Jump to content

Shienvien

Members
  • Content Count

    3,266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Shienvien

  1. I assure you, Syiren, you did the right thing.
  2. Male rats tend to be larger and calmer. All rats I've owned have been male. I managed to catch a couple of them a few tricks, and all of them came running when called. Most of them were quite fond of sitting on my lap and being scratched. Each had his own personality.
  3. Sexism - and sexist gender roles - certainly still are a thing, and rather oppressive in their nature. I've seen a fair share of it - feeling rather strongly "woman" as is, but being barely like or into any of the stereotypically "women things", I'm perhaps more opposed than the average individual to the notion of "boy" things and "girl" things... I've seen little children in shops go "I want it!", and parents reply with "No, that's a girl/boy thing, but you're boy/girl, I'll buy you X instead." It's sad.
  4. I'd say that if an individual has altered their physical body to the point where it matches a phenotype which it did not start out with, then, well, that body does objectively have the phenotype it was altered into. A person can effectively have their sex changed in this way, and we can only hope the process will become cheaper, easier, and more - for the lack of better term - "complete" as time goes on. For those who do actually want to change their body, of course. Some people might not want to, for various reasons, and that does not make them any "less" whatever identity they've decided to go with. And in the end, sex is still only the structure of your body. Nothing more. It does not define you. It does not mean you "should" be anything. Certain traits of your sex might make themselves annoyingly apparent every now and then, but as far as your person goes, it's about as defining as your eye color. (Heck, even gender does not mean you "should" have a specific set of preferences. There are no "girl" things or "boy" things...)
  5. Ironically, I've more often seen people claim sex==gender when they're trying to insist that sex does determine gender (thus, if your body is male, you're automatically a man, etc). Seeing people try to insist that to mean the exact opposite here is strange, certainly. And also speaks of odd kind of aggressive and borderline hateful denial, which is by no means healthy. (I'll refrain from making comparisons here, since that'd probably step on someone's toes.) The structural characteristics of your body - which is what sex is - are an objective fact. Some people are male sex, some people are female sex, and some people are intersex or otherwise nondistinct sex. A much more logical and healthier way to approach the matter would be to acknowledge the fact that your body is the way it is, but to also know that the structure your body does not define who you are as a person.
  6. For the lack of better explanation, sex is the description of elements of your body build. Sex is no different from, say, being strongly built or being a redhead. It does not tell anyone what you're like as a person or identify as, no more than me having green eyes has to do with my hobbies, aspirations in career or favourite food.
  7. Sex is phenotype, and an irrefutable fact. Gender is identity dependent on either people's personal feelings or social-cultural standards (the first of which is a matter of feeling comfortable with yourself, the latter of which - the "gender roles", if you might - is dubious at best and might be better abolished). They *are* different things. And sometimes people want to know your sex (eg: medical and statistical records, visual-phenotypical identification, dating sites, etc), and sometimes they want to know your gender (eg: how to address you or how to refer at you when talking to other people).
  8. Promote denial or ignorance, perhaps? I think we were getting at different things here, indeed. What you described seems to more fall into the "boy things"/"girl things", which I mentioned we should get rid of for good - the you are X, therefore you must like/want/be like Z, Y, W. Whereas I was more getting at a person oneself getting a feeling that something is what they'd rather be, do... (Another place used the analogy, I guess I'm not as good as phrasing myself as they were. )
  9. Sex != gender. Also, while there definitely are two primary sexes (with an undefined variety of intersex and otherwise nondistinct "secondary" phenotypses), there is basically about as many genders as we feel the need to define for ourselves. We also need to do away with "girl things" and "boy things" - which is indefinitely more harmful than acknowledging that sex is a thing ever was. Sex is phenotype. Gender is identity. You cannot erase the physical facets of the material world just because you happen not to like them. You may insist that making the distinction is somehow trans-intolerant (I refuse to use the word "phobic" here, since the matter has nothing to do with clinical phobia, which is a serious matter that is often also marginalized), but at the same time you actively promote blindness to the fact that these people exist, and there are discernible, measurable physical reasons to why those people feel the way they do. If we tell people they should be happy with whatever they happened to be born with, they will forget their unhappiness with their current, purely physical, state, right? Wrong. If a legless person wants to run, then their problem is their lack of legs, not their desire to run, and a fast wheelchair isn't "the exact same thing". The examples brought above also seem to not properly define either and/or use term interchangeably and/or switch context in an incoherent fashion.
  10. Discussion has already been merged to the gender thread. Please take gender discussion there. Pardon? This post was entirely about what triggers sexual attraction in people, and not about gender as such... Mistakes have been made in this post being removed; regrettably I do not currently have the time and/or mental reserves to restore it.
  11. "Sexual" is just an adjective, something that just denotes that it has something to do with sex in one form or another... Here I don't actually see where the linguistic argument of _sexual attraction and _sexual reproduction comes from, since the word has the same meaning in both instances. Both a type of attraction and reproduction have something to do with sex. Attraction that has to do with sex, and reproduction that has to do with sex. I don't really see asexuality as having its own spectrum - more as one outer corner of whatever shape our sexuality spectrum ... space ... polygon currently is. There are other things that are very close to that corner, but just slightly also offset towards something else. Libido is pretty much its own thing.
  12. I very rarely wear dresses, mostly because they don't fit my lifestyle and I don't find them comfortable (which is to say, they restrict my available activities and range of movement too much). I will wear a dress or a skirt if the event calls for it, though, even if I currently only own one long black dress and a handful of skirts. (What is a playsuit? Google seems to imply it's a shirt coupled with a pair of wide-sleeved shorts of a kind?)
  13. And sexuality inherently ties into which sexes people are and which sexes - or other qualities - they are inherently attracted to. Hence, whether sexuality most commonly refers to which sex or which gender one is is relevant to the topic. I also do not see how "not believing biological sex exists" excludes sex from the topic - it is a tangible, physical thing and something a vast part of sexuality relies on. It does not need to be believed in to exist. If it did not exist, trans people would not exist (and no, trans people are not the result of "society telling them they are X word" - they exist because there is a physically detectable mismatch or ambiguity between the different parts of their body). If it did not exist, we'd all be replicating vegetatively. And so on and so forth. @TameTheHarpie: This is a debate topic specifically meant for discussing/debating those things. Obviously I won't question a random person on the street what they mean (although I will by default assume that they use the word by what it actually says).
  14. Phenotype quite simply means how your body physically looks and is structured. If a person who was born male later has their a penis and balls removed and takes the appropriate hormones for a few years, then they will have the female phenotype due to having those physical traits. So yes, a trans woman who has decided to alter her body to match will factually have the female phenotype once her transformation is complete. She doesn't "pass" for having the female phenotype, she just has it now. A trans woman who has left her body alone will still have the male phenotype (which doesn't make her any less of a woman). Phenotype is not a matter of "passing", it just is. You can accentuate or hide some aspects of it, but it just is regardless. And sure, you can't always tell for certain, and some people simply are phenotypically ambiguous to begin with (remember - the human sex can be roughly represented by a triangle, it's not just two dots). I have been mis-sexed while wearing non-form-fitting clothing before. I'm generally fairly feminine, but I suppose having a somewhat strong jawline might make me a bit masculine in the face. And I can't even care to count how many times I've been misgendered. They are appropriate when we are speaking of phenotype. Any other sense? Yes, they are meaningless. No such thing as "feminine clothing" exists. A person can be feminine if they have defined breasts and hips as broad as their shoulders, for instance. Because there are male women and female men and intersex women and female genderfluids and ... sex does not equal gender. Assigning gender = writing down "this is girl/boy/whatever word refers to gender". Assigning sex = physically adjusting the body to correspond to the designated phenotype, via surgery, hormones, or both. Male/female/intersex/sexless are sexes, not genders. Female/male is NOT a gender. Many forms make the mistake of asking for gender when they want sex because "sex" is occasionally still seen as inappropriate word. I was not "AFAB" unless I was born with a penis, had it amputated, and never learned of it. If you ask different bisexual people, you're going to get different answers. And there is also the chance that people who have labeled themselves differently will go "Yes, this would actually make more sense to call myself polysexual" if explained things. And others will stick with their old label out of habit. And yet others will find that bisexual actually fits them best, since they don't seem to take interest in sex-wise ambiguous individuals (or similar). - Doesn't mean they will have to adapt said terms. Simply adding them to the list of available labels will not do anyone harm. It's a bit like religion. Even if a Christian might not opt to change their religion, it doesn't mean their local library should absolutely not contain any books on Hindu myths because it's "offensive to the Christian culture".
  15. I don't have a problem with anything, though I'll tailor my wishes to whoever I'm wishing something to if I know what they celebrate. Not wishing someone happy [name of holiday they celebrate but you don't] isn't any different from not wishing them happy birthday because *your* birthday doesn't happen to be on the same day.
  16. Sex != gender. Sex is phenotype. Gender is an identity. Sadly, we cannot change our phenotype too easily ... if it would make the life of many a dysphoric person much easier if we could. You must also understand that there is a difference between a theoretical discussion in a designated place and everyday interaction. In everyday interaction, gender is generally more relevant than sex unless you're specifically describing their appearance. Transman is a man, and ... that's it. What he has or doesn't have where is about as relevant as whether or not he has had his appendix removed. (I also object to AFAB/AMAB, as those terms are only appropriate for people who had "corrective surgery" performed on them shortly after birth.) Gender presentation is only done IN WORD. Everything else is a matter of preference and doesn't indicate gender. A woman is just as woman when she opts to wear a pair of tattered jeans and a tank top, a man is just as man when he's wearing a fancy dress and generous amount of makeup. Period. That left aside, "phenotype" encompasses more than just genitalia. Such as facial structure, voice, body type. If a person who has a deep voice, broad shoulders, narrow hips, no extra fat clinging to their pectorals, and some stubble on their face, then you can safely say that their secondary sexual characteristics match that of the male phenotype. Yes, even when they wear a dress and some makeup.
  17. "Transgender" isn't a gender identity, that I can agree on. Man/woman/agender/fluid/queer/etc (there are too many to name!) are. Trans just refers to some kind of mismatch between the gender and the phenotype. I'd disagree on sexual attraction being necessarily related to gender - if anything, I'd say sex-based (so phenotype-related) sexualities form the majority (but not *all* sexualities!). So if I say I'm heterosexual, it means I'm attracted to people who are phenotypically much closer to the other distinctly sexed corner of the sex triangle than my own, and if I say I'm strictly androsexual, it very clearly tells I'm only interested in the male phenotype. (There is a bit of an awkward spot with homo-/hetero- prefixes for trans people, which is why I find gyno-/andro- prefixes are generally more inclusive.) Which, yes, means that I cannot be attracted to *any* female humans regardless of their gender, and I *can* be attracted to any male regardless of their gender. Although, I'll admit that my consciousness would probably have me turn that interest off if I found out that a male I found attractive identified as a woman ... mostly because it somehow wouldn't feel right to, well, be attracted to a person who does not identify with their body only because they are phenotypically male. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can imagine that the vast majority of trans women would probably be very uncomfortable with the idea of someone being attracted to them *purely* due to their male phenotype.) Probably doubly so if they are dysphoric and/or may consider transition. (And no, this has nothing to do with transintolerance, and I'd treat them just as I would any other person I don't intend to be physically intimate with. Preference of SO doesn't inherently mean intolerance of any kind.)
  18. A prefix which means two. It's a tangible, unambiguous, scientific/mathematical prefix with a well-defined meaning. Binary is always binary, it isn't occasionally ternary or something else entirely. Bi == two. Mono means one. Bi means two. Poly means many/several. Pan means all. And so on and so forth. And thank you, Aquenee, that's a fair bit more elaborate way of putting it than I can do between patrolling the net and celebrating New Years. Happy New Years' Eve, should you celebrate it, by the way!
  19. Labels are for comprehension. Hence, they should be consistent and universal. We should be teaching people that two is two, and several is several. If they still want to insist that two means any number greater or equal than two after that, then that's their problem. "But language evolves!" - Change is not always good. Sometimes it just breaks what works perfectly. If we're going to change something, it should be in a direction that is actually beneficial and better defining, rather than muddling up a definite term to generate yet another word for a thing we already have a minimum of two words for. There is no benefit to generating additional redundancy at the cost of something that is much better left to define something much narrower. We don't need three or more words for the same thing. Two or more words for the same thing is already enough. Any more is superfluous and useless.
  20. Refer to the part about respecting people while having different views. Regardless, what a person or another labels themselves won't change the dictionary definition. "Sex" and "gender" are also different things, for the matter - the first is phenotype, the second is identity. (Sexuality refers to sexual attraction, which typically - but not always - is physical, so based on phenotype. Of which for humans there is basically a triangle of male, female and asexed as corners, with variations of intersex close to the center of the male/female axis. There are sexualities which effectively overlook sex, though.)
  21. Rude is extremely subjective matter, and different people have different sensitivities. Someone will always see something as rude. Your rude or subjective perception of right or wrong is no more valid than mine. I don't think you should dismiss another person just because *you* consider their feelings, interpretations or priorities less valid than your own. (Or your one friend's thoughts more "right" than another person-of-X-category's feelings.) I also abhor the term "homophobic" in the sense many people seem to be using it, for instance, and refuse to use it in that way since actual homophobia is - as far as I'm aware - very rare. What most people use the word for has nothing to do with phobia - it's homointolerance, bigotry and a bunch of other things, but not phobia. Point being, if we're going to approach this matter from the angle of who is more rude or has "hangups" and/or a narrow and constricted world-view, then we'll be here for the entirety of 2016 and then some. I am rather particular about language and consistent definitions. (We'll never understand one another properly if words have different meanings to everyone - and then we're in an awkward, harmful mess of misunderstandings, failures to communicate thoughts properly, confusion and pseudo-lies.) You're set in that your personal view of sexuality/gender/sex matters is the right one (which we've seen other trans/nonbinary/etc people both agree and disagree with). What I was talking about was apt terminology, rather than the preferences of any specific individual. General preferences and how you treat a specific individual are different matters. You can both respect a person and have a differing general opinion. (For the matter, I also did not know what capri meant other than a goat, so I'd have had to minimally go look up whatever was meant. I'd probably have assume goat-wool clothing, since the context seemed to imply something to do with attire...) Linguistically - yes, it has. Bi literally means two. There is no ifs, buts, or maybes about it. Bi *IS* two. Thus, bisexual is objectively and absolutely, by base definition, twosexual. For several (but not necessarily all), there are prefixes like multi- and poly-, amongst others.
  22. "Bi" is literally "two". I don't agree with deliberately promoting the abuse of terminology just because the term others have used to describe a different thing is not applicable to the situation we want to describe now - if we do not intend to say what we're literally saying, then we should use a different, more appropriate term. Bi is bi, two. Multi is multi, several. Hence, if you mean multisexual, say multisexual, not bisexual, as the latter is verbatim twosexual.
  23. People are different. I know I can take my time replying, *especially* to texts, since I barely use my phone as anything than portable Internet-reader and occasionally asking where people are because I can't find them on the location (if I don't need it for internet or locating others, I can plain forget to check it at all). I think I've only sent three texts, total, this entire year. I barely used texts when younger, either, though I had a few couple-hour long conversations with my closest friends (this was before Skype and/or accessible VoIP as such). [As opposed to the couple of novels I've written via e-mails, Skype and forum PMs during the past month alone...]
  24. I am sorry, tjsweepers. She does sound like she was a loving mother with a great family. Grief is a natural thing. The pain of loss never truly goes away in my experience, but it becomes less prevalent as newer experiences accumulate atop of it. Instead of thinking about it every time there is nothing distracting you, you would be reminded of the times spent together every now and then, on special dates... But it does become easier in time, in a sense. Your life will go on. You will soon have a child to take care of, a child you can see grow and learn... Your mother's life may have been cut short, but she had people around her who loved her. And that's what matters.