Friends of the Secular Café: Forums
Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain
Talk Freethought
Rational Skepticism Forum
EvC Forum: Evolution vs. Creation
Living Nonreligion Discussion Forum
The Round Table (RatPags)
Talk Rational!
Blogs
Blue Collar Atheist
Camels With Hammers
Ebonmuse: Daylight Atheism
Nontheist Nexus
The Re-Enlightenment
Rosa Rubicondior
The Skeptical Zone
Watching the Deniers
Others
Christianity Disproved
Count Me Out
Ebon Musings
Freethinker.co.uk
 
       

Go Back   Secular Café > Intellectual Debate and Discussion Forums > Miscellaneous Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 14 Nov 2017, 08:48 PM   #680265 / #151
Here Rests A Cemetery
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 647
Default

I didn't say anything about intersex, Roo. I was talking about gender non-binary, which isn't a physical issue.
Here Rests A Cemetery is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 15 Nov 2017, 04:28 PM   #680333 / #152
Shake
Mostly harmless
 
Shake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Upstate NY, USA
Posts: 1,215
Default

I don't have a lot to add as my knowledge on these issues is rather limited. I did learn a lot though, by reading Galileo's Middle Finger, which has nothing to do with telescopes and astronomy, but rather opened my eyes to the whole T and I parts of the LGBTQI acronym.
Shake is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 03:21 AM   #680371 / #153
Jobar
Zen Hedonist
Admin; Mod: Religion, The Smoking Section
 
Jobar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 25,995
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
...
I agree that we should have another word for it. Because in everyday language we equate gender with body dimorphism. That leads the queer theoreticians and the other side (what are they called? biologists?) talking past each other.
There's that psychological dimension, which obviously is not firmly tied to an X or Y chromosome. 'Gender' is a word I grew up understanding as two-valued, either male or female; so I also think another word, more to do with sexual psychology than with sexual biology, would be a very good idea. But I don't know what that word would be.
Jobar is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 04:24 AM   #680375 / #154
Roo St. Gallus
Loose Contact
 
Roo St. Gallus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 7,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Here Rests A Cemetery View Post
I didn't say anything about intersex, Roo. I was talking about gender non-binary, which isn't a physical issue.
I'm sorry, but you chimed in on a thread segment specifically and exclusively addressing that subtopic. I posted the entire thread segment when I asked you.

Go ahead. Go back and look. (Post #131 ITT)

It looks like your tugboat missed the dock on this one.
__________________
IF YOU'RE NOT OUTRAGED, YOU'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION!

Last edited by Roo St. Gallus; 16 Nov 2017 at 04:44 AM.
Roo St. Gallus is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 06:25 AM   #680377 / #155
Here Rests A Cemetery
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo St. Gallus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Here Rests A Cemetery View Post
I didn't say anything about intersex, Roo. I was talking about gender non-binary, which isn't a physical issue.
I'm sorry, but you chimed in on a thread segment specifically and exclusively addressing that subtopic. I posted the entire thread segment when I asked you.

Go ahead. Go back and look. (Post #131 ITT)

It looks like your tugboat missed the dock on this one.
Oh, LGBTQ apparently means intersex now, which would imply genetic abnormalities such as XXX chromosomes.

Still wasn't talking about intersex. Gonna just throw you on ignore. 7 years and still the same dweeb.
Here Rests A Cemetery is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 07:38 AM   #680388 / #156
Roo St. Gallus
Loose Contact
 
Roo St. Gallus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 7,947
Default

That sounds excellent to me.

If you cannot comprehend simple explanatory sentences and respond accordingly, then there is no real purpose in attempting to communicate with you.

Come back when you learn to correctly parse English sentences.
Roo St. Gallus is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 08:42 AM   #680390 / #157
DrZoidberg
Senior Member
 
DrZoidberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobar View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
...
I agree that we should have another word for it. Because in everyday language we equate gender with body dimorphism. That leads the queer theoreticians and the other side (what are they called? biologists?) talking past each other.
There's that psychological dimension, which obviously is not firmly tied to an X or Y chromosome. 'Gender' is a word I grew up understanding as two-valued, either male or female; so I also think another word, more to do with sexual psychology than with sexual biology, would be a very good idea. But I don't know what that word would be.
I don't think that will catch it. It's not just psychology. Some people build muscle faster than others. Some men have bigger penises. Some have bigger beards. Women have differently sized boobs. Body hair varies a lot. Anybody who has messed around with psychoactive medication, drugs or steroids knows how much our psychology is influenced by hormones.

I don't think it's helpful to think in terms of a mind/body dualism. I think it's an obsolete way to think of it. They're connected.
__________________
"Sorry, you must have been boring"
/Dr Zoidberg
DrZoidberg is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 09:31 AM   #680392 / #158
ruby sparks
Senior Member
 
ruby sparks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 7,768
Default

There's no doubt the existing words cause confusion. As in this headline:

"KIM KARDASHIAN WEST ACCIDENTALLY REVEALS THE GENDER OF HER BABY"

That's her baby that hasn't been born yet.

I could even quibble about the word 'baby' but...that wouldn't help matters.
ruby sparks is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 09:36 AM   #680393 / #159
ruby sparks
Senior Member
 
ruby sparks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 7,768
Default

What about 'sexual identity' instead of gender? Not perfect, I know (already in use so may cause confusion of a different sort), but it's not going to get confused with 'sex' (and I do think that arguably the biggest issue of usage comes from confusion and conflation). One could even argue that it encompasses the psychological and the cultural/social/role aspects, as well as catering for (encompassing) orientations (which is what sexual identity currently covers, as I understand it). And Kim Kardashian West could never be said to accidentally reveal the sexual identity of her unborn baby.

I read that it was Sexual Identity that John Money was investigating when in 1955 he (wisely? unwisely?) decided to appropriate the word gender to describe it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money

Wiki says the terminological distinction he made did not become widespread until the 1970's when it was adopted by Feminist Theory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender


At the moment we already appear to have:

Sex
Gender
Orientation
Sexual identity
Gender identity
Sexual orientation
Gender orientation
Sexual orientation identity......

I couldn't find gender orientation identity when googling. Not sure why not, but there could be a gap in the market for a new phenomenon or at least a new label.

Last edited by ruby sparks; 16 Nov 2017 at 10:00 AM.
ruby sparks is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 10:13 AM   #680394 / #160
DrZoidberg
Senior Member
 
DrZoidberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruby sparks View Post
What about 'sexual identity' instead of gender?

Not perfect, I know (already in use so may cause confusion of a different sort), but it's not going to get confused with 'sex' (and I do think that arguably the biggest issue of usage comes from confusion and conflation). One could even argue that it encompasses the psychological and the cultural/social/role aspects, as well as catering for (encompassing) orientations (which is what sexual identity currently covers, as I understand it). And Kim Kardashian West could never be said to accidentally reveal the sexual identity of her unborn baby.

I read that it was Sexual Identity that John Money was investigating when in 1955 he (wisely? unwisely?) decided to appropriate the word gender to describe it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money

Wiki says the terminological distinction he made did not become widespread until the 1970's when it was adopted by Feminist Theory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender


At the moment we already appear to have:

Sex
Gender
Orientation
Sexual identity
Gender identity
Sexual orientation
Gender orientation
Sexual orientation identity......

I couldn't find gender orientation identity when googling. Not sure why not, but there could be a gap in the market for a new phenomenon or at least a new label.
The problem with that one is how do you measure it? If we look at it scientifically, if you just allow people to decide for themselves what gender they consider themselves, then how will you sort that out from... I don't know... trends?

The more accurately/objectively we can measure something, the more confidence we'll have when generalising.

I'm not saying you are wrong. It's more that I don't think there's a good answer at the moment.
DrZoidberg is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 03:08 PM   #680405 / #161
Politesse
Sapere aude
 
Politesse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Chochenyo territory
Posts: 19,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruby sparks View Post
What about 'sexual identity' instead of gender?

Not perfect, I know (already in use so may cause confusion of a different sort), but it's not going to get confused with 'sex' (and I do think that arguably the biggest issue of usage comes from confusion and conflation). One could even argue that it encompasses the psychological and the cultural/social/role aspects, as well as catering for (encompassing) orientations (which is what sexual identity currently covers, as I understand it). And Kim Kardashian West could never be said to accidentally reveal the sexual identity of her unborn baby.

I read that it was Sexual Identity that John Money was investigating when in 1955 he (wisely? unwisely?) decided to appropriate the word gender to describe it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money

Wiki says the terminological distinction he made did not become widespread until the 1970's when it was adopted by Feminist Theory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender


At the moment we already appear to have:

Sex
Gender
Orientation
Sexual identity
Gender identity
Sexual orientation
Gender orientation
Sexual orientation identity......

I couldn't find gender orientation identity when googling. Not sure why not, but there could be a gap in the market for a new phenomenon or at least a new label.
The problem with that one is how do you measure it? If we look at it scientifically, if you just allow people to decide for themselves what gender they consider themselves, then how will you sort that out from... I don't know... trends?

The more accurately/objectively we can measure something, the more confidence we'll have when generalising.

I'm not saying you are wrong. It's more that I don't think there's a good answer at the moment.
Err, people's own words about what they are aren't scientific data? Where people are concerned, objective data is often about subjective truths. We are all subjects. Data is objective because it is collected in such a way as to eliminate the effect of the researcher's bias, not because it topically concerns objects, or humans being turned into objects by silencing their perspective on themselves.
__________________
"The truth about stories is that's all we are" ~Thomas King
Politesse is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 09:29 PM   #680427 / #162
Jobar
Zen Hedonist
Admin; Mod: Religion, The Smoking Section
 
Jobar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 25,995
Default

I agree with Ruby; 'orientation' seems a better word than 'gender' when we're discussing something other than the basic duality of biological sex.

Quote:
I don't think it's helpful to think in terms of a mind/body dualism. I think it's an obsolete way to think of it. They're connected.
No argument- I never thought otherwise. It's a polarity, not a pure either/or duality. But the rainbow of sexual orientations still has more to do with the mental aspect or pole of sexuality than it does with the physical, bodily aspect, I would say. Yes, there are people whose bodies don't allow a clear division into male or female; but from what I know of it, those are far rarer than people who are plainly male or female in body, but not comfortable in the role their body would have them fill.
Jobar is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 09:53 PM   #680435 / #163
Jobar
Zen Hedonist
Admin; Mod: Religion, The Smoking Section
 
Jobar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 25,995
Arrow

I do admit that one might call the subtle differences in brain chemistry and/or architecture, which modern science can identify in some LGBT+ people, physical- more to do with the body than the mind. But those differences are not externally visible, of course.
Jobar is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old 16 Nov 2017, 11:20 PM   #680455 / #164
ruby sparks
Senior Member
 
ruby sparks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 7,768
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
The problem with that one is how do you measure it? If we look at it scientifically, if you just allow people to decide for themselves what gender they consider themselves, then how will you sort that out from... I don't know... trends?

The more accurately/objectively we can measure something, the more confidence we'll have when generalising.

I'm not saying you are wrong. It's more that I don't think there's a good answer at the moment.
I guess I was aiming only at 'better', in terms of clarity. And I was particularly aiming at the confusion between the terms sex and gender, which is not helped by the fact that in certain sciences, they are used interchangeably. But I accept that in trying to make one issue more clear, it may muddy the waters in another.

As to measuring, yes, although I agree with Poli that in several sciences, and probably in this one, until we can find something to measure (a gene? A hormone? A combination of both? Something else?) which physically explains what people feel, then the best we can do is subjective data, which as Poli says, is admissible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobar View Post
I agree with Ruby; 'orientation' seems a better word than 'gender' when we're discussing something other than the basic duality of biological sex.
Well, actually, I had suggested 'identity'

Though Im like orientation too. As things stands, it seems to me (I stand to be corrected) this is currently used to describe how one feels about others, but in principle I can't see a good reason why it shouldn't also encompass what one feels about oneself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobar View Post
No argument- I never thought otherwise. It's a polarity, not a pure either/or duality.
Right. A polarity not a duality. I liked your 'U-shaped distrobution' model.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jobar View Post
I do admit that one might call the subtle differences in brain chemistry and/or architecture, which modern science can identify in some LGBT+ people, physical- more to do with the body than the mind. But those differences are not externally visible, of course.
There may, I suppose, come a time when we can measure something inside people which would allow us to predict their...oh what to call it.....gender identity? Sexual Identity? Orientation? Whatever.

But for now, asking people might be the only way, with all the subjective reporting issues which that unfortunately entails.

Last edited by ruby sparks; Yesterday at 12:34 AM.
ruby sparks is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old Yesterday, 08:47 AM   #680487 / #165
DrZoidberg
Senior Member
 
DrZoidberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruby sparks View Post
What about 'sexual identity' instead of gender?

Not perfect, I know (already in use so may cause confusion of a different sort), but it's not going to get confused with 'sex' (and I do think that arguably the biggest issue of usage comes from confusion and conflation). One could even argue that it encompasses the psychological and the cultural/social/role aspects, as well as catering for (encompassing) orientations (which is what sexual identity currently covers, as I understand it). And Kim Kardashian West could never be said to accidentally reveal the sexual identity of her unborn baby.

I read that it was Sexual Identity that John Money was investigating when in 1955 he (wisely? unwisely?) decided to appropriate the word gender to describe it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money

Wiki says the terminological distinction he made did not become widespread until the 1970's when it was adopted by Feminist Theory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender


At the moment we already appear to have:

Sex
Gender
Orientation
Sexual identity
Gender identity
Sexual orientation
Gender orientation
Sexual orientation identity......

I couldn't find gender orientation identity when googling. Not sure why not, but there could be a gap in the market for a new phenomenon or at least a new label.
The problem with that one is how do you measure it? If we look at it scientifically, if you just allow people to decide for themselves what gender they consider themselves, then how will you sort that out from... I don't know... trends?

The more accurately/objectively we can measure something, the more confidence we'll have when generalising.

I'm not saying you are wrong. It's more that I don't think there's a good answer at the moment.
Err, people's own words about what they are aren't scientific data? Where people are concerned, objective data is often about subjective truths. We are all subjects. Data is objective because it is collected in such a way as to eliminate the effect of the researcher's bias, not because it topically concerns objects, or humans being turned into objects by silencing their perspective on themselves.
It has to do with communication. I'm straight as an arrow. The term needs to be something that can communicate to me what's going on regardless if you're in the club or not. Otherwise it's not communicating.

"I can't explain it, but I know it when I see it" is an example of a bad definition.

For example, "I know I was born a women, but I feel as a man". How does this person define woman? How does this person define man? It's not clear.
DrZoidberg is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old Yesterday, 10:47 PM   #680545 / #166
Pandora
Chronically Skeptical
 
Pandora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Posts: 4,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo St. Gallus View Post
That sounds excellent to me.

If you cannot comprehend simple explanatory sentences and respond accordingly, then there is no real purpose in attempting to communicate with you.

Come back when you learn to correctly parse English sentences.
You're just as easy to get along with as ever, Roo. Keep up that consistency, buddy!
__________________
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform - Mark Twain
Pandora is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old Today, 12:14 AM   #680550 / #167
Roo St. Gallus
Loose Contact
 
Roo St. Gallus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 7,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandora View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo St. Gallus View Post
That sounds excellent to me.

If you cannot comprehend simple explanatory sentences and respond accordingly, then there is no real purpose in attempting to communicate with you.

Come back when you learn to correctly parse English sentences.
You're just as easy to get along with as ever, Roo. Keep up that consistency, buddy!

Really? And I thought I had reduced the scatological content.

Oh, well...
Roo St. Gallus is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old Today, 01:17 AM   #680554 / #168
Here Rests A Cemetery
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandora View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo St. Gallus View Post
That sounds excellent to me.

If you cannot comprehend simple explanatory sentences and respond accordingly, then there is no real purpose in attempting to communicate with you.

Come back when you learn to correctly parse English sentences.
You're just as easy to get along with as ever, Roo. Keep up that consistency, buddy!
I was talking about transgender suicide rates, hence the 41% statistic. He rambles on about intersex. He's obtuse & thick as shit.
Here Rests A Cemetery is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old Today, 01:45 AM   #680556 / #169
Roo St. Gallus
Loose Contact
 
Roo St. Gallus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 7,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo St. Gallus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandora View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo St. Gallus View Post
That sounds excellent to me.

If you cannot comprehend simple explanatory sentences and respond accordingly, then there is no real purpose in attempting to communicate with you.

Come back when you learn to correctly parse English sentences.
You're just as easy to get along with as ever, Roo. Keep up that consistency, buddy!

Really? And I thought I had reduced the scatological content.

Oh, well...
There it is now.
Roo St. Gallus is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Old Today, 03:40 AM   #680561 / #170
Hermit
Metierioric fail
 
Hermit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 5,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Here Rests A Cemetery View Post
I was talking about transgender suicide rates, hence the 41% statistic.
You obviously have not read up on what you are talking about. Firstly, the report on which that number is based concerns suicide attempts. That is why it is titled Suicide Attempts among Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Adults. According to the American Association of Suicidology the overall ratio between attempted and successful suicides is 1:25. For people aged 15 to 24 it is somewhere between 100 and 200:1. Among the elderly it is 4:1. Secondly, the report itself suggests under the heading "Methods and Limitations" on page 3 that the percentage of 41% of attempted suicides may actually be as low as 20%, though it also says that number cannot be ascertained.
Hermit is offline   Reply With Quote top bottom
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Secular Café > Intellectual Debate and Discussion Forums > Miscellaneous Discussions

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
 
Ocean Zero by vBSkins.com | Customised by Antechinus