Alternative Gender Pronouns: The Reboot

Started by Blythe, March 18, 2013, 03:54:32 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Blythe

I'd like to try to give this topic another try; the previous thread was locked, with good reason, but I believe it's possible to reasonably talk about and debate this hotbutton issue. As a Liege, I understand that others may disagree with the precept of the topic--some people don't like/believe in alternative gender pronouns. To each their own. If you wonder why the below topics seem neutral, it's because I listed them, hopfeully, as neutral points without my own bias and opinions clouding them. I tried VERY hard to keep the points neutral, with room for agreement and disagreement. I would like to hear from some Lords and Ladies regarding these points, in particular. Feedback from cisgendered people is helpful and useful.  Anyways, Here are the issues I'd like to discuss and debate, and feel free to adress related topics to these:



*Why or whether alternative gender pronouns should be considered and used.

*Why or whether alternative gender pronouns are or are not necessary.

*if alternative gender pronouns are a viable way to acknowledge alternative gender identities that do not fit into the gender binary.

*if it is possible to incorporate consistent alternative pronoun use for other genders in the English language consistently, with grammatically correct and easy to understand rules.

*which pronouns do and do not work for those who do not fit into gender binary and why.



I did not list my own opinions just yet, because I am going to go source-hunting for resources that are reliable that support my opinions, but it should probably be noted that I do have the Liege tag, so my opinions about this subject could be easily guessed. :)

~Blythe

Koren

I cant really answer all of the points above but I can provide my own personal view on a few things

Like I said in the other thread, really all it comes down too is courtesy. The same as most women dont like being refered to as male, and most men dont like being reffered to as female, its just courtesy that you respect the individual enough to acknowledge their identity. And if that means moving outside the established pronouns and gender referances then I think its only fair to do that when we do it for everyone else. We dont have a right to deny someone their identity simply because it doesnt fit into the easy words in my opinion.

I do think that our language as it is at the moment does not have the nessisary words and expressions to adequately encapsulate the details and subtlties of identity as a whole, and certainly not public language that we all know, and I think that goes for not only gender, but also sexuality, identity, personality and more. Language is incredibly limited, not only by words, but by culture and the way people understand words and the way those words are spoken and then taken apart and reinterpruted at the other end. We may never have the right words, or the best words, but we will all have to make do with what we have.
I cant speak much on what pronouns do and dont work as I am really horrible at language and all of that as well.

Just my opinions.

Oniya

I like to call people what they like to be called - at least, if I'm not intentionally trying to tick them off.  Even then, I don't go so far as to avoid their preferred pronouns.  I'll avoid pronouns altogether if I don't know the right one, in fact.

Alternative pronouns that I've seen used: 
'sie' or 'xe' (both pronounced in my head as zhee) for places that 'he' or 'she' would be used
'hir' (sounds a little like 'here') for 'him' or 'her' - also used as possessive ('his' or 'hers')
'xir' (zheer) in the same manner
'thon' - seen it used, find it clunky, mainly because I can't figure cases for it.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Ephiral

Quote from: Oniya on March 18, 2013, 09:19:03 AM
I like to call people what they like to be called - at least, if I'm not intentionally trying to tick them off.  Even then, I don't go so far as to avoid their preferred pronouns.  I'll avoid pronouns altogether if I don't know the right one, in fact.

Alternative pronouns that I've seen used: 
'sie' or 'xe' (both pronounced in my head as zhee) for places that 'he' or 'she' would be used
'hir' (sounds a little like 'here') for 'him' or 'her' - also used as possessive ('his' or 'hers')
'xir' (zheer) in the same manner
'thon' - seen it used, find it clunky, mainly because I can't figure cases for it.

A couple of sources I've read seem to indicate that there are no cases for 'thon'. I'll add to the list:
'ey/eir/em' - basically "they" with the th sawed off. Makes it feel much smoother using singular verbs around it. Which brings us to...
singular 'they' - can be smooth or clunky, depending on how you conjugate "to be". I'm also unsure how inherently gendered words work with this - what would you use in place of, say "boyfriend" or "girlfriend"? If there's a standard case, I'm unaware of it.

Oniya

Between the increasing awareness of non-hetero relationships and people over certain ages finding a certain discomfort with 'boy' and 'girl' as self-description (seriously, my sister's going out with a guy who has grandkids.  Calling him a 'boy' sounds ridiculous) - I see a lot more people using S.O. or 'partner' to describe their 'more-than-just-friends'.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Ephiral

Quote from: Oniya on March 18, 2013, 11:43:14 AM
Between the increasing awareness of non-hetero relationships and people over certain ages finding a certain discomfort with 'boy' and 'girl' as self-description (seriously, my sister's going out with a guy who has grandkids.  Calling him a 'boy' sounds ridiculous) - I see a lot more people using S.O. or 'partner' to describe their 'more-than-just-friends'.

Well, yes. That particular case has a solution; probably not the best example. I blame my melting brain. And it's an edge case in general, but... there are a handful of words for which any neutral option seems to feel awkward. Maybe I'm overthinking.

Kythia

This is something I struggle with in practice.  My brain wants to divide people into two and then use him/his and her/hers for them.  If someone says to me "Hey, Kythia, I much prefer <this pronoun>" then I will try to remember and use - exactly as I would if Ephiral said she preferred "Ephy" (just picking on you as you were the last person to post, Ephiral.  Nothing meant by it).  However, it is something I struggle to keep at the forefront of my mind, way more than "Ephy" not "Ephiral."

I don't mean any insult by it, though I totally get that "don't mean any insult by it" and "doesn't cause any insult" are not the same thing.  But I default to the big two and will, unless I'm really thinking about it, use whichever one seems most appropriate by the look of the person.
242037

Ephiral

Quote from: Kythia on March 18, 2013, 12:57:43 PM
This is something I struggle with in practice.  My brain wants to divide people into two and then use him/his and her/hers for them.  If someone says to me "Hey, Kythia, I much prefer <this pronoun>" then I will try to remember and use - exactly as I would if Ephiral said she preferred "Ephy" (just picking on you as you were the last person to post, Ephiral.  Nothing meant by it).  However, it is something I struggle to keep at the forefront of my mind, way more than "Ephy" not "Ephiral."

I don't mean any insult by it, though I totally get that "don't mean any insult by it" and "doesn't cause any insult" are not the same thing.  But I default to the big two and will, unless I'm really thinking about it, use whichever one seems most appropriate by the look of the person.

No worries! You generally have to be trying to offend me. I hardly claim to speak for everyone, but... most people I know might wince a little when you drop the wrong pronoun, but won't hold it against you. The fact that you're visibly making an effort is what's important. I have a trans friend that I still occasionally screw up on - and she still occasionally screws up on her singular-they-using SO. And my RL friends have trouble with using the "wrong" pronoun for me. It's an expected adjustment.

Vanity Evolved

Quote from: Kythia on March 18, 2013, 12:57:43 PM
This is something I struggle with in practice.  My brain wants to divide people into two and then use him/his and her/hers for them.  If someone says to me "Hey, Kythia, I much prefer <this pronoun>" then I will try to remember and use - exactly as I would if Ephiral said she preferred "Ephy" (just picking on you as you were the last person to post, Ephiral.  Nothing meant by it).  However, it is something I struggle to keep at the forefront of my mind, way more than "Ephy" not "Ephiral."

I don't mean any insult by it, though I totally get that "don't mean any insult by it" and "doesn't cause any insult" are not the same thing.  But I default to the big two and will, unless I'm really thinking about it, use whichever one seems most appropriate by the look of the person.

I'm pretty much in this camp; particularly because I've never come into any contact with people where s/he isn't valid. I've known a few intersex people in my time, but the few I have met have all been either MtF or FtM transexuals, who still identify as male or female. I always assumed to treat said pronouns in a similar way you would nicknames or other genuine mistakes.

"Oh, hey Rosie."
"Hey. Though, mind just calling me Rose? Never really been fond of Rosie."
"Oh, sorry Rose."

But I guess this does get a bit more confusing when referring not to the person, but where the person in question is being spoke about. I'm perfectly fine with calling someone 'hir' (though admittedly, not sure how you'd pronounce it - here?), but when you're talking to someone else who doesn't know this, it feels a bit odd having to explain what you mean after... But yeah, I'm pretty ignorant on the topic, so it's more me rambling to myself at this point. Hehe.

Ephiral

Quote from: Vanity Evolved on March 18, 2013, 02:12:46 PM
I'm pretty much in this camp; particularly because I've never come into any contact with people where s/he isn't valid. I've known a few intersex people in my time, but the few I have met have all been either MtF or FtM transexuals, who still identify as male or female. I always assumed to treat said pronouns in a similar way you would nicknames or other genuine mistakes.

"Oh, hey Rosie."
"Hey. Though, mind just calling me Rose? Never really been fond of Rosie."
"Oh, sorry Rose."

For most trans* people I've known, this is pretty on the money. One small note, though: "intersexed" refers to people born with biological characteristics of both sexes. "Trans*" or "non-binary" are pretty safe terms to cover non-cisgendered people as a whole.

Beguile's Mistress

Using alternative pronouns is a respectful thing to do if the person requests it and I'm happy to do that.  I don't mind being asked to change if I use the wrong one but I do like patience with the fact that I may not know or remember what is wanted so help is appreciated.  Like Oniya I'll avoid use of pronouns if I can't figure it out.

I don't see any need to debate the issue. 

Blythe

As someone who embraces the concept of incorporating and using alternative gender pronouns, the only issue I see is being able to consistently incorporate them into the English language. English doesn't have a gender neutral pronoun--"it" doesn't count, as the pronoun "it" shouldn't be used for people, as it refers to objects. "It" is rather dehumanizing to me. I found a small series of definitions that is rather helpful for defining elements of what I'll go ahead and call the "transgender" or "genderqueer" community. I admit that a few of the definitions listed may not be accurate, but a good majority are reasonable, and some can be expanded on. It helps to understand a lot of these first:

http://web.archive.org/web/20020614112429/http://alisha_clarke.tripod.com/readings/gender_terms.htm

For pronoun use, this site showed how to use many of the alternative variants: http://androgyne.0catch.com/terms.htm#4

It's mostly accurate. And some of these variants are used often on Elliquiy. The issue is consistent use in the English language. It's possible and I want it to happen, but it's a lot of pronouns. Other languages have a "third gender" pronoun that encompasses what does not fall into the cisgendered spectrum, and Chinese (standard Mandarin) doesn't have gender pronouns at all; English just translates this by applying gender binary to a language that is gender  neutral with pronoun use. Other languages present some interesting options for pronouns--granted, my source is Wikipedia, but the article seems reliable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun#Chinese

I'm curious if the English language could learn a lesson from other languages.

Also, my sources aren't the best. I can find more or better ones if necessary.

DarklingAlice

Honestly, I really kind of hate alternate gender pronouns and think they contribute to the problem. I certainly don't mind using them for my friends, if that's what they are comfortable with, but I will never use them for myself. To my mind, alternate gender pronouns try to correct a fundamental problem of our language: that it is geared to categorize people by gender.

The vast majority of the time you are using a pronoun, the gender of the person being talked about is irrelevant, so why have pronouns geared towards conveying it? Why gender the subject of your conversation every time you don't want to use a proper noun? To put it another way, I don't think the solution to the problem of forcing people into boxes is to increase the number of boxes.
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


Vanity Evolved

Quote from: Ephiral on March 18, 2013, 02:48:55 PM
For most trans* people I've known, this is pretty on the money. One small note, though: "intersexed" refers to people born with biological characteristics of both sexes. "Trans*" or "non-binary" are pretty safe terms to cover non-cisgendered people as a whole.

Ah. :3 Gotcha~

Ephiral

Quote from: DarklingAlice on March 18, 2013, 09:14:25 PM
The vast majority of the time you are using a pronoun, the gender of the person being talked about is irrelevant, so why have pronouns geared towards conveying it? Why gender the subject of your conversation every time you don't want to use a proper noun? To put it another way, I don't think the solution to the problem of forcing people into boxes is to increase the number of boxes.
What is the solution in your eyes, then?

Shadow879

#15
Quote from: DarklingAlice on March 18, 2013, 09:14:25 PM
Honestly, I really kind of hate alternate gender pronouns and think they contribute to the problem. I certainly don't mind using them for my friends, if that's what they are comfortable with, but I will never use them for myself. To my mind, alternate gender pronouns try to correct a fundamental problem of our language: that it is geared to categorize people by gender.

The vast majority of the time you are using a pronoun, the gender of the person being talked about is irrelevant, so why have pronouns geared towards conveying it? Why gender the subject of your conversation every time you don't want to use a proper noun? To put it another way, I don't think the solution to the problem of forcing people into boxes is to increase the number of boxes.

Unfortunately, I feel this is fairly spot on. Our language is very gender based, and until a new, less awkward agender word comes into the dictionary to refer to someone, it will continue to cause much confusion, because let's face it, ze/hir is practical, but, more so in text, because the pronunciation to many English speakers is awkward and hard to grasp, and feels foreign, as was pointed out in the androgyne link. In my opinion, all the ones where they try and combine words to make a new one, while they are a good concept, would not be used easily or commonly, due to being awkward to say or pronounce or use.

My personal favorite, and to me the most practical, is ey/em/eir. I refuse to look up whatever the proper pronunciation is for those because every time I look it up for the other ones it's not what I expected and it becomes awkward and hard to say. I pronounce them as they would be if the 'th' was still there. (ay/ehm/air)

Those are my favorites because they disconnect themselves from the 'th,' obviously, and thus take away the plural denotation, leaving a new word. I think those ones have the best chance of becoming an actual new word in the dictionary, because it's easy to use, sharing sounds with existing words and letters, as in letter A, letter M, and the word air.
Never back down, never look back.

How to make love to the Dark

DarklingAlice

#16
Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 12:32:47 AM
What is the solution in your eyes, then?

Simply collapse everything into one pronoun. English has no grammatical gender. We do not need the gender content of the information our currently used pronouns possess. The language should be tailored to make it easy to hold a conversation about a person without referencing that person's gender. It's simply irrelevant in the majority of circumstances and honestly kind of creepy that it has weaseled its way into language at such a basal level. Why on earth should we be referencing an individuals gender anytime we wish to say that individual did anything? And why does it take such circumlocution to avoid doing so? Though at least it isn't as bad as titles which try to get you to discuss someones gender and (if they are female) marital status in situations where it simply doesn't matter.  I sometimes think that English developed along these routes solely for the purposes of telling cishet males who was available for fucking.

So my suggestion is a single pronoun to refer to people. Not a new pronoun for transfolk but a new pronoun for everyone. (Or, if we could wash it of context we could use an old one. Half the Chinese researchers I work with, male and female, only use 'he' 'him' and 'his' to refer to everyone and it hasn't led to lab explosions...yet...). Actually come to think of it 'he' 'her' and 'hers' would be quite intuitive.
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


Ephiral

Quote from: DarklingAlice on March 19, 2013, 01:04:34 AM
Simply collapse everything into one pronoun. English has no grammatical gender. We do not need the gender content of the information our currently used pronouns possess. The language should be tailored to make it easy to hold a conversation about a person without referencing that person's gender. It's simply irrelevant in the majority of circumstances and honestly kind of creepy that it has weaseled its way into language at such a basal level. Why on earth should we be referencing an individuals gender anytime we wish to say that individual did anything? And why does it take such circumlocution to avoid doing so? Though at least it isn't as bad as titles which try to get you to discuss someones gender and (if they are female) marital status in situations where it simply doesn't matter.  I sometimes think that English developed along these routes solely for the purposes of telling cishet males who was available for fucking.

So my suggestion is a single pronoun to refer to people. Not a new pronoun for transfolk but a new pronoun for everyone. (Or, if we could wash it of context we could use an old one. Half the Chinese researchers I work with, male and female, only use 'he' 'him' and 'his' to refer to everyone and it hasn't led to lab explosions...yet...). Actually come to think of it 'he' 'her' and 'hers' would be quite intuitive.
This strikes me as a wonderful idea that is completely impractical at this time.

Shadow879

*points to my post* ey/em/eir would work for that.
Never back down, never look back.

How to make love to the Dark

Blythe

Ey/em/eir is a recognized alternative pronoun, as well. I believe it's referred to as the Spivak variant.

Top Cat

I have to agree with DarklingAlice. While it would be nice to recognize alternative gender orientations, what you end up doing, in the short run (and possibly in the long run as well), is turning the third gender-tag into a form of "othering." Tribalism is strong in our culture, and among most cultures around the world, and there's a lot of people with a lot of hate and looking for a direction to aim it. By expressly identifying alternative genders with their own pronoun structure, you are explicitly calling attention to them - sometimes very unwanted attention.

They're people. We're people. We don't need to make an effort to underscore their differences every time we talk about them.

I also acknowledge Ephiral's point that it's completely impractical to implement at this point. It's a hard change to make, but if it's going to be done, it's not ever going to be any easier.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Ephiral

Quote from: Top Cat on March 19, 2013, 02:15:05 AMI also acknowledge Ephiral's point that it's completely impractical to implement at this point. It's a hard change to make, but if it's going to be done, it's not ever going to be any easier.
I beg to differ. Right now, we're fighting to get people to stop calling trans* people by explicitly wrong pronouns, let alone the ones they choose. We cannot simultaneously hold that it is both right and wrong to tell someone "This is the pronoun you get, and you get no say in the matter." Until we get to the point where misgendering is recognized as an unacceptable action, I don't see embracing that statement turning out well for the minority.

gaggedLouise

#22
It's one thing to use these kinds of pronouns for yourself, or referring to people you know personally or feel connected to. It's a whole different ball park to claim or push for that everyone should use them regularly, or that the news media, schools, courts and academy should be using them as a default. I would agree with what Darkling said in another thread (on the liege board) that physical sex, social/styled gender and 'sex' (as in 'the ways and parts you bring into play for sexual pleasure') are different planes and don't need to square, but to most people those three - and especially bio sex and social/behaviour styled gender - are so close they are never really separate. And in that kind of world, pushing for a single genderless pronoun will come out as an effort to declare "gender doesn't exist" meaning sexual and social gender differences do not really exist, or shouldn't exist: they are just free choices or arbitrary whims flying through the air and landing in somebody's mind. Unfortunately, a vociferous part of the folks pushing for a genderless pronoun in my neck of the woods, Sweden, do seem motivated by that kind of ideological motive: they want to drive the notion that gender is nonexistent and that any concept of definite, lasting gender is a means of oppression - but they only half own up to that motive.

I would agree with Ephiral that most trans people (also, most lesbians and bi people I know or have heard of) are *not* committed to saying 'social gender - gendered behaviour, styling, clothing, ways of acting and talking - is trash, it's arbitrary and can be changed or remixed within a relationship at the drop of a hat'. Recognizing the right to fit within a gender (including intersexed or 'non-standard' gender) that might not square with what you were born with is much more important than trying to wipe out anything and everything that references gender or bio sex.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Top Cat

I agree very much with what both of you are saying. I'm not in a rush to wipe out gender language, or to try to march on some ideological drive to make gender "not exist" in some half-assed manner. But I believe that making gender an essential part of the language, and only a binary part of the language, is ultimately damaging, even when you're dealing with just the male/female dichotomy. People can get very offended when you use the wrong pronoun or title (Sir, Ma'am, etc.) for them by accident, and to what purpose? You weren't trying to offend them, you just misread the verbal/physical cues.

We don't need to bring gender into discussions where it doesn't really matter in the first place, and removing it from this level of discussion can be a positive change. Let gender identity rest in conversations where it matters.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Shadow879

#24
Quote from: Blythe on March 19, 2013, 02:10:02 AM
Ey/em/eir is a recognized alternative pronoun, as well. I believe it's referred to as the Spivak variant.

They are recognized. But until they're words that are in the dictionary and taught as part of basic grammar, they will not see common usage.

They are also agender, thus removing the gender connotation.

I don't see it as practical now or ever to lump EVERYONE into single pronoun.

In a sense, trans* people ARE an "other," unfortunately. We always will be. Human nature, for the most part, involves a bit of xenophobia. There are examples throughout history. There will always be those that hate on others who do not fit in the little boxes they've created in their minds, simply because they are not comfortable with the idea. Slowly, society as a whole seems to be becoming more accepting, but the hate will never truly go away. I'm kinda looking at the big picture here.

*edit* If I'm not making sense, someone please let me know so I can exit the conversation with some semblance of dignity :) I'm tired and probably not firing on all 8 cylinders.
Never back down, never look back.

How to make love to the Dark

Ephiral

Yeah, I don't think anyone here is arguing from a position of "Gender is just a social construct/doesn't really exist/can be changed on a whim". That's something that I would actually oppose as profoundly harmful to trans* interests, in exactly the way that "Sexuality is a choice!" is harmful to LGB interests. It's more a matter of relevance - someone's gender rarely actually matters when you're talking about them, so why do we have only a minefield of binary-gendered terms, and why should anything that doesn't denote gender be applied only to trans* people?

Shadow879

#26
Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 02:50:14 AM
Yeah, I don't think anyone here is arguing from a position of "Gender is just a social construct/doesn't really exist/can be changed on a whim". That's something that I would actually oppose as profoundly harmful to trans* interests, in exactly the way that "Sexuality is a choice!" is harmful to LGB interests. It's more a matter of relevance - someone's gender rarely actually matters when you're talking about them, so why do we have only a minefield of binary-gendered terms, and why should anything that doesn't denote gender be applied only to trans* people?

We have said minefield simply because the English language was created when a gender other than male or female was not accepted or understood or acknowledged to exist.

True, gender rarely actually matters when you are talking about someone, but gender is so deeply ingrained into society, and indeed in our language, that it would take a restructuring of English grammar and many generations before applying an agender pronoun except when referring specifically to someone's sex/gender would sink in.

There is no reason anything that doesn't denote gender be applied only to trans people. It should be applied to whosoever desires it to be applied to them. I prefer to be called she, I'm transitioning. If I preferred ey/em/eir pronouns, then they should be applied to me.

An inherent problem with agender speech is that it is a foreign concept to many people. Indeed, I had never even heard of someone being called by something other than he or she until I came onto the Liege board briefly :D And because it's a very small minority that desires to be referred to without gender involved, it won't get much attention until it becomes a bigger issue. I foresee someone making a lawsuit out of it.

Then it might get the attention it deserves.
Never back down, never look back.

How to make love to the Dark

gaggedLouise

#27
I suppose on a talk and grammar level, having two gender pronouns as opposed to just one makes it more supple when one is speaking about something involving two or more people. "He told her that she could see her brother that night" - compare "Ey told ey that ey could see hir brother that night", all the referencing becomes akin to grey cats in the dark.  ;) If you don't wish to push their names up again and again, having gendered pronouns really makes it smoother in that kind of common sentence situation. But with a three-gendered approach - as against a single-pronoun one - you keep those options anyway.

"Gender doesn't exist" or it's just an arbitrary social construct or even oppressive as such - that's something that's been considered a cash-in-cool-points thing to say or argue for some time where I live, an ideological pick-up line. I've come to be suspicious of people who claim that gender and sex "bah, never really matter" - very often that kind of talk is a way of hiding that gender does matter very much in the present-day world, and on the level of how people present themselves, make a living, fall in love etc, it sometimes matters *more* now than it did forty years ago. Contemporary culture, politics, the tone of the media and so on have become more gendered in some ways. I agree with you Ephiral that rights and options should not be hardwired to gender, that people should not be pushed or coerced to have to bring their gender to the front all the time to make their case, but that's not the same as saying gender is evil or crappy on a personal level.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Ack Arg

Quote from: Beguile's Mistress on March 18, 2013, 05:26:55 PM
Using alternative pronouns is a respectful thing to do if the person requests it and I'm happy to do that.  I don't mind being asked to change if I use the wrong one but I do like patience with the fact that I may not know or remember what is wanted so help is appreciated.  Like Oniya I'll avoid use of pronouns if I can't figure it out.

I don't see any need to debate the issue. 


1) Well, if you happen to think gender or sex confusion is something like a white guy deciding he's really a black guy then you don't see much need for debate either.

2) Replace Ze's and Per's or whatever with jargon from another subculture: furries, fans of japanese cartoons or economists. I expect you'll find something you wouldn't tolerate in daily speech soon enough.

3) Respect, meaning good manners not esteem, is something we have with flatulent strangers on the bus and those McDonalds employees eager to serve our children their horsemeat happy meals. It's rude to treat your friends with "respect."



Now, I think the point of accepting people that are "mentally" transgendered as something besides crazy is about saying reality is a mess and that's okay. If your first step in doing that is to invent a whole new pile of categories and terms then you're not really embracing ambiguity. You're just making new categories people don't fit into and don't want to fit into.

No one wants to be gay. They want to be a citizen, friend, neighbour... that is also, among other things, gay (and a fair golfer besides.)

If you're going to tell me about Cis... whatever, the wacky word for heterosexuals... If you start in on that I'm going to write you off as a person. It's the same thing when I hear someone dismiss "Socrates and other white dude philosophers." I'm thrilled. Because you've written off Socrates I can now write you off.

Why?

Because you've become the bigot. I'm not Ack Arg, good golfer, always willing to help someone out, thinks girls are pretty... I'm now The Cis. Now I come with a handy label and the rest is just details.




As it happens there are plenty of problems with the language. They're typically problems about jargon and news programs and politicians that have mastered the art of saying nothing. There are whole industries devoted to corrupting words and softening minds in order to pick pockets. They're impersonal and have truly awful consequences and they're hard to combat.

I hardly know what to say to the idea that English is a gender biased language. We've got holdovers in old material like man and mankind, which is aesthetically nice and as far as I know causes no confusion about whether it refers to the species or to a population of men, not even in kids hearing it for the first time. We do refer to people that are generally men and women as men and women but that's about it.

Is French going to result in sexism... or whatever the Cis thing ism is, because sandwich is a masculine noun? I don't think that's a silly question, it's just the one that lacks the usual noise of political correctness. I'd like to credit people with being able to make distinctions without having them beaten into their heads. That's generous. I'm a generous guy. Maybe you aren't.

And English has plenty in it to cover gender nonspecific references. Mentioning a person by name comes to mind. Or by title. Or They. They isn't accepted by your English Teacher but everyone else is just fine with it. If you can't work your way around it or are afraid to do so without the permission of the grammar police so be it.



Quote from: Top Cat on March 19, 2013, 02:39:47 AM
We don't need to bring gender into discussions where it doesn't really matter in the first place, and removing it from this level of discussion can be a positive change. Let gender identity rest in conversations where it matters.

I have to disagree but I won't press the point.

We can get plenty of exercise on this idea of unilaterally butchering English to avoid offending a few people. People have the right not to be offended. Also to be isolated. Isolating vulnerable communities helps them protect themselves from violence, exploitation and mischaracterizations.

That's just the "Cis" talking though.



Quote from: Shadow879 on March 19, 2013, 03:03:11 AM

There is no reason anything that doesn't denote gender be applied only to trans people. It should be applied to whosoever desires it to be applied to them. I prefer to be called she, I'm transitioning. If I preferred ey/em/eir pronouns, then they should be applied to me.


Thing is, we don't actually get to be called things because we want to be called them. We can think of ourselves how we like but when we say what we think we're opening ourselves to the evaluations of others.

We can only associate with those that approve of and agree with our evaluations but I can't say it's especially healthy to do so.
Returning after long... long hiatus. May be slow to find a rhythm.

Top Cat

Actually, gaggedLouise's point about making writing more awkward is a better point than anything else I've seen so far, with regard to opposing a move to a genderless pronoun system. She's right, it WOULD be far more onerous to keep referring to characters by name (even more than we already do!) in order to make it clear who is doing what.

That, alone, is enough to make me reconsider my stance here. I hadn't yet approached it from the perspective of trying to write in that mode - I'd like to think that I would have gotten there on my own eventually though. ;)

I may be a little oversensitive to "othering," or tribalism. Lord knows I've had enough of it in my lifetime, both directed at me and at people around me.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

gaggedLouise

*smiles* Just Louise, please? (and always 'her' for me, dear)

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Top Cat

O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Shadow879

#32
While I'm far too tired to respond to all the points in Ack Args post, I'll acknowledge that he has some good points and some that I don't agree with.

I will respond to the point dealing with my post though.

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 03:19:37 AM
Thing is, we don't actually get to be called things because we want to be called them. We can think of ourselves how we like but when we say what we think we're opening ourselves to the evaluations of others.

We can only associate with those that approve of and agree with our evaluations but I can't say it's especially healthy to do so.

I said should, not would. Yes, we're always opening ourselves to the evaluations of others, but that doesn't make their evaluation correct. I noticed your post seemed a little condescending and defensive, no one was saying "Cis's are evil and intolerant." And I say that as an inference, i suppose, I know you didn't actually say that in your post. It just seemed like you had some undertones of that, which is perfectly understandable. It's a label. if I misinterpreted I apologize :D

I still get called 'he" by my family. Because I am still hiding my transition from them. Not anywhere even remotely CLOSE to being full time.

I don't see where it's unhealthy to associate with those who call you by what you wanted to be called. I have an idea of where you were going with that, but I'd like to hear what you have to say without making assumptions.

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 03:19:37 AM
I'd like to credit people with being able to make distinctions without having them beaten into their heads.

Experience, in my case, has proven otherwise.
Never back down, never look back.

How to make love to the Dark

Top Cat

Quote from: Shadow879 on March 19, 2013, 03:38:53 AM
I don't see where it's unhealthy to associate with those who call you by what you wanted to be called.
This could probably be simplified to, "I don't see where it's unhealthy to associate with those who respect you."
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Shadow879

Quote from: Top Cat on March 19, 2013, 03:40:32 AM
This could probably be simplified to, "I don't see where it's unhealthy to associate with those who respect you."

Surely. *smiles*

I'm posting quickly and not paying as much attention to that because by the time I come up with a post the way I want it to be, the conversation has passed me by.

I was also restating his point, in a sense.

And he made a point about respect in the beginning of his post, so I felt it would not have gone the direction I wanted it to :)
Never back down, never look back.

How to make love to the Dark

Blythe

#35
Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 03:19:37 AM
If you're going to tell me about Cis... whatever, the wacky word for heterosexuals... If you start in on that I'm going to write you off as a person. It's the same thing when I hear someone dismiss "Socrates and other white dude philosophers." I'm thrilled. Because you've written off Socrates I can now write you off.

Um...you do realize that "cisgendered" is just a term that references people who's biological gender matches the gender they understand themselves to be. It's the opposite term of "transgender." You can be homosexual and be cisgendered. Aside from that, I understand what you're saying about labels.

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 03:19:37 AM
And English has plenty in it to cover gender nonspecific references. Mentioning a person by name comes to mind. Or by title. Or They. They isn't accepted by your English Teacher but everyone else is just fine with it. If you can't work your way around it or are afraid to do so without the permission of the grammar police so be it.

The Spivak variety of pronouns are just a singular version of the plural pronoun "they." The reason I liked them was because of the distinction between singular and plural, which can be tricky to write if you only use the plural form when trying to single out someone from a group. Makes it hard to know who you're referencing.

I do agree about name and title. I usually default to those if unsure of or can't recall someone's gender.


I'd respond to more of your post, Ack Arg, but you're a little hard for me to follow. My apologies if I've misinterpreted anything in your post.

Ack Arg

Quote from: Shadow879 on March 19, 2013, 03:38:53 AM
I don't see where it's unhealthy to associate with those who call you by what you wanted to be called. I have an idea of where you were going with that, but I'd like to hear what you have to say without making assumptions.

Quote from: Top Cat on March 19, 2013, 03:40:32 AM
This could probably be simplified to, "I don't see where it's unhealthy to associate with those who respect you."

I don't think you need me to point out the flip side of this: if your friends are the people that give you a free pass on things then it's really goddamned unhealthy. You could believe in magic spells or in racial genocide. Or just being an ass in public. Do I need to lay this one out?



Blythe:
My point about the Cisgender bit is two fold. One is that it's a practical political disaster. People will look at you as if you're from mars and with good reason. Two is that bit about ambiguity. Cis refers to gender matching sex in an individual... well you can leave out the bit about gender. It's not about gender, except as a substitute for a soul, that magical more you than you thing behind your eyes. So let's drop that.

"Cisgender are the people that aren't especially interested in being or being treated as the opposite sex."

If you had a similar word for people that "Are not especially black, don't identify as black and don't involve themselves in the concerns of the black community" then we'd more clearly see the problem:

Again, the point of admitting there's something besides male and female, even beyond just transitioning between the two categories is that sex is ambiguous and sex roles are ambiguous. That's good. That's a mess. Messes are fun. Why add jargon?

As for the difficulty with pronouns... well it happens that you don't really solve anything by adding extra ones. No matter who or what you talk about using pronouns you always have to rerefer to the subject every so often, even when you haven't changed subjects. We have no trouble distinguishing between plural they and singular they, we have trouble distinguishing between any two things being referred to by the same pronouns.

The argument for the pronouns doesn't seem to root in the difficulty of writing about transexual people at all. The difficulty seems to come up when someone insists on transexual people needing a special category, sets of rules and jargon so they they won't feel offended.

(I'm betting the offended are a minority within a minority, so I'm not too concerned about the offense angle.)



Let's try looking at this another way shall we?

If you're playing fast and loose with the roles and forms of male and female, wouldn't you expect a little confusion? Is the point of diversity in a free society for everyone to be categorized or is it to let people be people so they can get on with the really important stuff like killing each other over scores in baseball?

The pronouns routine really does seem to ruin the fun. Wouldn't it even be worth considering leaving it in a state of "I don't know?"


Returning after long... long hiatus. May be slow to find a rhythm.

Shadow879

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 05:00:09 AM
I don't think you need me to point out the flip side of this: if your friends are the people that give you a free pass on things then it's really goddamned unhealthy. You could believe in magic spells or in racial genocide. Or just being an ass in public. Do I need to lay this one out?

So what you're telling me is that hanging out with people who accept me for who I am and call me "she" as I ask them to instead of saying, "No, you're a boy, because you have a penis" even though I am transitioning to female is unhealthy?  It's not a "free pass," it's acceptance, and decency. I interpreted your statement as implying that my transitioning to female is just a fantasy. I understand you are not applying the statement to just me, but I am replying as it pertains to me.  Believing in magic spells is a fantasy, and yes, it would be unhealthy for someone to continue to be told "Yes, magic is real." Even though it is not. However, your friends applying the correct pronoun to your chosen gender (or lack thereof, if that's your thing), is not unhealthy, in fact it is a healthy friendship with people who are accepting and supportive of you.

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 05:00:09 AMCis refers to gender matching sex in an individual... well you can leave out the bit about gender. It's not about gender, except as a substitute for a soul, that magical more you than you thing behind your eyes. So let's drop that.

"Cisgender are the people that aren't especially interested in being or being treated as the opposite sex."

You can't "leave out the bit about gender." It doesn't work that way. Cisgender refers to the gender you feel you are matching your physical sex. "I am a man/woman and I like being a man/woman, and have no desire to be anything different."



Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 05:00:09 AM
The argument for the pronouns doesn't seem to root in the difficulty of writing about transexual people at all. The difficulty seems to come up when someone insists on transexual people needing a special category, sets of rules and jargon so they they won't feel offended.

I do believe the discussion on alternative pronouns was aimed at people who don't fit in the box in that way. Transsexuals/transgender people generally choose one binary gender or the other and prefer "he" or "she".

This was about all the in-between people that don't quite fit in one place.



Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 05:00:09 AM
The pronouns routine really does seem to ruin the fun. Wouldn't it even be worth considering leaving it in a state of "I don't know?"

Why would you leave it in a state of "I don't know?" I don't follow the logic.




Your whole argument seems to be against the pronouns, and while I can follow that the addition of a lot of pronouns complicates things, certain nouns do simplify things, such as cisgender.  Instead of having to spell out "Those who are comfortable with their birth sex and gender," it's easier to just say cisgender.

Why add jargon? Representation.
Never back down, never look back.

How to make love to the Dark

gaggedLouise

Read on another forum a few days ago:

"The correct word for a woman with a cock is......woman."

*joins hands with Shadow*

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

DarklingAlice

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 01:25:15 AM
This strikes me as a wonderful idea that is completely impractical at this time.

All the best ideas are ^_^

Still, it seems at least as far-fetched as people as a whole accepting us for who we are. And I take some comfort from being in a field where everyone is rushing to exchange their gendered titles of Mr., Miss, Ms., Mrs.  for the genderless title of Doctor, which to me shows the viability of such a transition.
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


ofDelusions

Quote from: gaggedLouise on March 19, 2013, 03:14:57 AM
I suppose on a talk and grammar level, having two gender pronouns as opposed to just one makes it more supple when one is speaking about something involving two or more people. "He told her that she could see her brother that night" - compare "Ey told ey that ey could see hir brother that night", all the referencing becomes akin to grey cats in the dark.  ;) If you don't wish to push their names up again and again, having gendered pronouns really makes it smoother in that kind of common sentence situation. But with a three-gendered approach - as against a single-pronoun one - you keep those options anyway.


Can't talk about other languages without gender pronouns but that really isn't an issue in Finnish language. Atleast you start translating Finnish text to English if the gender isn't mentioned...

For example the sentence: "He told her that she could see her brother that night" would become something like: "Hän kertoi tälle että tämä voisi nähdä veljeään sinä iltana." At no point in the translated sentence is there problem in telling the persons apart.

gaggedLouise

#41
Quote from: ofDelusions on March 19, 2013, 08:20:10 AM
Can't talk about other languages without gender pronouns but that really isn't an issue in Finnish language. Atleast you start translating Finnish text to English if the gender isn't mentioned...

For example the sentence: "He told her that she could see her brother that night" would become something like: "Hän kertoi tälle että tämä voisi nähdä veljeään sinä iltana." At no point in the translated sentence is there problem in telling the persons apart.

True - but isn't that because Finnish has such a rich assortment of cases for verbs, and the regulated endings for case forms will show how the verb relates to the person words around that verb. Most western European - Germanic and Romance - languages have dropped a lot of their case system, except Spanish and Portuguese, so in most of them you can't really decipher a lot of the sense of a sentence on case endings.

In French, too, it's quite easy to avoid indicating the bio gender of someone you're talking about, because the pronoun on ('one', 3d pers singular) and its object form lui (/to, for/ him, her) can stand in for pretty much any person/s involved in a sentence, even an animal - and the verb endings in 3d person sg are mostly not heard to be distinct from other persons. So if you're speaking, and sometimes in writing too, it's easy to sneak off giving any gender information.

Sometimes that way of doing it in French can create confusion though, not so much about gender but on *who* you are talking about with that 'on'.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Ephiral

On my phone, and most of this seems in good hands, so I'll limit myself to a few points I haven't seen addressed.
Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 05:00:09 AM
Blythe:
My point about the Cisgender bit is two fold. One is that it's a practical political disaster. People will look at you as if you're from mars and with good reason. Two is that bit about ambiguity. Cis refers to gender matching sex in an individual... well you can leave out the bit about gender. It's not about gender, except as a substitute for a soul, that magical more you than you thing behind your eyes. So let's drop that.

If you had a similar word for people that "Are not especially black, don't identify as black and don't involve themselves in the concerns of the black community" then we'd more clearly see the problem:
Point the first: Hi. I'm a genderfluid hard-line atheist.  I don't really understand what you mean by "soul". When I refer to myself as fluid or you as cis, I'm talking about what's going on in our brains. I don't think you even understand the terms you're disparaging, and it's certainly not due to lack of outreach.

Point the second: We do. The word is "white". Are you going to argue that combating racism is a bad idea and black people should be "isolated" so they don't bother the rest of us? Or does this show you the fundamental problem with your position?

Oniya

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 10:19:44 AM
Point the second: We do. The word is "white". Are you going to argue that combating racism is a bad idea and black people should be "isolated" so they don't bother the rest of us? Or does this show you the fundamental problem with your position?

Actually, the set of 'non-black individuals' consists of whites, Asians, Native Americans, Hispanics, etc.  It's just as non-homogenous as any set that derives its meaning solely from the absence of a particular factor. 
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Ephiral

Quote from: Oniya on March 19, 2013, 11:39:47 AM
Actually, the set of 'non-black individuals' consists of whites, Asians, Native Americans, Hispanics, etc.  It's just as non-homogenous as any set that derives its meaning solely from the absence of a particular factor.
Point taken. So this is just a really poor analogy.

Oniya

Yep.  ;)  You can define 'cis-gendered' without any reference to 'trans-gendered' by saying it's people who identify mentally with their physical gender.  However, the origin of the word itself is kind of esoteric in that most people who haven't studied chemistry wouldn't catch that cis- and trans- are opposites.  (I was lucky - my college roommate was a biology/chemistry double major.)  Unfortunately, the average reaction many people have to being called by an unfamiliar word is 'Did that person just insult me?'  Try telling someone that their mother is pulchritudinous, and you're likely to get a dirty look.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Ephiral

All right, back at a proper computer.
Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 05:00:09 AM
Again, the point of admitting there's something besides male and female, even beyond just transitioning between the two categories is that sex is ambiguous and sex roles are ambiguous. That's good. That's a mess. Messes are fun. Why add jargon?

As for the difficulty with pronouns... well it happens that you don't really solve anything by adding extra ones. No matter who or what you talk about using pronouns you always have to rerefer to the subject every so often, even when you haven't changed subjects. We have no trouble distinguishing between plural they and singular they, we have trouble distinguishing between any two things being referred to by the same pronouns.

The argument for the pronouns doesn't seem to root in the difficulty of writing about transexual people at all. The difficulty seems to come up when someone insists on transexual people needing a special category, sets of rules and jargon so they they won't feel offended.

(I'm betting the offended are a minority within a minority, so I'm not too concerned about the offense angle.)
This passage here is awfully revealing, Ack Arg... and it doesn't cast you in a very good light, I'm afraid. You're speaking from a position of massive privilege. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's invisible to you; perhaps this is the first social justice issue you've ever seriously thought about.

It's not about fun. It's not about celebrating ambiguity. It's not about muddying the English language. It's not about being special. It's about real people, a large percentage of whom experience not just offense, but real psychological distress, at being trapped in the wrong body and perceived as something they're not. This hurts a number of people, and drives a terrifyingly high suicide rate among trans* people. And that's without getting into the outright violence that is enabled and occasionally condoned by a society fixed on binary gender. It's about letting these people have even a chance at going about their lives without constantly being made to feel other, less, unwelcome, and unsafe. And for the record, no, the offended are not a 'minority within a minority'. In my experience, I'm in the minority in that I only occasionally get mildly annoyed by being misgendered.

In fact, I'll go a step further - it's about not being special. It's about being able to feel the same comfort and confidence in one's identity, and in society's acceptance of that, that you so clearly take for granted every day. It's also a bit about raising visibility and understanding, so that maybe someday being trans* won't be a special case worthy of shunning, harassment, legal action, violence, and death. It's about trying to, as you so eloquently put it, just be people in a society that will actually allow that to happen.

gaggedLouise

#47
I remember reading a thread at IMDB where Alicia Keys was blamed - by a dozen people, most of them Americans it seemed, and some likely black Americans - for "trying too hard to be black"...  ;D Very interesting kind of criticism. The supposed point was that she had no birthright or cultural right to act black in her music and the way she is in general, talking to the media and so on, and was overstating all of that, so she should wind it down.

At least it serves to show that someone who identifies with one end of a scale that's seen as binary by most people can also come under attack by the folks they want to connect with, wish to embrace or be seen as one with. For comparison, there are people who think Keith Jarrett isn't black enough as an artist. Actually he's about 40 or 50% black I think (data on that are kinda vague) but no one could deny that he comes out of jazz, that it's one primary root of who he is as a musician.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Top Cat

Quote from: gaggedLouise on March 19, 2013, 12:53:20 PM
I remember reading a thread at IMDB where Alicia Keys was blamed - by a dozen people, most of them Americans it seemed, and some likely black Americans - for "trying too hard to be black"...  ;D Very interesting kind of criticism. The supposed point was that she had no birthright or cultural right to act black in her music and the way she is in general, talking to the media and so on, and was overstating all of that, so she should wind it down.

At least it serves to show that someone who identifies with one end of a scale that's seen as binary by most people can also come under attack by the folks they want to connect with, wish to embrace or be seen as one with. For comparison, there are people who think Keith Jarrett isn't black enough as an artist. Actually he's about 40 or 50% black I think (data on that are kinda vague) but no one could deny that he comes out of jazz, that it's one primary root of who he is as a musician.
All of this speaks of tribalism, a "reptile brain" response. Either you're one of us, or you're not, hard lines drawn around one's own identity, to connect to those who are like you. There's naturally a stigma attached to those who are perceived (rightly or wrongly) to be pretending to be like you - it feels like deception, poorly executed. Alicia shouldn't be made to feel like an outsider for being black, being white, being female, or whatever box she chooses to put herself in... but there are those who insist on maintaining a "purity" in their racial/social identity associations. And "mutts" are often reviled by all sides, because they're not X enough to be my identity-type. Mulattos are often seen as not-black by black folks, and not-white by white folks, when they're actually both.

Keith Jarrett has it a little easier, because Jazz, as a culture, is inclusive, not exclusive. If you can lay down a jazz riff, you're a jazz musician. It doesn't matter if you're black, white, green, coffee-with-creamer brown, or anything else - as long as you sound right, you're in the box. His being authentically Jazz matters more than whether he's pure black or not - at least, to other Jazz musicians. For the black community as a whole, he may well receive some of the same negative reaction as Alicia... but if he only moves in Jazz circles and Jazz-respecting circles, it stops mattering as much.

The alternative gender pool is small enough, that it's much harder to move in social circles comprised entirely of people who are like you or respecting of your differences. You're almost forced to either hide your differences from most people, or brazenly flaunt it and force people to react. Neither is ideal.

Apologies for the semi-topical rambling. It seemed important when I started... Identity is the core of the entire discussion, after all.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

gaggedLouise

#49
Right on the money, Top Cat. Just adding about Jarrett that when I was saying some people think he isn't black enough as an artist, I mostly meant they perceive him as being musically not black enough, not pure black or even "purely jazz", because of how he's moulded other traditions into his music: European folk music, classical piano, and of course his own brand of improvisation. But so what? Jazz has always been an inclusive crossover music - to some extent - and the encounter with European classical and folk music goes back at least to the time of Gershwin and Stravinsky (who composed a couple of ragtime pieces around 1920 and kept an eye on what was happening in jazz - and conversely lots of jazz musicians must have felt kicked by The Firebird and The Rite of Spring). And it's long since stopped being just "the music of black folks" too. I'd say Keith Jarrett unites strains of European and American music, black and white and latino, and that's part of what makes him so exciting. It's quite a symbolic fact that he was born on VE Day.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Shadow879

*takes Louise's hand*

Lol now you guys are in music, and I can't follow any of that :P

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 12:41:09 PM
All right, back at a proper computer. This passage here is awfully revealing, Ack Arg... and it doesn't cast you in a very good light, I'm afraid. You're speaking from a position of massive privilege. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's invisible to you; perhaps this is the first social justice issue you've ever seriously thought about.

It's not about fun. It's not about celebrating ambiguity. It's not about muddying the English language. It's not about being special. It's about real people, a large percentage of whom experience not just offense, but real psychological distress, at being trapped in the wrong body and perceived as something they're not. This hurts a number of people, and drives a terrifyingly high suicide rate among trans* people. And that's without getting into the outright violence that is enabled and occasionally condoned by a society fixed on binary gender. It's about letting these people have even a chance at going about their lives without constantly being made to feel other, less, unwelcome, and unsafe. And for the record, no, the offended are not a 'minority within a minority'. In my experience, I'm in the minority in that I only occasionally get mildly annoyed by being misgendered.

In fact, I'll go a step further - it's about not being special. It's about being able to feel the same comfort and confidence in one's identity, and in society's acceptance of that, that you so clearly take for granted every day. It's also a bit about raising visibility and understanding, so that maybe someday being trans* won't be a special case worthy of shunning, harassment, legal action, violence, and death. It's about trying to, as you so eloquently put it, just be people in a society that will actually allow that to happen.

Ephiral, you said it better than I ever could :)




I wonder if he'll be back?
Never back down, never look back.

How to make love to the Dark

Ephiral

Quote from: Shadow879 on March 19, 2013, 05:28:22 PMEphiral, you said it better than I ever could :)

I wonder if he'll be back?
*blush* Thanks. I wasn't sure I'd struck quite the right note, so it's good to know this landed with someone. And honestly? I hope so. I always kinda hope that people like that can come to actual understanding, and maybe even become allies.

Azrael

At the end of the day it is no great hardship to identify people the way they want to be identified, we have learnt enough words for the world (most of us...) a few more pronouns is a simple enough thing to learn that will make other people feel much better about themselves.  And it does make a big difference, I am transgender and being referred to as 'her' is great.  Sometimes my friends forget, especially the friends I have known all my life, because it is a habit.  that is fine, I don't get offended by that at all.  I know people take a strong visual cue, and I look male, so they assume 'he' which is fair enough.  Interestingly with that visual element taken out, in online conversations 99 times out of a hundred people assume I am female.  What is offensive is when someone deliberately and knowing uses the wrong pronoun.  I have legally changed my name, and a friend's ex, with whom I have never gotten along, insists on using my old name and male pronouns on the rare occasions I have bumped into them.

There is a case for a reduction in terms in certain situations, personally I would like to see all jobs have a single title, we don't need police men and police women, we just need a single term because their job is the point of the title, not their private lives.  On the other hand in social settings for example I think it is good to embrace variety, it is after all the spice of life.  People are fascinating, they do and think amazing things, why restrict that in any way?
Non-binary, sometimes femme-ish, fae tiger.

Ack Arg



Well, once again we're not making good distinctions. If i can't point out that friends ought to be people that have responsibilities beyond reaffirming what you think and esteeming you for what you do without being assumed to be trying to imply... hold on, what was it?

Quote from: Shadow879 on March 19, 2013, 06:09:20 AM
So what you're telling me is that hanging out with people who accept me for who I am and call me "she" as I ask them to instead of saying, "No, you're a boy, because you have a penis" even though I am transitioning to female is unhealthy?  It's not a "free pass," it's acceptance, and decency. I interpreted your statement as implying that my transitioning to female is just a fantasy.

The functional reality here is that because I don't have a liege tag I don't get any benefit of the doubt as to what my views are and I'm definitely not allowed seperate my personal views from a reasonable arguement. Not that I've said them, I've had personal views assigned to me.

I'm a bigot because someone said I'm a bigot. I can't even suggest there is a population of people that do not accept a premise and have reasons for doing so. Not even for the very practical purpose of pointing out the consequences of insisting on radical changes to public language.

I'm the cis guy, the hetero guy, what comes out of mouth is suspect. If I'm not on board with the pronouns... well we know why don't we? I think that's a great demonstration of the use of label.

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 12:41:09 PM
All right, back at a proper computer. This passage here is awfully revealing, Ack Arg... and it doesn't cast you in a very good light, I'm afraid. You're speaking from a position of massive privilege. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's invisible to you; perhaps this is the first social justice issue you've ever seriously thought about...

...In fact, I'll go a step further - it's about not being special. It's about being able to feel the same comfort and confidence in one's identity, and in society's acceptance of that, that you so clearly take for granted every day. It's also a bit about raising visibility and understanding, so that maybe someday being trans* won't be a special case worthy of shunning, harassment, legal action, violence, and death. It's about trying to, as you so eloquently put it, just be people in a society that will actually allow that to happen.

I think this is quite s bit like giving a fraud the benefit of the doubt by saying they're not a liar, they're merely an idiot.

As it happens white heterosexual men as a population are not free of anxiety by default. We can talk about that but I don't get the impression we're having a real conversation here.

I can spell out some of these things in long form but what I suspect I'd be doing defending it my intellect, not enlightening anyone. Even so, I do enjoy hearing myself talk and might just indulge myself there.
Returning after long... long hiatus. May be slow to find a rhythm.

Kythia

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 06:46:32 PM

Well, once again we're not making good distinctions. If i can't point out that friends ought to be people that have responsibilities beyond reaffirming what you think and esteeming you for what you do without being assumed to be trying to imply... hold on, what was it?

The functional reality here is that because I don't have a liege tag I don't get any benefit of the doubt as to what my views are and I'm definitely not allowed seperate my personal views from a reasonable arguement. Not that I've said them, I've had personal views assigned to me.

I'm a bigot because someone said I'm a bigot. I can't even suggest there is a population of people that do not accept a premise and have reasons for doing so. Not even for the very practical purpose of pointing out the consequences of insisting on radical changes to public language.

I'm the cis guy, the hetero guy, what comes out of mouth is suspect. If I'm not on board with the pronouns... well we know why don't we? I think that's a great demonstration of the use of label.

I think this is quite s bit like giving a fraud the benefit of the doubt by saying they're not a liar, they're merely an idiot.

As it happens white heterosexual men as a population are not free of anxiety by default. We can talk about that but I don't get the impression we're having a real conversation here.

I can spell out some of these things in long form but what I suspect I'd be doing defending it my intellect, not enlightening anyone. Even so, I do enjoy hearing myself talk and might just indulge myself there.

I do honestly feel you're doing various people who have posted in this thread a disservice here.  I'm white, "cishet", etc.  Able bodied too.  And free from all but the least crippling mental illnesses.  But I haven't found my views minimised or stereeotype-ised (its a word) at all.  Now, maybe Im just dense and haven't spotted people laughing up their sleeves at me, sure thats possible. 

But I think what is happening is...well, have you heard a phrase "check your privilege?"  What I think people are saying is that its very easy to look around and say "hmmm, the world looks peachy to me, dont see the issue" and forget that what you're saying is "the world looks peachy from where I'm stood" not "the world objectively is peachy."  Does that make any sense?
242037

Blythe

Ack, I see your argument about the pronouns. You object to the use of the labels because you find them constricting and limiting, whether you're a straight man comfortable in his gender and sexuality or a transman uncomfortable about being bi. You like the more fluid aspect of not defining things directly, leaving room for more variety. At least, that's what I've been seeing in your posts, I think.

But I don't necessarily find labels harmful or constricting. I find that they help for easy identification and understanding. What I find limiting, and this seems to be what you're complaining about, are stereotypes, base and incorrect assumptions about certain labels. You seem to think we're stereotyping cisgendered individuals, but we're not. We're merely talking about a society that is predominantly cisgendered, a fact that can't be avoided, and therefore considering the issue of alternative gender pronouns and viability in such a society. You disagree with the usage and viability of altenative gender pronouns. Understood.

Blythe

Eph, you might want to take a step or two back and calm down, all right? Re-enter the discussion in a little while.

EDIT: Ack, might be a good idea if you did the same.

Top Cat

I think you may be carrying a bit of a chip on your shoulder there, Ack Arg. I'm hetero, and I'm not getting the antagonism you seem to feel you're receiving.

QuoteThe functional reality here is that because I don't have a liege tag I don't get any benefit of the doubt as to what my views are and I'm definitely not allowed seperate my personal views from a reasonable arguement.
This alone is flat-out false.

QuoteNot that I've said them, I've had personal views assigned to me.
At least some of your opinion can be inferred from how you're approaching the subject. If someone is making incorrect assumptions about you, it's on you to correct and clarify, not just stomp around and claim people don't understand you.

QuoteIf i can't point out that friends ought to be people that have responsibilities beyond reaffirming what you think and esteeming you for what you do without being assumed to be trying to imply... hold on, what was it?
Well, you either seem to be assuming the worst here, or you're deliberately skewing the discussion. Friends can accept who you are without trying to force you into societal norms. If your friends are constantly trying to change you to fit their preconceptions about the world, they're not very good friends. That goes double for partners. That doesn't mean that your friends can't tell you when you're being an idiot about something, or tell you off when you need to be told off.

But someone's self-perception isn't typically something up for debate. I'm heterosexual. If I had a gay friend who tried to insist that there truly aren't any heterosexual people, that everyone was some shade of bisexual, odds are good he wouldn't remain a friend for very long - particularly if his reason for arguing that was to try to get in my pants.

This goes for any self-perception issue, not just gender/sexual ones. I'm a furry, for example. I had one friend who didn't understand and didn't appreciate furry culture at all. But he accepted that I was a furry, and accepted that perhaps he just couldn't understand it, because he had no interest in it. If, on the other hand, he had started banging a furries-are-perverts drum, instead of trying to understand the appeal, he wouldn't have remained my friend.

I have lesbian friends. I have a genderfluid friend (and note, I'm making a distinction between friends and acquaintances here. I speak to both regularly, and the genderfluid friend is now on E). I'm not threatened by their self-perceptions, and I'm not interested in trying to make them fit into a heterosexual or bisexual "box," because that's not who they are.

Edit:
Quote from: Blythe on March 19, 2013, 06:59:55 PM
Ack, I see your argument about the pronouns. You object to the use of the labels because you find them constricting and limiting, whether you're a straight man comfortable in his gender and sexuality or a transman uncomfortable about being bi. You like the more fluid aspect of not defining things directly, leaving room for more variety. At least, that's what I've been seeing in your posts, I think.

But I don't necessarily find labels harmful or constricting. I find that they help for easy identification and understanding. What I find limiting, and this seems to be what you're complaining about, are stereotypes, base and incorrect assumptions about certain labels. You seem to think we're stereotyping cisgendered individuals, but we're not. We're merely talking about a society that is predominantly cisgendered, a fact that can't be avoided, and therefore considering the issue of alternative gender pronouns and viability in such a society. You disagree with the usage and viability of altenative gender pronouns. Understood.
I see no harm in the self-application of alternative gender pronouns, but as I've said before, I think that widespread usage and adoption might lead to some aggressive (violent) tribalism toward alternate-gendered individuals, that they might not have had otherwise. However, the biggest problem that we have here is that we can't do social experiments in a controlled test bed - we can only do it live, and any changes we make would probably suffer from the law of unintended consequences.

English is a finicky bitch of a language, thanks to its centuries of robbing from other languages. Start small; if it's a change worth making, it'll ripple out naturally.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Ephiral

Quote from: Blythe on March 19, 2013, 07:09:38 PM
Eph, you might want to take a step or two back and calm down, all right? Re-enter the discussion in a little while.

EDIT: Ack, might be a good idea if you did the same.
...thanks. I appreciate this.

Blythe

Quote from: Top Cat on March 19, 2013, 07:10:30 PM
Edit: I see no harm in the self-application of alternative gender pronouns, but as I've said before, I think that widespread usage and adoption might lead to some aggressive (violent) tribalism toward alternate-gendered individuals, that they might not have had otherwise. However, the biggest problem that we have here is that we can't do social experiments in a controlled test bed - we can only do it live, and any changes we make would probably suffer from the law of unintended consequences.

English is a finicky bitch of a language, thanks to its centuries of robbing from other languages. Start small; if it's a change worth making, it'll ripple out naturally.

I'll take some time to contemplate this. You bring up a valid issue and point. And yes, legitimate social experiments with this are essentially impossible.

As an English teacher, I agree that English is finicky indeed.

Azrael

English is a finicky language, but then the world is a finicky place, not everything needs to be or can be simplified.  There certainly is a point about not creating gaps and divisions, but then I also think that some people just pick on others because they want to, or because they can.  They might do it because of a different pronoun but then they might do it because you wear glasses, or support a different sports team.  Everyone is so different already that I wouldn't personally worry about a little bit more.
Non-binary, sometimes femme-ish, fae tiger.

Vekseid

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 06:46:32 PM
The functional reality here is that because I don't have a liege tag I don't get any benefit of the doubt as to what my views are and I'm definitely not allowed seperate my personal views from a reasonable arguement. Not that I've said them, I've had personal views assigned to me.

I'm a bigot because someone said I'm a bigot. I can't even suggest there is a population of people that do not accept a premise and have reasons for doing so. Not even for the very practical purpose of pointing out the consequences of insisting on radical changes to public language.

I'm the cis guy, the hetero guy, what comes out of mouth is suspect. If I'm not on board with the pronouns... well we know why don't we? I think that's a great demonstration of the use of label.

I think this is quite s bit like giving a fraud the benefit of the doubt by saying they're not a liar, they're merely an idiot.

As it happens white heterosexual men as a population are not free of anxiety by default. We can talk about that but I don't get the impression we're having a real conversation here

It might do to understand why the liege tag was created.

The final straw was a member joining who was genetically (46 XX/46 XY, phenotypically ('physically' - as in they had, and were born with, both a penis and a vagina), and mentally intersexed.

At that point I just couldn't ignore it any longer. I put it off for a lot longer than I should have, simply because, even among trans and intersexed populations, most do have a preferred gender. Some ten percent of Elliquiy's population is in some way non gender-normative, and this includes people who may not actually be aware of it (Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome and XX Male syndrome, for example). The Liege tag is more of a message to others telling them that they are not alone.

You are entitled to your own opinions, but facts are shared amongst all. The truth of the matter is, no matter how much you might like to have clean divisions, there is no such thing.

The more important truth is - these people are still people, and their problems are still problems. They are real, regardless of whether or not you want to admit that they are real.

Do heterosexual, cisgender white males have problems in society that we shouldn't have? Certainly. But the non-normative groups generally have it worse, and there is no group more discriminated against than those of non-normative gender.

And it's not to say we can't say anything. I've never seen much pushback against my reasoning for keeping with male/female/other for gender selection - I tried making a list of different genders, gave up at thirty. I tend not to use hir/shi/etc. either, instead call them by their preferred gender or, if genderless, them/their/they/etc. a number of truly genderless people generally don't care, as long as you avoid 'it'.

Blythe

*cheers for Vekseid's post*

And Top Cat, when I find some decent (or tolerable) sources, I might have thought of something regarding your point. I'll get around to posting it when I have it passably written and organized.

Ephiral

All right, trying this again, and let's see if I can keep it short and sweet:

Ack Arg, nobody here is saying that your concerns are illegitimate (though they are expressed very poorly in some cases). Nobody is saying that your opinion doesn't matter or is automatically suspect because you're a cis white hetero man. What we are saying is that you're concerned about comfort, while trans* people are concerned about justice and safety. I hope you can understand that the two are not equivalent.

(Also, when you claim that other people said things they did not (things that you said!), while complaining that people are assigning statements and positions to you? That makes what you say suspect. This is very disingenuous, and provably false. If you want to be taken at face value and in good faith, this might not be the best road to go down.)

Ack Arg





1) Not against the liege tag. Hope I didn't give that impression.

2) Not speaking from emotion here. Tempted to actually take the bigot position for my own amusement but I think it would give folks too much satisfaction to do so.

3) I don't see how you saying I'm concerned about comfort while transexuals are categorically concerned about justice and safety is supposed to make me take you seriously.


Anything else?
Returning after long... long hiatus. May be slow to find a rhythm.

Blythe

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 08:31:12 PM
2) Not speaking from emotion here. Tempted to actually take the bigot position for my own amusement but I think it would give folks too much satisfaction to do so.

It wouldn't satisfy anyone, so don't.

Ephiral

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 08:31:12 PM3) I don't see how you saying I'm concerned about comfort while transexuals are categorically concerned about justice and safety is supposed to make me take you seriously.
...because your rights aren't being denied; your objection seems to be based solely on your discomfort/percieved inability to communicate with third-gender pronouns. Trans* people, on the other hand, have to worry about real psychological and physical harm, a lot of which is facilitated by their invisibility in mainstream society. Are you really saying that you expect to be beaten or killed because you won't use alt pronouns? Or do you think trans* people are making that part up? I really don't see how you can possibly consider your concerns equivalent if you don't hold one of these positions.

Top Cat

For the record, Vekseid, I actually adore the Liege tag. Here, at, Elliquiy, it matters. Tribalistic bullshit ("Othering") isn't tolerated, so the tag is purely a positive sense of identity for many (10%? Wow). That's what people need - to feel comfortable, welcome, as themselves. And this site does a terrific job at that. My genderfluid friend was ecstatic at being able to be a Liege.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Ephiral

Quote from: Top Cat on March 19, 2013, 09:13:45 PM
For the record, Vekseid, I actually adore the Liege tag. Here, at, Elliquiy, it matters. Tribalistic bullshit ("Othering") isn't tolerated, so the tag is purely a positive sense of identity for many (10%? Wow). That's what people need - to feel comfortable, welcome, as themselves. And this site does a terrific job at that. My genderfluid friend was ecstatic at being able to be a Liege.
Your friend isn't the only one. For some of us, this is the first place we've ever felt comfortable just being completely out from day one. And I, for one, am forever appreciative that E's community and staff go to such great lengths to make that true.

And yeah, 10%? That's... wow. I wonder if E's community drives that number up, because my gut says it's way high for the population at large.

Ack Arg


Ephiral:
This isn't personal. It's not about your interest group versus my interest group. Call it corporatism or tribalism or or whatever you like, it's not interesting to me.


Quote from: Blythe on March 19, 2013, 08:46:00 PM
It wouldn't satisfy anyone, so don't.

Yup. If I can't make a joke I'm clearly in the wrong thread.

'Scuse me folks.
Returning after long... long hiatus. May be slow to find a rhythm.

Braioch

E is the first place I've known to offer that and as I've been more involved in E, I've adored that it's there. Mind you I'm Cis, so the tag is of no use to me, but nevertheless I've always found it to be neat, then growing into being something that was actually pretty awesome. E's always been inclusive for all walks of life, with sole exception of assholes, but that isn't a complaint you'll hear from me. I always thought it fit a great purpose and to be fair, I don't even really pay attention to those tags other than taking a cursory glance at someone and gaining surface information about them.

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 09:18:26 PM
Ephiral:
This isn't personal. It's not about your interest group versus my interest group. Call it corporatism or tribalism or or whatever you like, it's not interesting to me.

Not to be rude, then why are you in this thread that is going to cover this particular interest group?
I'm also on Discord (like, all the time), so feel free to ask about that if you want

[tr]
   [td]
[/td]
   [td]
[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

Blythe

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 09:18:26 PM
Yup. If I can't make a joke I'm clearly in the wrong thread.

'Scuse me folks.

You can joke. I'm fine with that. You can't joke about taking a bigoted position just to amuse yourself. That's not what this thread is for, and that's suspiciously close to trolling. So no, you can't do that. This is a serious discussion. Please take it seriously or exit the discussion.

Doncamiel

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 09:16:21 PM
Your friend isn't the only one. For some of us, this is the first place we've ever felt comfortable just being completely out from day one. And I, for one, am forever appreciative that E's community and staff go to such great lengths to make that true.

And yeah, 10%? That's... wow. I wonder if E's community drives that number up, because my gut says it's way high for the population at large.

I'm betting it does a bit. Like you said, people are comfortable being out from day 1...far more so than they're going to be for the census and poll-takers...

Ephiral

Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 09:18:26 PM
Ephiral:
This isn't personal. It's not about your interest group versus my interest group. Call it corporatism or tribalism or or whatever you like, it's not interesting to me.
When your entire argument is that our concerns aren't worthy of even basic civility because you find it awkward? Yes, yes it is. Claiming otherwise is just baldly false.


Quote from: Ack Arg on March 19, 2013, 09:18:26 PMYup. If I can't make a joke I'm clearly in the wrong thread.

'Scuse me folks.
You'll find that people get sensitive when you "joke" about how they're unworthy of basic civility and completely dismiss their civil rights concerns. Funny, that.

Vekseid

Quote from: Top Cat on March 19, 2013, 09:13:45 PM
For the record, Vekseid, I actually adore the Liege tag. Here, at, Elliquiy, it matters. Tribalistic bullshit ("Othering") isn't tolerated, so the tag is purely a positive sense of identity for many (10%? Wow). That's what people need - to feel comfortable, welcome, as themselves. And this site does a terrific job at that. My genderfluid friend was ecstatic at being able to be a Liege.

Most don't use the Liege tag. Most non-normatives don't advertise their status, and some aren't even aware of it. My estimate of Elliquiy's population demographics is, by necessity, pretty rough, but a statistical extrapolation suggests about 10%. I wouldn't expand this to the general population, of course, for obvious reasons, but there are a lot more non-normative people out there than even transgenders seem to realize.

Missy

I personally think the Liege tag is pretty cool, I admire people who can be themselves and comfortable with it. Even if that is only in some places for some, I hope society will improve eventually. I think the best thing about the tag for me is that it makes me curious about gender identity theory, even if I am often too shy to ask and it ends up just being pushed onto a lost of things to do.

As for the original topic: I think the primary issue with third-gender pronouns comes from implementation. I would like to see them in action and I would use them out of support for the transgender community, but I don't see it coming to be for a while, at least not generally. No change worthwhile will ever happen overnight however, so just because it takes a while doesn't mean it shan't can't be done.

I also agree with Alice somewhat on her statements of gender. I'm personally of the opinion that the difference between genders, and especially cisgendered opposites, is overstated. Just as one point of evidence is I've met more than one transfemale individual whose into stereotypically male activities such as first person shooters or strategy games. This suggestion is also backed up by studies done having nothing to do with transgenderism in which adults were told an infant was a specific gender (not always the true or accurate gender) and then given a series of toy options to give them child based on his or her perceived gender. Generally the toy given was the stereotypically assigned item, the child ultimately followed what was given to him or her based on an adults impression and not actuality. The concept that most gendered behaviors are learned could be further supported by the fact that in most instances elementary aged children associate almost exclusively with members of their own gender. So I'm personally of the belief that many of our strongest held beliefs about gender are little more than the result of a social construct. I do honestly wonder if the roles were reversed, how persons of one cisgender or the other might react.

Greytrail

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 09:16:21 PM
Your friend isn't the only one. For some of us, this is the first place we've ever felt comfortable just being completely out from day one. And I, for one, am forever appreciative that E's community and staff go to such great lengths to make that true.

And yeah, 10%? That's... wow. I wonder if E's community drives that number up, because my gut says it's way high for the population at large.
Hi, I'm TopCat's genderfluid friend and I've been reading the backlog of this discussion. Now, I don't always feel I have the words to get involved in conversations such as this, but this comment caught my eye. (and I'm not gonna stay quiet, dammit!) I haven't had a lot of nibbles for RPing at this site, but that's secondary to the Liege thing. It's very cool, freeing even to be able to experiment with oneself. (Not like that, you pervs. :)  I've lived long enough to grow resigned to the shape I was born to, but my imagination is a more comfortable place than the physical for me anyway. So, this forum is an excellent place for any sense of safety we that don't fit in could find. Yes, I've probably repeated things already said in this thread, but there's my take on it.

As for those that 'don't get it', I don't agree with you, but I understand you. You cannot know the aching discomfort with being disassociated with something so completely integral to the human experience as our sexuality and our very personal gender identity any more than I can know what I would have been like to indeed, be my mother's other son.

Greytrail

About this 10% thing? Years ago, my younger sister and I had a fascinating conversation about homosexuality as a biological modification to the human species. If it were a true mutation (same as our walking upright and have true thumbs) the numbers would be a solid 25%. That's always made me look around and wonder who the one in four were and what sort of world we could be if fear were less of a factor. As a younger entity, might I have had the freedom to try at least living LIKE a man? I wonder what sort of comfort that freedom would have brought me.

10%? No, I don't have any trouble believing that at all.

Ephiral

Quote from: Greytrail Ravenswolf on March 19, 2013, 10:19:44 PM
About this 10% thing? Years ago, my younger sister and I had a fascinating conversation about homosexuality as a biological modification to the human species. If it were a true mutation (same as our walking upright and have true thumbs) the numbers would be a solid 25%. That's always made me look around and wonder who the one in four were and what sort of world we could be if fear were less of a factor. As a younger entity, might I have had the freedom to try at least living LIKE a man? I wonder what sort of comfort that freedom would have brought me.

10%? No, I don't have any trouble believing that at all.
Well, current research points to gender-identity issues having nothing to do with genetics. It appears to be related to the dosages and timing of a fairly complex series of batches of prenatal hormones. So... that would drive the numbers down. And in my experience, the numbers who are willing to come to even a closed, secluded meeting are depressingly small. Then again, Veks might have had a point about people who aren't aware of it - that was the case with me for a depressingly long time.

Greytrail

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 10:24:11 PM
Well, current research points to gender-identity issues having nothing to do with genetics. It appears to be related to the dosages and timing of a fairly complex series of batches of prenatal hormones. So... that would drive the numbers down. And in my experience, the numbers who are willing to come to even a closed, secluded meeting are depressingly small. Then again, Veks might have had a point about people who aren't aware of it - that was the case with me for a depressingly long time.
Ah, back to the old 'nature vs nurture' debate, eh? As for figuring out, I do agree that it is more psychology than biology. But the discussion with my sister was a good place to start.

Vekseid

10% of -Elliquiy-, not of the general population. Mutations don't evenly distribute themselves - that's what natural selection is all about. Elliquiy is a place where we want you to feel actively accepted, even if we don't always meet that goal very well for various reasons. By the very nature of being non-normative people like you are more likely to seek out and find places like this.

Homosexuality being so common actually probably has more to do with homosexual behavior itself being attractive to mates. It's a transposed mutation - part of one chromosome hops to another - but it's ridiculously common considering how counterintuitive spreading it would be. Given I've met two lesbians who were open to the idea of trying things with me for a time, I do think there's something to suggest that homosexual behavior in humans thrives for the same reason it does in the animal kingdom.

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 10:24:11 PM
Well, current research points to gender-identity issues having nothing to do with genetics. It appears to be related to the dosages and timing of a fairly complex series of batches of prenatal hormones. So... that would drive the numbers down. And in my experience, the numbers who are willing to come to even a closed, secluded meeting are depressingly small. Then again, Veks might have had a point about people who aren't aware of it - that was the case with me for a depressingly long time.

Met one transwoman who got outed to herself by a friend. It certainly happens.

Ephiral

Quote from: Greytrail Ravenswolf on March 19, 2013, 10:34:56 PM
Ah, back to the old 'nature vs nurture' debate, eh? As for figuring out, I do agree that it is more psychology than biology. But the discussion with my sister was a good place to start.
Oh, no - what I'm saying is that the cause of gender identity itself is biological - it has to do with the way the brain develops. It's just not genetic. Not a mutation, not hereditary. And that doesn't mean that any behaviour or preference we classify as 'masculine' or 'feminine' is inherent - that's pretty much pure social construct.

Top Cat

QuoteThen again, Veks might have had a point about people who aren't aware of it - that was the case with me for a depressingly long time.
*nod* Greytrail is a friend of mine for over 20 years. When we first met, we were hormonal teenagers, and she was, at that time, a somewhat uncomfortable hetero female; I wasn't the only guy in our social circle who was carrying a torch for her. Some 5 years later, she found someone she could really connect with, and announced to all of her friends that she was gay. These days, she's still discovering her identity, and finds that she enjoys writing hetero smut with a male perspective. *shrug* For some people, it's as much a journey as a state of being.

(And yes, I'm writing about all of this with her permission)

For someone who is only aware of the concepts of male/female, straight/gay/bisexual, how would someone discover that they "feel" male in a female body? It's like trying to describe a symphony, when you haven't ever been exposed to music. You don't even have the concepts to work from, much less the words. And attempting to strike out into that unknown can be fucking terrifying. For some, it's better to stick with a "safe" label, even if it's not really a comfortable fit.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Ephiral

Quote from: Vekseid on March 19, 2013, 10:35:54 PMMet one transwoman who got outed to herself by a friend. It certainly happens.
Yeah, I got outed to myself while doing research to support a trans friend. When I came out to my friends, the general consensus was "This isn't news, but it's nice to have a word for it."

Greytrail

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 10:38:06 PM
Oh, no - what I'm saying is that the cause of gender identity itself is biological - it has to do with the way the brain develops. It's just not genetic. Not a mutation, not hereditary. And that doesn't mean that any behaviour or preference we classify as 'masculine' or 'feminine' is inherent - that's pretty much pure social construct.
Right, that makes more sense than what I said. Word choices can make me sound... muddy sometimes. But better to speak than be silent, eh?

Greytrail

Quote from: Top Cat on March 19, 2013, 10:38:50 PM
*nod* Greytrail is a friend of mine for over 20 years. When we first met, we were hormonal teenagers, and she was, at that time, a somewhat uncomfortable hetero female; I wasn't the only guy in our social circle who was carrying a torch for her. Some 5 years later, she found someone she could really connect with, and announced to all of her friends that she was gay. These days, she's still discovering her identity, and finds that she enjoys writing hetero smut with a male perspective. *shrug* For some people, it's as much a journey as a state of being.

(And yes, I'm writing about all of this with her permission)

For someone who is only aware of the concepts of male/female, straight/gay/bisexual, how would someone discover that they "feel" male in a female body? It's like trying to describe a symphony, when you haven't ever been exposed to music. You don't even have the concepts to work from, much less the words. And attempting to strike out into that unknown can be fucking terrifying. For some, it's better to stick with a "safe" label, even if it's not really a comfortable fit.
Yes indeed, he asked. And I like your description in that final paragraph even better than mine! My resigned attitude to what I was born as is simply my way of coping. even if I won the lottery and could get gender reassigned, it would still be only skin deep. But who knows? Maybe it would be worth it. And that statement ONLY applies to me.

DarklingAlice

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 09:16:21 PM
And yeah, 10%? That's... wow. I wonder if E's community drives that number up, because my gut says it's way high for the population at large.

It's probably higher in the general population than you think. Maybe not 10%...but still. The thing is, again: how often does it really come up? And how poor of sample groups are our IRL social circles? I think we can safely say that the demographic studies low-ball it because for every alternately gendered person willing to be open about it there are probably two who can't.

Quote from: Greytrail Ravenswolf on March 19, 2013, 10:19:44 PM
About this 10% thing? Years ago, my younger sister and I had a fascinating conversation about homosexuality as a biological modification to the human species. If it were a true mutation (same as our walking upright and have true thumbs) the numbers would be a solid 25%. That's always made me look around and wonder who the one in four were and what sort of world we could be if fear were less of a factor. As a younger entity, might I have had the freedom to try at least living LIKE a man? I wonder what sort of comfort that freedom would have brought me.

10%? No, I don't have any trouble believing that at all.

It's an interesting conversation, but there are nonmendelian inheritance patterns with multiple levels of penetrance. Not that sexuality or gender identity is genetic.

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 10:38:06 PM
Oh, no - what I'm saying is that the cause of gender identity itself is biological - it has to do with the way the brain develops. It's just not genetic. Not a mutation, not hereditary. And that doesn't mean that any behaviour or preference we classify as 'masculine' or 'feminine' is inherent - that's pretty much pure social construct.

Only a portion of the behaviors that contribute to what is called 'gender identity' (if that...research is sketchy) comes from hormonal exposure in the womb. It's how that meshes with societal constructs that matters and I am willing to bet that there are biologically normal males who are trans* for social reasons alone. Also things can be hereditary without being genetic mutations. Worth noting.

*goes off to try to replace her biology circuits before overload*
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


Ephiral

Alice, you never cease to be intriguing and insightful and give me something to think about. Sorry for mangling your discipline.  :-[

DarklingAlice

No sorry. I'm mainly just being a pedant. The point is that biological essentialism is almost never an appropriate explanation. Though it is often an expedient one for political purposes. It's far easier to pretend that sexuality and gendered behavior are inborn and thus not subject to choice than it is to understand that we are the sum of countless biochemical processes contextualized by our own individual life into a poorly understood conscious 'I' that can't simply choose to change its nature at a whim. It's just not, strictly, true. But if it helps to think about it that way it's not entirely wrong and I could just keep my mouth shut.

It's really similar to how HDL and LDL are not in fact any kind of sterol yet everyone will persist in calling them 'good' and 'bad' cholesterol. It's not true, but it's easier to understand than the truth and also will lead to similar decisions as knowing the truth.
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


Ephiral

Please don't apologise or shut up! I, at least, think it's pretty important to have a map of reality that has as much bearing on the territory as I can muster. It's never going to be perfect, of course, and sometimes it'll be easier to talk about things in simpler terms - but it's always good to be able to think about them accurately, at the very least. So thank you.

Greytrail

Quote from: Ephiral on March 19, 2013, 11:45:38 PM
Please don't apologise or shut up! I, at least, think it's pretty important to have a map of reality that has as much bearing on the territory as I can muster. It's never going to be perfect, of course, and sometimes it'll be easier to talk about things in simpler terms - but it's always good to be able to think about them accurately, at the very least. So thank you.
I agree. Talking things out is always a good thing!

Top Cat

#91
Quote from: DarklingAlice on March 19, 2013, 11:26:53 PM
No sorry. I'm mainly just being a pedant. The point is that biological essentialism is almost never an appropriate explanation. Though it is often an expedient one for political purposes. It's far easier to pretend that sexuality and gendered behavior are inborn and thus not subject to choice than it is to understand that we are the sum of countless biochemical processes contextualized by our own individual life into a poorly understood conscious 'I' that can't simply choose to change its nature at a whim. It's just not, strictly, true. But if it helps to think about it that way it's not entirely wrong and I could just keep my mouth shut.
It's really similar to how HDL and LDL are not in fact any kind of sterol yet everyone will persist in calling them 'good' and 'bad' cholesterol. It's not true, but it's easier to understand than the truth and also will lead to similar decisions as knowing the truth.
I had a fairly long, elaborate post written, but upon reading it, I realized that it was rambling and didn't really get to a point... and the way I was stating things could be badly misinterpreted. =>_<=
I'll just point out that suggesting that choice has no role in sexuality* is just as misguided as saying that you can simply choose to be gay, straight, etc. Some of it is wiring (biochemistry), but some of it is choice. It's just not one single choice, but a tightly woven array of past choices, not easily undone.

For a (safe-ish) example, there are women out there who like the aesthetic appeal of the female body, but identify as heterosexual, because the choices they've made have turned them away from considering other women as sexual partners. The right circumstances could put such a woman in a position to actively make that consideration, and decide to act on it, either for themselves or for the pleasure of a chosen partner.

Which just goes back to what several people have already said - that the dichotomy of straight/gay is only useful for basic discussion, and is a false dichotomy when talking more broadly.

* And I know that you're not saying that, Alice, but it seemed a point that needed to be made, and is often disregarded, either implicitly or explicitly, in discussions about sexuality and choice.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Doncamiel

#92
*slips in and tacks up a link*

Basically an article about some young kids who have invented a third person pronoun for their gender non-conforming friend.

Edit: Wrong article, need to find that one, but still an interesting article on kids and third person pronouns...

Ephiral

Yo... haven't heard that one before, but I like it. Rolls off the tongue, cases are easy (due to mostly not existing)... it works.

Oniya

Some of the comments were actually interesting, too - which I always find surprising on many blog sites, sorry to say.

One suggested that it might have derived from a singularizing of 'y'all' (dropping the 'all' part), and another suggested that it might have derived from generically naming the unknown individual 'Joe' - one of several names that has an ambiguous gender in common speech (short for Joseph or Josephine, although the feminine form drops the silent 'e').
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Missy

Quote from: Oniya on March 20, 2013, 08:35:55 PM
Some of the comments were actually interesting, too - which I always find surprising on many blog sites, sorry to say.

One suggested that it might have derived from a singularizing of 'y'all' (dropping the 'all' part), and another suggested that it might have derived from generically naming the unknown individual 'Joe' - one of several names that has an ambiguous gender in common speech (short for Joseph or Josephine, although the feminine form drops the silent 'e').

I very much doubt that my point of view in any way represents the majority, friends often describe me as 'independent'. I always thought "Joe" implied masculine and "Jo" feminine, no idea if that represents the majority consensus or not.

Just my random thought for the day, of course you're all expected to agree with me on that, when it come to matters pertaining to the earth: I intend to rule it! :P

Oniya

Quote from: MCsc on March 21, 2013, 12:03:05 PM
I very much doubt that my point of view in any way represents the majority, friends often describe me as 'independent'. I always thought "Joe" implied masculine and "Jo" feminine, no idea if that represents the majority consensus or not.

Just my random thought for the day, of course you're all expected to agree with me on that, when it come to matters pertaining to the earth: I intend to rule it! :P

In text, yes.  In speech, the two are indistinguishable.  Just like you can't tell Chris(topher) from Kris(tina).
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Valerian

Although in Charles Dickens' Bleak House, there is a male character whose name is spelled Jo.  Your literary trivia for the day.  ;D
"To live honorably, to harm no one, to give to each his due."
~ Ulpian, c. 530 CE

Oniya

Quote from: Valerian on March 21, 2013, 01:34:31 PM
Although in Charles Dickens' Bleak House, there is a male character whose name is spelled Jo.  Your literary trivia for the day.  ;D

*files in the Store House*
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

gaggedLouise

Not to mention Kim, Lee, Lou, Tony/Toni and Robin.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Oniya

There's also Marion/Marian, Leslie (as in Nielsen), Pat(rick/ricia)...

Whole slew of them.

Just, none of the others remotely resemble 'Yo'.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Ephiral

To Ack Arg and anyone else who might not get the importance of this issue: This. This is why it matters.

Top Cat

I have no words for how utterly vile that is. The public outing and denouncement, that is.
O/O / Story Seeds
Current posting speed: Slow to moderate. Most threads should get a response within 24 hours, with occasional dips as RL makes demands.
If I am more than a week behind on a story post, please feel free to PM me about it.
I am present in Elliquiy's Discord channel. If you want to chat about a story idea, feel free to DM me there.

Ephiral

Quote from: Top Cat on March 23, 2013, 01:49:43 AM
I have no words for how utterly vile that is. The public outing and denouncement, that is.
Yeah... doing it in the pages of a major paper is an extra-special level of disgusting, but... the outing and denouncement in general? Depressingly common.