Proposed Rollback of Transgender Protections

[Getting Traded]

Also, my understanding is that we know there has been testosterone decline in various populations (mostly amphibians), but I don't believe we have any evidence for that in mammals, even if it were connected to transgenderism.

There definitely has been in human males. I've read about it many times and it's mentioned in the article that I linked to in Forbes, which as you know is a very conservative publication.

 

[checkbookdoc]

Unfortunately, even sex is not that simple. People can be XX, but have an SRY region on one of those chromosomes, and so be male in every other way. XY males can have androgen insensitivity, and be born with female appearance in every way. There are variation on the classic XY, such as XXY, X, XYY, etc. The real problem is that there are few simple biological categories, and none about sex.

Thanks for the response!

I know there are variations from the XX/XY designation, but I believe that these are fairly unusual (like, it applies to more than 99.5% of people). As such, the use of sex seems like a reasonable classification system which allows for a fairly simple sort between male/female. Alternatively, I don't see how such a sorting could apply to gender (since there are infinite possibilities and no agreed upon definitions).

I guess for me the way the government sorts now, based on gender with no scientific definition behind it at all, is worse than moving forward with a definition that can be consistently applied.

Edit: I don't think it is all that unusual/unscientific to consider sex a binary condition http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html

 

[One Brow]

I guess for me the way the government sorts now, based on gender with no scientific definition behind it at all, is worse than moving forward with a definition that can be consistently applied.

Why do we need a simple classification system, other than "self-classify"?

 

[checkbookdoc]

Why do we need a simple classification system, other than "self-classify"?

I am resistant to the self-classification system because it does not result in a uniform definition of gender (I don't know what someone means when they say male or female). Also, some people don't feel like they fall in either category so that seems a bit off to me. I also wonder if society would be healthier in general and also more accepting of the LGBT community if we stop connecting people's sex with the rest of their identify.

 

[JazzGal]

I am resistant to the self-classification system because it does not result in a uniform definition of gender (I don't know what someone means when they say male or female). Also, some people don't feel like they fall in either category so that seems a bit off to me. I also wonder if society would be healthier in general and also more accepting of the LGBT community if we stop connecting people's sex with the rest of their identify.

It would depend upon how these classifications are used. If your sex classification is how you are identified on all of your government-issued documents (which is what is used for employment, school, passports, etc), then there is going to be problems for anyone who identifies as a different gender than their sex.

 

[babe]

It would depend upon how these classifications are used. If your sex classification is how you are identified on all of your government-issued documents (which is what is used for employment, school, passports, etc), then there is going to be problems for anyone who identifies as a different gender than their sex.

I wouldn't want us to officially go to a genetic test, including microheterogeneity markers and such, or to some kind of test of hormone levels to "scientifically" designate any of our government classifications. I think the real answer it to consider all people as "human" and be done with it.


Beyond that, it's nobody's business. Period.

 

[One Brow]

I am resistant to the self-classification system because it does not result in a uniform definition of gender (I don't know what someone means when they say male or female). Also, some people don't feel like they fall in either category so that seems a bit off to me.

So, we need a simple classification system for your comfort level?

I also wonder if society would be healthier in general and also more accepting of the LGBT community if we stop connecting people's sex with the rest of their identify.[/QUOTE]

I agree, but the administration's proposal does the opposite.

 

[The Privileged]

Trump is desperate to change the narrative from his disastrous foreign policy and capitulation to Putin, Kim, and MBS, endless corruption, and lack of legislative wins to loser identity politics.

Republicans know that they can’t campaign on things like deregulation and tax cuts. Democrats own them on health care.

But republicans do know that by tossing out some red meat exploiting fears about LGBT, South American caravans, and “unknown middle easterners”, they can draw out enough of the racist to can maintain control of congress.

So expect plenty of racist tweets in the upcoming weeks. Lots of ISIS and MS13 stuff. Probably toss in a few anti-NFL tweets. Lots of conspiracy nonsense about the Clintons and Soros and the “deep state.” And plenty of identity politics to change the narrative from real issues to identity. “Us” v “Them.”

I’d say this is a losing strategy but I’ve learned to never underestimate the stupity and short-sightedness of the American electorate

The Thriller (of all people) calling people stupid while spewing made up scenarios is pure gold.. thanks for the laugh

 

[Darkwing Duck]

So, we need a simple classification system for your comfort level?

Gender is societal in creation, not individually created. Otherwise it has no definition.

Plus, what works for 99.9+% of the population, specifically in regards to sex, creates efficiency in categorization, especially when sex is of critical importance, like health or even insurance.

 

[One Brow]

Gender is societal in creation, not individually created. Otherwise it has no definition.

I disagree. It's responded to in society, and we teach cultural understanding, but each individual creates and interprets their gender uniquely.

Plus, what works for 99.9+% of the population, specifically in regards to sex, creates efficiency in categorization, especially when sex is of critical importance, like health or even insurance.

I agree that it helps to have sex categories; I disagree they need to be simple and easily defined.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I disagree. It's responded to in society, and we teach cultural understanding, but each individual creates and interprets their gender uniquely.

Gender is an ideal, or an expectation. Adherence to it is certainly up to the individual, but others in society will view based on "compliance." That's a societal construct, not an individual one. People of the society tend to pool what those ideals or expectations are.

 

[Archie Moses]

Social constructs are, to say the least, interesting. Are there different types of social constructs @Darkwing Duck? (If that question doesn't make sense, I can try to explain what I mean.)

The thing that's weird to me with gender being a social construct is why the standard came up with just two genders. I imagine gender is largely based on masculine and feminine traits, yet we all are different with what we identify with so being a social construct, gender is like finger prints - everyone is unique.

I don't see the problem with marking birth certificates male or female for sex and or gender because it pretty much covers 95% of the people (I could be wrong, just throwing a number out there.) I don't see a problem with people requesting gender changes on legal documents either. I don't have a problem with the government keeping track of us through knowing our sex and what genitalia we are born with. I know there are some people who are born with both, but that's not the norm (there are people born with Situs inversus, webbed toes, six fingers on one hand, etc but we know that's not the norm too) so having sex listed as male of female is sufficient.

As to Bulletproof saying he feels this could escalate things, I felt like that for a little bit too. I told my brother the other day that if Trump gets reelected next term that I wouldn't be surprised if some **** went down. I'm already surprised no one has tried to take him out already with the level or crazies out there and the level of hate people have for Trump.