World's first genderless person

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7446850/Briton-is-recognised-as-worlds-first-officially-genderless-person.html

I kind of can't fathom this. Like, my idea of gender is inextricably tied into how I view the world and imagining being without it seems like the definition of being rudderless to me. Obviously, for this person, that's not the case, or rather hir (is that right???) notion of gender is entirely different from mine and easily divorceable from hir sense of self.

What do you make of this?

ha yeah, i have this same sort of reaction like "well... you have to be something"

Surely this person is intersex with a very low sex drive, rather than genderless/asexual?

genderless and asexual are two different things though

er i mean intersex and genderless

either way

i'm not sure which one i meant tbh, i'm hungry D:

eh aren't there a bunch of people born intersex?

i don't know, it's not for me, but i can see it for people who aren't good at making decisions? i'm kind of kidding about that, but i'm also kind of serious.

Somewhere Judith Butler is feeling vindicated.

Woah, man

gender does not equal sex fyi u guyz

yeah not for me but kind of cool bc i can't imagine it

Reminds me of Pit-Pat, the magical, pan-sexual, non-threatening spokes-thing.

Gender and sexual identity is endlessly fascinating to me; I recently met a lesbian who used to be a man. It took me a little bit to wrap my head around that idea.

I am pro this being an option. doesn't bother me, anyway, it'll obv seem less weird after a while.

I recently met a lesbian who used to be a man.

woah

I'm a lesbian and I'm still a man.

Somewhere Judith Butler is feeling vindicated.

― jam master (jaymc), Friday, March 19, 2010 3:10 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

thought this said "Justin Bieber" -- felt appropriate

hahaha

why is a biological man who is attracted to women but identifies as female any weirder than a biological man who is attracted to women identifying himself as male? Who you want to fuck and who you feel yourself to be are not the same thing.

it's a new concept to me, plaxy

and i don't think it's weird, personally. fascinating, really.

I'm imagining Mr. Que's "woah" said in the style of Beavis & Butthead.

why is a biological man who is attracted to women but identifies as female any weirder than a biological man who is attracted to women identifying himself as male?

Because you have to pay a lot of money and go through a lot of pain to change from a man into a woman, and most people do tie who you want to fuck together with who they feel themselves to be, regardless of whether that axis is heterosexual or homosexual, so encountering someone for whom that doesn't line up is unusual and kind of fascinating?

beavis, Keanu, Spicoli, Me--we're all deep thinkers

maybe ur confusion/fascination is because homosexual should be called homogenderual

Yeah, Jennifer Finney Boylan is a noted M2F transsexual who is still with the woman she married when she was a man.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/xe

okay this is like the coolest fucking word I've ever encountered, am gonna us it constantly now

except that gender and sex are NOT synonyms, sure for a lot of people they might feel as such, but its kind of dangerous to act as though that were in some way a natural order

(xpost) bánh me? bánh xe!

Because you have to pay a lot of money and go through a lot of pain to change from a man into a woman

then you end up in a section of the Telegraph called "How about that?"

Saying there is a strong correlation between gender and sex is not saying they are exactly the same. Furthermore, identifying/noticing people where that correlation is not followed isn't a value judgment on the validity of that person's existence. If you want to preach diversity, you kind of have to allow people to actually notice it in order for it to be appreciated.

judging by the quotes used on the wiki page, yr going to be in some pretty auspicious company with yr 'xe'

yeah I was noticing that, sigh

can't imagine what kind of pronouns they must use on alt.startrek.creative.erotica.unmoderated

De raised der eyes to look at lys torso. "Very nice," de rumbled, flicking a long finger across des partner's quivering nipples. "One for each finger."

Saying there is a strong correlation between gender and sex is not saying they are exactly the same. Furthermore, identifying/noticing people where that correlation is not followed isn't a value judgment on the validity of that person's existence. If you want to preach diversity, you kind of have to allow people to actually notice it in order for it to be appreciated.

― smoking cigarette shades? it doesn't even make any sense. (HI DERE), Friday, March 19, 2010 8:31 PM (6 minutes ago

well except that we are much more accepting of a broad range of sexualities than our language allows, and really if you are talking about gender as being the cultural and social performance/state of being of male or female identity, then really we understand gender as a much broader category than our language allows too ie, my understanding of my maleness is shaped by my sexuality along with a range of other cultural contexts that are different from yours for example. Yeah we both identify as male, but in understanding specifically what that means to either of us it starts to feel as unhelpful as, heh, indie.

I totally feel like this is landmark thing though, you are right, mainly because of other gender neutral people who will feel the benefit of a priori legitimacy for their gender identity. xe is a brave person.

xe is a brave person.

No doubt; I'm expressing bafflement mostly because I can't imagine being in that situation but that is easily trumped by admiration for xem and what it takes to be that type of, for lack of a better word, pioneer.

I don't see what the big deal is - the concept of the "third sex" has been around forever in various cultures (the Germans even enshrined it in their language), eunuchs used to be really common all over etc.

I don't know if you've noticed but most modern western societies don't use eunuchs anymore

"So someone is riding a horse down the highway; people rode horses everywhere back in the nineteenth century!"

oh ok western societies

personally I have no problem divorcing the concept of gender (which to me seems to be strictly biological - you have testicles/penis = you are a man, you have a uterus/ovaries/vagina = you are a woman, and if you have neither then you're a neuter or whatever) from sexuality. of course there are loads of people who want to endlessly argue how gender is a social construct about roles and whatnot but frankly I don't have any time for that, its always struck me as empty semantic posturing. Gender is about the biological mechanics of reproduction, plain and simple.

xp

because the political situation of Hijiras in india i thought was a fairly well known cause

uh

also they have three passport gender categories in india

i totally agree w shakey mo here (LOL SF) about separating gender and orientation, and it seems clear to me that a lot of people feel some sense of identification GENDER as different than physiological SEX, both distinct from orientation. certainly, some of the combinations of those three variables (let alone magnitudes, with regards to asexuality etc) are more prevalent, but i mean, it feels totally natural to me that that diversity exists

I guess it just seems natural to me that sexuality and expressions of sexuality encompass such a broad spectrum that terms like straight/gay/bi/lesbian quickly lose their validity except in the most general of contexts. whereas gender... I dunno that's more of a concrete thing referring to how someone's body is composed, its more straightforward.

as such, hey call yourself whatever you wan,t but I don't have time for any of this "shiz", "hir", etc. bullshit really

um i think you've got that mixed up

gender

2 a : sex <the feminine gender> b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex

Quite frankly I'd love to be genderless.

I know I'm on some quite shakey conceptual ground, but it always seemed like, a man can be e-masculated and that has connotations of being not-a-man and therefore a woman. But if you're a woman and you want to escape your gender - you don't get e-feminated and end up a man.

The binary nature of gender and gender roles has always bothered me, and if there was a way to escape it, I'd love to.

Shakey Mo's arguments make no sense whatsoever to me. They just seem reductive and just not descriptive of how the world, or at least, my sense of the world, has ever been.

mine either, and i'm ok with having a gender

i mean duh it's obviously socially constructed with roles etc. and i don't know how one can argue otherwise or dismiss that

gender

2 a : sex <the feminine gender> b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex

2a is a biological description that has to with the physical structure of a human body. 2b is a social description and is of course more fluid and messy cuz its gonna vary from culture to culture.

I don't see how this conflicts with what I said, really

I would think its fairly obvious how the two could be completely divorced from one another (eg one could "act" like what is "typically associated with being a man" in any given culture, and one could accomplish that without ACTUALLY posessing the biological traits of a man)

it conflicts bc sex is generally what the biological sexual characteristics are referred to as

and gender the social roles etc that differentiates male or female

you want:

sex

1 : either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures

point taken. hey the english language is a mess

cuz when most people say sex they mean, y'know, the act of coitus and when most people discuss gender they mean "male or female"

or am I entering Geir-ish misunderstanding of terms territory here...

no ur using sex for sexuality and gender for sex

sex=/=sexuality

Xe Services LLC (pronounced /ˈziː/), still usually referred to as "Blackwater", is a private military company founded as Blackwater USA in 1997 by Erik Prince and Al Clark.[2][3] Blackwater has a wide array of business divisions, subsidiaries, and spin-off corporations but the organization as a whole has aroused significant controversy.[4][5][6][7][8]

XE.com Inc. (XE) is a Canadian online foreign exchange services company. XE claims to be the world's most popular currency site based on independent, third-party site rankings[1]. As of early 2009, independent ranking site Alexa ranks XE in the top 300 to 400 of all sites worldwide by traffic, and a top 100 traffic site in Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United Kingdom[2].

awesome thread, T is my hero <3 but what I really wanted to say is lol @ that article's avoidance of any pronouns at all

"what are we gonna call...it?"

if only they had known xe

lol at the Telegraph taking a fortnight to find a hook for the story btw "Briton! Yes!"

I knew Norrie slightly in the mid-90s, and was unsurprised* and delighted to see this on the front page of the paper the other week

*re her, that is - v surprised to see an above-the-fold headline and photo!

All I know is, out of the considerably more than 6 billion humans now living, any kind of sexual preference or identity you can imagine probably exists out there somewhere. The existence of the internet and Google now makes this hypothesis almost provable.

provable, and quite often very unnerving.

gender is really a variable concept (spectrum not duality) and intersex people w/indeterminate genitalia are more common than thought. Pat Califia has some good writing on the scientific flimsiness of either-or gender assignation. fwiw I think Newsweek also recently had a cover story on this issue related to the Olympics.

ariel levy also had a great profile a while back of caster semenya, an intersex South African runner.

yeah - i read quite a lot about semenya at the time and was really surprised at just how many intersex possibilities there are.

I think this is great news! Personally, I feel I have much more common with the stereotypical woman than with the stereotypical man, yet I'm mostly straight and don't feel like I'm living the in the wrong body, so I certainly know how complex and non-fixed gender can be, and that it doesn't necessarily tie to either your sex or sexuality. I wouldn't mind being registered genderless. In fact, I don't quite understand why societies where equality of all its members is in the law even need to classify people according to gender? Why should that information be necessary for the state?

I imagine it's necessary for the state because it's a convenient minimal identifier in the majority of cases - it's the state who issue the I.D. that identifies you as the person you say you are. Don't some passport/driving licence applications require that one states one's eye colour? Isn't that problematic for people who have heterochromia or changeable hazel eyes, yet it's still considered the most convenient option?

In this Norrie's fairly clear that being registered as sex 'non specified' is necessary because people customarily use secondary sex characteristics to identify others, and xe's is a case where using secondary sex characteristics as an identifier won't work:

If my passport, for example, states that I am female, I may be detained when travelling if the local jurisdiction classes me based on the gender assigned at birth, or if my physically noticeable masculine aspects (for example, my Adam's apple, or my broad chest) are noticed.

If the passport states male, again there is a dissonance with my physical form, castration having had a feminising effect, and I am usually moving and talking in a feminine manner.

Stating my sex as male or as female makes the statement false, which is not acceptable for legal identity documentation, and puts me in danger of detention and assault.

It looks as though the NSW attorney general's office are backtracking now, though:
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/norries-ungendered-status-withdrawn-20100318-qhw5.html

I imagine it's necessary for the state because it's a convenient minimal identifier in the majority of cases - it's the state who issue the I.D. that identifies you as the person you say you are.

But identifyng someone as male/female is based on looking at him/her. And (at least in Finland) valid IDs need to have a photograph, so why shouldn't that be enough? In ambiguous cases a photo is certainly a better identifier than any classification of gender.

tbh im surprised by all the people who are surprised! what kind of college did u go to where the question of gender/sex/sexuality wasnt discussed ad nauseum.

I wonder if the world's first genderless person was unhappy as a woman because he/she wasn't being sexually satisfied

smdh

http://images.google.co.uk/url?source=imgres&ct=img&q=http://splinteredsunrise.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/hari.jpg&usg=AFQjCNFjB1pSOmM9OFjedwZULeXuKVINEQ

I didn't want to look it up but I guess sex change people can be sexually satisfied as much, if not more than joe-no-sex-change

sex change people

That sounds a lot less durogatory than transexual in my neck if the woods (southern bastard land)

u r a piece of work

smdh x2

also max otm

what a dumb thread

"So someone is riding a horse down the highway; people rode horses everywhere back in the nineteenth century!"

― smoking cigarette shades? it doesn't even make any sense. (HI DERE), Friday, March 19, 2010 9:01 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark

lmfao

hey guys did you know in thailand they have three kinds of hellos

y is this a dumb thread? o yeah, recognition and visibility for trans ppl is retarded. douche.

That reminds me, straight people aren't recognized enough on ilx: where is the '_____ is here - straight ilxors rejoice' threads?

I peed during sex!

That reminds me, straight people aren't recognized enough on ilx: where is the '_____ is here - straight ilxors rejoice' threads?

― CaptainLorax, Sunday, March 21, 2010 4:27 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

great question

Lorax why don't you just go ahead and start one? I have a feeling this could have potential.

y is this a dumb thread? o yeah, recognition and visibility for trans ppl is retarded. douche.
--plax (ico)

Yeah, THAT'S my problem with this thread and not the gawking over someone's personal choice that should just be accepted.

Thanks for advancing the visibility of the handicapped by using the word "retarded" in your post, hero.

heroes are a minority u dick

welcome to the real world where things like having a third gender listed on a passport are landmarks in the visibility of trans ppl, a group who this thread shows, even among smart educated ppl, there is a helluva lot of exoticising and misunderstanding. also the real world where ppl who push forward for such visibility, legitimacy and understanding are lauded and speculated about.

its not exactly ideal but thats kinda the point,

btw didn't mean to sound like i was criticising anybody on this thread except for whiney in that post.

I think we're on the same page, plaxico.

okay, but acceptance is a process, not just something that happens, and awareness which is advance by conversation is pretty important in that process. Trans ppl, esp people who specifically identify as trans as opposed to male female are still pretty easy victims of social marginalisation and the trans people affected by poverty are especially vulnerable (i mean specifically in western countries. here in ireland trans ppl are not allowed to legally change their gender status legally.) In the time I have been posting on ILX i cant remember ever seeing any real discussion about transgendered ppl, so im kinda welcoming this incident (and the immediate backtracking shows how flimsy the progress made by campaigners etc remains) as an opportunity to have a bit of conversation, i mean several ppl have already admitted a previous ignorance about some pretty basic things that pertain to the myths etc that build up around an easily maligned minority, the fact that we're having this conversation is positive afaic.

i mean, we're behind Iran in terms of rights for transgendered ppl here ffs

I dunno about the rest of this thread but my ignorance was about whether transexuals get as much satisfaction as non-transexuals... I don't think transexuals will be any better or worse off in the kind of recogniton they want if the world knows or don't knows the snawer to that question

I think this thread was supposed to focus on transgender folk specifically so I apologize for sidetracking of this thread in the past 24 hours

http://www.ilxor.com/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7769/Finn-is-recognised-as-worlds-first-officially-genderless-person.html

not gonna read this thread, but i keep reading it as "world's worst genderless person"

A previous job of mine was as a Passport officer. In my time I processed a few transgender people, and it was always such a tricky thing, as most of them had a disparity between birth cert and what they wanted on the passport. You couldnt (then at least I dont know about now) get your birth cert's gender changed. But I recall one person getting some kind of legal thing from the courts that allowed them to get a F passport on a M birth cert.

Of course, thats a completely different situation than the one Morrie is in, but these issues do present some interesting conundrums for officialdom, for sure.

The fact the law has for now overturned the decision because it hadn't been legally oked properly is quite upsetting.

Don Rickter invented the pronoun xe in November 1971

Misread this as "Don Rickles" at first!

"lol redfern"

was this guyrl born with the last name "may-welby"?? if so that's awesome

Hahaha shit I didnt even think of that!

I think xe came up with it hirself, but I've never been sure.

Amusing talk-show-host-going-into-the-audience talk with hir here: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s927538.htm

hay guys english already has gender-neutral singular pronouns: "they"/"them"/"themselves"

"Well, Norrie May, I must say you seem incredibly well-adjusted for someone who has been incredibly well-adjusted."

Lol.

hay guys english already has gender-neutral singular pronouns: "they"/"them"/"themselves"

In what world are those singular

In awkwardly phrased "plain english" local government documents probably.

And facebook.

tbh I've made the switch to using 'they' in nearly all of my writing already

I must note here that in Finnish the word for "he" and "she" is the same, cool huh? No gender in the language at all.

aside from nouns, I mean.

the traditional cantonese pronoun 佢 is genderless too

tbh im surprised by all the people who are surprised! what kind of college did u go to where the question of gender/sex/sexuality wasnt discussed ad nauseum.

― max, Saturday, March 20, 2010 5:36 PM (3 days ago) Bookmark

hay guys english already has gender-neutral singular pronouns: "they"/"them"/"themselves"

In what world are those singular

― ALLAH! *rolls on floor* (HI DERE), 23 March 2010 03:54 (11 hours ago)

in a world where i can't be bothered to look up a way of assigning the correct gender pronouns in a microsoft mailmerge.

xp ehh that statement smacks a little of elitism tbh

not only elitism but a pretty insular worldview that pretty much ignores everyone and everything outside of your comfort zone

http://englishbibles.blogspot.com/2006/09/singular-they-in-english-bibles.html (xposts)

fuck a narrative/text where the singular of an unknown person is written he/she tbh, it's just clumsy and meh.

so basically your answer is "bibleworld"?

Yes, 'they' is singular as well as plural, it always has been, and it reads so much fucking better than these horrible neologisms, aaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrgh.

I mean I went to a school that many would probably consider very liberal and that had a pretty big women's studies major, but I never really encountered butler & gender theory until junior year in a 300 level lit class. I don't think the theory has the widespread prominence of say, plato, at least not yet

multi-xposts:
it's less elitism than... sadness over a missed opportunity? like, I think my college experience has been kinda bullshit on the whole, but some of my best memories are of big groups of young adults discussing these sorts of things, topics that concern all of us and that we all have opinions about, only we rarely get to express those opinions because (I guess?) they still seem too 'private' or taboo or w/e to bring into the public sphere, and there aren't a lot of established semi-public settings in which to share them (other than, I guess, college!)

all of which is to say: good thread, keep talking everyone, don't be afraid to say 'stupid' things

Yeah, I may be fuzzy on this, but wasn't "he" as default singular not actually introduced until the 19th century, and previous to that, "they" had been standard usage? I have read something like this recently when talking about gender-neutral pronoun usage.

(x-post to emil.y obv there)

Yeah, it's only been recently that style guides frown on it, and I honestly can't understand why.

Not much to add to the main topic of the thread, really, as long as they're happy it's all fine.

excellent addition to thread ime

bernard, I think I take issue with going to a liberal arts school = being automatically exposed to in-depth discussions about gender

fair enough, but... if kids at liberal arts schools aren't having in-depth discussions about gender, what the hell are they having in-depth discussions about?

I dunno, the Western tradition?

also it's a little o_O to assume that everybody on this board went to a liberal arts school

don't even know anybody that went to a liberal arts school

liberal arts school = uk university to all intents and purposes

don't even know anyone that went to a liberal arts school

uh wait my younger brother is an arts graduate. never mind. pretty sure he never stayed up discussing the sexist/?genderist? aspect of 'they' as a singular.

I don't think 'everybody on this board' went to a liberal arts school, but I'm sure a fair number of them/us did

don't really understand how you can learn about 'the Western tradition' without also having discussions about shit like imperialism, racism, and yes, gender roles. maybe by getting in a time machine and graduating class of 1930? it ain't like this shit started with Judy Butler; like, I was under the impression that American academics as far back as the 1980s were reading a fair bit of Foucault...

I was in a program that /only/ talked about the Western tradition and I managed to make it through the entire program without really talking about imperialism/racism/gender roles? the Western tradition includes about 2500 years of stuff that happened before foucault, fyi

I'm starting to get hungry, so I think I'm gonna take leave of this conversation in the politest way I know: by telling you that your program sounds like everything I loathe about modern academia!

(just kiddin', it's all good right guys? but seriously, what program were you in, Classics or something? even the medievalists I know are generally pretty heavy into theory!)

we were dealin with source texts, mayne

(fyi what you did at your school sounds like everything I hate about modern academia too tbh)

hey guys? there are lots of things you can do in the humanities! some of which will cause you to encounter this stuff, and some of which will result in you pretty much avoiding it! the great thing is that since you're an undergrad you're probably too dumb to notice until it's over!

^^^ otfm

we were dealin with source texts, mayne

yep, that's exactly right. how did you know?

put an infinite number of humanities undergraduates in front of an infinite number of typewriters

xpost: I dunno! the knowledge just suddenly appeared in my head without any context, I guess!

xp ^^ typical tv sitcom screenwriting office

cross referenced with 'WS' thread, obviously

jesus fuckin christ guys

wish i had never written the word college

but max you are ile's expert on college

deeply apologize to anyone who felt offended or left out by my attempt at wry humor--i wont ever again assume that anyone on this board went to college or has ever discussed these issues before

save it for the I Love College spinoff board (coming this fall to NBC Thursday nights!)

college was retarded and gay but you should finish it imo

― barfy (harbl)

^^ smacks of elitism

gays make elitism seem like fun

it kinda says a lot abt ile maybe that of all the interesting ares this partic topic could have spun off into, grammar was the one that happened

you forgot sniping/zinging about ppl's life experiences, too

we could talk about gay elitism

all struttin' around like they own the place

also, you know a significant proportion of trans ppl like didn't go to college? I know that it isn't the point that max(?) was tryna make, but I mean, it is a vulnerable position to be in esp because the twin spectres of medicinal intervention and queerness kinda make trans ppl as a minority one of the easiest to targets of other ppls ignorance, so I think anything that contributes to visibility and a more mainstream understanding is important in moving toward acceptance and hopefully the rights and priveliges that entails.

It is somewhat frustrating to start a thread that should, by all rights, be a celebration of someone being legally recognized as something not commonly found or accepted in our society and watching it turn into a bunch of self-satisfied smuggos going "yawn I did this in college, where were you" (o rly, in college you got legal recognition for someone to be gender neutral? why have I never heard of you?).

I fully support the grammar aside that involves geeky new words from sci-fi/furry fandom because that's kind of hilarious.

I understand the importance of visibility and education, but sometimes I'm skeptical about the extent of actual change that can be brought about by calling attention to exceptional individuals from marginalized groups. especially when, as plax mentions, our awareness of the trans person is mediated by broader societal forces.

queer theory is not a substitute for queer people, but they tend to work well together.

i would kindof argue that this person has made themselves a necessary vessel for an institutional change (the addition of third gender status) which is important in lending institutional legitimacy which is one of the reasons that a lot of ppl are so hung up on gay marriage for instance, it says that the rules of the society we have created actively or otherwise have attempted to in some way validate you and that you do not just exist as an exception to or outside of the its norms.

i mean, personally i think a common trait amongst gay/trans ppl, although much more true for ppl who did not grow up in big cities where they were headed for a liberal arts college (haw!) from day one, is this thing of having this specific thing that marks them out as being different or wrong, and while I know everyone thinks that to some extent it is just part of life etc, in most cases those differences are not explicitely enshrined in law, which really is something that should embrace and try to enfranchise ppl because i mean otherwise why did we invent society imo?

society was invented in order to make it easier to get food

well yeah, the institutional legitimacy thing is a big deal, but there's not much to argue about there! :)

hi dere, I apologize for contributing to the ruination of yr thread. I think part of the reaction is just to the phrasing of your first post. I mean, no offense (really!), but when you write this

my idea of gender is inextricably tied into how I view the world and imagining being without it seems like the definition of being rudderless to me. Obviously, for this person, that's not the case, or rather hir (is that right???) notion of gender is entirely different from mine and easily divorceable from hir sense of self.

(which is to say: you are totally cool to make gender a big part of your identity, but yeah, a ton of us don't)

smh

see i always get uncomfortable with this kind of stuff when it comes down to ppl not being able to express earnest curiosity, confusion, or lack of understanding without the above kind of response

remember back in 2002 when people would ask "what do you mean by that" as opposed to just assuming the most toxic interpretation possible and then acting like a massive asshole? those were good times

okay i know it sounds like im gonna ask everyone here to just hold hands and listen to our heartbeats (the life force that connects us!) but i swear im not, i just think the main problem i have with the "weren't you there when we did 'the epistemology of the closet?'" argument is that it really misses out on how this might be an example of all that 80's gender theory becoming helpful as an actual too for people directly involved in you know the fight for equality.

all of which is to say: good thread, keep talking everyone, don't be afraid to say 'stupid' things

― INSUFFICIENT FUN (bernard snowy), Tuesday, March 23, 2010 11:27 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark

(in that, i've been reading bits of may-welby's blog and it definitely feels like there is an academic background in this stuff, which is really nice when you think of all the criticism theory comes in for in being all talk)

remember back in 2002 when people would ask "what do you mean by that" as opposed to just assuming the most toxic interpretation possible and then acting like a massive asshole? those were good times

― ALLAH! *rolls on floor* (HI DERE), Tuesday, March 23, 2010 6:00 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark

to be fair I came to the thread pretty late; if I had been responding directly to your first post I probably would've expressed earnest curiosity about your "idea of gender", what role it plays in your worldview, and how it's been changed (or not) by any previous interactions you've had with trans (or gay, or bi, or whatever) individuals.

let me just reiterate here--really wasnt trying to shit on anyone, or smack of elitism, was expressing quasi-earnest surprise that a bunch of left-wing message-board posters hadnt encountered these issues in college?

yeah--i mean i studied english in a program that was admittedly (if you talked to the right professors) weak on theory. most of my friends were in totally different disciplines (lol business and film production). there's just a range of "college experiences" out there.

and fwiw i do feel like i missed out on really digging into some of that stuff, but like i said above i was too dumb to know that at the time!

There is a palpable difference between "encountering these issues in college", where by and large the students get to create whatever world they want to inhabit and those worlds generally end the second you set foot off of campus, and a Western national government actually listing someone on an official document as "genderless".

The personal aside of my view of my own gender boils down to this: I recognize that I have a gender. Everyone I have encountered, be they male, female, or transgenedered, has also had a gender with which they self-identify. This is the first time I have encountered mention of someone who says they have NO gender.

I know that I am a man. I can imagine being a woman. I can't imagine being NOTHING.

i think its something that more and more ppl identify as, same as how queer as opposed to gay/straight/bi I mean, I don't think that may welby is saying that zie has no gender, i think its more that what for zies gender status straddles the binary to such an extent that either categorisation is wrong

I can imagine being nothing, in that sense. I can imagine it quite clearly - but then again, I have no particular attachment to my body and view it as kind of like a station wagon that ferries around my brain. Brains, no matter what anyone else might think, to me, are genderless.

As someone who would like to dispense with the body entirely and become pure brain, that genderless state seems like some kind of ideal, really.

If I need to show identity documents, I certainly don't want details that are false, for this will only cause trouble when officials realize I don't match my documents.

If my passport, for example, states that I am female, I may be detained when traveling if the local jurisdiction classes me based on the gender assigned at birth, or if my physically noticeable masculine aspects (for example, my Adam's apple, or my broad chest) are noticed. If the passport states male, again there is a dissonance with my physical form, castration having had a feminizing effect, and I am usually moving and talking in a feminine manner.

There is a palpable difference between "encountering these issues in college", where by and large the students get to create whatever world they want to inhabit and those worlds generally end the second you set foot off of campus, and a Western national government actually listing someone on an official document as "genderless".

ok i take it all back sorry i ever said any dam thing at all

you do not just exist as an exception to or outside of the its norms.

as a faceless govt bureaucrat this is really important. nobody's in love with the idea that for the most part of your interactions with the mechanisms of normal goverment you're just a box/category to be selected, but that reality's a cakewalk compared to how little institutions (governmental or otherwise) want to deal with someone that doesn't even have a convenient box to tick. it's an important step, and i thing plaxico's o(TM) even if it's not an area i'd really know much about or give much thought to myself.

for plax(ico), tho i'm sure he's up on this more than me tbh

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0621/foyl.html

irish govt finally backs down on right of transgenders to change their official gender on official docs.

hah, just came here to post abt this

Lydia Foy is a hero btw and the actions taken by the irish gov. on this up to now have been so disgusting (basically ignoring a European Human Rights Court ruling for three years)

yeha their position has been morally indefensible long before they realised it weas legally indefensible.

not quite the same thing but this was a really interesting read - http://www.thelocal.se/20232/20090623/

Yeah, the David Reimer case is really interesting I think, but the way it is being used there as a counter-point to the idea of gender being completely learned is kindof bogus. If you consideri the vast panoply of transgendered people, especially if you considere transgenderism as an adjective that goes well outside transsexual, cross-dressers, etc. right down to male displays of feminine traits, etc, ie proof that these traits exist in various forms of learned behaviours well outside biological imperatives, there is a much broader test sample than one really weird case.

i just read back through this entire thread and it's v interesting! :)

plax bringing booming post after booming post per usual

Jeeze, I sure made a lot of bad posts in this thread!

(They are sort of funny though — or at least, revealing — if you read them with the knowledge that I flunked out of college in 2008 and just kept showing up at the parties for a few years)