LGBTAitp 34: <3!!

[Eldest]

Well, you said this here. Emphasis done by me.

Which implied to me that you were planning to tell people who did neither ask nor talk to you about your boyfriend or whatever. Because otherwise your bisexuality would naturally come up.

I was, and I quote:

debating announcing that I'm bi on Facebook.

Being male doesn't give you enough expertise to talk about what attracts guys?

So then you know how to get somebody to ask you out, then?

In all those cases your bisexuality does come up. Never said you need to hide anything. I just don't see the need to announce it either. Just like with any other bedroom stuff.

But it's not bedroom stuff.

Ah, I get it now. Your position is that bisexuality is a valid lifestyle choice similar to homosexuality or heterosexuality?

...what? You're going to need to expand on this a lot, since I am reading a lot of different things that are (hopefully) not what you meant into that.

[Nix Nihila]

A condition that requires a person to undergo hormonal treatment and surgical interventions can under no circumstances be considered not uncomfortable or bothersome. Which is why I would seperate transsexuality and homosexuality in this hypothetical example.

Not all transsexual people want surgery/HRT (unless you're defining transsexuals as the subset of transgender people who want surgery/HRT).

RE: Preemptive "curing" of transgender people. I have very conflicting feelings on this. It's similar to the question of whether I myself would take medicine that "cured" me of my gender dysphoria by changing my identity to cis male, to which my answer would be a resounding "NO." At the same time, I wouldn't wish being transgender on anybody, because it is difficult and unpleasant (at least currently).

Obviously I can only speak from my own experience, but besides the initial discomfort with my body and desire to transition, all of the negative and uncomfortable aspects of my transition have stemmed from social discomfort. If I didn't constantly hear about/experience cisnormativity and transphobia, I think my transition would have been (or would be, since it's still a process I'm working through) very simple. Or at least much, much simpler.

Ultimately, a "cure" for transgender people, preemptive or not, does not make it easier for transgender people, it makes it easier for cisgender people (unless you somehow propose that we provide this cure to everyone in the world, which I'm confused on how you would manage to do, but I suppose we're talking hypotheticals anyways), and enforces a gender binary, which I think is rather unfortunate just from a cultural anthropology perspective, as there is a lot of cool cultural stuff regarding third genders and all of that.

Just my thoughts from skimming over the last page or so of discussion, so forgive me if I'm touching on things other people have already said or if I'm misunderstanding the line of thinking (also I'm on pain medication right now so sorry if I'm incoherent).

[noparlpf]

Being male doesn't give you enough expertise to talk about what attracts guys?

Every single man alive has a different set of preferences. You can't generalise.

In all those cases your bisexuality does come up. Never said you need to hide anything. I just don't see the need to announce it either. Just like with any other bedroom stuff.

Telling somebody your sexuality is not telling them what you do in the bedroom.
For example:
"I'm straight."
"Ew. TMI, dude. I don't need to know what your sex life is like."
Does that make any sense at all as an exchange? No. Assuming that everybody of a given sexuality has the same sort of sex (which is what assuming telling somebody you're bi is telling them about your bedroom stuff is) is like assuming everybody with blonde hair has the some sort of sex. Which I kind of doubt.

Ah, I get it now. Your position is that bisexuality is a valid lifestyle choice similar to homosexuality or heterosexuality?

That sounds kind of problematic. Please clarify what you mean.

[Dudebot2000]

I was [..] debating announcing that I'm bi on Facebook.

Ah, well, nevermind then. Everybody signing up for Facebook gives away private space anyway.

So then you know how to get somebody to ask you out, then?

Actually, I do. There are several techniques girls use when they try to capture the attention of a male. Now, I'm by no means an expert or anything, but honestly, I've got eyes.
Here are some basics.
Show interest in him, strike up a conversation, find him funny, try to catch his eye, with your eyes not with your tits. Drop some subtle hints about you being single or a movie you'd like to watch or a type of food you like.
Another important aspect are the looks of a girl. Tastes varie, so the following is highly subjective and from my point of view. But a good and solid rule is to look as natural as possible. When it comes to makeup, one should always use as little as possible. An ugly girl with makeup remains an ugly girl with makeup. An attractive girl is attractive without makeup, so she doesn't need to cover anything up. An average girl is actually quite charming without makeup aswell. If anything just some light touches to enhance. The goal is to look as if you aren't wearing makeup at all. The heavy makeup look only works on television screens and in commercials and you don't have photoshop in real life.
Or if a girl really wants to stand out and make an impression on her interest, she can always ask him out first. That means he either declines or accepts. If he accepts he'll probably be amazed and the girl will be on his mind, just for the novelty to be asked out. Don't underestimate that, that's actually huge. I guarantee you, he'll be thinking about the upcoming date.
If he declines he wouldn't have asked the girl out anyway. Plus the girl will have closure, so she can stop worrying for months or weeks and finally stop wondering how dumb boys can be. Also, she'll be let down gently and in a polite manner, because, again, boys don't get asked out often and she just made him a big compliment by asking him out. Unless she's ugly or fat, but then may God have mercy upon her.

There are actually a lot more hints and subtle signs of the body language in both genders. If you watch closely you sometimes see women talking with a man subconsciously crossing their arms a bit under their breasts to make them stand out more. Another one is women crossing their legs while standing, which makes them look longer and pronounces their hips.

Men often posture themselfes wider than they really are, arms crossed in front of their chests to make their shoulders wider, back straight to become taller, etc.
These are however largely unconscious body language clues and can be used to gauge the interest of another person.

But it's not bedroom stuff.

...what? You're going to need to expand on this a lot, since I am reading a lot of different things that are (hopefully) not what you meant into that.

Lifestyle choice was perhabs the wrong way of saying it. What I meant to say was, that you seem to be of the opinion that bisexuality affects your day to day life in a huge way, unique to bisexuality. Which warrants to call it a lifestyle. Similar to people calling homosexuality a lifestyle. No, I'm not saying that homosexuals are all flaming. But that these impacts of your sexuality then prompt you to inform people that you're neither hetero- nor homo- but bisexual.
If I assumed your position on this correctly, then you think that bisexuality requires its own societal rules, instead of being subsumed under the rules for hetero- or homosexuality according to what the bisexual is currently dating.

[noparlpf]

RE: Preemptive "curing" of transgender people. I have very conflicting feelings on this. It's similar to the question of whether I myself would take medicine that "cured" me of my gender dysphoria by changing my identity to cis male, to which my answer would be a resounding "NO." At the same time, I wouldn't wish being transgender on anybody, because it is difficult and unpleasant (at least currently).

Spoiler

Show

I don't understand how preventing an unwanted condition before conception or early in development (think like first month of pregnancy) is at all similar to changing an existing person's personality. I think that's my main stumbling block with this question.

If I assumed your position on this correctly, then you think that bisexuality requires its own societal rules, instead of being subsumed under the rules for hetero- or homosexuality according to what the bisexual is currently dating.

Pick something you are. Now pretend people constantly assume you're something else, and not the thing you are. It could be anything. Brown-haired, student, librarian, straight, doesn't matter. It tends to bother people when others assume they're something they're not.


Random aside: Lately when playing games I stop and think for like ten minutes before picking the gender of my avatar. I'd really rather just be neither, or have there be a default like in Portal. I don't want to have to think about it.

[Nix Nihila]

Spoiler

Show

I don't understand how preventing an unwanted condition before conception or early in development (think like first month of pregnancy) is at all similar to changing an existing person's personality. I think that's my main stumbling block with this question.

Spoiler

Show

Again, I think the assumption that's it's necessarily unwanted isn't wise.* Certainly in our current culture it's not that great to be trans, but I don't think that it has to be any different than any other medical condition. I suppose the obvious rebuttal to that would be that we do treat medical conditions in unborn children, but I think the difference in this case is that it's a "problem" with the child's identity rather than an inherently life threatening condition, and I'm not comfortable messing with that part of a person without their consent. I think transition is a more ethically sound treatment (and also quite reliable in terms of success rate).

*Based off of my experience, other trans people have different perspectives I'm sure.

[Eldest]

Ah, well, nevermind then. Everybody signing up for Facebook gives away private space anyway.

I do not know if this is how you intended it, but I am reading this as rude and snobbish. To respond to what I read as your subtext, I do not use Facebook to share things, in general. This will be the first post I have made that was not on my IRL gaming group's Black Crusade page in over a year, since I wished the world a merry Christmas in 2011.

Actually, I do.

Spoiler

Show

There are several techniques girls use when they try to capture the attention of a male. Now, I'm by no means an expert or anything, but honestly, I've got eyes.
Here are some basics.
Show interest in him, strike up a conversation, find him funny, try to catch his eye, with your eyes not with your tits. Drop some subtle hints about you being single or a movie you'd like to watch or a type of food you like.
Another important aspect are the looks of a girl. Tastes varie, so the following is highly subjective and from my point of view. But a good and solid rule is to look as natural as possible. When it comes to makeup, one should always use as little as possible. An ugly girl with makeup remains an ugly girl with makeup. An attractive girl is attractive without makeup, so she doesn't need to cover anything up. An average girl is actually quite charming without makeup aswell. If anything just some light touches to enhance. The goal is to look as if you aren't wearing makeup at all. The heavy makeup look only works on television screens and in commercials and you don't have photoshop in real life.
Or if a girl really wants to stand out and make an impression on her interest, she can always ask him out first. That means he either declines or accepts. If he accepts he'll probably be amazed and the girl will be on his mind, just for the novelty to be asked out. Don't underestimate that, that's actually huge. I guarantee you, he'll be thinking about the upcoming date.
If he declines he wouldn't have asked the girl out anyway. Plus the girl will have closure, so she can stop worrying for months or weeks and finally stop wondering how dumb boys can be. Also, she'll be let down gently and in a polite manner, because, again, boys don't get asked out often and she just made him a big compliment by asking him out. Unless she's ugly or fat, but then may God have mercy upon her.

There are actually a lot more hints and subtle signs of the body language in both genders. If you watch closely you sometimes see women talking with a man subconsciously crossing their arms a bit under their breasts to make them stand out more. Another one is women crossing their legs while standing, which makes them look longer and pronounces their hips.

Men often posture themselfes wider than they really are, arms crossed in front of their chests to make their shoulders wider, back straight to become taller, etc.
These are however largely unconscious body language clues and can be used to gauge the interest of another person.

I promise you, looking attractive and saying what you like will not cut it for the majority of men I have met. I am included in that list.

Lifestyle choice was perhabs the wrong way of saying it. What I meant to say was, that you seem to be of the opinion that bisexuality affects your day to day life in a huge way, unique to bisexuality. Which warrants to call it a lifestyle. Similar to people calling homosexuality a lifestyle. No, I'm not saying that homosexuals are all flaming. But that these impacts of your sexuality then prompt you to inform people that you're neither hetero- nor homo- but bisexual.

I am bi, and that is a part of me. It affects several things, like I already mentioned. No one component of (dammit, did not wish to use this word) my identity is all of me. Nope put it well: I am irritated whenever somebody assumes I am straight/gay, because I am not. But it is not the whole of who I am.

If I assumed your position on this correctly, then you think that bisexuality requires its own societal rules, instead of being subsumed under the rules for hetero- or homosexuality according to what the bisexual is currently dating.

I... again, you're going to need to explain a lot more. Because I'm reading this as you stating that bi people should be treated as gay or straight depending on who they are dating at the time.
Which, by the way, leaves out the possibility of being poly.

[Nano]

Coidzor:

Spoiler

Show

From the general tone of Astrella's posts on the matter, it certainly seems like she would prefer if we never investigated sexuality or gender in any scientific context ever again if she's not of the position that Kinsey should never have done any of what he did.

Well, the LGB community has a history of attacking people who try to explain homosexuality for trying to find a "cure". It's not entirely unfounded, but I'd still hope there were more gays who understood the sheer power of curiosity.

The point is that it's most of the time brought up in wrong contexts. The origins of queerness have 0% relevance when talking about human rights. And it's very tiring sometimes because opponents talk about the origins and reasons all the time to tear you down... and to hear it come from allies as well then and it also can carry a feeling of being a curiosity sometimes rather than just a human being who you empathize with.

"The point is that it's most of the time brought up in wrong contexts." Astrella's phrasing is slightly ambiguous here, but she clarifies with her next sentence, making her point obviously 'The scientific explanation of homosexuality has no place in a discussion of human rights.'

"It's very tiring sometimes because opponents talk about the origins and reasons all the time to to tear you down..." is the closest thing to anti-scientific sentiment in this post, and considering the rest of the post we can see that Astrella is primarily urging that human rights and the origins of queerness are not related, and that when people and especially LGBT allies relate the two it can feel dehumanizing.

I think it's neat for like, a classroom setting, because neurobio and genetics are cool. If I were talking about human rights I wouldn't bring up the how or why of it because that's not relevant.

Hm hm, definitely. I think it's just something to watch out for outside of those contexts, you know? Like, I think it's probably best to not assume that because someone is queer they're also interested in causes and origins

Agreement ("Hm hm, definitely") with noparlpf's statement shows
A.) Astrella thinks it is cool to study neurobiology and genetics of LGBT issues,
B.) She wouldn't bring up the how or the why of LGBT issues in a human rights argument because they're not relevant, or
C.) Both.


("I think it's probably best to not assume that because someone is queer they're also interested in causes and origins")

Doesn't seem to be anything unreasonable or anti-science about this. Astrella is cautioning against making assumptions.

--

I was unable to find anything anti-scientific in either the 'general tone' or the specific points of Astrella's posts, and especially not anything as polarized as "she would prefer if we never investigated sexuality or gender in any scientific context ever again," so this looks like hasty generalization.



I am not sure why you mentioned Kinsey, except as an example of scientific inquiry into sexuality.

Much like those facebook feminism posts that mostly seem to agree on one thing, that men should never flirt with women regardless of context, I have to wonder if Astrella is aware of how she's come off here.

I feel like this one is a straw-man, considering there is no supporting evidence for the idea that Astrella's posts are "like those facebook feminism posts," paired with the dismissal of her conversational skills.

Seeing anti-science thinking or actual full-on hatred for it always gets me a little overeager to jump into things, but it's compounded when the primary group opposed to LGBT rights/existence is the most anti-science group in modern history.

I'm not sure how this is relevant, but it might not have been addressed to me.

--------
Reading comprehension and appropriate consideration of evidence or the absence thereof are essential for skillful and productive discourse. If you do not take those things into account you run a high risk of bringing toxicity to otherwise healthy debates. Please consider this in future posts.

[VeisuItaTyhjyys]

On the other hand, though, pretty much everyone you've ever met and most people who've seen but not met you, but taken the time to think about it, have assumed, between the lot of them, that you are virtually everything that you are not. Which isn't to say that this isn't an annoying — if essentially universal — tendency, but rather that it's strange that others' assumptions about a specific subset of one's sexual preferences is so problematic; people are a lot more likely to be upset if someone assumes they are or aren't attracted to men than if that same person were to assume they were or were not attracted to, I dunno, blondes. I'm not saying that this reaction is wrong, just that I think it's interesting.

[Dudebot2000]

I do not know if this is how you intended it, but I am reading this as rude and snobbish. To respond to what I read as your subtext, I do not use Facebook to share things, in general. This will be the first post I have made that was not on my IRL gaming group's Black Crusade page in over a year, since I wished the world a merry Christmas in 2011.

I wasn't going for manners. Facebook is just a bad platform to broadcast something to a lot of people. I know, sounds strange and counter intuitive, but most posts on Facebook go unnoticed by everybody but close friends. There's a constant background noise of status updates, pictures and suggestions for partys Facebook makes. Most of those who read a specific post do not bother to answer. Because honestly, apart from close friends, people ain't that invested in the personal lives of others enough to keep track of their...what's the average? 100-200 Facebook'friends'.
Furthermore there's an expectation amongst the users of Facebook that they are constantly kept informed about the private life of all persons on their friend-list. Which makes proclaiming your bisexuality on Facebook to people who show no interest in your sex-life* something entirely different than doing so offline.
*We're still talking about you telling people with whom it doesn't come up, right?

I promise you, looking attractive and saying what you like will not cut it for the majority of men I have met. I am included in that list.

We agree on that. Not every man is interested in every woman. I did make that clear. Being proactive and asking someone out yourself is far more reliable than 'getting a guy to ask her out'. Did you seriously expect me to tell you a sure fire way of getting any man on the planet?

I... again, you're going to need to explain a lot more. Because I'm reading this as you stating that bi people should be treated as gay or straight depending on who they are dating at the time.
Which, by the way, leaves out the possibility of being poly.

That's pretty much what I said. There are certain rules in society and how people treat each other. What is considered polite, how to treat friends, how to behave towards acquintances. There are a lot of tiny rules a human picks up on naturally according to the society around us.
Now, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that bisexuality requires its own rules that are not already found with homo- or heterosexuals. Which would make bisexuality not a mix of both but its very own thing.

[noparlpf]

On the other hand, though, pretty much everyone you've ever met and most people who've seen but not met you, but taken the time to think about it, have assumed, between the lot of them, that you are virtually everything that you are not. Which isn't to say that this isn't an annoying — if essentially universal — tendency, but rather that it's strange that others' assumptions about a specific subset of one's sexual preferences is so problematic; people are a lot more likely to be upset if someone assumes they are or aren't attracted to men than if that same person were to assume they were or were not attracted to, I dunno, blondes. I'm not saying that this reaction is wrong, just that I think it's interesting.

I'm probably not the best to look at that, as I'm attracted to just about nobody, but I feel like (from watching people) most people probably don't feel as strongly about a variety of variable traits within broader categories as they do about the big categories. So gender might be very important, whereas hair color might not be super-important. Somebody who finds hair color super-important will probably mention it at some point.

Edit:

That's pretty much what I said. There are certain rules in society and how people treat each other. What is considered polite, how to treat friends, how to behave towards acquintances. There are a lot of tiny rules a human picks up on naturally according to the society around us.
Now, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that bisexuality requires its own rules that are not already found with homo- or heterosexuals. Which would make bisexuality not a mix of both but its very own thing.

I'm pretty sure social rules are precisely the same whether you're interacting with a heterosexual, a homosexual, a bisexual, an asexual, or &c. person. But I'm bad at human stuff, so I could be wrong.

[Dudebot2000]

I'm pretty sure social rules are precisely the same whether you're interacting with a heterosexual, a homosexual, a bisexual, an asexual, or &c. person. But I'm bad at human stuff, so I could be wrong.

Mostly yes, but not quite. You surely agree that there are expected differences between a man treating a woman and how he behaves towards his drinking buddies? Similarly you wouldn't behave towards your boss or a police officer as if you would do with your buddies.
Far more subtle differences exist with hetero- and homosexuals. Let me give you an example. Suppose you're out on a date with your hopefully soon to be girlfriend and another male friend of her sees you two and decides to chat a bit with her.
The way you react, even if it's only body language actually changes whether you know that guy to be straight or gay. In the first case he's a potential rival -if only subconsciously- and in the second case you'll be more relaxed.

[noparlpf]

Mostly yes, but not quite. You surely agree that there are expected differences between a man treating a woman and how he behaves towards his drinking buddies? Similarly you wouldn't behave towards your boss or a police officer as if you would do with your buddies.
Far more subtle differences exist with hetero- and homosexuals. Let me give you an example. Suppose you're out on a date with your hopefully soon to be girlfriend and another male friend of her sees you two and decides to chat a bit with her.
The way you react, even if it's only body language actually changes whether you know that guy to be straight or gay. In the first case he's a potential rival -if only subconsciously- and in the second case you'll be more relaxed.

Is that a thing? Weird.

[Eldest]

I wasn't going for manners. Facebook is just a bad platform to broadcast something to a lot of people. I know, sounds strange and counter intuitive, but most posts on Facebook go unnoticed by everybody but close friends. There's a constant background noise of status updates, pictures and suggestions for partys Facebook makes. Most of those who read a specific post do not bother to answer. Because honestly, apart from close friends, people ain't that invested in the personal lives of others enough to keep track of their...what's the average? 100-200 Facebook'friends'.


Furthermore there's an expectation amongst the users of Facebook that they are constantly kept informed about the private life of all persons on their friend-list. Which makes proclaiming your bisexuality on Facebook to people who show no interest in your sex-life* something entirely different than doing so offline.
*We're still talking about you telling people with whom it doesn't come up, right?

Never said it was a good platform for it, however, it is the best available for me at the time. And in addition, manners are considered polite. Would you mind using them in the future, please?

And, again. Sexuality is not my sex life.

And yet again, since you do not seem to understand this yet.

Sexuality includes but is not defined by a person's sex life.

So, please, stop making it sound like I'm posting about banging my girlfriend or something stupid like that.

We agree on that. Not every man is interested in every woman. I did make that clear. Being proactive and asking someone out yourself is far more reliable than 'getting a guy to ask her out'. Did you seriously expect me to tell you a sure fire way of getting any man on the planet?

No. In fact, the question could have been answered with a yes or no, originally. This is a tangent that I really don't care about, honestly.

That's pretty much what I said. There are certain rules in society and how people treat each other. What is considered polite, how to treat friends, how to behave towards acquintances. There are a lot of tiny rules a human picks up on naturally according to the society around us.
Now, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that bisexuality requires its own rules that are not already found with homo- or heterosexuals. Which would make bisexuality not a mix of both but its very own thing.

Mmhm. And what's different about those rules between straight and gay folk, might I ask? Because you seem to have ignored my original counterpoint, which is of a polyamorous person who is bi.

Mostly yes, but not quite. You surely agree that there are expected differences between a man treating a woman and how he behaves towards his drinking buddies? Similarly you wouldn't behave towards your boss or a police officer as if you would do with your buddies.
Far more subtle differences exist with hetero- and homosexuals. Let me give you an example. Suppose you're out on a date with your hopefully soon to be girlfriend and another male friend of her sees you two and decides to chat a bit with her.
The way you react, even if it's only body language actually changes whether you know that guy to be straight or gay. In the first case he's a potential rival -if only subconsciously- and in the second case you'll be more relaxed.

Mind sharing where you got this information? I am aware of how body language shows our thoughts, but I would be surprised that the knowledge of a man being gay managed to sink down into somebody's subconscious.

[Dudebot2000]

@noparlpf
Yes, the friend in question was actually me. I was dealt with with a simple introduction, a hand-shake and some sticking out of his chest. A nice display of the rules that govern our social interactions.
I'm sure you notice a few of them yourself once you start looking.

@Eldest
Relax, I don't care about your sexuality or what you do on your Facebook. You can tell people whatever you like. I just shot you a quick question which escalated.


A polyamorous person who is bi? I honestly can't tell you anything that wouldn't be covered by behaviour towards gay or straight people. I'd thought you could tell me.

Mind sharing where you got this information? I am aware of how body language shows our thoughts, but I would be surprised that the knowledge of a man being gay managed to sink down into somebody's subconscious.

You don't believe me? Fine, go and watch the video of Dawkins talking about the gay gene someone posted earlier in the thread if you want to hear some of his examples.
Also, I can't believe that you're arguing against the existence of different treatment because of sexuality in an LGBT thread.

[Eldest]

@Eldest
Relax, I don't care about your sexuality or what you do on your Facebook. You can tell people whatever you like. I just shot you a quick question which escalated.

I focused on that because that was one of my main points, and it seems to have repeatably slipped you by. If I tell people I'm bi, I'm not telling them about my sex life, which it seems like you've treated it as being. I'm telling them about me.

A polyamorous person who is bi? I honestly can't tell you anything that wouldn't be covered by behaviour towards gay or straight people. I'd thought you could tell me.

Alright, think I'm starting to see where we got mixed up. That was meant as an example of a bi person who wouldn't be covered by those rules, since he fits into both categories at the same time.

You don't believe me? Fine, go and watch the video of Dawkins talking about the gay gene someone posted earlier in the thread if you want to hear some of his examples.
Also, I can't believe that you're arguing against the existence of different treatment because of sexuality in an LGBT thread.

I'm asking for your source because I like to know what I'm talking about, and I do not know much about how the rules that govern society, as you put them, work, in large part because I never paid attention to them. I'm not arguing against the existence of different treatment for different people. I'm saying that I do not think bi people just slot into either hetero- or homosexual rulesets.

[Heliomance]

Spoiler

Show

And again, I'd argue that what you call those pains that come from being trans are almost entirely social in origin. But I'm pretty sure that I'm not going to convince you at this rate, so I'll leave it at that.

I would absolutely disagree with this. There is nothing social about the times I've woken up loathing my body and wanting to do nothing except curl up on my bed crying until the world goes away. Gender dysphoria is, for the most part, intrinsic. It can be triggered by social situations, but it's not a social problem itself.

Personally, I would absolutely support a pre-natal way to detect and cure transsexuality. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. And yes, I do use the word cure - I consider it a disorder. The problem is that "curing" it in an existing person by making identity match body is bad because it results in changing personality too much. I wouldn't want to identify as male because I wouldn't be me anymore. But I think I'd rather have identified as male from birth than have had to deal with being trans.

[Kittenwolf]

Design Note #1247-B for when the "Human Being" model is taken out of beta testing and everyone is upgraded to the release version: Humans should be able to determine their own sex rather than being randomly assigned one.

[Lentrax]

Note to Deity in charge/ future geneticists:

Everyone has access to the Create a Person interface before birth.

It's a lot like Create a Sim, but not as funny, because we are picking ourselves, not a bunch of sims to torment...

[Karen Lynn]

Note to Deity in charge/ future geneticists:

Everyone has access to the Create a Person interface before birth.

It's a lot like Create a Sim, but not as funny, because we are picking ourselves, not a bunch of sims to torment...

So you know, petitioning servants of Hades has proven fruitless for this. All I want is telepathy and the ability to alter a person's body at will. I feel the two combined could fix a lot of issues. :3

[The Succubus]

While I would like a feature like this, odds are wings would only be available as DLC and the store is always offline. -.-

@Medical debate: I've had a couple of people PM me saying that it's making them really uncomfortable - could those involved take it to PMs please?

[Iruka]

We clearly need our biomedical science to advance to the point where we can emulate Beta Colony from the Lois Mcmaster Bujold's "Vorkosigan" books.
For those that haven't read them, humans on Beta Colony live to be a couple of hundred and typically swap sex three or four times during their lives just because they can.

That would be awesome.

[The Succubus]

That would be awesome.

It'd certainly make people more empathic, or at least I'd like to hope so. It'd certainly be fun experiencing heterosexual Happy Fun Time from both sides of the fence....

[noparlpf]

Spoiler

Show

I would absolutely disagree with this. There is nothing social about the times I've woken up loathing my body and wanting to do nothing except curl up on my bed crying until the world goes away. Gender dysphoria is, for the most part, intrinsic. It can be triggered by social situations, but it's not a social problem itself.

Personally, I would absolutely support a pre-natal way to detect and cure transsexuality. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. And yes, I do use the word cure - I consider it a disorder. The problem is that "curing" it in an existing person by making identity match body is bad because it results in changing personality too much. I wouldn't want to identify as male because I wouldn't be me anymore. But I think I'd rather have identified as male from birth than have had to deal with being trans.

Spoiler

Show

Yeah, that's why I said look into therapy and HRT and stuff for existing cases. You're already a woman, and trying to change that would be wrong.

@Medical debate: I've had a couple of people PM me saying that it's making them really uncomfortable - could those involved take it to PMs please?

Ah. My bad. I was trying to keep it spoilered but sure.

[Astrella]

@Juniper; Juniper is a nice name and good to know about the right pronouns to use as well.

Something somewhat nice. If not the reason for the article itself, but that the mother and other students are supportive but that the paper was very good with pronouns.

Hm hm. Aside from the gender stereotypes it was a pretty good article.

Juniper - I like Juniper (that sounded less awkward in my head). Makes me think of a clearing in the woods, surrounded by birch trees, filled with tall grasses and dandelions.
Or a small fish (Nipper is Aussie slang for a small fish, and Juniper can be shortened to it).

Astrella - I'm on progynova, hasn't killed me yet so you should be ok and I bought cons the other week too!
Speaking of HRT my emotions have settled down a lot this last week, just really tired all the time still.

Neat!
Glad to hear your emotions have calmed down a bit already.

It's fortunate this is not a French forum, as the language only possesses "il"/he and "elle"/she, and is vastly incompatible with invented pronouns, because almost every word is affected according to the gender of the subject or the object. You can really see that in the few cases a defined gender is lacking (like in the cases "ça"/it applies), the masculine form is considered as the default. The French language is immensely confused at the idea of gender neutrality, but likes to otherwise attribute gender somewhat randomly.

Only a little bit related but a friend made a good remark with regards to grammatical gender. Basically that people often have very little issue with remember those for words, but sometimes get very argumentative when it comes to remembering pronouns for people, who are I'd argue a bit more important than individual words.

[Lorsa]

Lots of stuff about science...

It pains me when people misunderstand and/or misrepresent science. Having assumptions for example, or desired outcome of an experiment, is not science. You have a hypothesis which you then try to disprove. You never prove anything in science, you just disprove things. Theories are simply those things that haven't yet been disproved and thus can be held for true (at the time being). There is nothing inherently bad in scientific research (although the way you conduct it could be) as it is mostly being curious about the world around you. Understand the world is ALWAYS good as just about all bigotry comes from LACK of knowledge and understanding, not the presence of it.

So then you know how to get somebody to ask you out, then?

I would love to know how to get somebody to ask me out. Anyone have some tips for that?

...problems with grandparents...

I don't see how your grandparents having a problem or not with your sexual preference should change you attitude to how open you want to be about it in your family. People having unfounded issues with you or your choices should not be the ones deciding on your behavior.

When it comes to makeup, one should always use as little as possible. An ugly girl with makeup remains an ugly girl with makeup.

Makeup DOES make a difference (I have to sadly admit as I generally think people should use less).

Pick something you are. Now pretend people constantly assume you're something else, and not the thing you are. It could be anything. Brown-haired, student, librarian, straight, doesn't matter. It tends to bother people when others assume they're something they're not.

I don't see why you should assume someone to be anything they haven't stated or shown you. You can't assume someone has a certain sexual orientation by just meeting them. You can't assume what job they have or even what their natural hair colour is. People who make such assumptions are just stupid and laughing at them is really the best.

Mostly yes, but not quite. You surely agree that there are expected differences between a man treating a woman and how he behaves towards his drinking buddies? Similarly you wouldn't behave towards your boss or a police officer as if you would do with your buddies.

You're assuming a man's drinking buddies aren't women? Whatever these "expected" differences may be I find it important to try and rid ourselves of those as treating people should be based on their individuality rather than broad things such as if they are "women" or "drinking buddies". Of course you don't behave towards a stranger as you do with your buddies, but that's down to knowing the individuals rather than them being a "police officer" or "librarian". I agree that you might treat people differently but that there are "expected differences"? No. Generally I treat my female friends the same as my male friends.

[Astrella]

It pains me when people misunderstand and/or misrepresent science. Having assumptions for example, or desired outcome of an experiment, is not science. You have a hypothesis which you then try to disprove. You never prove anything in science, you just disprove things. Theories are simply those things that haven't yet been disproved and thus can be held for true (at the time being). There is nothing inherently bad in scientific research (although the way you conduct it could be) as it is mostly being curious about the world around you. Understand the world is ALWAYS good as just about all bigotry comes from LACK of knowledge and understanding, not the presence of it.

The thing is though that something not being *proper science* doesn't mean it can't affect and harm a lot of people, which is something we have to be vigilant about at all times. (And with regards to medical science, listening to the people involved is also important, you need both that and the research itself.)

[Philemonite]

I would love to know how to get somebody to ask me out. Anyone have some tips for that?

Be very cute.
What do you mean that doesn't help?

Makeup DOES make a difference (I have to sadly admit as I generally think people should use less).

Makeup is a great thing when used in normal quantity and applied correctly. Too much incorrectly applied makeup makes girls people look a lot worse then with no makeup. Sadly, most girls people don't know how.

You're assuming a man's drinking buddies aren't women? Whatever these "expected" differences may be I find it important to try and rid ourselves of those as treating people should be based on their individuality rather than broad things such as if they are "women" or "drinking buddies". Of course you don't behave towards a stranger as you do with your buddies, but that's down to knowing the individuals rather than them being a "police officer" or "librarian". I agree that you might treat people differently but that there are "expected differences"? No. Generally I treat my female friends the same as my male friends.

True. I have a female cousin that can out drink me any day, while still looking stunning(long legs, blond, the whole package).

[Zorg]

When it comes to makeup, one should always use as little as possible. An ugly girl with makeup remains an ugly girl with makeup.

Makeup is a great thing when used in normal quantity and applied correctly. Too much incorrectly applied makeup makes girls look a lot worse then with no makeup. Sadly, most girls don't know how.

Any guys want to follow up with a guide telling women what clothes they should wear too?

See, girls don't wear makeup exclusively for other people, they wear it for themselves or their friends.

@Medical debate: I've had a couple of people PM me saying that it's making them really uncomfortable - could those involved take it to PMs please?

+1


@ Astrella - yes, the article did have some gender stereotyping, but I was also impressed that it was from one of the much more right-leaning of our national papers as well.

[Astrella]

@ Astrella - yes, the article did have some gender stereotyping, but I was also impressed that it was from one of the much more right-leaning of our national papers as well.

Hm hm, it was pretty well handled, I agree.