• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

How should gender or sex be defined?

thats because there's not anybody insisting that humans can only have 2 eyes. meanwhile there's a whole hell of a lot of people that believe that whats in other people's pants (or for that matter, what consenting adults do together in private) is their business; a bunch of sick, perverted assholes that are obsessed with others' genitalia

Nobody is insisting intersex conditions don't exist. You're missing the point. Call me whatever names you like. I don't believe other people's genitals are my business...

there's long been discussions about whether or not its gay to find traps attractive


Finding someone who looks like a woman attractive is a far cry from performing fellatio.

...

Cream Gravy: most gay people I know wouldn't like your definition of what gay means. According to your definition a feminine lesbian being attracted to a masculine lesbian is heterosexual?
:\
 
I just don't find fellatio inherently gay based upon the recipients genitals. It's all about the nature of who's giving it to who and why.

But I have said my piece. I don't think explaining it any further would be anything more than talking in circles.

I will say that I realized this sexual interest via downloading what was supposed to be a lesbian porno. When it turned out to be two ladyboys in Thailand, I was sickened. Then I watched it more. And I came to realize they were more beautiful than many women I've met.

So if a woman is ugly and masculine and you eat her out, are you still straight? Is taking the grenade straight?
 
I don't see what Trump has done against the trans community.
during the campaign, he said he was a different kind of republican - he came from a more liberal background in new york and he was the candidate who would finally make some changes in the republican party with regard to lgtb issues and that he would be a friend to the lgtb community. how refreshing! he even flew the flag:

2QTCMYWUCQ4HNFG7RNS43MQF4M.png


it was all going to be different. well, how does his administration stack up on this?

it's been an absolute disaster. among other things:


i don't want to assume your response... he said he'd be a friend to the community - does anything about his actions in office say anything other than the exact opposite?

this isn't aren't-politicians-a-bit-slimy-business-as-usual political campaigning. he pandered and told people exactly what they wanted to hear and then got elected when they believed him and did the exact opposite :\

alasdair
 
The meaning of the word "gender" appears to contribute to some confusion in defining the sexes, which should be relatively straight forward in theory.


noun
1.
the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).
"traditional concepts of gender


Then there is this;

Gender is the range of characteristics pertaining to, and differentiating between, masculinity and femininity. Depending on the context, these characteristics may include biological sex (i.e., the state of being male, female, or an intersex variation), sex-based social structures (i.e., gender roles), or gender identity.[1][2][3] Traditionally, people who identify as men or women or use masculine or feminine gender pronouns are using a system of gender binary whereas those who exist outside these groups fall under the umbrella terms non-binary or genderqueer. Some cultures have specific gender roles that are distinct from "man" and "woman," such as the hijras of South Asia. These are often referred to as third genders.

Oh look at how easy it is to use Google and be an expert.

Wiki said:
Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955. Before his work, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories.[1][2] However, Money's meaning of the word did not become widespread until the 1970s, when feminist theory embraced the concept of a distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender. Today, the distinction is followed in some contexts, especially the social sciences[4][5] and documents written by the World Health Organization (WHO).[3]

In other contexts, including some areas of the social sciences, gender includes sex or replaces it.[1][2] For instance, in non-human animal research, gender is commonly used to refer to the biological sex of the animals.[2] This change in the meaning of gender can be traced to the 1980s. In 1993, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) started to use gender instead of sex.[6] Later, in 2011, the FDA reversed its position and began using sex as the biological classification and gender as "a person's self representation as male or female, or how that person is responded to by social institutions based on the individual's gender presentation."[7]

The social sciences have a branch devoted to gender studies. Other sciences, such as sexology and neuroscience, are also interested in the subject. The social sciences sometimes approach gender as a social construct, and gender studies particularly do, while research in the natural sciences investigates whether biological differences in males and females influence the development of gender in humans; both inform debate about how far biological differences influence the formation of gender identity. In some English literature, there is also a trichotomy between biological sex, psychological gender, and social gender role. This framework first appeared in a feminist paper on transsexualism in 1978.[2][8]

Copy pasting wiki is not really that interesting compared to the individual opinions and words of people who take the time to share their thoughts, but it's good to know who did begin the exploration of gender, when and why the diversity thats always been around grow enough in conversation to need these definitions.

What is weird is the growing scope of these definitions and labels then becoming a problem in itself with so many now out there being interpreted differently by individuals.

It's easier to go back to basics and just find a level of self acceptance that who you are and what you find sexually attractive is unique to you. Maybe the identity and what to call yourself if you are attracted to a particular type of person is only relevant to you and that person, why should anyone else get to define who you are anyway.



Take it to the Trump thread lol
 
Last edited:
I'll say I think genders such as 'sapiosexual' are BS. That's not a physical attraction and is therefore not sexual. Or non-binary, because it defies any and all logic. If someone looks male, I call them male, and vice versa.


Cream Gravy: most gay people I know wouldn't like your definition of what gay means. According to your definition a feminine lesbian being attracted to a masculine lesbian is heterosexual?
:\
Yeah, that fits my definition. And if someone who's gay finds that wrong, then perhaps that supports the notion that all these definitions are silly? I've said it before and I'll say it again, the world is gray, and sexuality is a part of that grayness. So sure, maybe I'm a little bit towards the gay end of the spectrum.
 
Nobody is insisting intersex conditions don't exist. You're missing the point. Call me whatever names you like. I don't believe other people's genitals are my business...

except for everyone that claims sex is binary. if sex was binary then it would be impossible for anyone to be intersex. words - they mean things

I just don't find fellatio inherently gay based upon the recipients genitals. It's all about the nature of who's giving it to who and why.

a dick is just a really large clit. i mean that literally too, in males the clit grows especially large and ends up being called a "penis". in some intersex conditions, the clit can end up being large enough to basically be a dick.

I'll say I think genders such as 'sapiosexual' are BS. That's not a physical attraction and is therefore not sexual.

why does sexuality only need to refer to physical attractions? why do you think that other, non-physical traits are irrelevant to attraction?
 
Last edited:
except for everyone that claims sex is binary. if sex was binary then it would be impossible for anyone to be intersex. words - they mean things


Biological sex is binary outside of very rare medical conditions, just as the number of fingers people have is five unless something goes wrong. We're not changing the definition of the number of fingers humans have or saying that it's a spectrum
... We don't define humans based on genetic disorders and birth defects. Intersex has nothing to do with non-intersex trans people... Sex is binary unless something goes wrong in the same sense that people have five fingers unless something goes wrong.

Yeah, that fits my definition.


Your definitions seem to be crafted in order to sustain the idea that you're 100% straight when you're obviously not.
 
Okay, it was a mistake to say I'm 100% straight then. Sure. But I'm mostly 'right' on the sexuality spectrum then, if left were gay and middle were purely bisexual.

why does sexuality only need to refer to physical attractions? why do you think that other, non-physical traits are irrelevant to attraction?
The rest of attraction outside the physical is created by nature to accommodate for the need of compatible personalities in mates.

But my opinions on sex being a purely primal and physical thing are usually denied by others. I think it's a denial of nature, imo. I embrace the purity of desire and physicality. My affection for girls who say, smoke weed, is just because that's an activity we can share. It doesn't give me a boner.
 
Gender is a system. It serves a purpose. I don't have very strong feelings on the matter beyond that. It can be changed to please more people, but I doubt you'll please everyone.
only if you believe that intersex isnt a real thing. fun fact: it exists! if biological sex can only be a 0 or 1 then how do you explain the existence of one that is neither?
This doesn't actually conflict with the "binary" definition, though. If you can have an apple or an orange, you can also have neither, but neither is not a half-orange half-apple, it's just nothing. There are still two choices of fruit.

I don't believe this whole "gender is binary", but I do think it's pretty silly to suggest that the existence of intersex people proves anything about gender.
SheWasLv18 said:
though [homosexuality in Ancient Greece] wasn't so much an identifier or traits as much as a fun thing to do
I mean that's the Disney version. The way I heard it told, the Greeks were raping each other all the time.

And that's the problem with "traditional" sexuality or anything really: most of it is terrible. Why respect traditions when traditions have a bad habit of looking like that?

alasdairm said:
can you even, for just a second, sincerely put yourselves in their shoes and try to imagine how utterly soul-destroying it must be?
I'm also not convinced that empathy is the way out here. Everyone has different experiences of different things. Many people cannot, for example, imagine what eating spicy food is like for a person who likes spicy food.
Like, I didn't choose to be a guy. I just happen to be a guy. It's okay. If I suddenly woke up as a girl I'd probably be somewhat unhappy. However, I don't think it would be as bad as if I suddenly woke up to find I was, for example, fat.
Everyone's different.
Cream Gravy said:
I think non-binary is bullshit. I can get on board with the hate on that. How do you identify as NOTHING? That's the most hipster bullshit I've ever heard.
I know a likely ex-male person who identifies as a "demigirl" which I assume derives at least somewhat from her unwillingness to go to the huge amount of effort it would take to look like a convincing girl after going through puberty with testicles. This seems like a rational choice.
 
People here really have an issue with the third gender concept. Or should I say divorcing gender from sex.

The Japanese have an appreciation for androgynous beauty and a more fluid concept of gender, as reflected in the less restricted definition of bishonen. (The less restrictive term includes females.)

The concept of the appeal of androgyny dates back thousands of years :) in Japanese culture.

Here's an interesting article.
How androgyny has been reflected in Japanese fashion
 
Androgyny isn't a third gender. Bishonen are young males. The kanji for bishonen uses a masculine descriptor... I went into a building in Tokyo and there was an entire floor dedicated to child pornography. I couldn't believe it... Some Japanese sexual practices are quite disturbing. See: shotacon, for example.

Bishonen, historically, were boys that men had sex with.

In Japan, the age of sexual consent is 13. Young boys with feminine features are seen as more attractive to Japanese men (in the same way that they are seen as more attractive - generally - to non-Japanese paedophiles).

I'm not sure how this is even remotely okay, according to most people's standards... nor do I understand how it pertains to the trans movement or the idea of a third gender. :\

atara said:
I know a likely ex-male person who identifies as a "demigirl" which I assume derives at least somewhat from her unwillingness to go to the huge amount of effort it would take to look like a convincing girl after going through puberty with testicles. This seems like a rational choice.


This makes sense to me more than calling trans women women. Most of the trans people I've met don't actually claim to be women. They refer to themselves as trans women. Not sure what the difference is between demigirl and trans woman / ladyboy? There are so many different terms now. It's (sue me, CH) kind of confusing.

Good post, atara.
 
This doesn't actually conflict with the "binary" definition, though. If you can have an apple or an orange, you can also have neither, but neither is not a half-orange half-apple, it's just nothing. There are still two choices of fruit.

I don't believe this whole "gender is binary", but I do think it's pretty silly to suggest that the existence of intersex people proves anything about gender.
not really analogous to humans. humans start the same, as "female", and then different genes activating at different times cause the embryo to gain either male or female characteristics. something better than 2 completely different fruits would be, say, a caterpillar/butterfly; you can even do caterpillar = female, cocoon = intersex, butterfly = male, but then you still cant say its binary because there's more than 2 possible states it can be in

what i'm talking about for this is biological sex, not gender, btw. biological sex and gender are not the same thing.
 
something better than 2 completely different fruits would be, say, a caterpillar/butterfly; you can even do caterpillar = female, cocoon = intersex, butterfly = male, but then you still cant say its binary because there's more than 2 possible states it can be in


Fruit is a better analogy, IMO. The caterpillar analogy doesn't work at all. How is cocoon intersex? Intersex is like muscular dystrophy or a cleft palate. It's not part of the natural process of human or non-human development... Oranges and apples are two different things. If an apple fails to develop properly, it isn't a new type of fruit. It's an imperfect apple. We don't change the definition of apple tree to include anomalies. We don't do this with anything.
 
this is a point i was working towards earlier when pointing out that biological sex is a spectrum and not binary. sex is basically the physical characteristics and traits, whereas gender is a social construct built on top of that regarding societal expectations, how they're expected to present themselves, and other stuff, and everyone gets assigned as being "male" or "female" depending on where they fall on the sex spectrum (or "intersex" if its too ambiguous to fit in either one). whats in somebody's pants, their sex, is irrelevant, unless we're gonna insist on checking everyone's genitals all the time; their gender, what they present themselves as socially, is the part thats relevant to others.

why does it only need to be male or female though? sex isnt binary, so whats with the insistence on shoehorning everyone into 2 categories, other than tradition, homophobia, and fragile masculinity?

I get that that's how you, and probably a lot of people define the words sex and gender, and how they differ from each other. And that's fine, ultimately I think it's more important that people are clear on what other people mean than the specifics of what words are used. Which is why generally if I'm talking to people who use those words that way, I'll try to use them that way too. And I can see how having that distinction would have advantages in discussing transgender issues. And really, that's probably the primary reason that personally, my default is to not draw any real distinction between them. It's extremely uncommon that I'm in a situation, especially in real life, where there'd be any point to having a different definition for the words sex and gender. I think most people, most people who don't really have any connection to or reason to frequently discuss anything to do with transgender issues that is, don't really think about it enough to really have different definitions for both words. If you do, then it makes sense that you'd want words to clarify what you're talking about. But if your life almost never warrants a distinction, and like a lot of people mine doesn't, it doesn't make sense to have two meanings if the words are almost never actually used intending that level of specificity.

I'm not a grammar nazi, I'm generally not one to change how I use words just because "the dictionary says so". But for the same reason neither do I care much what words are used so long as the meanings are clear in the context.

So, I try to keep in mind the difference amongst audiences that are likely to be paying attention to the difference, but virtually never do otherwise.

As for "why does it only need to be male or female" or "why shoehorn people into those categories". Well, I suppose it doesn't need too. But in my real life, it's probably almost never that I've encountered a need for a third category. If one day I do, I suppose I'd try to respect that.

But, with how my mind works mentally, on a purely instinctive level aside, I'm not sure my brain has any categories except male and female. I've never met someone where my brain hasn't mentally labeled them as one or the other.

But hey, that's just my brain. There's no need for society to follow that legally. Nor do I have to follow it in terms of how people wish to be addressed. And I see no reason why I should do so if doing so would be disrespectful to someone. There's just no need to be rude or disrespectful to people who are asking for so little. And really, I don't think someone who identifies as a particular gender, and asks that people address them as such, as asking for very much at all.

And on the subject of how my mind intrinsically categorizes people. ANT asked what qualifies as "sounds like a female, looks like a female, acts like a female" actually means.

As far as my mental classifications go, which at the time I was arguing that everyone's own mental classification can function as a way to identify gender without relying on chromosomes. That's the thing, I'm don't think it has to be explained. Our brains have evolved to do a great job identifying people as male or female without knowing things like chromosomes.

We've evolved an amazing ability to instantly identify men and women apart based on barely more than a glance, or half a second of hearing someone's voice. Our pattern recognition for it is phenomenal.
 
Last edited:
Androgyny, as described in the article I thoughtfully attached, is an aesthetic that plays with gender and the ability to perceive biological sex.

ANT, I realize Japan is not part of Western civilization, but sometimes people enjoy articles with cool photos about fashion trends that reflect gender identity and bending it hard.

See cool photos of Japanese gender bending (you kind of need the article for the first one):

http-cdn-cnn-com-cnnnext-dam-assets-180115153706-mogas-cruisin.jpg


IMG-1846.jpg


IMG-1847.jpg


Article link:
https://www.cnn.com/style/article/genderless-kei-fashion-japan/index.html
 
Last edited:
@JessFR Great post, again.

But, I think you might have missed something I wrote... There are people who are male/female and identify as such, but they don't look distinctly like either. They are not intersex or trans, it's just not obvious which gender they are. They're pretty rare. I've known maybe half a dozen people that fall into this category in my entire life. People who repeatedly have issues with being called a man when they're a woman or vice versa... Also there are super masculine lesbians that don't act remotely like the female gender stereotype, but they still identify as female. My point is - if gender is a social construct - it is an illusion, like all social constructs. The only real male/female is biological. Boys are guided in one direction by society and girls are guided in another direction. We evolved according to gender types. Men hunted. This created the modern illusion of gender. We don't have to hunt any more. So, we're breaking this down... and that's confusing for a lot of people.

The logical evolution of our understanding of gender is to not adhere to either gender stereotype. It makes no sense to go from male to female, because you're still conforming to a narrow definition of gender either way. This, I think, is why the trans movement has started to move away from being a woman or a man and has been inventing new terms for something that is neither... I'm not going to raise my daughter to be a girly girl. I will encourage her to not think too much about gender. Kids these days are focusing on it. What does it mean to be a woman? What does it mean to be a man? It doesn't mean anything. Who cares? You are free as a man or a woman to be whoever you want. The labels don't mean anything other than biology, so why swap them around?

(I started responding to you, then it went another direction. I'm stoned.)
 
Last edited:
cduggles,

I had a look at the article. I'm happy for you to have posted it. But, it doesn't change what I said.

Whether or not bishonen includes females is irrelevant. Swapping the gender around doesn't make it less disturbing. Part of the kanji is age specific. Bishonen are underage by Western standards. Male or female, they are children having sex with adults... I don't see how this connects to transgender people.
 
I get that that's how you, and probably a lot of people define the words sex and gender, and how they differ from each other. And that's fine, ultimately I think it's more important that people are clear on what other people mean than the specifics of what words are used. Which is why generally if I'm talking to people who use those words that way, I'll try to use them that way too.

one of the most important thing when having a discussion is ensuring that everyone understands the meaning of the words being used, that they all share the same definitions. without that very basic thing, you end up talking past each other instead of to each other
 
Top