Gender neutral craze comes to The University of Tennesee

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Mugly

originally posted by: JadeStar


It seems most ignorant people's issues are "but you were born blah blah blah so that's all you'll ever be".

Problem solved.

there will always be issues.
i mean it is 2015 and people still cant deal with regular ole homosexuals and interracial relationships.
the whole transgender thing has to be blowing peoples minds.

I tend to agree.

One of my uncles once asked, "So jade you are studying to become a scientist which looks for alien life. Do you think perhaps your interest in doing this has something to do with the fact that if we found aliens then some of your personal difference and indeed all of our differences would be less significant?"

I just smiled at him.

Well jade I have no issue with transgender people, nor do I have an issue with someone changing their social gender identity. Biological gender identity change isn't possible at the moment. Enjoy life.

But being gender neutral isn't possible and changing terms doesn't do much except change the terms we identify with a man or woman. Nothing wrong with current terms.

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
Grain neutral?

Personally, I'd question any farmer who had a field of oats that he was demanding everyone call sorghum.

The whole gender neutral thing is ridiculous.

Refer to someone as the gender they were born with, unless they go for a legal gender reassignment.

Political correctness has gone into the ridiculous zone. We're no longer supposed to use "He" or "She" in case we offend the odd person who's going to end up as gender neutral? The 99% have to give up using correct designations of gender because the 1% (or less) MIGHT get offended if you call them the wrong thing?

We've become a ridiculous society full of pandering to the smallest possible group.

It used to be survival of the fittest, for millennia. Now, it's "let's pander to every little group to make sure no one gets left out".

Bring on the trolls.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JadeStar

Teachers do, but by deciding that teachers are no longer a part of the gender discussion by making them use gender neutral, you remove them from it.

I agree.

As I pointed out, the kids will still use those terms and still now what's going on just like they will know the score in those games where the adults are NOT keeping score and keeping up the pretty fiction that if there is no score, no one feels bad because no one wins and no one loses. Guess what? There is still a winner and still a loser because the kids KNOW. They keep score, but because the adults are pretending the score doesn't exist, the adults are not in control of the situation.

You know the more I discuss this with you the more I am believing that this whole idea is just a bad compromise for people who don't want to just accept that someone who may look like a girl on the outside is really a boy inside or someone who looks like a boy on the outside is really a girl inside.

The problem is what would be considered more acceptable: Telling a teacher than someone whose name appears as John who looks like someone named John is really Jane inside and the teacher should refer to them as she, her, etc or simply eliminating gender entirely?

It's a very difficult question.

I think these situations would best be handled on a case by case basis. Broad brushes tend to miss a lot in terms of detail.

originally posted by: babybunnies
The whole gender neutral thing is ridiculous.

Refer to someone as the gender they were born with, unless they go for a legal gender reassignment.

There are some places where a legal gender reassignment still requires surgery. And still other even more backward states where even after surgery a birth certificate can not be changed, etc.

Which then often means other documents can't have the gender changed on them.

So what would you do then if someone who looked like me was born in a state where they wouldn't change the gender marker even after surgery and they presented you with a birth certificate with an M on it?

a reply to: JadeStar

Gee, you think these would best be handled case by case instead of trying to remake society?



It's like telling everyone that no can ever eat peanuts again or shellfish again because a few people are deadly allergic to them.

Or that we ought to tear down every building and remake it to accommodate the physical comfort of those born with dwarfism.

Or that ...

a reply to: JadeStar

Perhaps I just don't get this drive because I automatically refer to everyone as "Dude" no matter what their shirt has in it, or their pants for that matter.

All I know is, that if someone who appeared male, were to be greeted by me with a male specific greeting, and told me "actually, I am transitioning right now, and am actually female", I would simply say fair enough, start again, and carry on from there. If the other way about, I would probably have to throw in a "Sweet Jesus... I hope you know what you are letting yourself in for!". Being a guy is no picnic after all

I have to say though, it's not hard to work out when someone is going through the early stages, especially if you have seen a friend go through them. It does not require a Sherlock like capacity for observation, put it that way.

I guess I am just not comfortable with the idea that ambiguity through ignorance is any better than outright failure to correctly address someone. I am one of those people, who has never asked to be handed a hex key from a tool box. I always ask for either imperial, or metric, depending on the scenario. Accuracy... Its important, but in order to think so, it is first necessary to give a damn either way!

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JadeStar

Gee, you think these would best be handled case by case instead of trying to remake society?

It's like telling everyone that no can ever eat peanuts again or shellfish again because a few people are deadly allergic to them.

Or that we ought to tear down every building and remake it to accommodate the physical comfort of those born with dwarfism.

Or that ...

I guess my perspective is slightly different in some respects.

I come from a conservative family and household, hard as that might be for some who consider themselves conservative, to believe.

I also was raised to be a critical thinker and and independent thinker. I do not like jumping on bandwagons, I am not a "social justice warrior", etc.

I also did not transition and my parents didn't fund my transition just so that I could be Mx. Jade whatever or "Xe" rather than She.

I don't even like using there term transgender to refer to myself because I feel it is too broad and covers many experiences I have little to nothing in common with. But for purposes of communication I've had to use it as shorthand for "girl born differently".

I'm probably a minority, within a minority, within a minority, within a minority though so take that as you may.

a reply to: Mugly

Not the same, but close.

These things build character, or so I was told.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: babybunnies
The whole gender neutral thing is ridiculous.

Refer to someone as the gender they were born with, unless they go for a legal gender reassignment.

There are some places where a legal gender reassignment still requires surgery. And still other even more backward states where even after surgery a birth certificate can not be changed, etc.

Which then often means other documents can't have the gender changed on them.

So what would you do then if someone who looked like me presented a birth certificate with an M on it?

Seems to be a different issue from the push of recommending gender neutral terms.

But I would assume that after surgery recognized or not you have medical paper work validating your claims of how you look.could be wrong

As I said though this seems to be a seperate issue from the issue of being gender neutral or terms used. This seems like it's more of a standard set of laws to pursue to address it.

a reply to: JadeStar

i guess it didn't come out right, lets say that the baby is biologically a male, and if in the future, which i don't see how you could tell when a child is in the uterus what gender they will id with even if you can detect whether hormone levels or psychological cause.all of the children i've heard of being transgender didn't start to show any signs of gender issues until much older.

any way lets say they can, so what do you do, keep the biologically assigned gender or give the gender you think it is displaying.

i'm not correct in thinking that in order to be considered having Gender dysphoria / transgender, signs must be displayed for at least two years, and that the cause are unknown, and are thought to be one of the following.

Hormones in the womb.
Genes.
Social and Environmental factors (such as parenting) may be involved.

i think so according to the National Institutes of Health

Gender dysphoria

of them the only one that i can see adjusting in the womb would be Hormones.

genes and the others are not. there are lots of heterosexual/ homosexual men that show effeminate characteristics,that id as male, and heterosexual/ homosexual female that show masculine characteristics id as female. is that not a gene thing, then if it's genes don't you start a slippery slope.

and what about,Social and Environmental factors (such as parenting) that may be involved, how do you address that in the uterus.

so my point being that if you use nanotechnology to alter things in the womb you aren't doing anything other than creating another form of designer babies and there would be no transgender people.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: JadeStar

Perhaps I just don't get this drive because I automatically refer to everyone as "Dude" no matter what their shirt has in it, or their pants for that matter.

OMG. I hate that.

Are you sure you're British? That sounds so So-Cal.

All I know is, that if someone who appeared male, were to be greeted by me with a male specific greeting, and told me "actually, I am transitioning right now, and am actually female", I would simply say fair enough, start again, and carry on from there. If the other way about, I would probably have to throw in a "Sweet Jesus... I hope you know what you are letting yourself in for!". Being a guy is no picnic after all

Lol, if you think being a guy is no picnic you have no idea how easy you all have it! But that's a whole other long conversation.

I have to say though, it's not hard to work out when someone is going through the early stages, especially if you have seen a friend go through them. It does not require a Sherlock like capacity for observation, put it that way.

Right. I guess the problem is there is nothing in English which would adequately describe someone at the beginning of their process or people who are non-binary and do not consider themselves one nor the other gender.

I guess I am just not comfortable with the idea that ambiguity through ignorance is any better than outright failure to correctly address someone. I am one of those people, who has never asked to be handed a hex key from a tool box. I always ask for either imperial, or metric, depending on the scenario. Accuracy... Its important, but in order to think so, it is first necessary to give a damn either way!

Lol you just reminded me of someone who said "Americans are pretty much always going reject the metric system." To me that's similar to saying "English will always only have two gender pronouns."

a reply to: JadeStar

The thing is that very often when this type of thing is brought forward, it is done by one or a small group of someone's. Sometimes, it isn't even someone in the group in whose name it's being done. And, no one seems to think about the feelings of the larger body of the rest of people as though we are just supposed to accept these fairly radical changes and just go on with life.

No one asked us if maybe we were content with our regular old pronouns. I'll bet whoever thought this up didn't even think to ask a person who liked regular pronouns what their input was, or even if some kind of compromise could be made. I'll bet they just came up with it in their little activist group, brought it forward, and someone who wanted to look like they were being sensitive, inclusive and proactive decided this was a good idea.

This is how things get done in colleges. I was there once too and saw it at work in several different capacities.

a reply to: ketsuko

The compromise is that it's not mandatory.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JadeStar

The thing is that very often when this type of thing is brought forward, it is done by one or a small group of someone's. Sometimes, it isn't even someone in the group in whose name it's being done. And, no one seems to think about the feelings of the larger body of the rest of people as though we are just supposed to accept these fairly radical changes and just go on with life.

No one asked us if maybe we were content with our regular old pronouns. I'll bet whoever thought this up didn't even think to ask a person who liked regular pronouns what their input was, or even if some kind of compromise could be made. I'll bet they just came up with it in their little activist group, brought it forward, and someone who wanted to look like they were being sensitive, inclusive and proactive decided this was a good idea.

This is how things get done in colleges. I was there once too and saw it at work in several different capacities.

Oh trust me. I know the type. I tend to avoid them on campus though.

I am in favor of inclusive language etc but I do not want my identity stripped in the process.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ketsuko

The compromise is that it's not mandatory.

That compromise only works if everyone understands and accepts that. Some people will some people won't everyone knows and is ok with this. Otherwise, Otherwise a set of escalating tensions arise because not everyone accepts its not mandatory. Then demands of being mandatory start, tensions increase and so on.

a reply to: JadeStar

JadeStar, I was a metalhead before I ever left the womb, and I will be a metalhead when I go back to the dust. Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure was less of a sci-Fi/comedy, more of a glimpse into aspects of my future. In the circles I mix in, exclaiming "DUDE!", in a busy room, has all heads swivelling to see if they are being hailed. It has ever been thus.

Regarding the beginning of the process, surely if it is desired by the individual, the correct thing to do, would be to attach the descriptor which will match the end result? If it is as we often hear on this subject, that a persons gender is carried within them, and not without, surely it should not be necessary to come up with a descriptor for the period between? A woman is a woman if she feels like one inside, according to the way I have been taught to understand this matter over the last little while... Surely the period between starting the physical changes, and the end of that process does not necessitate a different descriptor therefore?

My buddy, who is part way through the process of matching her outers to her inners so to speak, came to me one day, and explained her position. She did not look very feminine at that point, although slight of build when compared to many lads that we know. From that day forward though, I never referred to her as a male again, even though it would be some time before her body, or even her general grooming became evidently female. It's still a work in progress, but she gets to be called how she is comfortable with, no matter whether there seems to be a mismatch happening between the outer shell and the inner workings.

Surely this is the way forward?

a reply to: Shamrock6

It is entirely likely that i would refuse to talk to someone who chooses to engage in the idiocy of the "Consensus Reality" that seems to permeate western culture..

that said...i feel most sorry for lions. They, along with birds, will have a very hard time shaking their gender specific appearance in order to live in a world that has our Consensus Reality in it.

a reply to: ketsuko

Liberal Arts majors tend to run the educational systems. That is why you get stupid ideas like this. Liberal Arts majors aren't trained at thinking rationally, or running an institution.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ketsuko

The compromise is that it's not mandatory.

And I would refer you to my earlier posts about why that would be a nightmare.