Quote from: Devlyn on May 13, 2025, 11:13:30 AMGo on, give it a shot anyway. What term do you suggest? Who would it extend to? Who gets to decide?

Hugs, Devlyn

For the good of the Forum, and to keep Tills very worthy thread on track, I don't want to start a debate on individual proposed terms. I am hoping for others to chime in with their respectful comments and ideas, even if they don't agree with mine.

Expanding the understanding of "Biological Sex" appeals to me, but I also know that the general community have very short attention spans, especially for things that don't directly affect them. I am reading an article in a local newspaper about a woman who spent $45k to choose the Gender of her baby, and my daughter recently went to a Gender reveal party, an my initial reaction is 'how do they know the internal identity a foetus will have?', but of course, the common understanding is that Gender refers to the observable genitals at birth. I realised some time ago that the general public has this common understanding of Gender, so when we say we have a different Gender to our Sex, it confuses people, and they believe we are refusing to see what is between our legs.

This confusion is not only with lay people, but has infected the medical profession, judges, teachers, and others who shape our lives. Trying to argue for a better understanding is fruitless until we have the tools with which to accomplish it, and appropriate and concise language is the starting point. We don't need to solve this here in this thread, but to consider Tills topic and discuss ways forward.

I hope this can be done in a spirit of respect and with the topic in mind.

Hugs,

Allie

Quote from: Allie Jayne on May 13, 2025, 07:17:08 PMI realised some time ago that the general public has this common understanding of Gender, so when we say we have a different Gender to our Sex, it confuses people, and they believe we are refusing to see what is between our legs.

Yes, This! 💗

Conservative politicians often conflate sex and gender when attempting to refute our experiences and claims. This misunderstanding or misrepresentation feeds public confusion, especially when we speak about having a gender identity different from our assigned sex at birth.


~ Lilis 🫂

Great points @Allie Jayne and @Lilis

My niece had a gender reveal party the other day and I did say to their mum (my sister), 'of course, I don't agree with parental gender imposition'. I put it lightheartedly but underneath was the pain of my mother and father forcing me from the word go to be something that I knew I wasn't.

I'm also very interested in the important point @Lori Dee made previously along the lines of why we need categorisations at all? Generally, as she so eloquently illustrated with regard to racial profiling, these categories are used to subjugate others, especially those who are different: to legitimise hatred, bigotry, and bias.

There's something similar in anthropology and sociology which Edward Said termed 'Orientalism.' It's the tendency to lump together disparate and diverse peoples under umbrella terms like 'Hinduism' or even 'Asia' and 'Africa'. He exposed that was really going on was a form of imperialism: a way in which white western academics were inventing terms in order to subjugate and oppress. In other words, we categorise in order to crush and control.

Right, it's 4.15 am and that's a bit early for a brain-stretch


(Edward Said and Orientalism, in case you're interested. I think it's pertinent to what's going on here in our world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism_(book) )

On topic:

BBC Responds to Complaint over its Assertion that Biological Sex Can't be Changed:

https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/05/14/bbc-biological-sex-complaint-response/

I just saw this and it demonstrates how the conflated terminology creates argument. The "all gender" rest room is meant to service all identities, but Mace reads it as meaning sexes. Surely if we could clear up this confusion a lot of misunderstanding could be erased.

Hugs,

Allie

What a sad state of affairs that someone finds it necessary to post on social media their take on an inclusive restroom as some sort of noteworthy or newsworthy item.

Fiddling while Rome burns.

I'm sure Mace has male and female bathroom signs in her house...

Edit: I guarantee that she used an all gender bathroom shortly before being aghast over an all gender bathroom. Complete horse hooey.

I would venture that it isn't that people don't "get it". It's that people don't want to "get it". Doesn't matter what words you use. You can't educate some people into acceptance. Someone is either okay with who we are, or they aren't. And the world is doing its utmost to make sure everyone comes down on the side of "aren't".

So, as Benjamin Franklin famously said:

"We must all, indeed, hang together or, most assuredly, we shall hang separately."

Maybe we need to focus on teaching people that different doesn't equal bad. And that goes for a lot of things in life. Not just gender identity.

Quote from: Sephirah on May 18, 2025, 04:02:49 AMI would venture that it isn't that people don't "get it". It's that people don't want to "get it". Doesn't matter what words you use. You can't educate some people into acceptance. Someone is either okay with who we are, or they aren't. And the world is doing its utmost to make sure everyone comes down on the side of "aren't".

So, as Benjamin Franklin famously said:

"We must all, indeed, hang together or, most assuredly, we shall hang separately."

Maybe we need to focus on teaching people that different doesn't equal bad. And that goes for a lot of things in life. Not just gender identity.

^^^^^^ This.

No amount of "The doctor concisely, precisely, and politely said I'm legitimately transgender" is going to influence a bigot.

Hugs, Devlyn

Sorry for the mis-spelling of one of the US's most influential people, Dev. I have fixed it. Darn mechanical keyboard doesn't play well with long nails .

You seem to have got this stuff back when the US was founded. And most of the world, honestly. It's only recently that people have gotten nasty. Which is massively ironic, considering how much information and brave people are out there.

I've edited my post to reflect your correction, which I hadn't even noticed to be honest. I'm sure ol' Benny isn't too upset. 

Hugs, Devlyn

Quote from: Allie Jayne on May 18, 2025, 03:29:13 AMI just saw this and it demonstrates how the conflated terminology creates argument. The "all gender" rest room is meant to service all identities, but Mace reads it as meaning sexes. Surely if we could clear up this confusion a lot of misunderstanding could be erased.

Hugs,

Allie

Definition of "all":  'every one', 'the complete number or amount', or 'the whole'.
Therefore, "all" includes only one, or two, or any number.

Stay in school, kids. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

We are in a hearts and minds on the ground and in our individual "sphere of influence" battle.  Making friends and allies on that smaller personal level is something each of can attempt.  Appeals to authority have a weak link as authorities come and go. 

Whilst I agree that you're not readily going to correct bigotry, I think education is important. Or, rather, I am now of the view that we need good minds to tackle this narrow definition of 'biological sex'.

The mainstream debate won't start to change until we unpick the reductionism at an academic level. That has always been the way, with every hot topic throughout history. Mind you, I'm an academic so probably would claim that 

I do feel that we let this slip. We ceded the ground without seeing how they were going to weaponise it.

There's one other saving grace though. Because they have wound this issue so tightly into the coils of other right-wing bigotry, when their whole world unravels - which it will - we will have our chance. The likes of Putin-Trump-Farage will die. Transgender life won't.

The mainstream will look back on this time as one of reactionary politics.

I'm just putting the finishing touches to a book I've written which contains this theme amongst others. It may not shake the foundations but it might help a little.

My first book was lucky enough to be a bestseller in the Uk and they're making it into a film so there could be a little traction from that publicity.

I just think we have to fight back with our minds and bodies, in a non-violent way of course.

xx

Murphy's Law # 37:

"Reform always comes from below. The man with four aces never asks for a new deal."

Corollary:

"A Smith & Wesson beats four aces."

 

I really do think that with this issue reform has to begin with an intellectual unpicking of the narrow reductionist definition of 'biological sex.'

It's all over the internet: that's how people now see it. The unalterable binary definition of biology.

Until we demonstrate why that's narrowly-conceived and wrong, we will not regain the high ground. If it goes hand-in-glove with a groundswell of [trans] female defiant living then so much the better But we need both imho.

xx

Quote from: Tills on May 18, 2025, 11:35:58 PMI really do think that with this issue reform has to begin with an intellectual unpicking of the narrow reductionist definition of 'biological sex.'

It's all over the internet: that's how people now see it. The unalterable binary definition of biology.

Until we demonstrate why that's narrowly-conceived and wrong, we will not regain the high ground. If it goes hand-in-glove with a groundswell of [trans] female defiant living then so much the better But we need both imho.

xx

< puts Smith & Wesson back into its holster. > 

Quote from: Tills on May 18, 2025, 11:35:58 PMI really do think that with this issue reform has to begin with an intellectual unpicking of the narrow reductionist definition of 'biological sex.'

It's all over the internet: that's how people now see it. The unalterable binary definition of biology.

Until we demonstrate why that's narrowly-conceived and wrong, we will not regain the high ground. If it goes hand-in-glove with a groundswell of [trans] female defiant living then so much the better But we need both imho.

xx

I agree Tills, but I think the concise re definition is more complex that the general public could absorb, so it would need to start in legal context, then medical, and then use those as a base for challenges against the current improper use.

Hugs,

Allie

Quote from: Allie Jayne on May 19, 2025, 01:59:50 AMI agree Tills, but I think the concise re definition is more complex that the general public could absorb, so it would need to start in legal context, then medical, and then use those as a base for challenges against the current improper use.

Hugs,

Allie

The problem there is that you would need to invent terminology that is sufficiently different from common terms used today to prevent association with the old terminology. But at the same time, the new words need to be clear enough in meaning to prevent confusion by the general populace. People reject what they don't understand.

I think the only other option is to just redefine what we have... and people will still associate it with the old definitions that they know, and reject what they don't understand.

Round and round we go.