How many genders are there? How many should there be? (1 Viewer)

[The_Doc_Man]

Steve, you raise some good points. However, the solution to your SECOND question is easy... do away with ALL forms of sexual discrimination. Then nobody can complain unless they wanted undue advantage because of their gender identity. Take away the advantages, end the debate.

 

[Isaac]

much more than 40 years

I'm referring to a certain period of wide psychiatric acceptance of it. Remember, it was relatively recently that it was de-classified as a mental disorder.

 

[Jon]

Let us strip away to its raw elements this alternative definition of gender, which I disagree with. The fact I disagree is irrelevant, because while we can argue about the semantics, we can still address the underlying characteristics of this thing I will call "X".

What is X exactly? Someone care to explain?

If there are many differences in X, I find it a bit unrealistic to expect outcomes in things like incomes and work choices to be the same. If different X's leads to different choices and decisions in life, then why should the aggregate of those decisions for your type of X result in the same outcomes for someone else's type of X? I could be alluding to things like the fictitious wage gap, prominence in certain types of job positions or career choices. Or is the argument that you own decisions do not have any impact on, for example, your income?

As a side thought, are languages like French discriminatory because they use male and female language elements (e.g. le and la)? Should we say Latin languages are hostile to those who don't identify as being male or female because they are discriminating by omission?

 

[Minty]

Good luck with getting the French to change anything to do with their language

 

[Steve R.]

Tucker Carlson last night highlighted a very obvious philosophical "conflict" between the mantra of "self-identification" and being a "biological male/female". Essentially, how can you promote female equality as a societal objective when you are "erasing" that distinction through the law? Basically a case of cognitive dissonance. To analyze this philosophical "conflict", Tucker Carlson interviewed Kara Dansky:

Kara Dansky: Biden's order on gender identity harms women and girls | Fox News Video

Women's human rights group warns of 'complete obliteration of biological sex' on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight'

video.foxnews.com

@The_Doc_Man; at the two minute mark Kara Dansky does a much more detailed explanation concerning how "erasing" biological sex will screw-up government data collection efforts than I had previously detailed. Two examples, crime and public health. For example, drugs affect women and men differently. The different effects can't be analyzed when the data can't be verified because it is "subjective". I also believe that certain medical related questions are not even allowed to be asked of a person, such as HIV status. By extension, would there be other medical related questions that can't be asked in terms of "self-identification"?

 

[NauticalGent]

I will be so happy when the interest in this topic moves on to something else...

 

[NauticalGent]

My favorite discussion on this topic...

Get `em Ben

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

I'm with crocodile Dundee on the gender issue and I can demonstrate how you can tell the difference.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Good luck with getting the French to change anything to do with their language

And Spanish!

In Spain, if you have a room full of women and there's one man there, then you have to address the room in the male sense.

 

[NauticalGent]

I'm with crocodile Dundee on the gender issue and I can demonstrate how you can tell the difference.

And if you test it on a enuic?

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

And if you test it on a enuic?

Well, you'd say you're either a very lucky lady, or a very unlucky man.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

@Steve R. - I am aware that there is a problem because of non-traditional viewpoints about gender identity. I only know that every time I have talked with people whose gender identity is non-conformant to "society's standards" I have heard stories of pain, frustration, anger, and confusion because of feeling that their rights as a person were somehow violated. Though there are folks who have more or less adjusted, there are a lot MORE folks who have not. (I am specifically using "folks" because as noted in comments earlier, that word is gender-neutral.)

I look at gender dysphoria as parallel to (but NOT identical to) the concept of birth defects. People can be born different. They have a harder life because of that difference. It is not something they wanted but it is something they got. How many kids do you imagine would WANT to be able to do a dance routine or an Olympic-class floor routine. How many kids do you imagine would LOVE to play football or basketball? But accidents of birth caused those kids to have deformed or crippled legs, they are FORCED to stay on the sidelines for those things. Sure, folks tell them to be brave and just try to do the most with what you've got. But how many of them feel frustrated and terribly afflicted in their enjoyment of life because of what they don't have that everyone else DOES have? I have (sadly) known more than one person who was afflicted and decided to end it all. Life can be tough on folks who are perfectly healthy. Now throw another disadvantage into the pot and stir it.

Now project that back to people born with people born with some variant of gender dysphoria. I don't claim that it is a birth defect because that would say something about the person being "damaged goods." BUT making the parallel comparison helps me to better appreciate their feelings about being "different" all of their lives - and KNOWING it. I can dimly imagine the kids, and that imagination helps me to (at least imperfectly) understand the folks with gender identity issues.

It ALSO echoes in considerations of race (but I don't want to hijack this thread so I'll leave it at simple comparisons.) We have other threads on this forum that HAVE taken up that issue and I'm content to discuss that issue elsewhere. But it is another parallel.

 

[Jon]

My view is that there is a difference between protecting someones feelings and the underlying facts. We can call genders anything you like to protect the feelings of others. But for me, hard biology determines gender and to force others to speak in a way that goes against reality is unjust. It seems like it has become a modern day cult to claim you are of this or that gender, which goes outside the established norms that have persisted for thousands of years. If someone says they are non-binary, what does that exactly mean? Their body is either male or female, but they claim they are of neither gender. It just makes no sense. If they are of neither gender, what are they then?

I think part of the problem is the fragmentation of the definition of gender, caused by social pressure when loud voices shout discrimination. It is a bit like everybody calling someone else a white supremacist or racist, just because they are white or hold views that differ to yours. This type of hysteria is oppressive. I lump it all in together. It is a similar political philosophy of shaming and cancelling others because you want to force through a particular agenda, no pun intended. Shaming of climate change critics is another one.

I've seen many debates where a multi-gender advocate is asked how many genders there are, and they reply they cannot say. So if someone cannot say how many there are, what does gender actually mean anymore under this definition?

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

There are two genders. A female who carries the eggs, and has the womb to grow the baby.

As far as I am aware no man has had a baby, I'm sure if this was the case, I would know who, when and where.

Then there is the male that provides the sperm, again I know of no female that has produced sperm and fertilized an egg. Again if this was the case, then I'm sure I would know who, when and where.

Now to the problem of a man who thinks he's a woman and vice-a-versa. This is obviously possible, because we all have a spectrum on which we sit, the typical bell curve, with totally male at one end and totally female at the other end. There's a bell curve for each and every aspect of our thoughts and feelings and we all sit at different places regarding male-female attributes on each curve.

Most men have certain female attributes about them and most females have manly attributes about them. It is evident in life.

I recall speaking to a woman who was placing an order, I was convinced it was a man from the sound of her voice!

 

[Jon]

I know someone who used to have a 5 o'clock shadow if she didn't have a daily close shave in the morning, using her husbands Gillette. But she identified as being female.

It seems that this new view on gender does not just believe in the spectrum between male and female. Instead, they are classifications that do not have any relation to male/female. An example would be nonbinary, which can mean not having any relation to male or female. If so, what does that actually mean? Nothing really, people just like saying it.

 

[NauticalGent]

This thread reminds me of this song:

 

[The_Doc_Man]

As far as I am aware no man has had a baby,

According to the Koran, man born of woman is a man, but man born of man is a prophet - which is why fundamentalist Muslims wear very loose pants - to catch the baby.

 

[wvmitchell]

The kinky ones like a bit of snail.

that made me think of the Kip Addotta song "Wet Dream"
"They said I'd blown a seal ~ I said, "Fix the damn thing ~ And leave my private life out of it ~ Okay, pal?"
song: Wet Dream

 

[Isaac]

There are two genders. Man and Woman. Generally speaking, they were made (obviously) to interact with each other in certain ways, and not made to interact with their own gender in certain ways.

Alternative urges are real, Gender dysphoria is real.

I don't wish to denigrate nor allow persecution of those who have this problem.

Many people with these 'variant' urges have chosen to believe that it is not a negative thing, is not something to be treated or overcome, not something to be changed, and totally normal. I wouldn't specifically wish to change anyone's mind on this, but nor would I completely exclude the possibility that I might share my actual opinion in cases of a loved one or someone in whose life I have been given the invitation to provide input.

I don't wish to tolerate any form of persecution for those who choose to continue believing that it's not normal, might be something that could be overcome or avoided in the first place (that's a case by case basis), is less than ideal, or who believe that for many such people, genetics is nowhere near the only influencer of it.

Parents who choose to continue to rear their children with values that attempt to avoid or circumvent this problem ought to be left alone. In fact, even encouragement along these lines should not be out of the question: After all, the natural nuclear family is a treasure and ought to be preserved and supported in many ways.

To the extent that I have some religious views on this subject, I don't see it as necessarily any different than any other matter on which a person may fall short of the ideal virtues. (Anger, deceipt, infidelity, etc). I strive to maintain this equilibrium in my mind, and ensure that my reaction to the subject is not influenced by any sort of repulsion, other than a simple viewpoint on right vs. wrong, but not "elevating" it in any false or pretentious way in my imagination.

Much like we predicted back in the 90's (when everyone mocked our slippery slope arguments, and kept asking How is 2 strangers getting married going to impact you/why do you care?), the political agenda of many "____ - rights" advocates has gone far beyond what is appropriate, and has begun to meddle with people's right to see the issue through a moral lens if they so choose. That agenda ought to be thoroughly repudiated wherever it is found. However, I do agree with the idea of society not tolerating any sort of persecution or bullying of these people, (as previously stated), and have glad we have made progress in that area, compared with, say, 50 years ago.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

@Isaac - by any chance were you a tightrope walker during that time that you ran away with the circus?

I have a simplistic view of this and adamantly maintain that there is no need to complicate it. Considering cowboy philosopher Will Rogers, there is a simple statement that applies when someone is giving someone else a hard time for the results of their gender dysphoria: "Your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins."

When folks try to give my (gay) daughter a hard time, they do so at peril because I will defend her (and her wife) with vehemence and fire. However, if such defense becomes necessary, I might not be first in line because her mother will be in there whaling away, and P. will be quite able to toss in a few punches herself. Where I go absolutely ballistic is when religious zealots insist in sticking their noses in her private life, and in that case their nose will happen to be in range of my swinging fist.

People claim that they are somehow hurt by someone who is an Air Force veteran of the Desert Storm era (ground-based communications group), a homeowner, taxpayer, a person who maintains her home through cash projects AND sweat equity, a person whose parties tend to be mostly quiet (except when her in-laws bring their kids), a person who supports charities, a person who has a loving and caring demeanor, and ... oh, yes, happens to be gay. Anyone who looks at ONE SMALL FACET of her life and uses that as an excuse to hate will get back that hatred from me in a heartbeat.

You may believe as you wish, but I happen to believe that sexuality runs across a continuum with inverse Gaussian distribution. Most people are very strongly male or very strongly female (at either end of the scale), with a diminishing number in the middle. How many genders are there? That is a black-and-white question for which shadings exist. If you are stuck in the binary mind-set, you cannot understand the variations that you see. I.e. you cannot understand what your mind cannot accept.