[quote=GrahamS ]Yeah I think that is the tricky part. Humans love to categorise. It is a very basic part of how our minds work.
Given the post you were replying to was discussing physical attraction, then it's a pretty fundamental issue for many (most?) people to categorise other people into the group they're attracted to and the group they aren't.
[quote=nealglover ]Male Nurse is still a well used term.
Is it? In any more than simply categorising into one of two types (as you might say "male doctor" or "male actor") or something more than that?
I think when it comes to relationships, it's more about honesty. The fact that a chick used to stand up to take a slash is a fair old skeleton-in-the-closet by anyone's standards*.
When it comes to sports, I guess this is the bit where my folks roll their eyes and say "See? This is what happens when you **** about in God's domain!"
Personally, the older I get, the less answers I seem to have.
*Tongue firmly in cheek (for Rachel's benefit)
Should the same rules around gender categorisation be applied to animals too?
I think the only reliable gender indicator is how long it takes to buy curtains.
Any longer than 30 minutes you are female.
[quote=johndoh ]Should the same rules around gender categorisation be applied to animals too?
Provided they've ticked the right box on the form.
What about the use of he or she does that not categorise us as in she is a good police officer.
squirrelking - MemberIt's one of those bizarre things that in the pursuit of equality people feel the need to pigeon hole as many folk as possible instead of just accepting folk for who they are.
How do you accept someone for who they are, if you don't know? TBH I don't like the pigeonholing but it's got some very good things going for it- helps stop us thinking about normal vs different is the main one. All about defaults. I don't think the pigeonholing's very healthy myself but then neither is the whole assumption of mainstreamness that it's a reaction against.
(and with sexuality, there's that ugly catch 22 where people assume someone's straight then get uppity when they tell them they're not, "why do gays always go on about it".) Tons of stuff like this in many fields- see also, everyone on the internet is a man- but things that go to the heart of who you are and how you want to be seen are always going to promote strong opinions
Well, it might be complicated but you’re all going to have to get used to it quickly.
Judging by the sudden social acceptance of people living outside the simple genders they were born with, the number of people putting themselves forward for help from Gender Identity services in the NHS is going up exponentially. In 2014, 70 new cases were started in the Norwich trust and more than 100 are expected in 2016.
Rachel
Saxon rider wpc is not a term I would use.
But if I was stopped by a policeman and later that day someone asked how my day was I would say I had been stopped by a policeman and the same could be said if I was stopped by a policewoman.
Am I wrong.
That said I would always adress both as officer regardless of sex or rank.
I recall some time ago I wrote a message on here about an incident I encountered with a black bloke in a red Micra.
Some rather silly people tried to pull me up about the fact I had mentioned him being black.
Some rather silly people tried to pull me up about the fact I had mentioned him being black.
Wont be long before they are pulling you up for mentioning he was a man 😀
I think the only reliable gender indicator is how long it takes to buy curtains.
Any longer than 30 minutes you are female.
What if you post a "Recommend me some curtains" thread on here?
Wont be long before they are pulling you up for mentioning he was a man
I was thinking that as I wrote it 🙂
La la la la Lola
I must have deleted 4 or 5 different posts as each one sounded like a comment from the Daily Mail.
Unless it's pertinent to the situation, gender is irrelevant, as is if someone is gay, straight, hair colour... Having said that, some things are a continuum (sexuality, hair colour, race), some things are distinct - like sex. Sex is a really simply definition and there's a very specific 'gender indicator'; male or female. There's no argument with chromosomes; you're XX or XY. How you percieve youself has many, many, many different answers and, honestly, does it matter?
I think I say policeman, fireman etc to mean either. If I offended a lady policeman by saying that, I think that's her issue. I don't want to be an arsehole but I really couldn't care less. People look for reasons to be offended nowadays. It was very recent that male pronouns were the norm. Most English laws use 'he' to mean, a person.
How about this for a PC question on a form?
Do you see yourself as
male I---------------------------------------------------------------I female
Sexuality
homo I---------------------------------------------------------------I hetero
Just let everyone tick somewhere on the line.
Had to google what "cisgender" meant... Has it really come to the point when we need to tell people that we're default, stock, bog-standard, OEM human beings???
Brilliantly answered your own question there - as long as some gender identities are considered "normal" and the others are considered "weird" than yes, I reckon it's necessary, for that very reason.
Confused though, I came here expecting a thread about sex, but all I can find is a discussion about gender. Disappointed.
Oh, and race. Don't recall the thread in question, but I've seen others where stating ethnicity gets questioned where there is no apparent pertinence to its mention, and its context suggests that it's only mentioned to either emphasise diference and /or imply some stereotyped behaviours of people with that characteristic (which might be race, or, yes, might be gender) - examples I recall seeing here or elsewhere are, for example, threads criticising poor driving where it goes "driver" "driver" "driver" "driver" "woman driver" "driver" "driver" "black man" "driver" "driver" - it's blindingly obvious to me why that attracts raised eyebrows...
There's no argument with chromosomes; you're XX or XY
[url= http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency ]Oh - if only it was so simple…[/url] 🙄
Judging by the sudden social acceptance of people living outside the simple genders they were born with, the number of people putting themselves forward for help from Gender Identity services in the NHS is going up exponentially. In 2014, 70 new cases were started in the Norwich trust and more than 100 are expected in 2016.
There's a rise, but it's hardly going to make a dent in statistics when you look at the number of people served by the Norwich NHS Trust (around 655,000).
It's risen from from 0.0107% to 0.0152%.
Now, call me old fashioned, but assuming Norwich is fairly representative of the rest of the UK (which we all know it isn't due to the shallow gene pool), should we really need to re-label 99.99 percent of the population on the off chance that 0.0152% *might* be offended?
makecoldplayhistory
If I offended a lady policeman by saying that, I think that's her issue. I don't want to be an arsehole but I really couldn't care less.
Well, that’s because you’re sat in a situation where you are unlikely to feel excluded by such a statement. When you hear the same thing, over and over and over again, it starts to get just a little bit annoying.
I do get why you think that’s “her problem” - you don’t experience it. It’s difficult to see from the inside.
Can I suggest (once Radio 6 has stopped playing Bowie) you listen to an excellent comedy set Marcus Brigstocke did? It’s very silly but really does help explain why this stuff matters.
olegmcnoleg - erm - that’s new cases per year - it adds up. Generally, about 1% of the population is gender non-conforming but growing.
Rachel
Sex is a really simply definition and there's a very specific 'gender indicator'; male or female. There's no argument with chromosomes; you're XX or XY.
Do you mean sex or gender? Assuming gender. And you're wrong. That's not a political point, you've got the science wrong, people are born with the physical distinctions not as clear cut as you assert. You may have heard of Caster Semanya (not sure on spelling there) - she was not the first human born where the issue arose.
As a medical term I agree completely that it is useful. As a day to day thing, not really. As long as you know what a person identifies as and respect that then that's all that is really necessary IMO.
In case anyone hadn't noticed, women and men are quite different. I personally am quite glad of the ability to distinguish between the two
See sex vs gender. See also transgender issues (but you're a man! Er, no I'm not...). Not a simple as all that.
[quote=chip ]Wont be long before they are pulling you up for mentioning he was a man
I was wondering why nobody is concerned about the typecasting of cars by colour
Wont be long before they are pulling you up for mentioning he was a man
I was thinking that as I wrote it
What about the Micra? Was it really communist?
olegmcnoleg - erm - that’s new cases per year - it adds up. Generally, about 1% of the population is gender non-conforming but growing.
Erm, these people die too... We're not going to end up with a majority population of trans-gender folk strutting around with their big hands and feather boas!*
And christ knows where you get 1% from, the most commonly touted figure is 0.3% which is SIGNIFICANTLY less than 1%.
*Again, tongue-in-cheek facetious language used for humourous effect (for Rachel's benefit).
What about the Micra? Was it really communist?
You Communistist, you.
Generally, about 1% of the population is gender non-conforming but growing.
It would be interesting to know how many of these people are non-conforming because they don't conform to accepted genders and how many are simply being belligerent just because. Like the wags that put their religion down as 'Jedi' because they can.
Never try to be funny/facetious on here!
A few years ago I was on the wrong end of a homophobic attack by an idiot in a car while out riding. On mentioning the homophobic aspect I said "Well I was in Lycra on my road bike" and got the kind of shoeing on here that made wish I was still on the A6 dodging abuse and cans of Carling!
Or on the flipside, whether the number is actually growing or (more likely) the number of people who are now comfortable enough to state they have a non-conforming gender is growing.
i.e. they don't see more cases because incidents of Gender Identity Crisis are growing; they see more cases because people are realising that Gender Identity Crisis is a thing and there is help available to them.
Now, as a red-blooded bloke, if things were getting frisky, I'd prefer to know... Not because I'm a homophobe, or because I think people shouldn't have the right to reassign their gender, but at the end of the day, I'm a straight bloke and my preference is for straight women. With small hands.
Do you want to screw them, or not? If you do, but they're transgender, have you got a tiny little bit of cognitive dissonance, given how indisputably straight you are? Are you going to be a dick about it? #BigQuestions.
🙂
To be clear: I am interested only in why there is a convention of distinguishing between the sexes in a professional context.
I think the official convention nowadays is to use gender neutral terms, e.g. firefighter, police officer, actor, nurse etc although gendered terms are obviously still used informally by many people, because they have been around for so long.
Seems like common sense and more accurate to use gender neutral terminology, when it's the role that is important, not the gender of the person doing the job.
Do you want to screw them, or not? If you do, but they're transgender, have you got a tiny little bit of cognitive dissonance, given how indisputably straight you are? Are you going to be a dick about it? #BigQuestions.
Depends, there's probably a long list of other things you'd want to know as well though isn't there that aren't to do with whether their bits dangle or not?
Are they thick as 2 short planks and unable to hold a conversation?
Are they really into S&M?
Do they vote Tory?
Are they only sleeping with you because they're a dirty old man and you're a 14yr old boy?
None to do with the dangly bits, all mostly in the mind, but it would still inform your decision wouldn't it?
You're awfy choosie. I thought the standard STW requirement was "is it breathing?"
Stop being so discriminatory to the living impaired.
Should we really only say what is pertinent.
I actually like a bit of detail. If it was a matter a pertinence a black man in a red micra becomes someone in a car.
God would life not be so boring.
It's more about people who are quick to judge others because they think they are judging others.
We had it here when that poor young girl disappeared when lots of people went potty because the media mentioned the main suspects nationality. Young girl murdered by Latvian man and people were upset because they did not believe Latvian was pertinent. Why is Latvian not pertinent but young girl and man are, should it not be one person is murdered by another and no more.
They deliberately did not report the cologne sex attacks as according to the female exec they did not want to report it as she said it would be unfair on other immigrants.
PC correctness is dangerous as recently proved.
all the gear "Oh - if only it was so simple… "
It is.
For example, gonadal dysgenesis is divided into XX gonadal dysgenesis and XY gonadal deygenesis.
Another, vaginal agenesis, is a physical abnormality. Not saying it's anything other than terrible, but it's not the same as sex / gender issues (that's sex as an adjective). It may cause mental issues as a side effect, but it's a physical issue.
______________________________________________________________________
If I offended a lady policeman by saying that, I think that's her issue. I don't want to be an arsehole but I really couldn't care less.Well, that’s because you’re sat in a situation where you are unlikely to feel excluded by such a statement. When you hear the same thing, over and over and over again, it starts to get just a little bit annoying.
I do get why you think that’s “her problem” - you don’t experience it. It’s difficult to see from the inside.
If something is just a little bit annoying then the best thing to do is ignore it. Spend the time you've saved on something more meaningful.
I'm bi-polar but don't get offended by mental jokes.
__________________________________________________________________________
Do you mean sex or gender? Assuming gender. And you're wrong.I had no idea there was a difference.
people are born with the physical distinctions not as clear cut as you assertambiguous genitalia is different to what I'm talking about. I'm sure it must be very difficult to deal with. You're still XX or XY though. There are very, very, very few people with chromosonal abnormalities like XXY. So few, it's not worth discussing unless you're a geneticist, specialist or have a particular need to know about it.
___________________________________________________________________________
I think the official convention nowadays is to use gender neutral terms, e.g. firefighter, police officer, actor, nurse etc although gendered terms are obviously still used informally by many people, because they have been around for so long.Honestly, I didn't pay that much attention in biology, but isn't female the [u]default sex[/u], until some of us become men in utero? Hence both sexes having nipples. Therefore a police officer, we would assume to be a lady?
It seems like those who don't like labels, the one's who aren't normal*, are the ones seeking labels for themselves, it's just that the list of labels grows as it attempts to accomodate everyone. As I said earlier though, with this stuff being a continuum, there will never be enough labels!
*I mean 'normal' in a non-offensive way. Average may be a better word. I mean something like 'born a man, in a man's body. Sexualy attracted to females in female bodies...
I actually like a bit of detail. If it was a matter a pertinence a black man in a red micra becomes someone in a car.
Not quite sure why I'm responding since you are clearly being deliberate in missing the point, which is that typically the only people who get their ethnicity mentioned are the non-white ones, the only drivers whos genders gets specified are women, and the only people whos sexual orientation is worthy of mention are the non-heterosexual. Feel free to point me to the black-man-in-micra thread if I've got it wrong on that one occasion, but I've seen many, many other examples on here (and elsewhere of course) where that is the reality - the blackness of the man is worthy of mention because it differentiates him from the "norm". The majority of posters on here seem to be straight, white men, so I can see how it doesn't even get noticed, as it doesn't generally, but the flip side is that it sends a message that you are "other", "not normal" if you are black, or gay, or female. Although we're all (okay, nearly all) white straight men, it shouldn't be to hard to understand how this works - just go to the bottom of the internet and remember that, for all you are part of the "in" group most of the time you are also, first and foremost when the abuse is being dished out, a "cyclist"...
I heard John Humphrys do this, and get away with it too, on the Today programme a while ago - it was after the Pussy Riot thing blew up and Putin brought in that homophobic law, Humphrys was interviewing an LBGT activist who described how, government sanctioned discrimination go hang, he was going to continue walking hand-in-hand down the street with his boyfriend. Humphrys wanted to know how that was now, with the oppressive climate and all, so did he ask how "other passers by" reacted? Did he specify "straight people", and how they reacted? No, here's what he said, to an LGBT activist who was literally taking his life in his hands by standing up for who he was:
How do [b]normal[/b] people react?
I have a good friend (a GP) who runs an online resource for transgender people. It's been humbling to hear some of the stories she has. I cannot imagine how horrendous it must be to be trapped in a body that isn't the right sex. The thing I found most sad was that medical treatment is far more effective if undertaken prior to puberty however most parents won't seriously consider it because they are sure that their child is just confused. It's a very serious medical issue for a small but significant number of people and disgustingly used by many SJW's to further their agendas.
i think its an outrage that animals arent treated the same.. those poor drakes, ewes, c0cks and hens. Flippin outrage I tell ya!
I have a friend who is referred to as black Anthony and a friend who is referred to as white Anthony. Both know this and neither are bothered. I have a friend known as fat simon and another skinny simon.
No, here's what he said, to an LGBT activist who was literally taking his life in his hands by standing up for who he was:
He's not wrong though? He used the word normal, which means exactly what he intended t it to mean.
noun: the usual, typical, or expected state or condition.
Normal is the 95% of people not affected by this. In this case being straight is "usual, typical or expected".
In fact it could even be more nuanced and inclusive than that, normal could encompass those affected that were opting not to protest?
NB. I'm trying very hard to be unoffensive as it really isn't my intention. After an interesting and intelligent discussion.
@ edlong
How do normal people react?
But, there are normal people and therefore abnormal. Not as far as race, but for sex and sexuality, of course there are. None are better than the other, but there is a normal or typical. Binary? Isn't that the same as normal? Isn't typical (and atypical) the same as normal or abnormal. Average or um... non-average(?). Common or rare...
There's no implicit suggestion of better or worse in those words.
There was a very interesting Louis Throux doc. where he met children who were all uh, ummm, 'not normal' (waiting for a better word). Some were taking hormones to change their sex. Some were cross dressers. Some were waiting for the op (in either direction). I was amazed at how young these people were and changed my mind. Having said that, the treatments are pretty irreversible aren't they? There are people who change their mind. How young is too young? What tests should a child go through before they are allowed to go through treatment? Very difficult to say. I get the reductio ad absurdum, but I had to tell my son last week that he wasn't a polar bear and had to use a knife for his sausages. My friend from prep school (we must have been about 6) wore girls clothes* at home for a few months. I remember being confused. He stopped and never went back to it. I guess just a phase.
*are we allowed to say that any more, or just say pink garments?
How do normal people react?
To be fair to John Humphrys, given that they were talking about public protests against [i]"government sanctioned discrimination"[/i], the term [i]"normal people"[/i] could mean [i]"people who aren't government representatives"[/i] or indeed just [i]"people who aren't protesting"[/i].
makecoldplayhistory - MemberThere's no implicit suggestion of better or worse in those words.
I'll just leave these here:
ab·nor·mal (?b-nôr?m?l)
adj.
Not typical, usual, or regular; not normal;[b] deviant.[/b]
abnormal
?b?n??m(?)l/
adjective
adjective: abnormal
deviating from what is normal or usual, [b]typically in a way that is undesirable or worrying.[/b]
abnormaladjective uk /æb?n??.m?l/ us /-?n??r-/
C1 different from what is ?usual or ?average, ?[b]especially in a way that is ?bad[/b]:
Why should what constitutes a "normal" person be defined by who they want to f***? Is a gay man more or less normal than a straight man who wants to sleep with women thirty years younger than him, or doing it while wearing a nappy? Some of my colleagues (including the gay ones) would say I'm not the "normal" one because I ride a bike to work rather than driving a car like they all do. Since when does everyone have to defined by one particular characteristic (people still get referred to as being "a gay" rather than a characteristic of them being that they are gay) and who gets to decide what the characteristic is?
Sorry but I have a problem with anyone who seriously suggests that it's okay, and reasonable, that the population divides down into "gay" or "normal"
Apart from anything else, the gay people I know are about the most normal out of the lot of them, other than being in a minority regarding how they get their lovin'
Apart from anything else, the gay people I know are about the most normal out of the lot of them
Why would any gay person be any more or any less normal than a heterosexual person?
