually none of them can be justified by it (e.g women needing protection when they are pregnant... duh).



Amusing story (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/22/swedish-parents-baby-gender): a Swedish child is being raised without any disclosure of its gender. (It's not even being furnished with a unisex wardrobe from the Swedish children's unisex clothing retailer, but with clothing on either end of the spectrum. No word about the toys.) Imagine the coming-out party later in life. [EDIT: To forestall the question of grammar, Swedish has two grammatical genders: neuter and non-. No convolutions are required to strip out references to masculine or feminine.]
Let's just say there's a difference between not imposing gender roles upon one's children, and using them as a social experiment.

[Dogmantra]

Some decades ago, little boys tended to be dressed in pink

Which makes sense, what with pink being Red Jr.

[Serpentine]

I would like to point something out about that story: There is nothing there that indicates that they won't tell the kid about its sex or anything like that, only that they won't tell other people. It chooses its own clothes, and has a (crappy) gender-neutral name (except "Pop" isn't gender neutral :smallconfused:). I find those quite reasonable - I intend to do the former more or less with my children, and one of my favourite names is gender netural. They're just actively avoiding anyone finding out what sex it is - the extent to which they're doing so is a bit weird, but not even nearly as scarring as, say, botching a circumcision and trying to force the child into a sex it's obviously not comfortable with.

[Coidzor]

Let's just say there's a difference between not imposing gender roles upon one's children, and using them as a social experiment.

And using them as a social experiment and... this odd fetish of theirs.

[Serpentine]

Like I said, what we know they're doing isn't all that extreme.

[Coidzor]

Like I said, what we know they're doing isn't all that extreme.

Whereas I'd say what they're doing is fairly extreme, as they've managed to come to our attention in the first place for what they're doing, but doesn't appear to be a probable cause of harm to the child.

Well, beyond what the child's peers will do to the poor bastard based upon the name anyway.

[Serpentine]

It's a pretty crappy name.

[Lix Lorn]

Some people are strange. :/
On a brighter note, shiny new thread. ^_^

[Beelzebub1111]

Sometimes I wish I was pretty enough to crossdress.

[golentan]

Sometimes I wish I was pretty enough to crossdress.

You clearly know different crossdressers than I do. :smalltongue:

Personal note, my breasts still haven't gone away. And I got referred to as a "She" the other day, and then the person immediately apologized and asked which way I was transitioning. I is worrying. Also, buying looser clothing.

[Eloi]

Sometimes I wish I was pretty enough to crossdress.

Cross-dressers don't need to be pretty, they just need to be able to flaunt the clothes with confidence.

...I think, I'm no expert.

[Lix Lorn]

Personal note, my breasts still haven't gone away. And I got referred to as a "She" the other day, and then the person immediately apologized and asked which way I was transitioning. I is worrying. Also, buying looser clothing.
I'm really sorry if this is an awkward question, but... why do you have breasts?

[npc revolution]

Aaaw, hugs for golentan. Don't worry, I imagine it's all within the boundaries of a "normal" transition. :smallsmile:

Side note, I'mma be involved in this thread from the start.

[Coidzor]

Aaaw, hugs for golentan. Don't worry, I imagine it's all within the boundaries of a "normal" transition. :smallsmile:

See, he isn't transitioning, he's just overweight, at least, last I recall either thing coming up. Which makes it all the more bizarre.:smallconfused:

[cycoris]

Curse English and its ambiguities. Usually I'm perfectly content to let people interpret what I say however they wish, but sometimes I really, really wish that there was a way to state something unambiguously without having to draw attention to it. :smallannoyed:

Yes, this is actually on topic. :smalltongue:

[Coidzor]

Indeed. Context is everything. Which is something it probably wouldn't hurt for you to give more often.

[Nano]

I'm really sorry if this is an awkward question, but... why do you have breasts?

I don't think that there is any scenario in which this is not an awkward question.

[Lix Lorn]

You are not helping. XD

[Nano]

That wasn't in the plan anyways. :smalltongue:

[Dogmantra]

I don't think that there is any scenario in which this is not an awkward question.

Hypothetical "you", as in "one", but apparently the world is too cool for that word now. In the question "why do you have breasts?" meaning "why do human women have breasts?" The correct answer being "to suckle their young" or similar.

[Nano]

It would still be awkward because it's coming from an alien or something, gosh.

[cycoris]

Indeed. Context is everything. Which is something it probably wouldn't hurt for you to give more often.

:smallsigh:

"Girlfriend" is ambiguous and annoys me.

Happy now?

ION: Does anyone have suggestions for getting swimming trunks that wouldn't look overly baggy on a thin girl? I would try boys', but I don't think they'd go over my hips.

[Lycan 01]

My girlfriend wears guy's swim trunks over her bikini. They fit her decently, and most of them have draw-strings so you can tighten them and prevent them from slipping down.

[Dogmantra]

It would still be awkward because it's coming from an alien or something, gosh.

Or a small child. Honestly Nano, an alien speaking English? You crack me up.

[golentan]

Aaaw, hugs for golentan. Don't worry, I imagine it's all within the boundaries of a "normal" transition. :smallsmile:

No, it isn't. That would require transitioning.

Lix, I don't know why I have them. I know why I had them (I.E. 50 pounds over a decent BMI). I don't know why they haven't shrunk now that I'm down 45 pounds from that. And by "haven't shrunk" I mean at all. Meaning they now appear (proportionally) larger, getting into the lower range of standard feminine forms.

It's awkward. It may also explain why an alleged lesbian has been dating me off and on for the past year.

Edit: Wait What? Doggy, I'm right here, you know...

[Eloi]

No, it isn't. That would require transitioning.

Lix, I don't know why I have them. I know why I had them (I.E. 50 pounds over a decent BMI). I don't know why they haven't shrunk now that I'm down 45 pounds from that. And by "haven't shrunk" I mean at all. Meaning they now appear (proportionally) larger, getting into the lower range of standard feminine forms.

It's awkward. It may also explain why an alleged lesbian has been dating me off and on for the past year.

Edit: Wait What? Doggy, I'm right here, you know...

An alleged lesbian, aye? I'm going to allege that they're bisexual, allegedly.

[Eloi]

Or a small child. Honestly Nano, an alien speaking English? You crack me up.

Aliens speaking any language at all cracks me up.

[Coidzor]

Cycoris: In this case, children's sizes would be your self-serving and duplicitious friends that will inevitably betray you. At least, if a men's is really too wide for your waistline.

Anyhoo, yes, I am always happy to hear from you.

[Serpentine]

What about non-bikini two-pieces? Bikini or "boy-leg" bottom, and singlet-style top? You might be able to mix and match the sizes a bit that way, too.

[Xzeno]

golentan, three things:

1) Should I leave your name uncapitalized (I assume so)? What if it starts a sentence?
2) On a related, but silly note, would it be okay if I called you G-flow at some point in the future?
3) On a less silly note: At the risk of sounding trite, perhaps this "alleged lesbian" thing is something you should discuss with her. Ask her what the deal with that is.


:smallsigh:

"Girlfriend" is ambiguous and annoys me.

Happy now?

ION: Does anyone have suggestions for getting swimming trunks that wouldn't look overly baggy on a thin girl? I would try boys', but I don't think they'd go over my hips.

Why are you so hesitant to explain yourself? I ask because I am of a similar feather; knowing my reasons, I am interested in yours.

If you haven't already, I would google "girls swim trunks" or something to that effect.

[golentan]

golentan, three things:

1) Should I leave your name uncapitalized (I assume so)? What if it starts a sentence?
2) On a related, but silly note, would it be okay if I called you G-flow at some point in the future?
3) On a less silly note: At the risk of sounding trite, perhaps this "alleged lesbian" thing is something you should discuss with her. Ask her what the deal with that is.

1. Doesn't matter. And it does actually kick off a sentence: golentan ni kyrana lis agnerak va ishmar livira keru te segata.
2. No it would not. But it would be funny, so go ahead.
3. We've talked about it. Gist: She is bisexual, has a vast preference for females, and so identifies as lesbian.

[Coidzor]

She is bisexual, has a vast preference for females, and so identifies as lesbian.

Am I the only one who is slightly unsettled by this sort of practice? Always sets off my suspicious nature.

[The Rose Dragon]

Am I the only one who is slightly unsettled by this sort of practice? Always sets off my suspicious nature.

It's not necessarily easy to identify as a bisexual. Most people don't believe they exist, or think they are just greedy - even though they get only 5% of the world's population available on top of what the 45% heterosexuals have, so I have no idea where that comes from. Even among the LGBT folks, the fact remains that bisexuals are often treated as red-headed stepchildren.

[Delta]

Am I the only one who is slightly unsettled by this sort of practice? Always sets off my suspicious nature.

Actually I found it to be quite common, especially for bisexual women who prefer women to identify as lesbians.

[Raistlin1040]

It's not necessarily easy to identify as a bisexual. Most people don't believe they exist, or think they are just greedy - even though they get only 5% of the world's population available on top of what the 45% heterosexuals have, so I have no idea where that comes from. Even among the LGBT folks, the fact remains that bisexuals are often treated as red-headed stepchildren.
This. Unfortunately this.

[Lix Lorn]

I know more bisexuals than homosexuals. I think. :/
Of course the one who I actually like is homosexual. XD

[golentan]

But why must people always specify, anyway?

Show of hands. Has anyone ever honestly in the history of the world gone through their life without a romantic friendship, crush, or at least moment of physical attraction to a sex/gender they are not normally into?

I never met such a person. They would certainly be a fearsome thing to behold.

[Delta]

Show of hands. Has anyone ever honestly in the history of the world gone through their life without a romantic friendship, crush, or at least moment of physical attraction to a sex/gender they are not normally into?

Well as I am normally into every sex/gender, I guess I can honestly say that has never happened to me :smallbiggrin:

[Lix Lorn]

Well as I am normally into every sex/gender, I guess I can honestly say that has never happened to me :smallbiggrin:
You got LOOPHOLE'D! XD

[Arti3]

Show of hands. Has anyone ever honestly in the history of the world gone through their life without a romantic friendship, crush, or at least moment of physical attraction to a sex/gender they are not normally into?
Me? I guess.

[Coidzor]

But why must people always specify, anyway?

Who can say? People like shooting the breeze, I guess.

[Murdim]

Am I the only one who is slightly unsettled by this sort of practice? Always sets off my suspicious nature.
Calling yourself "gay" or "lesbian" doesn't necessarily imply you deny any attraction to the opposite sex. There's even some people who label themselves "gay bisexuals" or "lesbian bisexuals" : essentially, they recognize their sexual orientation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation) as a bisexual one, but prefer to identify (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_identity) with the gay or lesbian community. And there's also those who consider "gay" as the fits-all antonym of "straight", and don't see the need to take a more specific label.

But yeah, usually, that's just plain dumb biphobia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biphobia).

I'd like to say that there's no need for the "bisexual" label. But as long as homosexuality, and more generally sexual orientation, will be seen in such an essentialistic way on both sides of the fence, such a position is not only wrong, but outright harmful. Especially for those of us who still feel compelled to decide (or worse, choose) between exclusive heterosexuality or exclusive homosexuality, and then hold to that decision by rejecting and repressing any feeling that could contradict it.

[Scorpina]

I think there'll always be a need for the category of 'bisexual' (unless it's replaced by 'pansexual', which would be neat), so long as there are people who are only attracted to one gender to differentiate us from.

[Quincunx]

/hand. (Filler.)

[Raistlin1040]

I think there'll always be a need for the category of 'bisexual' (unless it's replaced by 'pansexual', which would be neat), so long as there are people who are only attracted to one gender to differentiate us from.
That's one thing I've never understood, the desire to replace bisexual with pansexual.

[Scorpina]

'Bisexual' suggests a gender binary, and that such a person is attracted to men and women and nothing else. 'Pansexual', on the other hand, does not require the binary, and is inclusive of more possible sexual partners.

[Dogmantra]

But I'm pretty sure that as they are, bisexual is used to imply there is acknowledgement of the sex of the partner, and pansexual is used to imply that there isn't, thus they're different things. Though I can understand the desire to remove the implied gender binary from bisexual.

[Delta]

I can understand the desire, but I don't really share it, because for 99% of people, bisexual means the same as pansexual, and that's enough for me to use it.

[Dogmantra]

for 99% of people, bisexual means the same as pansexual, and that's enough for me to use it.

Which is pretty much exactly why I describe myself as bisexual even though I tend more towards pansexual.

[Scorpina]

I think that's why I think it'd be neat if pansexual 'replaced' bisexual, since I might lean more towards pan than bi, but despair of explaining pansexuality to most people.

[Raistlin1040]

Right, I get that, but I'm a gender****, and I even think Pansexual is just a term designed to be confusing. Bisexual doesn't *exclude* anyone, necessarily. For discussions of sexuality, specifically sexuality, I think you've not got much to go off of other than what parts you like. I like masculinity, sometimes. I like femininity. I like androgyny. I like men, I like women, I like men becoming women and women becoming men. I feel like there is no gender binary, but there is a sexual binary, more or less.

Is it gay for a heterosexual man to have sex with a FtM transsexual, pre-op? Is it gay if he has sex with a MtF, post-op? Questions like that are a little too circular in logic, in my opinion, so when you're talking about sexuality, I think it's best just to include the biological parts. The gender binary is a piece of horse crap, I agree, because people can feel like both genders (like I do) or neither (like I do, by virtue of feeling both). But I think the sex binary is sort of...Either you've got a penis, vagina, or perhaps both by some arcane condition. As a self-identified bisexual, nothing on that list repulses me. Even if you mixed them with some secondary characteristics, like a mid-stage transsexual, you're still adding Male and Female biological elements. Even the most androgynous person is physically a mix of male and female.

My apologies for this being ramble-y. It's past 4 AM over here and I'm a bit scatter-brained.

[Serpentine]

Repeating myself from all-too-recently, but anyways: As far as I'm concerned, the only meaningful difference between "bisexual" and "pansexual" is that the former can be seen as exclusive, the latter being technically more accurate to the meaning of the former. As a replacement for "bisexual", I support "pansexual". As yet another sexual orientation category, I find it redundant and unnecessary.

Raistlin: I did an "Are you homophobic?" test years back, and got a "not homophobic, but might not actually acknowledge the existance of homosexuals". Because I answered just those sorts of questions with "no", because they didn't have an "it depends..." or "maybe" option.

[Anuan]

/hand. (Filler.)

I thought two jokes were being made here before I remembered the 'show of hand' thing.

I'm now disappointed.

[prufock]

As a replacement for "bisexual", I support "pansexual". As yet another sexual orientation category, I find it redundant and unnecessary.

Why would one replace the other?
You could have Bob, who is attracted to both males and females, but not to transsexuals or those with Klinefelter's, for example. Pansexuality is less specific, and not necessarily applicable in all cases of bisexuality.

[Serpentine]

You have Bob, who likes girls with red hair.

What's the difference?

edit: For brevity, here's (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8330492&highlight=pansexual#post8330492) the start of the last discussion on this matter.

[Eloi]

Why would one replace the other?
You could have Bob, who is attracted to both males and females, but not to transsexuals or those with Klinefelter's, for example. Pansexuality is less specific, and not necessarily applicable in all cases of bisexuality.

I always thought that Bisexual meant you acknowledged multiple genders/sexes existed and you liked both in different yet similar ways, whilst Pansexual meant that you didn't care which gender they were because you are concerned with the people on an individual basis as opposed to a gender/sex basis.

[prufock]

people can feel like both genders (like I do) or neither (like I do, by virtue of feeling both)

This is one thing I never have understood about gender identity: people who say they "feel like" the opposite sex. How would you know what it feels like to be the opposite sex?

To clarify: I am male. I feel like me. Therefore, I feel like a male. If I have never been a female, how can I know what it would feel like to be a female? To me, this makes no more sense than if I said "I feel like a horse." I have no idea what it would feel like to be a horse, having never been a horse, therefore it's a nonsensical statement. How can I know what it feels like to be a horse?

I can't; it's a logical impossibility, which leads me to believe that it's a problem with the language.

I can think of things that are similar, and might be conflated with "feeling like" the opposite sex - identification with the opposite sex stereotypes, delusion that I AM the opposite sex, desire to BE the opposite sex. These things are not logically invalid. Do any of these cover "feeling"?

I have no idea. And I've never felt like the opposite sex, so I don't have a standard for comparison. So, just curious, for anyone here who DOES, what does it mean, really?

[Eloi]

This is one thing I never have understood about gender identity: people who say they "feel like" the opposite sex. How would you know what it feels like to be the opposite sex?

To clarify: I am male. I feel like me. Therefore, I feel like a male. If I have never been a female, how can I know what it would feel like to be a female? To me, this makes no more sense than if I said "I feel like a horse." I have no idea what it would feel like to be a horse, having never been a horse, therefore it's a nonsensical statement. How can I know what it feels like to be a horse?

I can't; it's a logical impossibility, which leads me to believe that it's a problem with the language.

I can think of things that are similar, and might be conflated with "feeling like" the opposite sex - identification with the opposite sex stereotypes, delusion that I AM the opposite sex, desire to BE the opposite sex. These things are not logically invalid. Do any of these cover "feeling"?

I have no idea. And I've never felt like the opposite sex, so I don't have a standard for comparison. So, just curious, for anyone here who DOES, what does it mean, really?

Perhaps its less about general stereotypes, and more about the appropriation of attributes of people you know that are of the opposite sex? Like I "feel like" a guy sometimes because the things I do and the way I act are more akin to the things I see guys doing, thus I term the general behavior as masculine.
Hope that was helpful in someway.

[Murdim]

Why would one replace the other?
You could have Bob, who is attracted to both males and females, but not to transsexuals or those with Klinefelter's, for example. Pansexuality is less specific, and not necessarily applicable in all cases of bisexuality.
What about heterosexual people who are attracted to transwomen and/or transmen and/or intersexed persons ? Do they need another label too ? The possibility of being attracted to people who doesn't fall squarely into the gender binary isn't restricted to bisexuals.

I'd say that bisexuality and pansexuality are two sexual identities for a same sexual orientation, which can be called bisexual, pansexual, ambisexual, fluid, partly-heterosexual partly-homosexual, or whatever. Remember that there's much more in sexuality than sexual orientation. And also remember that while sexual orientation can be classified in four mutually exclusive possibilities (attracted to "the same sex", attracted to "the not-same sex", attracted to both, attracted to neither - the ambiguities stemming from what exactly constitutes a significant attraction, and what exactly constitutes "the same sex"), sexual identity is much more free-form (one can identify as asexual and straight, or lesbian and gay, or bisexual, queer, pansexual and fluid at the same time).

[Delta]

This is one thing I never have understood about gender identity: people who say they "feel like" the opposite sex. How would you know what it feels like to be the opposite sex?

There's your first, and most important misunderstanding. Gender is not sex. Sex is a biological attribute, while gender is a socially/culturally defined attribute. But I think I'll better let others explain this in depth, because I'll be horribly wrong if I try, I'm sure.

[prufock]

You have Bob, who likes girls with red hair.

What's the difference?

edit: For brevity, here's (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8330492&highlight=pansexual#post8330492) the start of the last discussion on this matter.

I'll have a look at the link provided.
In the meantime... are you agreeing with me? I THINK you are, but I'm not sure. For sake of argument, let's call sexual attraction to redheads "gingersexuality."

In terms of specificity: pansexual < bisexual < gingersexual
It wouldn't make any sense to replace gingersexual as a term with bisexual, just as it wouldn't make sense to replace bisexual with pansexual. There are differing degrees of specificity. At a certain point, terminology becomes somewhat pointless (for example if I said "I'm attracted to long-legged brunettes named Angie with college degrees) because combinations are endless.

You could argue that the labeling system should be done away with altogether (in which case "pan" would be a bit superfluous - might as well just say "sexual"), but that would be too far in the other direction.

[prufock]

Perhaps its less about general stereotypes, and more about the appropriation of attributes of people you know that are of the opposite sex? Like I "feel like" a guy sometimes because the things I do and the way I act are more akin to the things I see guys doing, thus I term the general behavior as masculine.
Hope that was helpful in someway.

That makes sense, and I would probably lump it into the same type of attribute-designation as stereotypes, just that in this case your stereotype is personal as opposed to society-wide.

But at the same time, there are plenty of women who like fixing cars, playing sports, and drinking beer (choosing stereotypes on purpose), yet don't make the self-designation as "feeling male."

[Serpentine]

Just gonna put the things I said last time here.

Where does it say bisexuality is about being attacted to only manly-men and womanly-women? :smallconfused: It's just "not attracted overwhelmingly to one sex or the other". A bisexual can be attracted to all and anyo of those people - it's just preference, like a preference for hair colour or a sense of humour. "Pansexual" may be a more accurate substitute for "bisexual", but I don't see that mere interest in non-usual binary genders is unique to it. I mean, by that theory we need another term for heterosexuals for whom cis- and transexual status is irrelevant, or who have a preference for butch girls/effeminate men.
But how is this any different to a heterosexual man who has no interest in the physical bits of women, but they find they connect better to women on an emotional level?
I'm not saying you shouldn't identify as pansexual or anything else you want to, by the way, I just don't see how it's a meaningfully distinct category to bisexual.

Good luck, Tricksy Hobbitses.
What? :smallconfused: Dammit! I put in a pretty detailed post, and it's gone! :smallfurious:
*sigh*
Lets see what I can remember :smallsigh: :smallfrown: Won't be as good as before, but anyways...

Sexuality is about the sex/es one is attracted to. Gender is nothing but preference, like long hair on guys or big breasts on women. A guy isn't any less heterosexual because he's attracted to butch girls, nor a girl for being attracted to effeminate guys. A guy also is still heterosexual if he likes girls for no identifiable reason. Similarly, whether a person is attracted to both sexes for their respective masculinity and femininity, or for no particular reason, it doesn't change the fact that they are not attracted overwhelmingly to one sex or the other.
Transexuals blur the line and can complicate things, including with regard to preferences and prejudices, but in my opinion they are considered the sex they prefer.
Ugh... Dammit! I had more specific stuff that explains better what I'm getting at! Why did it have to disappear?! :smallfurious:
Basically, as far as I'm concerned, there is no meaningful difference between "bisexual" and "pansexual", except in that the latter may be considered semantically more accurate, any more than there should be different terms for "heterosexual who prefers really feminine women" and "heterosexual for whom relative femininity has no impact on his attraction".
I've fallen into repeating myself :smallsigh: The original wasn't as much, honestly...

So you're attracted people of both/any sex. Then you're bisexual, or pansexual if you prefer that term for "not mostly attracted to one sex" *shrug* :smalltongue: Like I said, it's no different than if I were attracted to effeminate males, or any men for no definable reason.

Yay Fay ^_^

I still fail to see how that is any different to monosexuals happening to be attracted to the sex of their choice "as people" (and find the implication that bisexuals and these people are only attracted to physical features very minisculely slightly offensive (but no more than the people who say "oh, I'm not attracted to mere physical features. I'm far more deep than mere superficial appearance"), and I've never heard of anyone seriously believing that all bisexuals are attracted to men and women solely for their respective primary and secondary sexual characteristics, but I'm happy to leave it at "as far as I'm concerned the terms are synonymous and have yet to see any convincing evidence otherwise", specially as I obviously have nothing else of substance to add to it and should have shut up a couple of pages ago :smallsigh:

On your mini-note: post-modernism is weird. Good for history, though.(might be out of order)

[prufock]

I always thought that Bisexual meant you acknowledged multiple genders/sexes existed and you liked both in different yet similar ways, whilst Pansexual meant that you didn't care which gender they were because you are concerned with the people on an individual basis as opposed to a gender/sex basis.

It's not so specific. Bisexual means you are attracted to males and females. It doesn't require that you're attracted to them equally, but doesn't exclude that option either.

[Lix Lorn]

I can think of things that are similar, and might be conflated with "feeling like" the opposite sex - identification with the opposite sex stereotypes, delusion that I AM the opposite sex, desire to BE the opposite sex. These things are not logically invalid. Do any of these cover "feeling"?
All of them, though delusion isn't the right word.

If you take the deepest yearning you've ever had, and magnify it to a scale on a par with true love, that's how badly a transexual NEEDS to be the other sex. Or me, anyway. I KNOW that's what I should be, as surely as I know anything. It's not really something I'll explain. To use an old metaphor, colours to a blind man.


There's your first, and most important misunderstanding. Gender is not sex. Sex is a biological attribute, while gender is a socially/culturally defined attribute. But I think I'll better let others explain this in depth, because I'll be horribly wrong if I try, I'm sure.
True.
Part of it is that my, and I, and assume many trans, have a gender that fits much more easily into the other sex' stereotypes.

[Quincunx]

All of them, though delusion isn't the right word. . .

Any time you accept the evidence of your mind over the evidence of the real world (and, by extension, your body), there's a penalty to pay, and the penalty extends to the language used to describe it. "Delusion" is a suitable word, but so are words like dream, gnosis, psychosis, inspiration, nightmare, Buddhism, etc.

[Lix Lorn]

But I'm not accepting mind over body. I'm claiming that the body shouldn't be this way, not that it isn't.

[Pinnacle]

Aliens speaking any language at all cracks me up.

What would they speak other than a language?


It's not necessarily easy to identify as a bisexual. Most people don't believe they exist, or think they are just greedy...
I don't think it's quite most.
And the "greedy" thing just makes no logical sense and gives me a headache.

[Graymayre]

You are whatever word you use to describe yourself.

To others, you are whatever word they describe you as.

Language is not the descriptor. It is merely a tool for one.

[Eloi]

Any time you accept the evidence of your mind over the evidence of the real world (and, by extension, your body), there's a penalty to pay, and the penalty extends to the language used to describe it. "Delusion" is a suitable word, but so are words like dream, gnosis, psychosis, inspiration, nightmare, Buddhism, etc.

Yes, but 'delusion' implies the person is wrong in their beliefs, which is a negative implication in this case.



What would they speak other than a language?

Why would they speak? Why would they have similar enough cultures to have a language? It's illogical to assume such things.

[Quincunx]

. . .Yes. Believing what you think/feel over what your five senses note is often seen as a negative, and specifically, a delusion. At the very least, trying to reconcile the opposing inputs is a very good way to give yourself delusions. I did supply an equal number of positive, negative, and neutral synonyms; branch into whichever ones carry the connotations you want.

That being said, I can now see where Lix Lorn draws the line between what is and what should be, and I can see my line, and that they're at slightly different parallel locations, and they're both self-consistent and OK. Heck, I can even envy Lix Lorn's certainty of the superiority of the. . .(pause, double-check vocabulary). . ."feeling" (I want to say 'will' but that's not what we're discussing).

*****

Getting back to prufrock's question, sympathy and empathy are the tools we use to get into the mindset of what-we-are-not. I came at the question from the other direction--how do you forget what knowledge you've already accumulated in the gender you do not want, how do you forget those feelings? Then I think about our capacity to convert to a new mode of thought and fail to identify with the past self, fail to feel what it felt under the same stimuli, and all that is not the accident of birth seems plausible. Human plasticity, whether in thought or feeling, annoys me. So I turn to the flesh as the constant, while the transsexual does not.

[Eloi]

. .Yes. Believing what you think/feel over what your five senses note is often seen as a negative, and specifically, a delusion.

Yes but gender is determined by the mind, sex is determined by the body. If you feel that you are a gender not commonly associated with your sex, its not a delusion, as gender only exists within side your mind and others'.

[Asta Kask]

Yes but gender is determined by the mind, sex is determined by the body. If you feel that you are a gender not commonly associated with your sex, its not a delusion, as gender only exists within side your mind and others'.

Doesn't that assume a strict mind-body dichotomy? There's very little in science to support it. All we know is consistent with the mind being a property of the brain, and the brain is part of the body.

[Dogmantra]

. . .Yes. Believing what you think/feel over what your five senses note is often seen as a negative, and specifically, a delusion.

Now now Quincunx, a lot of scientists agree that there are many more than five senses. I wish I could remember the fancy words, but commonly agreed on are sense of balance, sense of heat and sense of where your body parts are in relation to your others without needing to see them. At least a few would agree sense of self, of hunger and thirst, of humour even, are all also senses.

If we agree that sense of self is a sense, then we also agree that it's not a delusion to trust those senses that tell you you're female. If you don't agree that, then at least sense of where your body parts are in relation to the rest of you would be a decent stand in, showing the relevant body parts (i.e. those of the gender you identify with) up as being nowhere.

As for gender and sex, I dunno... I'm just some dude who happens to have a penis. As if I'm supposed to know about these things. What's a woman feel like? What's a non-woman feel like? How about a non-woman who's specifically male and not just formed by tacking on a prefix? I don't have a clue. And I'm okay with that.

[Worira]

But I'm not accepting mind over body. I'm claiming that the body shouldn't be this way, not that it isn't.

You said yes to all. Therefore to both wanting to be the opposite sex, and to believing yourself to be the opposite sex.

[Eloi]

Doesn't that assume a strict mind-body dichotomy? There's very little in science to support it. All we know is consistent with the mind being a property of the brain, and the brain is part of the body.

M'kay.

Imagine you're flying into the sky overhead and land in Kyoto, before gaining hundreds of fingers and growing 30 meters taller.

Now do that in real life.

You can't, because there is a mind-body dichotomy. See what I mean?

[Dogmantra]

You said yes to all. Therefore to both wanting to be the opposite sex, and to believing yourself to be the opposite sex.
Thing is, what is "self"? Is it physical, mental, both? As I said, I'm just a dude who happens to have a penis. I'm also just a dude who happens to have brown hair and two arms. Would I still be myself if I dyed my hair and had one of my arms amputated? Would I still be myself if I suffered amnesia and forgot the first 16 years of my life? You can't really use ill-defined terminology then call it delusion when someone disagrees because they interpret the rather ambiguous "self" in a completely different way.

[Danne]

You said yes to all. Therefore to both wanting to be the opposite sex, and to believing yourself to be the opposite sex.

And? Those aren't mutually exclusive, y'know.

1) I have a vagina. I wish I didn't. I.e. I "want... to be of the opposite sex."

2) Regardless of whatever genitalia I have, I am male. I.e. I "believ[e my]self to be of the opposite sex." Which is actually a gender question, not a sex question, but we're using your/prufock's wording here.

Just switch the respective gender bits for Lix Lorn.

[Asta Kask]

M'kay.

Imagine you're flying into the sky overhead and land in Kyoto, before gaining hundreds of fingers and growing 30 meters taller.

Now do that in real life.

You can't, because there is a mind-body dichotomy. See what I mean?

No. Just no.

"You may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of underdone potato. There's more of gravy than of grave about you, whatever you are!"

As far as we know, this is exactly true. How could psychogenic drugs like LSD produce effects on the mind if there was a mind-body dichotomy. But this is off-topic for this thread.

[Cotilla]

Years without even an illusion of hope. :smallconfused: Something's wrong here.

Well, I loved (or still love, i don't know myself) him, and hurts thinking that he is not here anymore... when I told my parents that I'm gay, I thought about him and started crying, so they believed that I have issues with being gay (and I don't) :smallsigh:

More on line with the current discussion, I've had my share of gender issues. Some years ago, I wanted to be a woman, but I've resolved that I'm no more and no minus than a effeminate man with a too manly body :smallannoyed:

[Eloi]

No. Just no.

"You may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of underdone potato. There's more of gravy than of grave about you, whatever you are!"

As far as we know, this is exactly true. How could psychogenic drugs like LSD produce effects on the mind if there was a mind-body dichotomy. But this is off-topic for this thread.

You're over-complicating things. Let's re-contextualize this:

'Gender' is a societal construct, and thus only exists within side our minds. This does not mean gender doesn't matter or that it doesn't exist, it just means that it can be altered by our thinking and influence on other's thinking, without actual physical change. (Mind)

'Sex' is a physical-based term based usually upon one's genitalia, but what gender you have can be seperated from what sex you have, as in order to have a different sex, it requires physical change, whilst gender change does not. (Body)

While there is a dichotomy, that doesn't mean there isn't an overlap. For example, you might make yourself look more like the other sex in order to indicate to others your chosen gender thats commonly associated with that sex, among other examples.

[Asta Kask]

'Gender' is a societal construct, and thus only exists within side our minds. This does not mean gender doesn't matter or that it doesn't exist, it just means that it can be altered by our thinking and influence on other's thinking, without actual physical change. (Mind)

I'm fairly certain this isn't true. There must have been plenty of (misguided) attempts to 'cure' transsexuality by sheer indoctrination. I would be surprised if more than one or two have been 'successful'. Either way, I would argue that any act of learning changes the brain and that it's at least as plausible that it's an effect of those changes.

Why is this important? I would argue that bringing in mind/body just complicates things unnecessarily. You can talk about gender and sex - where sex would be that which is unamenable to change (except through surgery) and gender is that which can be changed. That's a reasonable distinction. I don't see what mind/body adds.

[Quincunx]

Mind/body adds a reality check, a touchstone to make sure whatever you're thinking/feeling hasn't come into an unresolvable conflict with the outside world. While I would like it if the dividing line could be drawn at mutable/immutable, too many people have too variant ideas about how much of sex and gender is mutable. It's much harder to dispute the boundaries of the body. (See, again, Lix Lorn, agreeing that the body is there, just maintaining that it's less relevant than the mind.)


Now now Quincunx, a lot of scientists agree that there are many more than five senses. I wish I could remember the fancy words, but commonly agreed on are sense of balance, sense of heat and sense of where your body parts are in relation to your others without needing to see them. At least a few would agree sense of self, of hunger and thirst, of humour even, are all also senses.

If we agree that sense of self is a sense. . .

Sort those all into two categories: those which can be quantified against reality (temperature, thirst quantified via dehydration, hunger via blood sugar) and those which cannot (balance, humor, that one about sense of where your body is, which is particularly easily fooled*, and sense of self). You will see why I used the shorthand for the five classic senses, ones which quantify reality, for more than just trying for once to not go off on a not-so-clarifying tangent.

*Recent reading: volunteers were asked to place one hand under a table and pinpoint various parts of that hand above the table. Errors towards too-wide and too-short perception abounded, and that was with the hand, an area rich in touch receptors. Body dysmorphia studies can be so telling.

[Asta Kask]

It's much harder to dispute the boundaries of the body.

Not visavi the mind it isn't. For instance, drugs used to treat Parkinson's Disease can result in aberrant sexual behavior (article (http://resources.metapress.com/pdf-preview.axd?code=q45823n225063683&size=largest)). I haven't heard of drugs triggering homosexual or transsexual* behavior but say it did. Would that be a matter of mind or body?

Yes, people disagree on what traits are mutable and what traits aren't. I just don't think that adding another dimension clarifies things. I also think this is a matter for some other thread - I understand where you come from, and I hope you understand where I come from.

*note - I do not wish to imply that homosexual or transsexual behavior is aberrant.

[Lix Lorn]

And? Those aren't mutually exclusive, y'know.

1) I have a vagina. I wish I didn't. I.e. I "want... to be of the opposite sex."

2) Regardless of whatever genitalia I have, I am male. I.e. I "believ[e my]self to be of the opposite sex." Which is actually a gender question, not a sex question, but we're using your/prufock's wording here.

Just switch the respective gender bits for Lix Lorn.
We just need to manifest True Mind Switch and everything'll be okay. (Sardonic)

Also, I had an ear infection last week, and I can most definitely tell you that if you don't have a sense of balance, things are much, much harder.
I almost fell over. Regularly. On flat ground.

[Quincunx]

That would be a matter of mind. How could it be a matter of the body when the body itself is unchanged? (Substitute 'gender' for "mind" and 'sex' for "body" as desired, if you want to better relate it to the topic, but I don't.)

Adding the mind/body dimension doesn't clarify gender questions. What it helps clarify is whether your thinking is sane or delusional, and the question of gender-mis-identification-as-delusion was what got us onto this tangent in the first place. It's curious, you know. Very few other dramatic life changes require someone to more or less undergo a thesis defense of their psyche before completing them. There's no test before marriage, birth, or death.

("Vis-a-vis". Pesky French phrases and their stubborn resistance to being Anglicized.)

[Asta Kask]

That would be a matter of mind. How could it be a matter of the body when the body itself is unchanged? (Substitute 'gender' for "mind" and 'sex' for "body" as desired, if you want to better relate it to the topic, but I don't.)

But the body is not unchanged. The brain changes it function considerably as a result of the drugs' actions, and the brain is part of the body.

Experimental psychosurgery proved successful in treating paedophilia*, but was abandoned due to intolerable side effects. Is this a matter of body or mind?

*again, no similarity between paedophilia and LGBT implied.

[Xzeno]

Mind/body: Everything we think or feel is a result of biochemical reactions in the brain. Therefore, mind, body and spirit are in always in perfect harmony. Understanding and applying that can be difficult. /mumbojumbo


Show of hands. Has anyone ever honestly in the history of the world gone through their life without a romantic friendship, crush, or at least moment of physical attraction to a sex/gender they are not normally into?

There was a person I met of the gender I don't normally fancy. I exalted that person. That person was pretty much my hero.

I'd like to tell you, in no uncertain terms, that I didn't love that person. But I don't like to lie.

[Danne]

"Blah, blah, philosophy" is, I believe, the best way to sum up this conversation. :smalltongue:


We just need to manifest True Mind Switch and everything'll be okay. (Sardonic)

Also, I had an ear infection last week, and I can most definitely tell you that if you don't have a sense of balance, things are much, much harder.
I almost fell over. Regularly. On flat ground.

Magic would make things so much easier, there'd either be a way to do body switches or a way to easily replace the parts in question!

I myself recently started a new medication, and I've been non-stop dizzy for the past three days. It's finally starting to pass, but I've fallen down a good few times, especially yesterday. For some reason Mum won't let me drive the car... (I hope you're feeling better now!)

In other news, am I the only one who gets pissed off at the gay comments on various out musicians' Youtube pages? They're all either, "I don't care that s/he's gay, I love this song!!11!" or they're hate messages. Why can't we just enjoy the music because the artist is talented, instead of dragging something completely irrelevant into it? :smallfurious:

[Rappy]

In other news, am I the only one who gets pissed off at the gay comments on various out musicians' Youtube pages? They're all either, "I don't care that s/he's gay, I love this song!!11!" or they're hate messages. Why can't we just enjoy the music because the artist is talented, instead of dragging something completely irrelevant into it? :smallfurious:

To paraphrase something I saw once, it's because YouTube comments tend to be "about as coherent as a goat set on fire".

[Murdim]

In other news, am I the only one who gets pissed off at the gay comments on various out musicians' Youtube pages? They're all either, "I don't care that s/he's gay, I love this song!!11!" or they're hate messages. Why can't we just enjoy the music because the artist is talented, instead of dragging something completely irrelevant into it? :smallfurious:
Because people are tired that every queer wants to ram their sexualities into their throats. Those freaks should keep what they're doing in their bedroom for themselves, dammit ! It's not like anybody cares about it ! There's no need for them to "affirm themselves" by flaunting their deviancies, much less to feel "proud" about it. We know that they exist, and we're dealing with it, now they just need to shut up !

Or at least, that's what I often hear or read as a reaction to someone's coming-out, and in debates about the concept of coming-out itself. :smallsigh:

[Pinnacle]

Because people are tired that every queer wants to ram their sexualities into their throats. Those freaks should keep what they're doing in their bedroom for themselves, dammit ! It's not like anybody cares about it ! There's no need for them to "affirm themselves" by flaunting their deviancies, much less to feel "proud" about it. We know that they exist, and we're dealing with it, now they just need to shut up !

Or at least, that's what I often hear or read as a reaction to someone's coming-out, and in debates about the concept of coming-out itself. :smallsigh:

Well, it doesn't look exactly like that, usually.

You spelled far too many words correctly.

[The Rose Dragon]

Or at least, that's what I often hear or read as a reaction to someone's coming-out, and in debates about the concept of coming-out itself. :smallsigh:

I am of two minds on this. On the one hand, I feel that coming out should not be such a big deal, because we should implicitly accept different sexualities as normal (though probably not "the norm"). On the other hand, since most people don't do that, I can't help but feel proud whenever someone comes out of the closet.

Even though I'm not gay myself. Or bisexual. Or whatever.

[Worira]

Thing is, what is "self"? Is it physical, mental, both? As I said, I'm just a dude who happens to have a penis. I'm also just a dude who happens to have brown hair and two arms. Would I still be myself if I dyed my hair and had one of my arms amputated? Would I still be myself if I suffered amnesia and forgot the first 16 years of my life? You can't really use ill-defined terminology then call it delusion when someone disagrees because they interpret the rather ambiguous "self" in a completely different way.

The thing is, I'm not saying Lix isn't herself. I'm saying her sex isn't female. In the same way, whether losing an arm makes you stop being yourself is irrelevant to whether it makes you stop being two-armed. One may be ambiguous, but the other is not.


And? Those aren't mutually exclusive, y'know.

1) I have a vagina. I wish I didn't. I.e. I "want... to be of the opposite sex."

2) Regardless of whatever genitalia I have, I am male. I.e. I "believ[e my]self to be of the opposite sex." Which is actually a gender question, not a sex question, but we're using your/prufock's wording here.

Just switch the respective gender bits for Lix Lorn.

But you don't believe yourself to be of the opposite sex. You believe yourself to be of the opposite gender. And neither Prufrock, nor Quincunx, nor I, have stated that to be a delusion. When I say sex, I mean sex, and when I say gender, I mean gender. Please don't put words in my mouth.

[mercurymaline]

Guess what, kids? Arguing philosophy isn't answering the original question.

I've kept my hair short for about half my life; sometimes I get "ma'am"ed, sometimes I get "sir"ed. I've learned I am very happy when I am assumed to be male, and very unhappy and uncomfortable when I'm assumed to be female. There are times when my gross dislike of my own body has colored my judgment and caused me a general distaste for women at all, from time to time. This is what transexuality feels like for me. I'm sorry to say that I can't really explain it any better, and you will probably never fully understand it. Just accept that it happens.

Yes, transexuality is considered an illness, for the time being (not for long.) Hormone replacement and sex reassignment are considered the only real treatments. Is a person still "delusional" then? Or are they cured, having made their delusion a reality? (FYI, using language like that is really offensive, especially in what I always assumed could be considered a safe space, hth.)

Also, question re:

The thing is, I'm not saying Lix isn't herself. I'm saying her sex isn't female. In the same way, whether losing an arm makes you stop being yourself is irrelevant to whether it makes you stop being two-armed. One may be ambiguous, but the other is not.

At what point in transition does a person get to say "I am [target gender]?" Does she not get to say "I am female?" Does she have to be fully post-op? Does she have to hang out in some purgatory in between and never use public restrooms? At the point someone understands they are transgender and want to begin transitioning, they should have every right to be addressed as they wish. Someone referring to themselves as "female" rather that "chick-who-used-to-be-a-dude" should not be considered delusional. Delusion would be convincing yourself post-op that all your bio-gender memories were false, and you had always been your target gender.

Alright, I'm done. God, I'm not even supposed to be here.

[The Rose Dragon]

At what point in transition does a person get to say "I am [target gender]?" Does she not get to say "I am female?"

She can say "I'm a woman", "I'm a girl" or something else that is not purely based on your biological make-up. "I am female", however, is a biological statement. I've been told that FtM, MtF, transmale and transfemale are terms in transsexuality, and do not necessarily use the original meanings of the words. But "female" alone already has a defined biological meaning: the sex that can produce ova. With our current knowledge of biology, humans can only be born female, they cannot become it. Same for being male.

So, no, she does not get to say "I am female". At least not if she wants to be correct. It would be desirable if she could (and I'm pretty sure there is research aimed to accomplish just that), but it is not possible yet.

[Eloi]

@Above discussion:Someone identifies with a gender not typically associated with their sex, I don't see why that's difficult to understand. Like, I have a guy who plays in my D&D group, and his sex isn't male, but that doesn't not make him a male in gender.
As well, if someone wishes to declare "I am male"/"I am female" I don't think semantics would prohibit that in the context of gender. As well, the words 'sex' and 'gender', 'male' and 'boy', 'female' and 'girl', are all synonyms, and their precise semantic meaning is not carried in casual conversation, nor is it distinguished in thesaurus or dictionaries (U.S.A. ones, anyway). You can only find such differences in the realms of philosophical discussion. Thus outside of the context of a philosophical discussion, if someone says "My sex is male." and they have a vagina, there is nothing semantically wrong with that, besides the fickle philosophical differences not present in casual discussion.

[mercurymaline]

She can say "I'm a woman", "I'm a girl" or something else that is not purely based on your biological make-up. "I am female", however, is a biological statement. I've been told that FtM, MtF, transmale and transfemale are terms in transsexuality, and do not necessarily use the original meanings of the words. But "female" alone already has a defined biological meaning: the sex that can produce ova. With our current knowledge of biology, humans can only be born female, they cannot become it. Same for being male.

So, no, she does not get to say "I am female". At least not if she wants to be correct. It would be desirable if she could (and I'm pretty sure there is research aimed to accomplish just that), but it is not possible yet.

I see your point, and I don't necessarily disagree. But Eloi has it here ^.

You're heading dangerously close to that oft-heard implication that only fertile women are really women. The point is, does a person have to wait til their body fully matches their target gender, reproductive concerns aside, til they can identify that way in conversation. The question was mostly for clarification from Worira, but again, I see what you're getting at.

[Danne]

(FYI, using language like that is really offensive, especially in what I always assumed could be considered a safe space, hth.)

What he said.

Could we maybe just stop with the delusion/mind-body/wrong vs. right conversation? I'm not saying it isn't interesting or that it's not good to discuss/explain such things, but isn't this supposed to be primarily a support thread? Whether you happen to agree that there's a distinction between "sex" and "gender," or that we're allowed to use certain words if we want to be right, or whatever, it's not really the best thing for someone who needs help to be reading, yeah?

I mean, I'm a little annoyed/offended, I can only imagine how a transperson who came here looking for a shoulder to lean on might feel.

[Worira]

At what point in transition does a person get to say "I am [target gender]?" Does she not get to say "I am female?" Does she have to be fully post-op? Does she have to hang out in some purgatory in between and never use public restrooms? At the point someone understands they are transgender and want to begin transitioning, they should have every right to be addressed as they wish. Someone referring to themselves as "female" rather that "chick-who-used-to-be-a-dude" should not be considered delusional. Delusion would be convincing yourself post-op that all your bio-gender memories were false, and you had always been your target gender.

Alright, I'm done. God, I'm not even supposed to be here.

She can say she's whatever gender she pleases. And for what it's worth, I don't really have an issue with her saying she's female, either. Female has become as much a term of gender as of sex in common, and even some niche, usage. What I do disagree with, at least in the sense of technical correctness, is her saying that she is of the female sex.

The thing is, I'm drawing a distinction between sex and gender, and you aren't. In fact, my posts on this subject have been made pretty much entirely on this distinction. Responding to them without at least recognizing the distinction that I'm making results doesn't lead to particularly meaningful discussion.

[Eloi]

She can say she's whatever gender she pleases. And for what it's worth, I don't really have an issue with her saying she's female, either. Female has become as much a term of gender as of sex in common, and even some niche, usage. What I do disagree with, at least in the sense of technical correctness, is her saying that she is of the female sex.

The thing is, I'm drawing a distinction between sex and gender, and you aren't. In fact, my posts on this subject have been made pretty much entirely on this distinction. Responding to them without at least recognizing the distinction that I'm making results doesn't lead to particularly meaningful discussion.

The fickle philosophical differences between two like words doesn't really lead to much meaningful discussion in any scenario, in my opinion.


What he said.

Could we maybe just stop with the delusion/mind-body/wrong vs. right conversation? I'm not saying it isn't interesting or that it's not good to discuss/explain such things, but isn't this supposed to be primarily a support thread? Whether you happen to agree that there's a distinction between "sex" and "gender," or that we're allowed to use certain words if we want to be right, or whatever, it's not really the best thing for someone who needs help to be reading, yeah?

I mean, I'm a little annoyed/offended, I can only imagine how a transperson who came here looking for a shoulder to lean on might feel.
Seconded.

I'm not even a transperson and I'm getting annoyed/offended.

[golentan]

Can I make a suggestion?

Keep your touchy feely stuff out of my science, and keep your science out of my touchy feely stuff.

From a biological standpoint, Human Male and Human Female are pretty rigidly defined by chromosome shape, gene presence, and physiology. Regardless of fertility. And no combination of hormone treatments and surgery currently available will make you into a category you didn't begin as in the first place. Tough cookies. And shouting about how it's oppressing you and you want to be called lorraine and have a right to give birth won't help you when you win independence from the romans.

Conversely, the existence of transgender people isn't something which has anything to do with biological classifications. A transman or transwoman feels the way they do, and seeks out the options that will make them feel better. Regardless of classification. It's not an error, in that the only treatment that will truly help is to transition, and it is a part of them the person as opposed to them the organism. Tough cookies. And shouting about how it's anarchy and you won't stand for it and you will have order and perfection won't help you dodge the karmic death in the form of a dragon coming through your window that you deserve for being an overbearing prig on things completely outside your areas of expertise.

[Worira]

And that's exactly the point of a distinction between gender and sex.

[Eloi]

Can I make a suggestion?

Keep your touchy feely stuff out of my science, and keep your science out of my touchy feely stuff.

From a biological standpoint, Human Male and Human Female are pretty rigidly defined by chromosome shape, gene presence, and physiology. Regardless of fertility. And no combination of hormone treatments and surgery currently available will make you into a category you didn't begin as in the first place. Tough cookies. And shouting about how it's oppressing you and you want to be called lorraine and have a right to give birth won't help you when you win independence from the romans.

Conversely, the existence of transgender people isn't something which has anything to do with biological classifications. A transman or transwoman feels the way they do, and seeks out the options that will make them feel better. Regardless of classification. It's not an error, in that the only treatment that will truly help is to transition, and it is a part of them the person as opposed to them the organism. Tough cookies. And shouting about how it's anarchy and you won't stand for it and you will have order and perfection won't help you dodge the karmic death in the form of a dragon coming through your window that you deserve for being an overbearing prig on things completely outside your areas of expertise.

I don't believe anyone was 'shouting' in this mostly polite discussion, and I don't believe over-simplifying two opposing sides and then proposing your own solution as the only compromise is a very good solution either.


And that's exactly the point of a distinction between gender and sex.
All of my dictionaries (Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Wikitionary) and thesauruses (Roget's College Thesaurus, Roget's Super Thesaurus) say they are the same thing semantically.

[mercurymaline]

The thing is, I'm not saying Lix isn't herself. I'm saying her sex isn't female.



She can say she's whatever gender she pleases. And for what it's worth, I don't really have an issue with her saying she's female, either.

These quotes just seem a little at odds to me. It seems, at first, like you're saying a transperson is never a real member of their target gender. I do understand the distinction between gender and sex. But you cannot say to a transwoman "You're not a female," even if you prefix it with "You may be a girl, but." This is a point of dysphoria for this person, possibly to the point of previous suicidal ideation; this just really isn't something you should say.

[Worira]

"Her sex isn't female" and "she isn't female" are two different statements.

EDIT: And I think I've been pretty clear that I don't have a problem with Lix stating that she's of the gender she wishes to be. At no point have I ever said she, or any other transgendered individual, can't be a member of their target gender.

EDIT AGAIN: And while we're on the subject of semantics, I really dislike the word "transperson". I'm not exactly a huge fan of "transman" or "transwoman" either, just because they don't actually contain any linguistic cues as to which way the transition is. But "transperson" literally means "one who has ceased to be a person" or "one who has become a person". Well, or "a trip which goes past a person", technically.

[The Rose Dragon]

You're heading dangerously close to that oft-heard implication that only fertile women are really women.

Not quite. I'm heading close to the implication that only fertile females are really females. I also disagree with it, though, because there are many reasons why a female might be sterile.

The description I gave also does not pass all scrutiny, but it is good enough for discussions of mammals. For example of non-mammalian animals that do not adhere to it, all worker bees are female, but all of them are also sterile, due to nurture (the explanation I heard was the dietary differences between queen bees and worker bees as they were raised, but I cannot confirm it myself). They are born with the capability of becoming either a queen or a worker, but they cannot become the other after maturation.

((Then again, I'm not an expert on the reproductive cycle of bees, so if someone who is could kindly correct or support me here...))


All of my dictionaries (Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Wikitionary) and thesauruses (Roget's College Thesaurus, Roget's Super Thesaurus) say they are the same thing semantically.

In casual speech, yes. However, in any actual discussion of the two, including in non-LGBT related ones, gender refers to the social distinctions while sex refers to the biological ones.

The funny part is, gender was originally a grammatical term, referring to the types of pronouns and nouns. There is a language which has four genders, for example, none of them male, female or neuter. Also, my dictionary states the definition of gender as "the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)". So not all dictionaries agree, either.

[Danne]

Keep your touchy feely stuff out of my science, and keep your science out of my touchy feely stuff....

....It's not an error, in that the only treatment that will truly help is to transition, and it is a part of them the person as opposed to them the organism....

Very well said. *applause* :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:

And Worira, I agree with you that there's a difference between "gender" and "sex." And, as far as I know, Lix Lorn does, too (correct me if I'm wrong, hun). I think you misunderstood her answer to prufock's original question, in which she answered the spirit of the question instead of the word. Prufock apparently didn't know/understand the difference between "sex" and "gender," so just used "sex" in the question even though he meant "gender" in one of the questions. Lix answered his "believe yourself to be the opposite sex" bit as if it were a gender question, since that's technically what he was asking. Which is what I was trying to explain in my original response to you, though I guess I wasn't clear.

Did I get that right?

[mercurymaline]

From a biological standpoint, Human Male and Human Female are pretty rigidly defined by chromosome shape, gene presence, and physiology. Regardless of fertility. And no combination of hormone treatments and surgery currently available will make you into a category you didn't begin as in the first place. Tough cookies. And shouting about how it's oppressing you and you want to be called lorraine and have a right to give birth won't help you when you win independence from the romans.


From a biological standpoint, transmales are closer in brainchemistry to cismales than cisfemales, and vice versa. Neither of these arguments is more or less valid. Nobody's shouting about how "the man" hasn't got around to building them a functioning artificial uterus/testes. But being not considered how you feel because that's not "the category you were born in" is oppressive. As is continuing to call someone Dave when they wish to be known as Lorraine.



Not quite. I'm heading close to the implication that only fertile females are really females. I also disagree with it, though, because there are many reasons why a female might be sterile.

The description I gave also does not pass all scrutiny, but it is good enough for discussions of mammals. For example of non-mammalian animals that do not adhere to it, all worker bees are female, but all of them are also sterile, due to nurture (the explanation I heard was the dietary differences between queen bees and worker bees as they were raised, but I cannot confirm it myself). They are born with the capability of becoming either a queen or a worker, but they cannot become the other after maturation.

((Then again, I'm not an expert on the reproductive cycle of bees, so if someone who is could kindly correct or support me here...))

The issue with any argument regarding instinct and what does or does not happen in nature is, we are human. We have culture and society and hopes and dreams and free will.

[Worira]

If prufrock did mean gender when he said sex, then yes, I agree with Lix Lorn's answer, and disagree with the use of the word "delusion" to describe it. My, and as far as I can tell Quincunx's, responses were both based on prufrock meaning sex.

[Danne]

When I read his question I assumed that he was just ignorant about the difference, based off his own admissions that he didn't understand certain things. And I'm pretty sure that's how Lix Lorn answered, though I shouldn't speak for her or put words in her mouth.

[mercurymaline]

EDIT AGAIN: And while we're on the subject of semantics, I really dislike the word "transperson". I'm not exactly a huge fan of "transman" or "transwoman" either, just because they don't actually contain any linguistic cues as to which way the transition is. But "transperson" literally means "one who has ceased to be a person" or "one who has become a person". Well, or "a trip which goes past a person", technically.

These are the most commonly accepted terms in the community. Semantically weird, yes, but it would be nigh impossible to get the whole community to switch terminology at this point.

For future reference: Transman is female to male, transitioning to be a man. Transwoman is male to female, transitioning to be a woman.

Hm, I'd never noticed before this discussion, but the common terms FtM and MtF use the sex designations, rather than gender. Not sure what to make of that.

[Worira]

Hurrah! Super misunderstanding resolution fun time!

EDIT: I know, Mercury. But the words themselves don't actually tell you anything. If anything, they should mean the opposite of what they do.

[golentan]

I don't believe anyone was 'shouting' in this mostly polite discussion, and I don't believe over-simplifying two opposing sides and then proposing your own solution as the only compromise is a very good solution either.

Not meant literally.

My point was that both sides are accurate (from their own perspective, or even a third party perspective), and useless (from the perspective of the people examining it from the other side).

Science and classification and what not don't operate well from a position of bias. Emotional attachment to a cause is bias. Emotional significance to gender/sex is therefore unhelpful in scientific classification of gender/sex. Research and classification are and should be slaved to drives and feelings to keep them from going overboard and running amok. But just because you need to use a wrench on your engine to keep going towards your goal doesn't mean you should shove it into the fuel tank and say that you've reached your destination.

Emotional attachment is not helped by classification. Emotions are desperately important to who we are as people, they guide us through our growth and decisions and serve as axioms on which to build, and can't be thrown away safely. And even if they could, the clearest mind in the world won't make them go away just by mulling the problem over rationally. Knowing you hurt because of a knife in your sternum is fairly useless for making it stop. Even more so is the knowledge of the carbon content of that knife, as is whether it is more properly a dirk or a shiv. If you don't know the safest way to cope with it, though, or better yet have an unbiased expert (physician or surgeon) to consult who does know relevant details of the knife's properties, you're going to have bigger problems.

I.E. touchy feely stuff out of science, science out of touchy feely stuff. You keep your terminology compartmentalized and you can use them together as a tool for good. It's either that, a big pile of angry useless scrap (mixing them), or a big pile of really accurate/really nice feeling useless scrap (one side view only).

[Coidzor]

This reminds me. Remember those people who genetically should be male or female but have hormonally developed physical bodies of the opposite sex through genes being flipped on or off or other transcription errors.

I believe there was one on House where a genetic male had developed a female body and had his teste gonads in an ovary position and all that jazz.

I was just wondering what the incidence of that sort of condition is amongst transsexuals and transgender individuals.

And if it's occurred to anyone to look into that yet.

[mercurymaline]

This reminds me. Remember those people who genetically should be male or female but have hormonally developed physical bodies of the opposite sex through genes being flipped on or off or other transcription errors.

I believe there was one on House where a genetic male had developed a female body and had his teste gonads in an ovary position and all that jazz.

I was just wondering what the incidence of that sort of condition is amongst transsexuals and transgender individuals.

And if it's occurred to anyone to look into that yet.

Intersex people are not generally considered transgender for having surgery to become more definitively one gender or the other. There have been instances where people were born with characteristics of both sexes and the parents chose to surgically or hormonally alter them to push one gender or the other; in many such cases the person has grown up feeling like they'd been shoehorned into the wrong gender.

[Xzeno]

This reminds me. Remember those people who genetically should be male or female but have hormonally developed physical bodies of the opposite sex through genes being flipped on or off or other transcription errors.

I believe there was one on House where a genetic male had developed a female body and had his teste gonads in an ovary position and all that jazz.

I was just wondering what the incidence of that sort of condition is amongst transsexuals and transgender individuals.

And if it's occurred to anyone to look into that yet.

Testicular feminization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome). XY people can develop as females if their androgen receptors are messed up. I could go into details of the symptoms, but that doesn't seem board appropriate. I'm sure they have more information on Wikipedia. /reads medical journals

For the record, it is considered highly offensive to claim that an adolescent girl is male because she has XY chromosomes and testes. House is a bad, insensitive doctor who should have been fired on the spot. But, you know, that's how that show goes. :smallbiggrin:

...this is actually the first thing I brought up, back in thread 5.

[Eloi]

Testicular feminization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome). XY people can develop as females if their androgen receptors are messed up. I could go into details of the symptoms, but that doesn't seem board appropriate. I'm sure they have more information on Wikipedia. /reads medical journals

For the record, it is considered highly offensive to claim that an adolescent girl is male because she has XY chromosomes and testes. House is a bad, insensitive doctor who should have been fired on the spot. But, you know, that's how that show goes. :smallbiggrin:

...this is actually the first thing I brought up, back in thread 5.

Interesting, I never knew any of that before now, about the... condition? Is that the correct term? Before it was mentioned here, interesting.

[Pinnacle]

Hm, I'd never noticed before this discussion, but the common terms FtM and MtF use the sex designations, rather than gender. Not sure what to make of that.

"Masculine" and "feminine" start with the same letters as "male" and "female".

[Eloi]

"Masculine" and "feminine" start with the same letters as "male" and "female".

That's because they come from the same Latin words.

[mercurymaline]

"Masculine" and "feminine" start with the same letters as "male" and "female".

And I've never heard someone refer to themselves as a Masculine to Feminine transexual. Or vice versa.

[The Rose Dragon]

And I've never heard someone refer to themselves as a Masculine to Feminine transexual. Or vice versa.

Mostly because the traditional definitions of masculine and feminine are not limited to males and females, respectively.

[Eloi]

Mostly because the traditional definitions of masculine and feminine are not limited to males and females, respectively.

Indeed Masculine is considered "male-like" and Feminine "female-like" in the common vernacular.

[mercurymaline]

Mostly because the traditional definitions of masculine and feminine are not limited to males and females, respectively.

Exactly. A person transitions from male to female or female to male, not feminine to masculine or masculine to feminine. Masculine or feminine behavior is a matter of personal choice, and is usually in place regardless of transition, except in instances when a person is acting as they think they are "supposed to."

The point I was making is after all that discussion of sex vs. gender, I noticed the distinctions for transexuals use the terms for sex rather than gender. Just a random point.

[The Rose Dragon]

Hey! People actually agree with me on matter of sex and gender! That's awesome!

We'll be best buddies forever and ever now! *hugs*

[Eloi]

Hey! People actually agree with me on matter of sex and gender! That's awesome!

We'll be best buddies forever and ever now! *hugs*

Who gets an agreement happy sticker? You do! *puts florescent sticker on your head with smiley face* D'aww, you look so cute with that sticker plastered on your forehead. <3

[Raistlin1040]

"I noticed the distinctions for transexuals use the terms for sex rather than gender. Just a random point."
"distinctions for transexuals use the terms for sex"
"transexuals sex"
That would be why. Personally, I think the term transgendered is a better term, just because it usually reflects the mindset better ("I was born biologically male. Mentally, I feel like I am a woman. Therefore, I am changing my body to reflect my mind" instead of "I was born biologically male. I feel like I should have a vagina and breasts". They're both correct, to an extent, but one sounds a bit better, I think), but that's really splitting hairs.

[Serpentine]

I disagree, somewhat. Repeating myself again, sorry, but anyways... It's my understanding (and, somewhat, hope) that for transexuals the problem is that their body - that is, their sex - is wrong. Their brain doesn't fit the body, or vice-versa; the body is easier to fix than the brain, so changing the body is the best current treatment.
Transgender implies that the gender is "wrong". In my opinion, there are two significant definitions of gender: 1. the social constructs and expectations placed on people based on their physical sex that may or may not have any real relevance to sex, and 2. the scientifically determined "tertiary" traits and tendencies demonstrably associated with sex.
#1 is effectively meaningless - it changes dramatically from place to place and time to time, and does nothing but hinder human progress.
#2 is meaningful, but not particularly relevant. Men and women will tend to be a particular way, but that doesn't mean that all are, nor that it is bad or wrong for individuals to be different from the trend.
Often people describe themselves as "transgender" because they violate gender definition #1. I know that's not what you're doing, Raist, but that's what it's usually used for. In my opinion, such people are both using a meaningless term, and reinforcing what meaning it does have - which, as indicated above, I think should be removed entirely.
Basically, to me changing "transexual" to "transgender" would transform the implications of the condition from "unavoidable probably at least somewhat physiological disparity between mind and body with regard to physical sex" to "a boy/girl who wants to act like a girl/boy, but they can do that anyway so what's the issue?".

As an aside, I also use a third definition for "gender": in the context of discussing transexuality, a transexual's "mental" or "preferred" sex as opposed to their born, physical sex, for ease of discussion.

[mercurymaline]

Trans - Opposite from. A transexual's sex is opposite their gender. Or the other way around. When I first became involved in the community, trangender was usually used to mean pre-op, meaning their gender was opposite their body, and transexual meant post-op, meaning their sex had changed from their birth sex. Such distinctions don't even seem that important anymore. Most people I speak to now prefer the term transgender, as do I. The original or literal meanings aren't really important. Both terms are valid.

[Raistlin1040]

Upon reflection, there are probably people who feel either way, so I concede that point.

So instead I'm just going to hold storytime, with my own experiences. I am NOT trans in any sense of the word, so I am not a go-to person, nor am I an expert. I am, in fact, 16 years old and with only the barest grasp of gender studies.

Growing up, I never knew anything about transsexuals or transgendered people. I learned what gay meant when I was probably 8 or 9, but I didn't really put much thought into it. My parents are both tolerant (ish) but it's just not something that came up often, so even when I understood the terminology better, I didn't think about it often. I hung out with boys and girls (until the girls stopped wanting to be my friend, because we were 10 and girls didn't have friends who were boys, and vice versa).

I had little crushes on girls, and a few on boys, but in an innocent sort of way. By the time I was 13, I was doing a lot more reflection, trying to understand myself and what was going on in my head. Unfortunately, I was only 13 and I wouldn't admit anything to myself, so I didn't get very far with my thought process.

When I was 14, however, I made a lot of progress, and I started realizing a few things about myself. I didn't identify as a boy. I know your gender might not be something you think about very often, but I NEVER think about it unless it's pointed out. I've been talking to female friends before and nearly walked into the girls' bathroom before being given a look. I wear my hair in a purposefully androgynous style. I like "girly" things like makeup and jewelry, but I also like guitar and video games.

Part of it comes from my lack of LGBT support IRL, I think. I'm bisexual, which I guess accounts for something. I'm a bit of a "gay man" stereotype sometimes, in that I like Lady Gaga and Katy Perry, chick flicks, and the like. But for me, I don't feel like a gay man, not entirely. I feel like a girl when I partake in that sort of thing. As of late, I've been forced to notice my physical sex more, and I do not hate my body at all. However, it's not perfect, and there are things about the male form I dislike in general.

BUT. I do not wish to be a woman either. I would like my body to reflect my mindset. In my perfect world, I could be a boy some of the time and a girl some of the time, and a mixed gen. I joked once that I'm a gay man, a lesbian, a straight guy, and a straight chick all wrapped up in one body, and I guess that's how I feel.

So my comments were based on my own experiences, which is that me, as a person (Being someone who is a biological male who identifies with the genderqueer gender), has a mentally-based...thing, I guess, and anything I feel about my body, or what I would like to be physically, is based off of that. But it's really sort of chicken and the egg, I suppose.

[mercurymaline]

Hurrah! Super misunderstanding resolution fun time!

EDIT: I know, Mercury. But the words themselves don't actually tell you anything. If anything, they should mean the opposite of what they do.

Late, I missed your edit. I know the terminology is weird, but think about it this way: I wouldn't want to be called a transwoman, "someone who used to be a woman." I don't particularly want to put a modifier in front of it, I just wanna be a dude, and that's how I generally describe myself.

Somebody who is transitioning/has transitioned wouldn't want to be described with a word referring to their bio-gender, as it's something they're probably quite dysphoric about.

[Worira]

Yeah, I think the real intent is closer to "trans(-sexual, or perhaps -itioned) man". Putting them together without a space forces the prefix to apply to "man", garbling the meaning.

"trans man" sounds like something you'd call a bus driver, though.

[mercurymaline]

Yeah, I think the real intent is closer to "trans(-sexual, or perhaps -itioned) man". Putting them together without a space forces the prefix to apply to "man", garbling the meaning.

"trans man" sounds like something you'd call a bus driver, though.

This is why I personally prefer "transdude." But that's just me.

[bluewind95]

Show of hands. Has anyone ever honestly in the history of the world gone through their life without a romantic friendship, crush, or at least moment of physical attraction to a sex/gender they are not normally into?


I haven't read all the thread. I am very tired right now. But I'd like to say... that'd be me.

... But then again, I'm asexual(though not aromantic) and BARELY ever manage a crush either way... so yeah.

[Phaedra]

I I like "girly" things like makeup and jewelry, but I also like guitar and video games.



I'm sorry, but this kind of thing annoys me. What I got from your post was that you don't fit neatly into one of the gender stereotypes, so you must be genderqueer. Now, maybe you are, I don't know enough about genderqueer folks to comment, but surely you aren't so simply because you don't fit neatly into the stereotype society names "boy" in every detail. This attitude simply reaffirms the stereotypes that exist and strengthens them.

For example, I am a girl. I like video games and watching football, both activities which society associates with men. Does taking part in these activities make me less female and more male? What if I do them in a skirt? Am I challenging the gender dichotomy? No, I'm a girl who happens to like video games and football. It makes me no less of a girl. Challenge the stereotype assumptions, don't just capitulate and say, oh, I must be some other kind of gender then.

I'm sorry if that seems harsh, but it still annoys me that after decades of feminism, it still all seems to come down to "girls wear make up and boys play guitar and video games".

[Delta]

I'm sorry if that seems harsh, but it still annoys me that after decades of feminism, it still all seems to come down to "girls wear make up and boys play guitar and video games".

I thought one of the points of the whole gender issue was being able to say that it's not inherently girly (as in biological females) to wear make up, but it's part of the female "gender", as in what our culture typically attributes to women.

And yes, it annoys me as well that after all this time, we still have all these stupid social stereotypes, but you can hardly deny they're there.

[Serpentine]

Also, what Phaedra said. Which is why I have an aversion to claims of "genderqueer"edness, which is fairly or not in my mind associated with "transgender".

[Phaedra]

I thought one of the points of the whole gender issue was being able to say that it's not inherently girly (as in biological females) to wear make up, but it's part of the female "gender", as in what our culture typically attributes to women.

And yes, it annoys me as well that after all this time, we still have all these stupid social stereotypes, but you can hardly deny they're there.

And my point is that, rather than just going, "oh, ok, those stereotypes are still there, I guess make up is girly", you should challenge that. Don't just go, "it's part of what culture attributes to women, therefore doing it makes me more like a girl". That attitude will never change the culture.

[golentan]

I'm sorry, but this kind of thing annoys me. What I got from your post was that you don't fit neatly into one of the gender stereotypes, so you must be genderqueer. Now, maybe you are, I don't know enough about genderqueer folks to comment, but surely you aren't so simply because you don't fit neatly into the stereotype society names "boy" in every detail. This attitude simply reaffirms the stereotypes that exist and strengthens them.

For example, I am a girl. I like video games and watching football, both activities which society associates with men. Does taking part in these activities make me less female and more male? What if I do them in a skirt? Am I challenging the gender dichotomy? No, I'm a girl who happens to like video games and football. It makes me no less of a girl. Challenge the stereotype assumptions, don't just capitulate and say, oh, I must be some other kind of gender then.

I'm sorry if that seems harsh, but it still annoys me that after decades of feminism, it still all seems to come down to "girls wear make up and boys play guitar and video games".

Sides which, watching Football is totally a girly thing. Heavily muscled guys, sweat, and lots of physical contact?

And as for the music, dudes only play guitar to pick up chicks anyway.

In case you were wondering, I'm against over engendering ideas of gender in any gender of activity.

[Delta]

And my point is that, rather than just going, "oh, ok, those stereotypes are still there, I guess make up is girly", you should challenge that. Don't just go, "it's part of what culture attributes to women, therefore doing it makes me more like a girl". That attitude will never change the culture.

Why not? "Gender" is just a label. If enough girls don't behave the way society expects them to, over time, society will have to change it's view if what constitutes being a girl, it's a completely natural process that's happening right now, if very, very slowly.

[Serpentine]

People are using it as a category of self-identification of the same variety as transexual or whatever. It's like making "t-shirt wearer" a counterpart to "Iranian". It's meaningless.

More importantly, it is potentially damaging to social progress. Some girls like "boyish" things, and some boys like "girlish" things. By saying "girls who like boyish things are genderqueer", you are setting those people apart as different and unusual and worthy of categorisation. They are not. They are just individuals who do not conform to the totally meaningless socially-constructed outdated obsolete stereotypes which is long overdue to be totally ditched. It is counterproductive to the very movement you mention.

[Raistlin1040]

I'm sorry, but this kind of thing annoys me. What I got from your post was that you don't fit neatly into one of the gender stereotypes, so you must be genderqueer. Now, maybe you are, I don't know enough about genderqueer folks to comment, but surely you aren't so simply because you don't fit neatly into the stereotype society names "boy" in every detail. This attitude simply reaffirms the stereotypes that exist and strengthens them.

For example, I am a girl. I like video games and watching football, both activities which society associates with men. Does taking part in these activities make me less female and more male? What if I do them in a skirt? Am I challenging the gender dichotomy? No, I'm a girl who happens to like video games and football. It makes me no less of a girl. Challenge the stereotype assumptions, don't just capitulate and say, oh, I must be some other kind of gender then.

I'm sorry if that seems harsh, but it still annoys me that after decades of feminism, it still all seems to come down to "girls wear make up and boys play guitar and video games".Um. I think you sort of missed my point. I put "girly" in irony quotes, because I don't really like the stereotype either. Sorry, it doesn't come across well on the internet. I am DEFINITELY for people challenging the gender norm, men wearing makeup and skirts, women in pants, etc. Like Delta said though, unfortunately the stereotype is there.

My mother (semi tolerant as she is) is sort of my base, because I see her as the average American. Tolerant, mostly of Gays and Lesbians, less so of Transsexual and Bisexuals. She mentioned something about transsexual people, and I refuted it, and she said something like "I just don't see how people can feel different than what they are! I've always felt like a woman, and always known I was a woman, and that female is what I am supposed to be!" And my viewpoint on it is sort of "Well, I'm biologically male, but I don't feel like that's what it's supposed to be. I don't feel like there is a supposed to be. I'm just me, and I'm not Me, The Man, or Me, The Woman. I have traditionally masculine traits and traditionally feminine ones. I wish I could be physically male, female, and other at varying times. I wouldn't commit to a full transformation into a woman, and going partway would only serve to outcast me from society, so even though I don't feel like either gender, and feel more like a blend of both, I will stay biologically male."

It's very odd to explain, and skepticism is the general reaction, and so I apologize for the lack of clarity. In no way was I trying to categorize women into one group of traits that society has picked. I was just saying that from a Gender Standpoint, I do things that are both masculine and feminine, and those were my examples. My sincerest apologies for both the misunderstanding and any offense it may have caused.

[Serpentine]

I think I thought you were getting at something like that, which is why I didn't leap on you, but although I don't particularly think the criticism necessarily applies to you, Raistlin, I do fully agree with Phaedra's sentiments.
Another pet peeve: noted.

[Raistlin1040]

I agree as well. Just because a girl likes football, or a boy likes makeup, doesn't mean they should be considered strange or weird. They're certainly no less their gender because of it. HOWEVER, if they feel like they don't necessarily belong to one gender, that should be respected as a legitimate gender as well, in my opinion. Yes, we should be inclusive, and throw off the shackles of stereotype, but, for me at least (which may have been another miscommunication in my post), I think I fall inbetween genders, and I would be a bit offended if someone tried to tell me that I'm just a boy that likes makeup, because that's not how I feel, and that's not how I choose to describe myself.

[Delta]

I see your point, even if I don't agree on it. I don't think using the "gender" labels will affect this change much, if at all, because it's bound to happen, unfortunately, it happens very slow.

But as I'm not too deep into gender theory and all that stuff anyway, and don't use those labels in that way myself, I guess we can easily agree to disagree on this.

[Serpentine]

But saying "if you do not fit in with this arbitrary expectation, you are abnormal and thus deserving of a special classification" is making that slow process even slower by legitimising its claim to relevance and meaning.
I think I fall inbetween gendersBut that just makes you "a normal human being whose preferences and the like happen to not fall in with those at best expected and at worst required of them by their current society", not "a weird and wonderful new classification"!

[Phaedra]

Words

Oh, ok, sorry, I think I did misunderstand you. Sorry if I caused any offence.

But I stand by what I said and agree with Serpentine. I do think that a lot of genderqueer assertions damage the slow moves we have towards gender equality because they implicitly support the distinctions of society.


Sides which, watching Football is totally a girly thing. Heavily muscled guys, sweat, and lots of physical contact?

Haha, you must never have seen the England team. No one watches a team containing Rooney to ogle. :smallsmile:

[Jokasti]

American football, I think.

[Serpentine]

You mean the one that involves exactly 1 foot per side? :smallwink:

[Phaedra]

American football, I think.

Pah, nothing but rugby with extra padding. :smalltongue:

[Jokasti]

I never said I liked it! I much prefer soccer, both playing and watching.

[Delta]

But saying "if you do not fit in with this arbitrary expectation, you are abnormal and thus deserving of a special classification" is making that slow process even slower by legitimising its claim to relevance and meaning.

Again, I can say nothing but that I disagree, I understand your reasoning, but I don't think it works like that in this case. We could argue on forever about this, but it wouldn't get anywhere.

[Lix Lorn]

Pah, nothing but rugby with extra padding. :smalltongue:
I believe Giles, from Buffy, said it best.

I never saw why Americans have to put on a tonne of armour to play rugby.

[Delta]

I don't think we want to turn this into a sports discussion, do we? :smallwink: Because otherwise, I could explain to you some differences between the two sports because of which it makes a lot of sense for American Football players to wear all this padding.

[Lix Lorn]

If you do, I'll show you why I'm Chaotic Neutral and not Chaotic Good.

[Delta]

I'll be good, I promise :smallbiggrin: (or should I rather be Neutral? I don't know)

[Murdim]

I'll be good, I promise :smallbiggrin: (or should I rather be Neutral? I don't know)
Lawful is your best bet when it comes to promises.

[Delta]

But Lawful is booooooooring :smallfrown:

[Lix Lorn]

Plus, I regularly Chaos Hammer them on principle.

[Delta]

Have I mentioned how decidedly not Lawful I feel today? :smallsmile:

[Lix Lorn]

Good girl. Now, let's frolic contentedly in flowery meadows.

[Murdim]

But Lawful is booooooooring :smallfrown:
Death. Jedi Knights. Darth Vader. Boba Fett. God. Aragorn. Gimli Every fantasy dwarf ever. Asmodeus. Roy. Redcloak. Nazis. Superman. Iron Man. Phoenix Wright.

[Lix Lorn]

Death. Jedi Knights. Darth Vader. Boba Fett. God. Aragorn. Gimli Every fantasy dwarf ever. Asmodeus. Roy. Redcloak. Nazis. Superman. Iron Man. Phoenix Wright.
Death, maybe. Jedi Knights would be far cooller as chaotic. Darth Vader is neutral. Boba Fett is alright. God ent lawful. [/subject because of religion]. Aragorn, maybe. Dwarves are alright. (Shrug) Asmodeus I don't know enough, I prefer Haley, Elan, Xykon or MitD to Roy and Redcloak ANY day, Nazis are... horrific, if not boring. Superman is dull. Iron Man is on the Neutral side of Lawful. Phoenix Right is Awesome Good, not Lawful Good.

Lawful PEOPLE can be interesting. Lawful as an ideal is constrictive and choking as soon as you try to apply it.

[Delta]

I'd strongly disagree on Iron Man and each and every Jedi being lawful. Apart from that, well most of those aren't characters I'd like to play anyway. But I think this is not the right place for a Law/Chaos-argument either :smallwink: *goes on to frolic in a very chaotic and girlish way in flowery meadows*

[Lix Lorn]

Yay! ^_^
(Cuddles and frolics)

(prepares only metamagic'd Chaos Hammers in every single spell slot)
(Well, every one except three and down.)

[Quincunx]

Conversation's winding down after having gone on while I slept (curse the European time-zones), so I'll offer a kudos, a recap, and an apologia and then drop it.

Raistlin1040, somewhere on page six, brought up a useful viewpoint:

. . .she said something like "I just don't see how people can feel different than what they are! I've always felt like a woman, and always known I was a woman, and that female is what I am supposed to be!" And my viewpoint on it is sort of "Well, I'm biologically male, but I don't feel like that's what it's supposed to be. I don't feel like there is a supposed to be. I'm just me, and I'm not Me, The Man, or Me, The Woman. . .
This willingness to admit that what is (the body) might not be what should be (the gender, in this case) is a rare quality. Keep in mind, when you're trying to discuss this with people, that you'll have to make it obvious they're not one and the same.

*****

mercurymaline, at the end of the last LGBT thread I made a reference to a safe place, not in reference to this thread as the safe place, and nobody understood what the heck I was talking about. The assumption of a safe place is far from universal. Also it seems to be flagging she-who-assumes-it as a female and possibly as a victim or an American. You may wish to reject the idea on the grounds of it having cooties.

*****

As for the apologia: I thought I had made it clear in post #93 of this thread. The logic you have to go through to justify transsexuality does lie dangerously close to the logic in insanity; it is no accident and no crime on the speaker's part that the word 'delusion' entered the conversation. It's important to test your own logic while you are of sound mind to be sure it's self-consistent, lest a bit of ill-logic later nag at the unsound mind and drag it further towards insanity. Crazy is not fun, but more to your point, it's wasted time, it's more time spent questioning yourself and to no usable result.

Still, the charge of 'delusional' can't be leveled at any of the participants. Everyone has shared self-consistent logic and the presence of mind to be able to defend it. Everyone has had the presence of mind to not use delusional thinking as a shortcut to get where they wanted to go. Whatever knee-jerk reaction you had against the word was against being associated with crazy, not with using it. Well done. :smallsmile:

[Murdim]

Well, I didn't intend it to become a semi-serious aligment debate :smalleek: If it was the case, I wouldn't have included such "traps" as God and Nazis.


Lawful PEOPLE can be interesting. Lawful as an ideal is constrictive and choking as soon as you try to apply it.
Hey, I never said the opposite. It's not like I'm Lawful myself. I just wanted to show that acting in a Lawful way isn't necessarily dull or boring.


As for the transsexual/transgender debate... well, as a cisgendered person who doesn't really feel the need to make a big deal (or actually, a deal at all) out of his own gender in one way or the other, I'm not sure how I could participate constructively.

[Lix Lorn]

Sorry, I just flared up when you used to word delusion. (Sweatdrop) One of my friends considered himself Draconic Otherkin for several years. He doesn't Now, and he was questioning why it was different, and my dad thinks I'll grow out of it and arrgh.

Anyway.

I play up how Chaotic I am. I'm Red-White, probably Neutral. Chaotic in small matters, Lawful in big matters. Personal freedom is very, very close to my heart... but an extreme Lawful would take it away to defend you. 'It's not a cage if it keeps out the darkness.'

And I'm rambling.
Let's go with the meadow frolicking!
(Frolics barefoot through flowery meadows)

[Ilena]

Sorry, I just flared up when you used to word delusion. (Sweatdrop) One of my friends considered himself Draconic Otherkin for several years. He doesn't Now, and he was questioning why it was different, and my dad thinks I'll grow out of it and arrgh.

Anyway.

I play up how Chaotic I am. I'm Red-White, probably Neutral. Chaotic in small matters, Lawful in big matters. Personal freedom is very, very close to my heart... but an extreme Lawful would take it away to defend you. 'It's not a cage if it keeps out the darkness.'

And I'm rambling.
Let's go with the meadow frolicking!
(Frolics barefoot through flowery meadows)

Actually my friend mentioned that she had a past life dream a month ago and met me, at the time i was a young dragon apparently :P If its true thats awesome, if its not true, well thats awesome too! :P

Ya ... ive been discribed as CE, i can be very Chaotic and very evil :D But im also CG, I am so much a split personality :D

Yay! Frolicking! *hasn't frolicked in ... ages!*

[mercurymaline]

Alright, awake.

Quin: My issue is that I don't think there's anything wrong with a transperson's mind, but a problem in the body. A birth defect, not a delusion. Dysphoria is a better word, anyway. Part of transitioning is making sure the person is of sound mind to make such choices. No doctor would perform such life-altering alterations on a delusional person. Not that I've ever met a transperson who had convinced themself they were actually biologically of their target gender.

On Genderqueer: When a person doesn't feel like their bio-sex is correct and want to be the opposite, they are transgender. When they feel their body is wrong, but the opposite gender isn't right either, they are genderqueer. Both are equally valid designations.

And, going to work. Return to your discussion about alignment, or rugby, or whatever.

[Serpentine]

Quin: My issue is that I don't think there's anything wrong with a transperson's mind, but a problem in the body. A birth defect, not a delusion.I find it more likely for one organ to be... "faulty" than all of them, but ultimately it comes down to the same thing anyway - easier to fix the body than the brain.

On Genderqueer: When a person doesn't feel like their bio-sex is correct and want to be the opposite, they are transgender. When they feel their body is wrong, but the opposite gender isn't right either, they are genderqueer. Both are equally valid designations.Eh, I've already said why the former sits poorly with me. The latter is... an odd definition that I haven't come across before. But if it involves gender it probably means I think it's a load of obsolete hogwash.

Also: Hiiiiiiiii! :3

[mercurymaline]

I find it more likely for one organ to be... "faulty" than all of them, but ultimately it comes down to the same thing anyway - easier to fix the body than the brain.
Eh, I've already said why the former sits poorly with me. The latter is... an odd definition that I haven't come across before. But if it involves gender it probably means I think it's a load of obsolete hogwash.

Also: Hiiiiiiiii! :3

One organ, yep. Ovaries/testes, pumping the body full of the wrong hormone, making it mature incorrectly.

I've always understood genderqueer as wanting a different body, at least some of the time, and either modifying your body, or having partial surgery, but not feeling fully of the other gender, as transexuals do. I don't think it has so much to do with social constructs as it does with body dysphoria.

Also: Hello, dear.

[Serpentine]

One organ, yep. Ovaries/testes, pumping the body full of the wrong hormone, making it mature incorrectly.And genes? The things that are in and determine every single cell in our bodies?
Actually... How often to transexuals get genetic testing?

With the latter: you mean like this person (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norrie_May-Welby)?

By the way, while I was looking for hir, I found this (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/sydney-confidential/nicole-kidman-signs-to-play-first-post-op-transsexual/story-e6frexer-1111117990175).

[CurlyKitGirl]

Wee! Told my Dad that I might be bisexual/bicurious today and he just said, "Okay, it's your life after all. Long as you're happy, 'ey treat you right and you treat 'em right I don't care."
This might not sound like much, but he's not exactly 100% tolerant of non-herterosexual people; so a big step was made.
Worst to tell'd be the two brothers, but I'm a tought cookie, so all's doing fine.

Now I think about it, my parents and grandparents never really cared. I went through phases of 'girly' clothing, but acting 'boyishly', wearing 'boy' clothing and acting 'girly', acting 'girly' in 'girly' clothing and vice versa; had toys and books intended for both genders. The music and films were almost entirely of my parent's and grandparent's generation.
So I knew about boys and girls, but I don't think I ever really cared. This sort of not-caring applies to disabilities and every such thing I can think of.
Perhaps pansexual (however you use it) is a better descriptor as I generally don't care about sex or gender or anything.
I do think I identify as slightly more masculine for the most part, to the point where I am genuinely shocked when I find myself 'acting like a girl'. Outside of watching Disney films as Disney surpasses all boundaries.

But hey, one hurdle down, a few more to go. Wish me luck.

[Danne]

...I don't think there's anything wrong with a transperson's mind, but a problem in the body. A birth defect, not a delusion....

This. The best description of transpeople I ever heard came from an FtM on LiveJournal, who basically said (I'm paraphrasing): "Just because I can't afford a penis doesn't make me any less a man. I'm not about to let a birth defect stop me from living my life."


I find it more likely for one organ to be... "faulty" than all of them, but ultimately it comes down to the same thing anyway - easier to fix the body than the brain.

But most birth defects don't just affect one area of the body. There's (typically) one root cause, with a plate full of side effects. My friend with cerebral palsy has a problem that originates in her brain, but affects her muscles, the way she walks, her stamina, her facial features, and a variety of other areas. Down syndrome is usually caused by a third copy of the 21st chromosome, but it causes a variety of physical and mental problems (which I'm not qualified to discuss because I've no first hand experience with the condition).

Similarly, a transperson's birth defect stems from that person's possession/lack of a certain combination of genes (e.g. the SRY gene) which regulate hormone production, which in turn cause the development of testes/ovaries and secondary sexual characteristics. How is a brain injury or genetic condition that causes someone to have physical/mental handicaps different from a genetic condition that affects hormone production and thus messes up certain physical characteristics? I'm sure there are people who disagree with me, but that's how I see it.

(Btw, I know that you're probably aware of the biology and wasn't trying to say you weren't, I was just explaining my opinion using the best analogies I could.)

Edit:
Wee! Told my Dad that I might be bisexual/bicurious today and he just said, "Okay, it's your life after all. Long as you're happy, 'ey treat you right and you treat 'em right I don't care."
This might not sound like much, but he's not exactly 100% tolerant of non-herterosexual people; so a big step was made.
Worst to tell'd be the two brothers, but I'm a tought cookie, so all's doing fine.
*snip*

But hey, one hurdle down, a few more to go. Wish me luck.

Congrats on the good talk with your dad, and good luck!!! :smallbiggrin:

[Coidzor]

Similarly, a transperson's birth defect stems from that person's possession/lack of a certain combination of genes (e.g. the SRY gene) which regulate hormone production, which in turn cause the development of testes/ovaries and secondary sexual characteristics.

Wait, they finally figured out at least one cause? Anyone got any further reading along this particular vein?


...And how did we get on a half page tangent about law and chaos from Lix Lorn saying it's ok for CN people to go on genocidal rampages against non-chaotic people? :smallconfused: I mean, sure, is an artificial construct in much the same way as gender is, but I don't get the topicality. No one really mentioned bigotry for a parody of such to be dramatically appropriate...

[Danne]

Wait, they finally figured out at least one cause? Anyone got any further reading along this particular vein?

Not exactly. The SRY gene (and a few others) are what determine which sex a developing fetus becomes. If I recall correctly, the SRY gene (found on the Y chromosome) flips a bunch of "switches" which cause the testes to develop and testosterone to be produced, which leads to male sex characteristics. A separate gene (also found on the Y chromosome), D-something-or-other, suppresses the development of female sex characteristics (which is how everyone starts developing until those few genes kick in). Basically, there are genes to control becoming male, and without those one becomes female.

I wasn't commenting on the cause of transgender-ness/transexuality/whatever so much as on the genes that cause male parts to develop. I feel like it's a birth defect that I don't have those genes and, say, Lix Lorn does, the same way that it's a birth defect for people with down syndrome to have a third copy of one of their chromosomes. I don't know if there's an actual link to the cause of trans-stuff or not. Like, if someone karyotyped me, would I have a Y chromosome but lack an SRY gene because of some freak mutation? Would an MtF have two X chromosomes with an SRY gene translocated onto one of them? Or is it all in our heads, and if so, what causes that? I don't know if anyone's checked that.

[The Rose Dragon]

With the latter: you mean like this person (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norrie_May-Welby)?

The pronouns used to refer to that person are abominations and must be burned to the ground.

[Eloi]

The pronouns used to refer to that person are abominations and must be burned to the ground.

I find your "Modern English" an abomination and should be burnt to the ground.

[Coidzor]

^: I'm sorry, but the words you were looking for that would have applied more appropirately were "Brigand, Thug, Bandit, Bandito, Low-life, Scoundrel, Filching Rat, and/or Sneak Thief."


Not exactly. The SRY gene (and a few others) are what determine which sex a developing fetus becomes. If I recall correctly, the SRY gene (found on the Y chromosome) flips a bunch of "switches" which cause the testes to develop and testosterone to be produced, which leads to male sex characteristics. A separate gene (also found on the Y chromosome), D-something-or-other, suppresses the development of female sex characteristics (which is how everyone starts developing until those few genes kick in). Basically, there are genes to control becoming male, and without those one becomes female.

Ahhh. If I had paid a bit more attention in sophomore genetics I'd've remembered that more readily. x.x


I don't know if there's an actual link to the cause of trans-stuff or not. Like, if someone karyotyped me, would I have a Y chromosome but lack an SRY gene because of some freak mutation? Would an MtF have two X chromosomes with an SRY gene translocated onto one of them? Or is it all in our heads, and if so, what causes that? I don't know if anyone's checked that.

That actually was part of what I was asking two pages ago and got told to STFU about intersexed individuals since we were talking about transpeeps. They really should get around to it at some point.

:smallsigh: I knew I should've spent more skillpoints on talking.



:smallconfused::smalleek::smallconfused: ...So how does Norrie May-Welby go to the bathroom if the poor git doesn't have either sex's urinary tract?

[Lix Lorn]

I assume she has one of the gender's urinary tract, but no sexual organs, or some unusable mixture of the two.

Also, there was no relevance, really. I was trying to change the subject because the discussion was getting heated enough to warrant Resist Energy. :smalleek:

[Asta Kask]

If you do, I'll show you why I'm Chaotic Neutral and not Chaotic Good.

"I am Locutus... of Borg. Resistance... is futile. Your life as it has been... is over. From this time forward... you will service... us."

[npc revolution]

I'm doing a project for school about identity and I figured I could ask a couple of you nice friendly guys and girls about it.

How has being LGBT affected you as a person? And if that's too broad a question, what challenges have you faced because of it?

You are all great people, by the way.
Hugs for all. :smallsmile:

[golentan]

I'm doing a project for school about identity and I figured I could ask a couple of you nice friendly guys and girls about it.

How has being LGBT affected you as a person? And if that's too broad a question, what challenges have you faced because of it?

You are all great people, by the way.
Hugs for all. :smallsmile:

Well, it's resulted in me getting punched by angry boys, whereas without it I would only have been punched by angry girls. I still am, but there are boys in there too. Also, I may have anyway. I think I'd be secure enough in my identity to flirt with guys for the express purpose of annoying them.

Law is awesome. It gives you a stable platform to build on, and you can still be crazy awesome. Just as Good is not Nice, (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodIsNotNice) law doesn't mean "stifling order." Knowing and adhering to the Code Duello doesn't mean you can't kick a barrel of oil down the stairs mid-siege and throw a torch after it. Obeying the speed limit doesn't keep you from rigging up your car with every (legal) speed boosting item known to man, including jump jets, "Just in Case." Or collecting exotic chemical reagents useful in a wide variety of tasks for no good reason. Or rigging an assault carrier to be remotely piloted, tipping the enemy off that it's a distraction through a triple agent, and strapping yourself underneath it and remotely piloting it into the heart of their base while they look for the main thrust of the attack to be coming from elsewhere.

Ah, memories. Good times, good times.

[mercurymaline]

And genes? The things that are in and determine every single cell in our bodies?
Actually... How often to transexuals get genetic testing?

Good question. I have no idea. Hormone testing is much cheaper, and I know I produce way more testosterone than is normal.


With the latter: you mean like this person (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norrie_May-Welby)?
May-Welby is non-gendered, or somesuch now. Ey wasn't satisfied living as either gender, now lives between the two poles. Just one expression of genderqueerness.

By the way, while I was looking for hir, I found this (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/sydney-confidential/nicole-kidman-signs-to-play-first-post-op-transsexual/story-e6frexer-1111117990175).
I like her well enough. I approve.



How has being LGBT affected you as a person? And if that's too broad a question, what challenges have you faced because of it?

This is tough. I honestly can't imagine what it would have been like to be cisgender, or monosexual, so I can't know who I would be if I weren't how I am.
Sadly, being transgender has made it harder to make friends and meet people in general. People seem offended if I don't tell them right away, though I always have to be careful who I inform of what, because, well, I don't wanna die.
If you have any more specific questions I'd be more than happy to answer. But being LGBT has affected a lot of aspects of my life. To the existing question, it would be quicker to list the bits of my life that aren't affected by it.

[Ilena]

Edit - removed for privacy :P

[Serpentine]

But most birth defects don't just affect one area of the body. There's (typically) one root cause, with a plate full of side effects. My friend with cerebral palsy has a problem that originates in her brain, but affects her muscles, the way she walks, her stamina, her facial features, and a variety of other areas. Down syndrome is usually caused by a third copy of the 21st chromosome, but it causes a variety of physical and mental problems (which I'm not qualified to discuss because I've no first hand experience with the condition).

Similarly, a transperson's birth defect stems from that person's possession/lack of a certain combination of genes (e.g. the SRY gene) which regulate hormone production, which in turn cause the development of testes/ovaries and secondary sexual characteristics. How is a brain injury or genetic condition that causes someone to have physical/mental handicaps different from a genetic condition that affects hormone production and thus messes up certain physical characteristics? I'm sure there are people who disagree with me, but that's how I see it.

(Btw, I know that you're probably aware of the biology and wasn't trying to say you weren't, I was just explaining my opinion using the best analogies I could.)But we're not talking about faulty or misplaced genes*. Those are abnormal genes or chromosome numbers that result in physiologal problems.
We're talking about a perfectly healthy set of genes in a body that has somehow developed a mind-body disparity. Having two X or an X and a Y chromosome is normal, and are what determine** an individual's sex. Having one of those sets isn't the problem, it's that the brain doesn't match that set*. The body is* producing the hormones and things it should be according to its genetic code. If the genes are fine, and the body is fine, then it is the brain in which the birth defect has occurred.
Now, like I keep saying, this doesn't actually have any real practical significance. At the moment, we can only change the body, not the brain, so that's the treatment for it. As it appears, to me, to be more physiological than biochemical, I don't expect that there will ever be a brain-changing treatment. Even if there is, I would expect it to be much riskier than sticking with the body modification.

*Based on my understanding of current knowledge of transexuality, in which the brain is physically a different sex to the body and genes, with no presently identified genetic cause. If this changes, well, the whole issue will be a lot easier.
**Except in multiple-chromosomed, defective, and other weird things that results in weird sex stuff going on, of which transexuality is not one.*

Curly: Better than I would've hoped from what you've said about your family :smallsmile:

[742]

copper is good. it makes my computer work, it makes my TV work, pennies used to be made of it giving it a place in making our economy work when it did that, and its quite pretty; i very much enjoy looking at it.

excess copper in the human body can* be remarkably unpleasant and cause (among other things) death; most people consider death to be a negative outcome.

*correct me if im wrong here and ill switch it out for some other metal

[Lioness]

So I used to be sort of sure, but now I'm not so much.

I was pretty sure I was completely straight, with nothing but an aesthetic appreciation for the female form. But...I dunno.
I'm don't think I'm completely bi...the thought of sex with other girls sort of makes me, not squick, exactly, but shy away. That could be due to a lack of male sexing as well, but I'm not sure.

So I'm undecided, but definitely more bi than I thought I was a few months ago.

So, yeah.

[Coidzor]

Man, now you've all gotten me existentially wondering whether there's any similarity to the feeling of love between members of one group or if it's as wildly varied and individualized as to be completely different between every person.

Or maybe it's just the staying up all night packing for my trip today.Or having a <thing> for a bi girl and wondering whether my feelings for her are in the same language as her girlfriend's.
I know, my mind, it is a horrible thing.

Good luck figuring out yours though, lioness. Don't panic and remember there's no especial rush to get worked up over.

[Lioness]

I'm not sure about the case-to-case thing. I mean, that's the case for heterosexual attractions as well. I like guys, but there are some I wouldn't go near. Their personalities are disgusting, and they don't appeal to me at all. It's probably safe to say that I'm not attracted to most guys (but that could just be exposure to teenaged hormonebags).
Then again, girls too. They're pretty and soft, but there are some girls that aren't attractive at all.

So I think it's a case-by-case thing, in which gender and/or sex plays a large role in some people's decision, while not so much with others.

[Jacklu]

I've been having extremely vivid nightmares the last three nights. Last night I dreamed that my family found out about me and things went south very fast. =/ Thought it might be relevant.

[Lix Lorn]

DX
(huggles Jacklu)

[golentan]

The temptation to link to "I kissed a girl" is almost unbearable. :/

Jackie, I still think it's best in general to get things out in the open. Especially since you're dating now, it's more and more likely to come out in a way you aren't in control of, which is harder than one you are. But... Eesh. I also know why you're worried about tu familia taking it poorly.

Luck.

[Lix Lorn]

If they'll do something drastic like throw you out, then maybe keeping it secret is good... but otherwise, you should probably tell them... DX

[Asta Kask]

Oooh... A clinic (http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpps/news/spanish-clinic-investigated-for-homosexuality-cure-dpgonc-20100615-fc_8108666) in Spain is offering 'cures' for homosexuality. Now there's a gravely unethical endeavor. And also, in all likelihood, hopeless. They are offering pills and psychiatric counceling? *snort*

Good thing the authorities are looking into this.

[Xzeno]

The temptation to link to "I kissed a girl" is almost unbearable. :/

I hate that song. :smallfrown:

Jacklu, I must echo Golentan's sentiments. I think coming out would be for the best, especially given your nightmares, which are worrying in there own right. However, I must stress that I am neither in a position to offer sound advice or in a position to interpret dreams. Do what you think is right. I hope it works out for you.

Homosexuality cure: Why is it unethical? I happen to think it is, but I am interested in hearing your reasons (Asta Kask or anyone). I'll probably expand on my own later. :/

[Asta Kask]

Homosexuality cure: Why is it unethical? I happen to think it is, but I am interested in hearing your reasons (Asta Kask or anyone). I'll probably expand on my own later. :/

It is unethical because a) there's no reason to believe that homosexuality is a disease or a disorder, and b) because there is no known way to turn a homosexual person into a heterosexual person. These people are essentially conning people by selling false hope, when the patients would be better served spending the money on counseling to learn to accept their sexuality.

[Cotilla]

Oooh... A clinic (http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpps/news/spanish-clinic-investigated-for-homosexuality-cure-dpgonc-20100615-fc_8108666) in Spain is offering 'cures' for homosexuality. Now there's a gravely unethical endeavor. And also, in all likelihood, hopeless. They are offering pills and psychiatric counceling? *snort*

Good thing the authorities are looking into this.

I'm grateful that they are being investigated... too close to home.

[golentan]

I hate that song. :smallfrown:

Jacklu, I must echo Golentan's sentiments. I think coming out would be for the best, especially given your nightmares, which are worrying in there own right. However, I must stress that I am neither in a position to offer sound advice or in a position to interpret dreams. Do what you think is right. I hope it works out for you.

Homosexuality cure: Why is it unethical? I happen to think it is, but I am interested in hearing your reasons (Asta Kask or anyone). I'll probably expand on my own later. :/

1995 song, not the one making the rounds lately.

Also, it's unethical because it pathologizes behavior that doesn't deserve it, adding ammunition to the "gays are wrong" crowd and adding guilt to many who are having trouble for whatever reason accepting themselves.

The idea of changing isn't in itself bad (if possible, rather than repressive and thus harmful). But the idea of a clinic advertising a "cure" is a terrible one. IMO.

[Serpentine]

I hate that song. :smallfrown:Jill Soluble's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4r41vPTF8k) better.
1995 song, not the one making the rounds lately.Oh hey! =3
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2007/11/15/va1237277408483/Hi-5-5751482.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-5_(Australian_band))

[golentan]

Jill Soluble's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4r41vPTF8k) better.Oh hey! =3
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2007/11/15/va1237277408483/Hi-5-5751482.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-5_(Australian_band))

Oh Hai.

Great minds think alike, I guess. And fools seldom differ.

[Strawberries]

Hello people. I'm not LGBT, but I figured that this would be the right place to vent a bit.

Yesterday there has been the gay pride parade in a city close to where I live. I wanted to go, together with my boyfriend, as supporters (gay pride parades have a way of filling me with cheerfulness), but I couldn't because of job issues.
Now, I was talking to the phone to a friend earlier today, and in between other chit-chats, I happened to mention this to her (somehow, being both straight females, we managed to never talk about the issue till now).
I was first met with shocked silence. Then, the first comment I heard was "why would you want to go there?!" (said in a tone between horror and disgust) and then a rant of the most trite homophobic trash I've ever heard.
I honestly didn't know what to say at the beginning - me and this friend have kind of lost close contact recently, but we were for a time very close, and I would never have suspected she felt that way. I got angry (I have a bit of a temper when it comes to these issues) and we both ended up shouting, till I slammed down the receiver. I'm still fuming, and I'm angry to have misjudged a person so badly. I don't know if I'm going to call her again - if I do, I'm not sure if I could reason with her - I can not remain friends with a person who feels like this.

Again, sorry to intrude like this. I felt the need to rant - I feel better now.

[MickJay]

Welcome to the thread and you're more than welcome to write about anything LGBT-related here :)

I can see three ways in which you could act now, depending on how exactly you feel about it: either end the friendship (which, in general, is not something I'd be suggesting); ignore your friend's homophobic views (but as you said yourself, it's not something you'd do), or try speaking with her about it in a calm way and see why exactly she feels the way she does. Of course, it all depends on whether your friend will want to speak with you as well, considering how your argument ended. By now you've already considered these options, so I'm probably not being very helpful here :smallwink:

In any case, hopefully you'll find a satisfying solution to your dilemma!

[Strawberries]

Welcome to the thread and you're more than welcome to write about anything LGBT-related here :)

Thanks for the welcome, MickJay :smallsmile:.

Yeah, I need a couple of days to calm myself a bit (right now I can't stand the thought of hearing her voice again) and then I'll make another try at a calm, reasonable conversation. If she's simply repeating something she constantly hears around her, without giving much thought to the matter, I'll try to make her realize what a load of bull that is. Otherwise (and, judging from this morning's conversation, I think this is more likely), I fear I'll have to end the friendship - that's sad but, knowing myself, that would be the best solution.

As I said, I'm angry with her, but I'm much more angry with myself. That is a person I've known for seven years (five of which were spent almost daily together). Why didn't I realize she was like that before?

[Jokasti]

Like you said it had never come up before. But I don't think you should stop being her friend just because of her opinion on one matter. Do you have friends with different views on religion, politics, and other matters?
Your friend has probably just been brainwashed conditioned to think that way. Many children are raised with the "When a mommy and a daddy love each other very much" speech, and aren't ever exposed to that until older, when they already have deep set and often closed minded opinions.
When you talk to her again, ask her why she feels that way, and try to work from there.
Just my 2 coupons.

[742]

the whole idea of pathologizing things that dont cause anyone harm may seem like a little annoying social thing now, but [paranoid rant] i predict our world is going to go totally cyberpunk very soon* (and when the plot of dollhouse happens: i told you so) we can already modify memories through therapy, and eventually (tomorrow? 10000 years from now?), assuming we dont die before then it will happen.

arbitrarily picking ideas and feelings to eliminate based on one groups ancient traditional values; i would try to explain why thats bad but there are sooo many ways it could go wrong. just think of the irish potato famine, but with brain potatoes or ideas! assuming of course that someone invents brain potatoes at some point and that theyre tasty. culture stagnates, or everyones thinking the same thing and theres a big problem that the one person in the trillion different bodies cant solve.

*read farenheit 451 and look at the technology theyre using, its been a while since i read it but i remember being seriously creeped out. then look at how easy restrictive always-on DRM and cloud computing make the plot there to implement. who even pays attention to print media anymore anyway? but have you been to our moon colony yet? me neither.[/paranoid rant]

in the non-paranoid part of my post: my response to people suggesting that we "cure homosexuality" is to ask why, and since im in america and this is 2010 it inevitably leads to "because its against god" my standard follow up is something along the lines of "oh. given the rates of 'relapse' of the two it seems like curing christianity is far more practical."
not to imply that i think of homosexuality and religion as at all similar, i have a positive view of one, especially in regards to general overpopulation problems** and a very different view of the other.

**742-reducing extreme angst and moral outrage to matters of efficiency since 1993.

[Danne]

Hello people. I'm not LGBT, but I figured that this would be the right place to vent a bit.

Yesterday there has been the gay pride parade in a city close to where I live. I wanted to go, together with my boyfriend, as supporters (gay pride parades have a way of filling me with cheerfulness), but I couldn't because of job issues.
Now, I was talking to the phone to a friend earlier today, and in between other chit-chats, I happened to mention this to her (somehow, being both straight females, we managed to never talk about the issue till now).
I was first met with shocked silence. Then, the first comment I heard was "why would you want to go there?!" (said in a tone between horror and disgust) and then a rant of the most trite homophobic trash I've ever heard.
I honestly didn't know what to say at the beginning - me and this friend have kind of lost close contact recently, but we were for a time very close, and I would never have suspected she felt that way. I got angry (I have a bit of a temper when it comes to these issues) and we both ended up shouting, till I slammed down the receiver. I'm still fuming, and I'm angry to have misjudged a person so badly. I don't know if I'm going to call her again - if I do, I'm not sure if I could reason with her - I can not remain friends with a person who feels like this.

Again, sorry to intrude like this. I felt the need to rant - I feel better now.

Not an intrusion. Welcome to the thread! :smallsmile:

Regarding your friend, I think the others have the right idea. It's incredibly hard for a close friendship to end, sometimes akin to breaking up with a significant other, so try to save this one if you can. If you can't (I know I probably couldn't remain friends with someone who held those views) then make sure you take some time to grieve the loss.


But we're not talking about faulty or misplaced genes*. Those are abnormal genes or chromosome numbers that result in physiologal problems.
We're talking about a perfectly healthy set of genes in a body that has somehow developed a mind-body disparity. *snip*

What I'm saying is that I disagree about having a perfectly healthy set of genes. The reason I brought up down syndrome and other genetic conditions was to point out that sometimes the genetic code is wrong. Nature screws up sometimes. I don't know what the average transperson's genes look like, but even if they're 100% normal, there's something inherently wrong with them because they don't match the person's gender. I.e., it's a birth defect, at least in a manner of speaking.

[Serpentine]

What I'm saying is that I disagree about having a perfectly healthy set of genes. The reason I brought up down syndrome and other genetic conditions was to point out that sometimes the genetic code is wrong. Nature screws up sometimes. I don't know what the average transperson's genes look like, but even if they're 100% normal, there's something inherently wrong with them because they don't match the person's gender. I.e., it's a birth defect, at least in a manner of speaking.As of yet, we have not identified any gene or genes causing or contributing to the development of transexuality. It is possible to have birth defects that are not genetic. I'm not, by the way, saying it's not a birth defect - in fact, that's exactly what I'm saying. I'm just saying that it seems most likely to me for the fault to be in the brain, rather than in the body, a problem (or quirk) of the brain's development rather than the body developing the wrong bits. I'm saying the brain isn't synching up with the body and (sex) genes, you're saying it's the body and genes that's not synching up with the brain. If it is genetic, then it will be the abnormal genes effecting the brain, not the body.* We don't actually have anything to confirm either, really, so we're just arguing impressions and opinions that have no actual practical application or significance.

*Unless they do large scale genetic testing of transexuals and find some of those various sex chromosomal anomalies, in which case: score! Transexuality just got a whole lot simpler!

[Danne]

Ah, okay. So we're arguing the same thing, but differently. I can live with that. :smallsmile:

[Serpentine]

Out of curiosity, what did you think I was arguing?

[Danne]

Hum. I'm not entirely sure. :smallredface: I knew we weren't saying quite the same thing, and I just wanted to explain my thoughts on the subject.

[Delusion]

Had a weird dream last night.

First someone found evidence that I was gay (which I am not/was not (atleast on man liking man sense)). Then organised a mob to ambush and beat me up.

The dream was very scary until that point. Then it turned into weird combat game thingy because I had played too much tekken during the day before :smallconfused:

Dreams are weird.

[Jacklu]

Continued nightmares. I think it is stress from work (my boss made me work two hours after my shift ended, scrubbing the entire store down =I ) combined with a few other factors weighing heavily on me right now. Not sure how this counts as LGBT related, aside from thinking that a good chunk of the stress has to do with keeping this big stupid secret from my family.

[golentan]

Continued nightmares. I think it is stress from work (my boss made me work two hours after my shift ended, scrubbing the entire store down =I ) combined with a few other factors weighing heavily on me right now. Not sure how this counts as LGBT related, aside from thinking that a good chunk of the stress has to do with keeping this big stupid secret from my family.

The suffering of one is the suffering of all. To swallow one's pain is to bring injury to one's sisters, as it robs them of the chance to seek healing. Such is the teaching of the Third Wind.

(I.E. who cares: We're here to help each other).

[Rappy]

What Golentan said, only less philosophically. *Hugs for Jackie*

[Lix Lorn]

If anything's wrong with any of us, something's wrong for all of us.
So, same as Golentan. Again.
(hugs)

[Ilena]

:P One for all and all for one!

[Je dit Viola]

So, I've got 2 questions. I'm pretty sure they at least partially pertain to this thread. If they don't, I'm sorry.

1. So there's this guy (and all his friends; I'm friends with them too, and play sports with them), but they're all attracted to a lesbian couple over me because I'm pretty sure they all see me as 'one of the guys'. Why is it that lots of straight guys (Or, at least the ones I know) would rather get rejected by a lesbian than go on a date with a tomboy who they play sports with all the time? Is it because my breasts are too small compared to theirs?
and, the second question,
2. Due to a recent virus that my computer got that makes random porn pages pop up whenever I'm connected to the internet (luckily after 6 hours of losing sleep, I managed to half-kill that virus), the next time my parents check my Webbrowsing History, my mum will likely come to the conclusion that I'm lesbian. What should I do to convince her otherwise and to make it so that she doesn't make a big deal out of it?

Since those questions may leave some of you wondering how I got in that situation so that those hold true, here's the story behind what happened:
(It's a semi-long story)
I hang out a lot with guys, and play sports with them (some contact sports), like American Tackle Football, soccer (somehow, this ends up high-contact as well, probably my fault), and volleyball (Less contact than the other two). Fortunately, my chest that's nearly as flat as a guy's prevents most of the awkward situations that arise from co-ed contact sports. Also, I get extremely competative. Something in the back of my mind just clicks and makes me have a drive to beat whoever I'm against. With sports and music, it's a good thing. However, sometimes it's not so good, as I'll show you later in the story.

Because of those two factors, I think the guys just see me as 'just one of the guys', except with a higher voice and longer hair. Probably because of this, I've never been able to get a date with any of them.

One day, when we're playing Quadball, a pair of girls (our age) come walking by. Everyone knows that they're lesbian or bi, and they also have huge chests. While I felt jealous, some of the guys stopped playing to flirt with them and ask them on some dates. They were rejected, but that just made my jealousy that much stronger. I mean, here's some girls who they don't even know getting enough offers for dates for every day of the week (and they aren't as desperate for a date as I am), whereas I've known those guys for years and none of them have even once responed to my flirting! (Other than, "Hey, [my nickname that sounds like a guy's name]. I didn't see you there; Oh! We're playing this weekend, want to come?")

Of course, it wasn't that big of a deal, because I had gotten used to it by now. Later, when I was playing some viola music and using my laptop as my sheet music, a virus was suddenly downloaded. It made some ugly porn pages pop up. As I was closing the windows while trying to figure out what had happened, a sudden thought came into my mind. [I]Here's a girl my age (19) who's claiming to be a lesbian, yet she can make hundreds of guys waste their life watching recordings of her getting undressed and taking baths. Plus, her chest isn't flat. Lucky. Then, unluckily, my competative drive kicked in, and I suddenly wanted to get more guys than her, who claims to only like girls.
And not just ones looking at me online.

Extremely fortunately, I was too tired to go get a camera. That entire night, instead, I occupied myself with trying to get rid of that virus because I realized that if I didn't get rid of it soon, I would do something that I would regret.

Just before I passed out from exhaustion (a few days of little sleep can do that to you) I realized what my parents would do when they saw what was on it. My dad would understand, because he also spent a couple days trying to get rid of a similar virus. My mum, however, would see that as further evidence that I'm a lesbian. (Other evidences include: Hanging out with guys who go out and hook up with girls, playing contact sports over cheerleading, being unable to get a date despite knowing so many guys, my Orchestra stand partner's sexual orientation, and going on a 'video game website' (this one).)

And, I don't know what I should do when my mom thinks that. She might try to hook me up with other girls. If she gets her heart set on that, then no matter how much I protest she'll just think I'm protesting just to protest.

So, as you can see, I don't know what to do, which is why I wrote out those long questions and this even longer story. Could someone help please?

[Blue Ghost]

Okay, I thought I would never post in this thread. But let me see if I can help.

1. Men are weird. That's all I can say. :smallsigh:
(No, seriously.)
2. Maybe you can talk to your parents about the situation before they check your webbrowsing? I would think it would be easier to convince your mom if you went to her about the situation than if she found out herself. (Of course, I may be wrong.)

(Oh, and I would recommend you not be too preoccupied with getting guys. Not much good can come of that.)

[Je dit Viola]

2. Thank you; that sounds like it might work. I might try that later, when she gets back home.

(It's just that...!) Oh, you're right. Except I can think of 2 things, but they would belong in a different thread as they have nothing to do with this topic.

[Jokasti]

Um, delete your history? <.< What browser do you use?
Also, have you ever asked the guys out? Maybe they're just waiting for you to ask first, or are nervous. I know it would take me longer to ask out a girl I'm really close to as opposed to someone walking by. Less fear of rejection/ playing sports with later awkwardness. Maybe they were trying to get you jealous so you would ask them out?

[golentan]

1. Having asked out a gal who was one of the guys before, the response from the other men in the group was basically "Gay." Not only that, but if things ended messily it can really screw up a group dynamic, all of which makes it easier (from a low risk/status quo perspective) to ask an outsider, even a relative stranger. Also, maybe you just don't tickle their fancies, for reasons unrelated to cup size. Seriously, bigger isn't better, nor does it determine as much a role in decisions as people think.*

2.Ask your family for help expunging the virus. If you didn't get it browsing a porn site, it's not a problem. Also, your family checks your browser history?

Recommendations: Be proactive. It sounds like you're complaining nobody has asked you out. Ask someone out yourself, and don't worry about it too much if you get rejected. If your mom isn't willing to listen to you on the topic of your preferences, that's her bag.

And don't get that camera. Getting into that business isn't the best career move for a wide variety of reasons, and it doesn't pay as well as people think. Plus the retirement plan is terrible.

*Weirdly, a husky voice is the best predictor of romantic entanglement future.

[Thufir]

Also, have you ever asked the guys out? Maybe they're just waiting for you to ask first, or are nervous. I know it would take me longer to ask out a girl I'm really close to as opposed to someone walking by. Less fear of rejection/ playing sports with later awkwardness. Maybe they were trying to get you jealous so you would ask them out?

Also also, they may be convinced for whatever reason that you're not interested in being any more than friends, and either not notice you flirting or think you're not serious about it. I'll grant you that if this is the case, it may be at least partly down to your 'one of the guys' status.

[Je dit Viola]

About deleting history: It won't work, because my dad (who fixes computers a lot) knows 3 places where he can access what sites I've visited, whereas I only know two. (I use several browsers, but, oddly enough, the virus only infected IE) (And, no, I didn't get it by looking at porn sites. I got it because someone hacked into a game site that I visited once in a while, and then exploited a loophole in an old program which I had installed on my computer. Needless to say, I have since deleted that program with the loophole) Therefore, if I delete those two, then it'll look suspicious. Which is why I'm going to follow BG's advice, and just tell them in advance and hope my mom doesn't overthink it.

And, thank you; I'll just go ahead and ask one of them out.
In fact, I know just which one I can ask and still convince him to pay for it. :smallamused: (No, I won't make him pay for it. That would be too mean.)

Now that I'm less tired and I can think straight, I decided to lock my camera up. Since it's only when I'm unable to think straight that it crosses my mind, locking up my camera seems like a good idea because I can only remember the combination to open it when I'm thinking really hard anyway.
So don't worry, I won't do it.

((Except, now I'm worried about what if the date goes badly. But that would belong in the Relationships thread, not here.))

[Blue Ghost]

I am surprised that you would be tempted by the camera in the first place. :smallconfused:
Well, good luck with your date. I can't be of much help there. :smalltongue:
(Is this your first time posting here too? :smallredface:)

[Je dit Viola]

(What a hetero flat-chested gal thinks about when she's sleepy is a sign that it has veered a little off topic, I think.)

And, well...this might be my last post here in this thread unless I have other business pertaining to it. (Can't think of any, though.)

[Lix Lorn]

(Oh, and I would recommend you not be too preoccupied with getting guys. Not much good can come of that.)
Yeah, you don't wanna end up like me, but in real life, do ya?

(half joking)