Judge Dredd gay........ WTF

SuperflyTNT wrote: Uh, no. There's plenty of gay characters on TV which is what I was saying in response to TS' comment that there needs to be more gay exposure.

My point about Dredd was both anecdotal and a joke. But thanks for sharing.

And as for "normal gays" I was at a party last Saturday with plenty. And when I lived in CA, two girls in our cadre of partiers were lesbians and we spent every second Saturday at JR's, a huge gay nightclub. My perspective is just fine, thanks,

The point is precisely, that this is should NOT be about giving exposure to "teh gay".

Just like giving a character blonde hair isn't about giving exposure to blonde people.

I mean, your reaction in this thread can be accurately summarized by the sentence: "Oh please, not more of this gay shit!" Correct me if I'm wrong.

Death and Taxis wrote: Also, if you can't be civil or are struggling to maintain civility, go back to talking about board games.

Friday freakout is a thing of the past. There is a new kid in town now.... and on the seventh day he rage posted.

I think this thread is worse than Hitler. There, I said it.

JonJacob wrote:

Death and Taxis wrote: Also, if you can't be civil or are struggling to maintain civility, go back to talking about board games.

Friday freakout is a thing of the past. There is a new kid in town now.... and on the seventh day he rage posted.

Actually, I enjoy a good Friday Freakout as much as the next guy, but today is Monday (where I am) and sometimes good discussions get drowned out with increasingly personal attack posts.

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Bull Nakano wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: I have no problem with them, their lifestyle, or any of that himophobic bullshit. I'm speaking only of the bastardization of language.

I'm going to try real hard to keep civil.

Language is not unalterably set in stone. Languages are generally very old and from time to time need updating, revisions, and additions to work. Language exists because you cannot generally transmit who you are, how you feel, and what you want in other ways.

If transgendered folks bother you because 'they're ruining languages', you're no better than someone who thinks gays are ruining marriage.

You take a stupid pill today or are you just feeling hypersensitive? What I SAID was that the word transgender in and of itself applies the meaning of the word GENDER as synonomous with sex. Ie. you can't be TRANSGENDER if GENDER can mean whatever you want it to.

The first part of your post was about how gender and sex mean the same thing. They don't, in short one is biological sex, and one is sexual identity, and they are no more similar than biological sex is to sexual orientation. (additional reading: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinction )

You then point out a problem that gendered language simply does not work all the time, which I totally agree. But you then go on to explain how transgendered persons, by using language to identify themselves, are muddying, bastardising, and making language less meaningful. You are blaming transgendered persons when you should be blaming language.

(also, you can type a tilde n on an ipad by holding down the N key for a second)

If you go to a job application, government form, or any medical text, GENDER=PLUMBING.

So, let's start with that.

My point is that "transgender" means "cross gender". The word in and of itself defines the word "gender". "Transexual" is far more useful and descriptive. So, as I said, trying to redefine words causes more confusion. Remember also that the root word for gender is genus (latin), "kind, type". So redefining gender is retarded.

"Gender identity" also does the same thing it says "the gender you identify with" and therefore ascribes "gender" a meaning. If using the word "gender" in place of "how you feel you are" is the "new right way" then both gender identity and transgender need to go away altogether and gender needs to be redefined as "gender identity". You can't use the word two ways and then tell people that they're all wrong.

Simon: No. Not more "gay shit". I don't mind the subject at all. I actually like to know whatother people think, and why they think it. As someone who was in AP English for my entirety of my schooling, I have a keen understanding that language changes, but the keystone of language is that everyone has to agree on what words mean or it doesn't work.

Saying "gender" does not mean "sex" anymore is fine as long as it's commonly understood, but at the same time you can't say "gender identity" and "transgender" because doing so directly defies the conventions set forth when you say "gender does not mean sex". It's like "IRREGARDLESS".

And Bull, I don't blame anyone but the sociologists who get paid to come up with better ways of putting us all in neat little boxes. How about "American" and "dude" over the hyphens, semantic masturbation and bullshit. Just look at others as others, not as an objectified and categoried "unit".

Mostly, I just want people to get along, not be bigots and hateful for stupid reasons, and start working together to solve problems rather than create them. If we'd been doing that all along we'd already be colonizing Mars and I'd never have to put up with this bullshit again.

It's completely pointless to build a colony on Mars. Get a grip on reality, dude.

SuperflyTNT wrote: GENDER=PLUMBING.

FIRE=TWO STICKS

I found your post really frustrating to read because it said nothing in SO MANY words, but the problem was you started with this co-mag "gender is your genitals because Uncle Same says it is" garbage.

If English is the problem, then English is the problem. You can't say people can't identify as they'd like because YOU don't agree with the evolution of a word. People don't consider themselves transgendered, bigendered, queergendered in attempts to 'shake things up' they do so to best express who they are.

In Nepal they've just (this past week) started issuing third-gendered IDs for people who do not identify as male or female ( stream.aljazeera.com/story/201301240002-0022501 ), not granted that third gender IS a blanket term for people who do not identify as male of female, are you saying simply because on your tax form you only have two options these people do not exist in America? Don't answer, I know you aren't, but what are you saying?

I haven't read this thread very carefully (I've only been scanning for jokes, but alas). But I did notice Pete's mention of plumbing. You may have mentioned this already but in case not fyi not only is gender self-identification extremely variable, so is the actual 'plumbing'. Apparently it is less uncommon than one might realize for a baby to be born with ambiguous genitalia and have his/her gender and sex 'decided' by parents or professionals who speak for him or her. And if the call doesn't work with how the person experiences him or herself, it can set him or her up for a life of great difficulty, where the person is brought up to be someone he or she is not. It's hard to imagine what that would be like. It's a super complex problem with tons of implications, and it doesn't surprise me that people who study it come up with new ways of talking about things.

SuperflyTNT wrote: If you go to a job application, government form, or any medical text, GENDER=PLUMBING.

So, let's start with that.

My point is that "transgender" means "cross gender". The word in and of itself defines the word "gender". "Transexual" is far more useful and descriptive. So, as I said, trying to redefine words causes more confusion. Remember also that the root word for gender is genus (latin), "kind, type". So redefining gender is retarded.

"Gender identity" also does the same thing it says "the gender you identify with" and therefore ascribes "gender" a meaning. If using the word "gender" in place of "how you feel you are" is the "new right way" then both gender identity and transgender need to go away altogether and gender needs to be redefined as "gender identity". You can't use the word two ways and then tell people that they're all wrong.

Simon: No. Not more "gay shit". I don't mind the subject at all. I actually like to know whatother people think, and why they think it. As someone who was in AP English for my entirety of my schooling, I have a keen understanding that language changes, but the keystone of language is that everyone has to agree on what words mean or it doesn't work.

Saying "gender" does not mean "sex" anymore is fine as long as it's commonly understood, but at the same time you can't say "gender identity" and "transgender" because doing so directly defies the conventions set forth when you say "gender does not mean sex". It's like "IRREGARDLESS".

And Bull, I don't blame anyone but the sociologists who get paid to come up with better ways of putting us all in neat little boxes. How about "American" and "dude" over the hyphens, semantic masturbation and bullshit. Just look at others as others, not as an objectified and categoried "unit".

Mostly, I just want people to get along, not be bigots and hateful for stupid reasons, and start working together to solve problems rather than create them. If we'd been doing that all along we'd already be colonizing Mars and I'd never have to put up with this bullshit again.

Just shut the fuck up before you somehow manage to make yourself look even worse.

now now Cook, that was by far Pete's best post in this thread. He is trying to explain himself rationally and I think is making sense, no hateful attacks or anything. I'm surprised you pick this post of all of his in this thread to tell him to shut up when he's actually engaging in the discussion here.

And who the heck is this Bull Nagano guy? I like him



note: I know I'm not actually contributing to the discussion in this thread and am basically trolling but when you have an avatar like mine you HAVE to participate in threads with titles like this.

Wow, TS, that's some stamina. Guess you got both mom AND dad. Well, at least we know how you're paying off those gender studies degree loans. Call me when you get the degree...I thinkmImcan find you work shovelling shit somewhere.


BULL: It's not uncle Sam, it's the English language. Groups of people can't arbitrarily decide that a word means something because it causes confusion. The same way Neo-cons redefine words, the way Clinton tried to redefine what "is" means, you simply can't do it and expect that people will accept it or even know what you mean anid how youncame to the reasoning, And you further can't try to do so while coming up with terms like gender identity and transgender when thise very words refer back to using gender as synonomous with sex.

I mean, are you trying to tell me that you don't get the paradox there?

Let me make it simpler: If a person identifies themselves as transgendered, are they not saying that they are identifying themselves as the opposite gender? And to have an opposite gender in that context, you have to have had a gender to begin with to vary from or oppose. So, if you are a male-female transgendered individual, you had man parts (gender) which has typical traits asstociated with that gender, but you identify with the opposite, having traits identified with the opposite gender. If gender is a floating word, with variable meanings, then there would be no reason to identify one's self as ransgendered, they would simply call themselves a woman, man, or whatever they felt their gender is.

Same with gender identity; you can't say "gemder identity" unless you accept that the word gender has a finite meaning or you could not identify with it in the first place.

Let me add this: your link makes my point. They are adding the "other" box because it is accepted that the two genders commonly accepted are male and female. If gender means whatever it wants, people would put male or female in the box based upon their gender identity and there would be no reason to have the "other" box.

Gender and gender identity are two separate things,

SuperflyTNT wrote: If a person identifies themselves as transgendered, are they not saying that they are identifying themselves as the opposite gender? And to have an opposite gender in that context, you have to have had a gender to begin with to vary from or oppose. So, if you are a male-female transgendered individual, you had man parts (gender) which has typical traits asstociated with that gender, but you identify with the opposite, having traits identified with the opposite gender. If gender is a floating word, with variable meanings, then there would be no reason to identify one's self as ransgendered, they would simply call themselves a woman, man, or whatever they felt their gender is.

I knew someone once who was male-identified to her brother and immediate family, but female-identified to everyone else. Her self-presentation to the general public was quite ambiguous, but she would get very hurt when anyone but her family read her as masculine. So, in her case "gender" had a very strong boundaries, and "man" and "woman" were very distinct. But the contradictions she lived were not resolvable in a consistent way (at least back then when I knew her).

On the other hand, I know someone else who rejects all gender labels, and goes by "they" instead of "he" or "she". They seemed much more psychologically stable than the other person I just described.

So, for people for whom gender is problematic, some actually insist on the distinctions and others don't.

Add in issues of sexual orientation (is there such a thing as "gay" or "straight" for someone who doesn't think of themselves in gender categories?) and things get even more complicated.

And all this is real life, not books or theory. People are unique and various, and so it helps to use categories very loosely.

SuperflyTNT wrote:
BULL: It's not uncle Sam, it's the English language. Groups of people can't arbitrarily decide that a word means something because it causes confusion.

How do you think words obtain meaning? Some Platonic ideal we all glimpse? Words have meaning through their usage.

The same way Neo-cons redefine words, the way Clinton tried to redefine what "is" means, you simply can't do it and expect that people will accept it or even know what you mean anid how youncame to the reasoning, And you further can't try to do so while coming up with terms like gender identity and transgender when thise very words refer back to using gender as synonomous with sex.

The definition has changed, deal with it.

I mean, are you trying to tell me that you don't get the paradox there?

I guess it is a paradox that only fucks with old tryhards.

Let me make it simpler: If a person identifies themselves as transgendered, are they not saying that they are identifying themselves as the opposite gender? And to have an opposite gender in that context, you have to have had a gender to begin with to vary from or oppose. So, if you are a male-female transgendered individual, you had man parts (gender)

That is sex you fucking moron.

which has typical traits asstociated with that gender, but you identify with the opposite, having traits identified with the opposite gender. If gender is a floating word, with variable meanings, then there would be no reason to identify one's self as ransgendered, they would simply call themselves a woman, man, or whatever they felt their gender is.

Same with gender identity; you can't say "gemder identity" unless you accept that the word gender has a finite meaning or you could not identify with it in the first place.

Either learn basic fucking factual information about what you're talking about or shut the fuck up. I hate fisking.