Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, etc)

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

maydayp
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:10 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby maydayp » Sun Jan 11, 2015 8:01 am UTC

I am not a tumblr person and I use as many labels as I need to (and one of those is actually Asexual (with a side of "maybe demisexual" ). I know many many people who do. For example, there are at least 4000 people on facebook who ID as asexual, or support asexuals. I also use aromantic. and a few that aren't relevant here.

Personally I find your opinion on this subject really really offensive. Just because *you* do not need those labels, or don't understand them, does not mean other people don't need them. Nor do you get the right to decide what is "normal" and what isn't.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby elasto » Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:23 pm UTC

maydayp wrote:I am not a tumblr person and I use as many labels as I need to... I also use aromantic. and a few that aren't relevant here.

(I read that as 'aromatic' - and definitely think more people should pick that one!)

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby Azrael » Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:08 pm UTC

poochyena wrote:As for the transgender labels..
I liked what i read someone said somewhere else
male/female describes sex
masculine/feminine describes gender.

"i'm a feminine male" makes more sense than saying "i'm a female male"

Considering I'm the one who introduced that particular dichotomy, I think it's important to note that you're missing the heart of the issue here: A trans person wouldn't say that they're a feminine male. They would say they are female -- perhaps trans female if they were being particularly descriptive and felt like letting you know what their sex was along with answering the question about gender.

A feminine male they way you're thinking is a person who identifies as male, likely has a penis and XY chromosomes but presents in some number of effeminate ways. It could also be a trans male (perhaps without a penis and with XX chromosomes) who presents in effeminate ways.

poochyena wrote:I honestly don't know of any community larger than Tumblr that has as many users that use as many uncommon labels such as "pansexual" or "genderfuild".

Just because you haven't realized there is a larger community doesn't mean they don't exist. The larger community is the entire spectrum of gender non-conformists (Warning: That was a Shitty Label) and their allies. It's all those people on Tumblr that use those labels plus all the people who aren't on Tumblr and use those labels. For example, maydayp.

Also, seriously. These terms predate tumblr. It's like saying that ... google don't fail me now ... The One Ring forums are the largest community of people who speak Tolkein Elvish. Some people who speak Elvish may congregate there, and probably in a higher concentration than a NASCAR forum where they'd get abused for it. But not only is there a larger community, the one in question isn't creating the terminology.

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby KrytenKoro » Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:04 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:If you say so. However no reproduction no little tumblers.

...seriously, even among "tumblers", almost all of them can still reproduce. And even among "normals", every single one of them will at least have a sterile period. This fixation on "whether they can pass on their genes" is nonsensical and completely contradictory to the real world.

I'll be even happier when you can provide a definition that is verifiable as an alternative.

Chromosomal, expressed or not, cis or trans are already a very verifiable system.
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Mon Jan 12, 2015 4:13 pm UTC

Of course you're welcome to your reality, however in mine all the genders that we have discussed are related to the basic male, female sex roles. Therefore the basis of the genders are the existence and the necessity of reproduction. Take away reproduction and there is no need for genders, which by any definition I can find, are defined by some relationship to sexual pairing or the lack thereof. These are the ones Facebook offers.

Agender
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
FTM
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Genderqueer
Intersex
Male to Female
MTF
Neither
Neutrois
Non-binary
Other
Pangender
Trans
Trans*
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transfeminine
Transgender
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transmasculine
Transsexual
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman
Two-Spirit

I had to look up agender. From something called the Gender Wiki. It does fit my thesis. No need to reproduce, no need for those bits, as Azrael calls them. And if they want to be identified that way I'm ok with it. As if they needed my input at all.
Agender people do not feel they align with any gender. Being asexual is not a requirement of agender people, as gender identity and sexuality are unrelated

Gender nullification surgery is one procedure used almost exclusively by agender people, because some desire a body that lacks sex characteristics.
KrytenKoro wrote:Chromosomal, expressed or not, cis or trans are already a very verifiable system.
We managed it for some period of time without understanding genotypes. And it always comes back to the same place. If two humans can reproduce with each other then one has a vagina and one has a penis. How either of those two express is irrelevant, except in understanding us as a whole. And to return to the OP topic, people want to be special in some fashion. To differentiate themselves from the 7 billion or so people on the planet currently. Labels help them achieve that. I puts them in a place with people like themselves since society overall isn't really very friendly with the non conforming. Something I can testify to.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Jan 12, 2015 5:18 pm UTC

You'll notice that most of those labels are semantically duplicates for the sake of people who have very slightly different self-identities.

Also, next to words like "asexual" and "atheist" and "amoral" you couldn't hazard a guess on "agender"?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby azule » Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:03 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
Agender people do not feel they align with any gender. Being asexual is not a requirement of agender people, as gender identity and sexuality are unrelated

Gender nullification surgery is one procedure used almost exclusively by agender people, because some desire a body that lacks sex characteristics.
I saw a horror movie where one of the characters wanted to become a human doll. Fake boobs, molded figure, face, et al. Including no vaginal opening. Just, smooth.

That would take sex out of the picture. (Her husband was murderously unhappy with this, of course. Didn't care about the other surgeries.) With sex off the table, I wonder what the need for the gender label is, as well. I don't have a strong argument, but I do wonder.

I think people fear others who have a nonstereotypical gender because of the sex aspect. It confuses their world view and means that if that person exists, then the person they want to be with might end up having issues. You marry someone and they turn out to be gay or transgender, even if you've had kids together, that can be very disconcerting. What if they had a clue before marriage? I think that's the issue. The labels are just a way to make a stand. To say, we're here, we're queer, etc. If that's not done, then no one will ever get over this issue. But, hell, they may not (see: marriage issue).

Oh yeah, and back to the nonsexual representation of a human: There must be a possibility that a lot of these issues of identity are the fault of society. See, trying to be like Barbie. Or, just, simply, the desire to be nonsexual. That would be a preteen desire to interact in a world that is nonthreatening, sexually, maybe even due to being sexually abused.

Life's complicated. The causes of the need for all these labels is probably not just because they were born this way (which seems to be the biggest argument by the prolabel people).
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:18 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:You'll notice that most of those labels are semantically duplicates for the sake of people who have very slightly different self-identities.

Also, next to words like "asexual" and "atheist" and "amoral" you couldn't hazard a guess on "agender"?
I'm slow on the uptake.

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby KrytenKoro » Mon Jan 12, 2015 9:27 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:How either of those two express is irrelevant, except in understanding us as a whole.

You really can't conceive of any situation in which it would be useful to differentiate between various labels beyond as a "view of how the individual sees themself" or "list of who they can fuck to try to procreate"?

Really? Because I know I've mentioned a few already.

To clarify one of them further, then:

Suppose you had a population that was 99 sterile men and 1 sterile woman. According to you, there would be no use or reason to pay any attention to gender in this case, since none of them are able to pump out babies. Let's even say that they are all immune to aging, so they can't just be written off as "they'll be dead without having reproduced anyway, why care about them."

I would hazard that a doctor having to budget medical supplies for diagnosing and treating prostate cancer vs. ovarian cancer might disagree with your claim.

(Since trans-, sexuality, expressive-, etc. have been demonstrated to have medical reality, this thought experiment can be easily rephased for diseases whose prevalancy varies based on each of those demographics.)

And to return to the OP topic, people want to be special in some fashion.

Like I've said multiple times, there is quite a large scientific basis for the medical reality and relevance of what you are treating as "flair". Your posts on this topic are massively ignorant of science, medicine, and reality.
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:30 pm UTC

I can think of many uses for labels. But in the case I'm arguing, it doesn't mean that not being able to reproduce makes you less human or anything else. The point is that the reason we need gender arises from the fact of human sexuality. And that sexuality arises as part of reproduction, the essential purpose of life. I don't feel any particular need to keep telling you this, you should know it. In your hypothetical you are speaking of a specific situation, whereas I am speaking in general, as to why the gender labels male and female exist. It isn't about your value if you can't reproduce, it is about how things work on a basic level. The whole concept of human clothing and how we build our spaces is loaded with accommodations specifically for the binary position. Men and women. We are just now accommodating transgender persons by having unisex bathrooms and by having the initial legal systems put in place. And I'm well aware of the medical reality of a number of the alternate labels.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:50 pm UTC

As I've mentioned a couple of times, the "we" you're talking about is just our particular culture, not all of humanity.

Many cultures have had more complex sex/gender constructs for centuries at least, and homosexual activities and intersex characteristics exist with enough prevalence in nonhuman animals that I'm quite comfortable with the notion that perhaps some human cultures have always had a broader concept of sex and gender than the strict male/female binary you and others keep implying is the most "natural" or "biological" or whatever.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

azaethral
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:22 pm UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby azaethral » Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:30 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:And to return to the OP topic, people want to be special in some fashion. To differentiate themselves from the 7 billion or so people on the planet currently. Labels help them achieve that. I puts them in a place with people like themselves since society overall isn't really very friendly with the non conforming. Something I can testify to.


I think the common objection is that labels tend to be shallow, and thus distract people from feeling special, even if the label is flattering. I mean, statistically, when you compute the percent of the 7 billion or so people who fall under any specific label, it's still going to be a lot of people.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:35 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:As I've mentioned a couple of times, the "we" you're talking about is just our particular culture, not all of humanity.
And I've never implied otherwise. But I would guess it arose in other cultures for the same reason it arises now. Like it or not you can't have the concept of pangender, or androgyny unless you have a baseline to measure it against.

gmalivuk wrote:Many cultures have had more complex sex/gender constructs for centuries at least, and homosexual activities and intersex characteristics exist with enough prevalence in nonhuman animals that I'm quite comfortable with the notion that perhaps some human cultures have always had a broader concept of sex and gender than the strict male/female binary you and others keep implying is the most "natural" or "biological" or whatever.
Natural is a question begging term. But up to this point there was no possibility of reproduction without a penis and vagina being involved. And in terms of natural selection that is all that is important. Everything else is a construct built by our intellect, what we think about it. Gender roles are a solution to the problems caused by requiring two sexes to reproduce.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jan 13, 2015 1:42 am UTC

And all the other ways societies assign roles other than "male roles" and "female roles"?

You're begging the question yourself when you assume gender roles are more fundamental than other divisions based on family or age or skills, and also when you imply that a male/female binary is the only possible baseline. Even if you're right that social constructions of gender arose wholly out of patterns of sexual reproduction, there's no reason to assume the "baseline" construct was binary.

Why not "reproductive with a penis", "reproductive with a womb", and "nonreproductive"? Many languages have gender systems more complex than simply "masculine" and "feminine", so why should we expect social genders to have originally only come in two varieties? Many cultures today (and European and American culture not all that long ago) consider prepubescent children not to be masculine or feminine, and since there have always been prepubescent children, why not assume that maybe the baseline is trinary, with the sexing of children into "male" and "female" a relatively recent aberration rather than the neutral starting point?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

azaethral
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:22 pm UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby azaethral » Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:53 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:You're begging the question yourself when you assume gender roles are more fundamental than other divisions based on family or age or skills, and also when you imply that a male/female binary is the only possible baseline. Even if you're right that social constructions of gender arose wholly out of patterns of sexual reproduction, there's no reason to assume the "baseline" construct was binary.


I'm not sure he meant that you were begging the question (since you weren't speaking for yourself with the world "natural"), just pointing out that it was. And he was referring to male/female as a baseline specifically when gender was the subject of discussion (thus it wouldn't contradict your point about family/age/skills).

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:20 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:And all the other ways societies assign roles other than "male roles" and "female roles"?

You're begging the question yourself when you assume gender roles are more fundamental than other divisions based on family or age or skills, and also when you imply that a male/female binary is the only possible baseline. Even if you're right that social constructions of gender arose wholly out of patterns of sexual reproduction, there's no reason to assume the "baseline" construct was binary.

Why not "reproductive with a penis", "reproductive with a womb", and "nonreproductive"? Many languages have gender systems more complex than simply "masculine" and "feminine", so why should we expect social genders to have originally only come in two varieties? Many cultures today (and European and American culture not all that long ago) consider prepubescent children not to be masculine or feminine, and since there have always been prepubescent children, why not assume that maybe the baseline is trinary, with the sexing of children into "male" and "female" a relatively recent aberration rather than the neutral starting point?
Simplicity. Use the simplest form that gets the job done. But if there are genders at all then they use sexual differences as the baseline. That isn't a theory, it is a simple statement of what I observe. I asked Azrael a question, which he blew off, about what a transgendered female who presents as a male feels about what she sees when she looks in a mirror. The point wasn't about what I think about it, but to try and understand what she does. What does gender mean for her. Can she reconcile the body she sees with the image she has internally. If she can than the externals are all that is important, if she can't than it is more basic than that. I can treat her like what she appears to want to be, but is that sufficient? And the same thing holds true for everything that has been discussed. Take agenders. If gender identity isn't related to the sexual organs why remove the external markers? Anyhow, I see no reason it couldn't be done the way you outlined, but it hasn't in so far as my reading has shown me to this point.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jan 13, 2015 1:43 pm UTC

My point was that "sexual differences" aren't necessarily binary to begin with, what with pre-reproductive and post-reproductive ages being a thing. So even if your observation is correct, that doesn't lead naturally to a gender binary as the baseline.

And Azrael didn't "blow off" your question, he more likely understands, unlike you, that as a male-presenting cis man he's not remotely in a position to answer for all the male-presenting trans women in the world.

If you want to know what a male-presenting trans woman feels when she looks in a mirror, maybe consider asking a male-presenting trans women. She could no more answer for all such people than Azrael or I could, but she might at least answer for one, which is one more than Az is prepared to speak for.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby Azrael » Tue Jan 13, 2015 1:48 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:I asked Azrael a question, which he blew off, about what a transgendered female who presents as a male feels about what she sees when she looks in a mirror.

I thought I answered that question entirely accurately?

Azrael wrote:
morriswalters wrote:What makes her happy when she looks in the mirror?
Wistfully reliving the final moments of anguish felt by foes defeated on the battlefield. Knowing that her exterior appearances match with the identity she innately understands. When people don't try to determine what makes a person happy based on their genitals.

Yup, that's statistically accurate for a sample size of at least one. The latter two thirds of that is likley applicable to a significantly larger set. In fact, other than pronouns, those two thirds apply to a lot of us non-trans people too. Funny thing.

But to be clear as to why I gave you the answer I did: Any system, argument or point you have that requires me to explain to you the inner thinking of a third person -- rather than their observable behavior or public statements -- is a shitty system, argument or point. Never mind the added layer that asking what one individual's version of happiness looks like in order to make extractions to a larger, highly varied set, is unfathomably silly.

Plus what Gmal said.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Tue Jan 13, 2015 3:27 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:My point was that "sexual differences" aren't necessarily binary to begin with, what with pre-reproductive and post-reproductive ages being a thing. So even if your observation is correct, that doesn't lead naturally to a gender binary as the baseline.

And Azrael didn't "blow off" your question, he more likely understands, unlike you, that as a male-presenting cis man he's not remotely in a position to answer for all the male-presenting trans women in the world.

If you want to know what a male-presenting trans woman feels when she looks in a mirror, maybe consider asking a male-presenting trans women. She could no more answer for all such people than Azrael or I could, but she might at least answer for one, which is one more than Az is prepared to speak for.
The question was published. If somebody with the relevant data had wanted to speak up there was nothing stopping them. However as a point of etiquette, he could have said as much. And if I knew someone, I would ask. Just out of curiosity, what would you tell your children if they asked?

However if there is no answer or the answer is specific to any given individual, than it is worthless as a point of investigation. And then why should I care. They don't need my permission, all they require is my acquiescence. And they can have that. I grant all the Jim's in the world the right to be Jim's and will address them as such. Is that where we are?

I bolded a section above. Name me a system that doesn't include the binary sex roles male and female, with the gender roles using them as a reference point.

azaethral
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:22 pm UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby azaethral » Tue Jan 13, 2015 3:45 pm UTC

Backtracking from the gender discussion and going back to why people use labels, it's simply an information filtering and organization tool (to put it another way, Randall could probably do a What if? about how many simultaneous unfiltered viewpoints a person can contemplate before beginning to display symptoms of schizophrenia). Of course, it can become problematic when labels take the place of civilized discussion (or if someone's unjustly labelled, or if someone is systemically filtered out by labels, or if labels come from corporate marketing, etc...)

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby Azrael » Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:43 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:However as a point of etiquette, he could have said as much.

Really, a tone argument? Also, I'm right here and I've directly addressed your perceived slight between the time Gmal posted and your latest response. Moreover, I did 'say as much' in my original answer to your question:

morriswalters wrote:
Azrael wrote:What makes her happy when she looks in the mirror?
... When people don't try to determine what makes a person happy based on their genitals.


Just stop already. We aren't -- can't -- speak for what constitutes the happiness of someone that isn't us. Find another way to make your point or else you don't have a point.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jan 13, 2015 4:50 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:Name me a system that doesn't include the binary sex roles male and female, with the gender roles using them as a reference point.
There are lots of systems with third genders, plus my hypothetical male/female/nonreproductive trichotomy.

And there are more role divisions than male/female, so why is that the only one you're demanding an explanation for?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:51 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
morriswalters wrote:Name me a system that doesn't include the binary sex roles male and female, with the gender roles using them as a reference point.
There are lots of systems with third genders, plus my hypothetical male/female/nonreproductive trichotomy.

And there are more role divisions than male/female, so why is that the only one you're demanding an explanation for?
I'm not demanding anything. I asked you to name one that didn't have male and female as primary. Get to the non reproductive one for instance without first going through the male and female. Those simple gender roles, with one classed as a sperm provider and one as an egg provider and incubator. You may be able to eliminate one today, the male, but you can't eliminate the other, the female. Not yet. And there is no certainty that you can do without males in the long term. They always have to exist, those roles. Now you can add any complexity that you need, bigender, trans, anything. And nothing in this view precludes anyone from taking any other role.

I don't need an explanation for any other gender, and if I did I couldn't get it here, since by your own words you can't tell me. From the Wikipedia.
Gender identity is more inclusive than sexual identity. That is to say, the status of one's external genitalia is not the only factor determining whether one identifies oneself as a woman or as a man. For instance, a man who has lost his external genitalia in some accident will not necessarily for that reason cease to regard himself as a man.
So you can be more than a man or a women but you can't be less, which is how I summarize it.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:22 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
morriswalters wrote:Name me a system that doesn't include the binary sex roles male and female, with the gender roles using them as a reference point.
There are lots of systems with third genders, plus my hypothetical male/female/nonreproductive trichotomy.

And there are more role divisions than male/female, so why is that the only one you're demanding an explanation for?
I'm not demanding anything. I asked you to name one that didn't have male and female as primary.
You used the imperative, "Name me a system blah blah blah." That sounds an awful lot like a demand to me.

Get to the non reproductive one for instance without first going through the male and female.
I don't even know what you mean by this. Children exist because of male and females sexually reproducing, sure, but that's not what determines their role as non-reproductive members of a society.

Those simple gender roles, with one classed as a sperm provider and one as an egg provider and incubator. You may be able to eliminate one today, the male, but you can't eliminate the other, the female. Not yet. And there is no certainty that you can do without males in the long term. They always have to exist, those roles. Now you can add any complexity that you need, bigender, trans, anything. And nothing in this view precludes anyone from taking any other role.
You're talking about reproductive roles, not social roles. Whenever the rest of us have been reading and using the phrase "gender roles", we've been talking about roles in society, not roles in procreative sex.

Have you always been using this word differently from everyone else, or is it just in this most recent post?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

azaethral
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:22 pm UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby azaethral » Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:58 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:You're talking about reproductive roles, not social roles. Whenever the rest of us have been reading and using the phrase "gender roles", we've been talking about roles in society, not roles in procreative sex.


azaethral wrote:And he was referring to male/female as a baseline specifically when gender was the subject of discussion (thus it wouldn't contradict your point about family/age/skills).


Which is to say that this is slowly becoming a full-fledged argument over semantics. Otherwise, it's a discussion about the fact that a) many constructs are possible beyond the trivial one, and b) any suitably mature construct of gender identity would at least recognize male/female, due to the fact that it is so common... in other words it's a discussion that is unwinnable by taking sides.

I know that many forums have post-count favoritism, but sometimes it feels like I'm talking in a vacuum.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:21 pm UTC

It's not post-count favoritism, it's trusting that morriswalters is capable of speaking for himself regarding what he meant.

Also, your repetition of something you said earlier misses my point, even if it was valid when you said it the first time. I'm not now talking about age/family/skill roles, I'm talking about gender roles. By which I mean the roles gender plays in society, not the role of who puts which body part where during the tiny fraction of the time spent engaging in sexual activity. But it seems that morriswalters is talking about the reproductive role only, which isn't what anyone else means even when they do restrict themselves to discussions of "gender roles".
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

azaethral
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:22 pm UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby azaethral » Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:50 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Also, your repetition of something you said earlier misses my point, even if it was valid when you said it the first time. I'm not now talking about age/family/skill roles, I'm talking about gender roles. By which I mean the roles gender plays in society, not the role of who puts which body part where during the tiny fraction of the time spent engaging in sexual activity. But it seems that morriswalters is talking about the reproductive role only, which isn't what anyone else means even when they do restrict themselves to discussions of "gender roles".


I know what he meant, and I know what you meant, but it was still an argument about semantics. :)
Even if I might have stolen someone's soapbox, I start to lose interest when conversations start to get more and more argumentative, and I don't feel the need to be excluded.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:52 pm UTC

First things first, my apologies if you read that as a demand. As you said, I have shitty language skills.
gmalivuk wrote:You're talking about reproductive roles, not social roles.
I'm talking about the source of gender. Sex. No sex, no gender. And I've said as much pretty consistently I believe.
azaethral wrote:Otherwise, it's a discussion about the fact that a) many constructs are possible beyond the trivial one, and b) any suitably mature construct of gender identity would at least recognize male/female, due to the fact that it is so common... in other words it's a discussion that is unwinnable by taking sides.
Wisdom, pure and simple. However one thought on the OP. Tumbler aside, overuse of labels tends to make them non distinctive, and in extreme cases useless for serving any purpose other than self classification. 56 gender types on Facebook.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:58 pm UTC

As I already mentioned, it's 56 because of what mostly amounts to lots of synonyms. The problem with not simply letting people self-identify is that you have to try to take into account all possible slight variations yourself when making your hard-coded list.

morriswalters wrote:I'm talking about the source of gender. Sex. No sex, no gender.
And as I keep pointing out, take a snapshot of any society at any time and you'll find more than two categories people can be put into based on sex.

In any case I know that's what you're claiming, my point is that don't call it "gender roles" if you're not talking about the same thing literally everyone else means by "gender roles". You'll likely save a whole lot of confusion.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
slinches
Slinches get Stinches
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:23 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby slinches » Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:22 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Whenever the rest of us have been reading and using the phrase "gender roles", we've been talking about roles in society, not roles in procreative sex.

I've been reading this thread all along and it's been helpful despite the adversarial tone. Although it has caused me some confusion on exactly this definition. What are "gender roles" if they aren't the social roles used to help guide selection of partners for reproductive/sexual relationships?

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:43 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:As I already mentioned, it's 56 because of what mostly amounts to lots of synonyms. The problem with not simply letting people self-identify is that you have to try to take into account all possible slight variations yourself when making your hard-coded list.
I know what they are, and why they put them there, but us poor old folks are easily confused.
gmalivuk wrote:And as I keep pointing out, take a snapshot of any society at any time and you'll find more than two categories people can be put into based on sex.

In any case I know that's what you're claiming, my point is that don't call it "gender roles" if you're not talking about the same thing literally everyone else means by "gender roles". You'll likely save a whole lot of confusion.
Ok. I'll do so if you use a word other than sex, or qualify it as, say, sexual preference. As with your modified quote.
And as I keep pointing out, take a snapshot of any society at any time and you'll find more than two categories people can be put into based on sexual preference.
And for clarity, I don't include trans or transgender in that statement. I'll reserve why I say that.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:00 pm UTC

slinches wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Whenever the rest of us have been reading and using the phrase "gender roles", we've been talking about roles in society, not roles in procreative sex.

I've been reading this thread all along and it's been helpful despite the adversarial tone. Although it has caused me some confusion on exactly this definition. What are "gender roles" if they aren't the social roles used to help guide selection of partners for reproductive/sexual relationships?
To start with, how about every single thing on this page?

Especially when you consider that some cultures spend a lot of the time naked, meaning that selecting sexual partners based on primary sex characteristics is pretty easy, and selecting based on secondary sex characteristics is pretty easy in most other cultures.

Like, do you seriously check whether someone is wearing pink or blue before deciding whether you think that person most likely has a penis or a vagina? Do you disregard the deep voice and copious facial hair and conclude that the person in front of you most likely has a vagina on account of they're at home taking care of the kids?

morriswalters wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:As I already mentioned, it's 56 because of what mostly amounts to lots of synonyms. The problem with not simply letting people self-identify is that you have to try to take into account all possible slight variations yourself when making your hard-coded list.
I know what they are, and why they put them there, but us poor old folks are easily confused.
I don't care how difficult it is for old people to accept that we're not always going to hold onto the same bigotries and oppressions they grew up with.

gmalivuk wrote:And as I keep pointing out, take a snapshot of any society at any time and you'll find more than two categories people can be put into based on sex.

In any case I know that's what you're claiming, my point is that don't call it "gender roles" if you're not talking about the same thing literally everyone else means by "gender roles". You'll likely save a whole lot of confusion.
Ok. I'll do so if you use a word other than sex, or qualify it as, say, sexual preference.
I don't mean sexual preference, I mean sexual and reproductive activity. I could have been clearer in this quoted sentence, but that's what I've been talking about for a while now with the pre- or non-reproductive thing.

As in, take a snapshot of a society, and in addition to the people who are in or seeking sexual relationships with one or more other people, possibly for the purposes of reproduction (but far more often for the purposes of enjoyment), you'll also notice many people who are too young or otherwise uninterested in sexual relationships or who might have sexual relationships but with no chance of reproduction. On what basis should we look at this snapshot and assume that only two of the categories are important enough to call "gender"?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:47 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:I don't care how difficult it is for old people to accept that we're not always going to hold onto the same bigotries and oppressions they grew up with.
Take a deep breath and say,"it was a joke"
gmalivuk wrote:As in, take a snapshot of a society, and in addition to the people who are in or seeking sexual relationships with one or more other people, possibly for the purposes of reproduction (but far more often for the purposes of enjoyment), you'll also notice many people who are too young or otherwise uninterested in sexual relationships or who might have sexual relationships but with no chance of reproduction. On what basis should we look at this snapshot and assume that only two of the categories are important enough to call "gender"?
Call any and all of them whatever suits you. If I understand the rules it doesn't matter to me. And in that context we again return to the idea that it is about sex. What makes sexual preference, or perhaps sexual identity is a better phrase, different than the way you define gender? For instance define the gender role of an asexual person.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:03 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:For instance define the gender role of an asexual person.
First how about you actually share with the rest of the class what you mean when you say "gender role"?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:27 am UTC

Fair enough. Say a typical female gender role of my youth. Care giver for children, house slave for husband, unable to do math, very emotional. Not capable of handling money. Totally dependent on the husband. Is that sufficient? For men. Wage earner, unemotional and cold. Handyman and protector of the home and hearth. Never cry or show weakness. Obviously those are stereotypical, although I have seen all of them at one point or another in my own home. As a child that was what I absorbed of the roles. Sex never played into it. I had toy guns, cowboy boots and my sister had dolls and dresses. Very well defined roles if a little limiting for my sister. For me the mantra was don't cry, be a man, and so on ad nauseam. I never knew of the existence of trans, gays, lesbians, or any of the alternates that we are talking about until my late teens at school. Took me years to unload that crap. Now I've showed you mine, you show me yours.

User avatar
slinches
Slinches get Stinches
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:23 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby slinches » Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:39 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
slinches wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Whenever the rest of us have been reading and using the phrase "gender roles", we've been talking about roles in society, not roles in procreative sex.

I've been reading this thread all along and it's been helpful despite the adversarial tone. Although it has caused me some confusion on exactly this definition. What are "gender roles" if they aren't the social roles used to help guide selection of partners for reproductive/sexual relationships?
To start with, how about every single thing on this page?

Especially when you consider that some cultures spend a lot of the time naked, meaning that selecting sexual partners based on primary sex characteristics is pretty easy, and selecting based on secondary sex characteristics is pretty easy in most other cultures.


Like, do you seriously check whether someone is wearing pink or blue before deciding whether you think that person most likely has a penis or a vagina? Do you disregard the deep voice and copious facial hair and conclude that the person in front of you most likely has a vagina on account of they're at home taking care of the kids?

Ah, I see. I thought we had essentially done away with the concept of traditional gender roles and was conflating the definition with gender cues. :oops:

And gender roles are more of an expectation of duties which aren't often visible, so their usefulness in sexual selection is very limited. Although I would argue that gender cues are used as much as anything for that purpose. I think we will use everything available to us and gender related things like style of dress and mannerisms are often more readily recognizable than physical secondary sexual characteristics.


On the topic of labels (at least for official documentation) what's wrong with having 3 options:
male
female
other (explain):__________

That way forms don't have to be constantly updated to keep up to date with changes in labels, the vast majority are covered by the two most common options and anyone who wants to can self identify however they want.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:24 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:Fair enough. Say a typical female gender role of my youth. Care giver for children, house slave for husband, unable to do math, very emotional. Not capable of handling money. Totally dependent on the husband. Is that sufficient? For men. Wage earner, unemotional and cold. Handyman and protector of the home and hearth. Never cry or show weakness. Obviously those are stereotypical, although I have seen all of them at one point or another in my own home. As a child that was what I absorbed of the roles. Sex never played into it. I had toy guns, cowboy boots and my sister had dolls and dresses. Very well defined roles if a little limiting for my sister. For me the mantra was don't cry, be a man, and so on ad nauseam. I never knew of the existence of trans, gays, lesbians, or any of the alternates that we are talking about until my late teens at school. Took me years to unload that crap. Now I've showed you mine, you show me yours.
So, you allege that sex is the source of gender roles, and yet sex never plays into those roles? You claimed that sperm-provider and egg-provider are the most basic or baseline "gender roles" and then proceded to descrive gender roles having nothing whatsoever to do with providing sperm or eggs? If gamete type doesn't play a part in gender roles, what basis do you have for maintaining that the "primary" gender roles must correspond to gamete type?
- - -
To answer your earlier question, though, now that you've decided to once again use "gender role" the way the rest of us were using it, the gender role of an asexual person is whichever gender that person identifies as.

Gender and sexual orientation are not the same thing, so I'm not sure why you even asked that question, but whatever.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
poxic
Eloquently Prismatic
Posts: 4756
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:28 am UTC
Location: Left coast of Canada

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby poxic » Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:32 am UTC

Just a note from an asexual: you might be thinking of non-gendered/agendered people. (Here is a comic authored by a non-gendered person, in case you're interested. They happen to not be asexual.)

Asexuality is about who you're sexually attracted to, not what your gender is or how it matches to your sex.
The Supreme Ethical Rule: Act so as to elicit the best in others and thereby in thyself.
- Felix Adler, professor, lecturer, and reformer (13 Aug 1851-1933)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jan 14, 2015 10:16 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:So, you allege that sex is the source of gender roles, and yet sex never plays into those roles? You claimed that sperm-provider and egg-provider are the most basic or baseline "gender roles" and then proceded to descrive gender roles having nothing whatsoever to do with providing sperm or eggs? If gamete type doesn't play a part in gender roles, what basis do you have for maintaining that the "primary" gender roles must correspond to gamete type?
- - -
To answer your earlier question, though, now that you've decided to once again use "gender role" the way the rest of us were using it, the gender role of an asexual person is whichever gender that person identifies as.

Gender and sexual orientation are not the same thing, so I'm not sure why you even asked that question, but whatever.
Note I divided the roles into male and female, and under the females role was caregiver for children. Perhaps you believe in virgin births as well? As to you last you described asexual in such a way as it means nothing.

poxic wrote:Asexuality is about who you're sexually attracted to, not what your gender is or how it matches to your sex
Yes.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26824
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Why is there a need to be labeled? (gender, sexuality, e

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:43 pm UTC

I know asexuals who have borne and raised children, which leads me to believe that you still don't understand most of the key words you're using.

(And "virgin births" *are* possible with the help of IVF and artificial insemination.)

Edit: also you know it's possible to care for children that didn't personally come out of your own body, right?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests