First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply Do you believe that people can have no gender?
41693 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/4/15 , edited 2/4/15
I admit I myself don't always feel "female" myself, despite it being my given gender, but it's not a nagging feeling like the dysphoria that transgender people experience. I think we all have those days though. I think that yes, gender isn't necessarily a "requirement" and a spectrum limited to two but it still baffles me that one can consider themselves genderless all the time, without any lineancy towards one of the "limited" gender constructs, male or female. I guess gender is just a psychological thing / mind thing and often in these cases is influenced by dysphoria. Personally, I won't say I'm always 100% comfortable with myself in my body, but it's not a dysphoric thing for me. It's my lack of confidence and lousy self perception. Some days I don't feel human at all, I just kind of drudge around. It's more of a body dysmprohia thing. Used to have an eating disorder, still have tendencies and bad self image and bad perception of myself to the point of where I don't feel comfort in my own skin. But it doesn't really affect how I feel genderwise. Like, I think we all have those days when we feel like just a person.

Personally I think to be classified as such, one should have some kind of gender confusion or gender nonconforming behavior beforehand and not be doing it for a short tenure. The problem is in my eyes that the majority of the people practicing it, especially on tumblr, are not part of the actual marginal percentage who have dysphoria and yes, are using it as a method to make themselves seem more specialized. I see that as childish and attention seeking on their part. In reference to someone earlier, I think you have to feel like you've been queergendered for a long damn time to identify as such, it's not something you find out as a teen but something rooted more in childhood. Teenagerhood is hella confusing and undoubtedly it's everchanging and consists of experimentation before you become a "real adult" and reach maturity. I do not belief in calling yourself genderless or any of that off the bat with no prior explanation or reason. Sanserif's post is a good example of it stemming from childhood and seeping into adulthood. Doing it when you're a teen and you want to be a special snowflake? That doesn't sit well with me.

It's like self diagnosis when it comes to mental illness for me. I find it to be rather insulting to people who actually experience that confusion. If you're just doing it because sometimes you feel like just a person and others like one of the two "traditional" gender roles i just don't like it. It's like when people with tendencies for mental illnesses self diagnose themselves and refuse to get professionally diagnosed because they know they probably won't fit all the criteria. I bet some people in the margin of actual genderqueer folks find it very hurtful, as I find people faking having Borderline Personality Disorder hurtful.

inb4 - "CLASSIST ABLEIST" "society is cissexist" "YOU TRANSPHOBE" and all that nonsense because im scared SJWs may lurk in the deepest and darkest corners of this site. Though really, actually, thus far the debate and the reponses are quite civil and entertaining to read. This is an interesting thread i made, har har har.
28602 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
51 / M / Inside the Anime...
Offline
Posted 2/4/15 , edited 2/4/15

deer wrote:


Steelmonk wrote:

Nope
XX=female DNA
YX =male DNA
anything else is an attempt to re-purpose biological fact. And the other option is hermaphrodite, which is a genetic anomaly. Any other argument is social or psychological, therefore subjective to a point of view. Scientifically no, no such creature exists unless you are a hermaphrodite, and then it's not asexual, but both sexes. I hate being a scientist sometimes, it gets me into a lot of arguments. But I will only argue from a biological point on this kind of subject. What you think or feel is immaterial, just the hard polynucleotide facts. Homogametic structure vs heterogametics. If you have a mix, you will have combinations of both organs, not organ free. Although this could cause a person to identify themselves as neuter, but that's really not the case. Be careful, you are treading on some deep genetic information. It's always been around, but people tend to make waaay too much of it. Go back to watching anime....


What you're referring to is sex, not gender.


Then it has no meaning for me, it's a human defined unscientific non-objective term. It's all in your head or societies conscience, thus cannot be defined scientifically. Just the observable eternal facts, everything else is human hubris, which changes from generation to generation. In a hundred years from now your definition will be a on the junkpile of history, like blood letting, infanticide and flat earth. Your current definition will cease to have meaning. I see my error, forgive me, I was trying to argue a word that is defined by the current social order, which will change as time passes. Therefore changing the definition as each generation adds their opinion.
1329 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / NY
Offline
Posted 2/4/15 , edited 5/18/15

Steelmonk wrote:


deer wrote:


Steelmonk wrote:

Nope
XX=female DNA
YX =male DNA
anything else is an attempt to re-purpose biological fact. And the other option is hermaphrodite, which is a genetic anomaly. Any other argument is social or psychological, therefore subjective to a point of view. Scientifically no, no such creature exists unless you are a hermaphrodite, and then it's not asexual, but both sexes. I hate being a scientist sometimes, it gets me into a lot of arguments. But I will only argue from a biological point on this kind of subject. What you think or feel is immaterial, just the hard polynucleotide facts. Homogametic structure vs heterogametics. If you have a mix, you will have combinations of both organs, not organ free. Although this could cause a person to identify themselves as neuter, but that's really not the case. Be careful, you are treading on some deep genetic information. It's always been around, but people tend to make waaay too much of it. Go back to watching anime....


What you're referring to is sex, not gender.


Then it has no meaning for me, it's a human defined unscientific non-objective term. It's all in your head or societies conscience, thus cannot be defined scientifically. Just the observable eternal facts, everything else is human hubris, which changes from generation to generation. In a hundred years from now your definition will be a on the junkpile of history, like blood letting, infanticide and flat earth. Your current definition will cease to have meaning. I see my error, forgive me, I was trying to argue a word that is defined by the current social order, which will change as time passes. Therefore changing the definition as each generation adds their opinion.


What are you even talking about... the abstract concept of science was formulated by humans anyway... it's clearly defined by the APA like you can look this up. It's not my "own personal definition" lmaoooo what are you on..
8401 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/4/15

animegirl2222 wrote: Personally I think to be classified as such, one should have some kind of gender confusion or gender nonconforming behavior beforehand and not be doing it for a short tenure.
It seems like our society makes it pretty easy to be gender confused though. Minus using a person's actual sex organs to stick them in a gender category, what would you personally define as male and female gender wise? What constitutes as nonconforming behavior?

4210 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / England
Offline
Posted 2/4/15
How's a subject to do with ones perspective gender turn into denial science exists, damn.
2461 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Minnesota, USA
Offline
Posted 2/4/15

AzazelOfNexium wrote:

the way you feel doesn't change the fact you have a penis or a vagina.


high-five
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 2/4/15

deer wrote:

congratulations



I know. I read what people post before just deciding to launch into some ego stroking self affirming wise ass comment about how ignorant people are...
28602 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
51 / M / Inside the Anime...
Offline
Posted 2/4/15

deer wrote:


Steelmonk wrote:


deer wrote:


Steelmonk wrote:

Nope
XX=female DNA
YX =male DNA
anything else is an attempt to re-purpose biological fact. And the other option is hermaphrodite, which is a genetic anomaly. Any other argument is social or psychological, therefore subjective to a point of view. Scientifically no, no such creature exists unless you are a hermaphrodite, and then it's not asexual, but both sexes. I hate being a scientist sometimes, it gets me into a lot of arguments. But I will only argue from a biological point on this kind of subject. What you think or feel is immaterial, just the hard polynucleotide facts. Homogametic structure vs heterogametics. If you have a mix, you will have combinations of both organs, not organ free. Although this could cause a person to identify themselves as neuter, but that's really not the case. Be careful, you are treading on some deep genetic information. It's always been around, but people tend to make waaay too much of it. Go back to watching anime....


What you're referring to is sex, not gender.


Then it has no meaning for me, it's a human defined unscientific non-objective term. It's all in your head or societies conscience, thus cannot be defined scientifically. Just the observable eternal facts, everything else is human hubris, which changes from generation to generation. In a hundred years from now your definition will be a on the junkpile of history, like blood letting, infanticide and flat earth. Your current definition will cease to have meaning. I see my error, forgive me, I was trying to argue a word that is defined by the current social order, which will change as time passes. Therefore changing the definition as each generation adds their opinion.


What are you even talking about... the abstract concept of science was formulated by humans anyway... it's clearly defined by the APA like you can look this up. It's not my "own personal definition" lmaoooo what are you on..



Hmm interesting. Your definition is formed by the very aspects of the society you live in, or the the definition you use is. You do understand that the very definitions you use are defined by the current social order, right? Granted all science is merely a tool used by humans to model the universe, I find the hard sciences are much less forgiving and less conducive to change due to opinions. I didn't mean to get you ruffled, I can't help being a scientist/ engineer. I have to be objective otherwise people die. If my control system designs fail, planes fall out of the sky. Forgive this tired old man...there are no shades in my world, unless it's quantum mechanical in nature.

1329 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / NY
Offline
Posted 2/4/15

serifsansserif wrote:


deer wrote:

congratulations



I know. I read what people post before just deciding to launch into some ego stroking self affirming wise ass comment about how ignorant people are...


like... i didn't even direct it towards you so whatever you wrote wouldn't have mattered anyway because it's not like the guy read your post. so here you are injecting yourself into me replying to his comment like... what were you trying to achieve? more views on your short essay? plus people shouldn't be babied for choosing to stay ignorant. this whole thread is unnecessary because everyone and their mom can look up and do research for themselves before spewing unjustifiable and anecdotal/bogus definitions. at this point people are ignorant because they want to be and i don't have to coddle them or their close-mindedness
41693 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/4/15 , edited 2/4/15
The problems is that the definition of gender is quite broad and murky, compared to other constructs. Some argue it's biological and others say it is mentally or socially based. Both the terms "sex" and "gender" often coincide and could be considered interchangable. One definition is related to genitals, what you were assigned at birth. And I think this definition of "gender" is important whether it be labeled sex or gender, for one health wise. Whether designated female or male at birth, both females and males have health problems thst they are more prone to. Your original "gender" so to speak matters medically. "Genderqueer" is not going to indicate to the doctor anything about what you'd be more susceptible to, illness wise. That is why in some aspects I think one's birth gender matters. Your birth gender is what you were labeled at birth. The kinds of genitals you have affect your health. Whether you identify as female, male, or otherwise, what's down there does matter.

However, gender is also a mental thing. While we are groomed at birth to conform to one of two "traditionalized" genders, respectively, male and female, that does not mean we are 100% one and 0% the other. We all have tendencies of both femininity and masculinity, I like to think. But for the most part people as they become adults either choose to fall into one category or the other. If you do not conform to either society will see it, in what Tumblrinas call its "cissexist" attitude as odd. But it happens. It kind of stems from the transgender dysphoria thing. One feels like they're born in the wrong body, except unlike trans people they don't think of themselves as conforming to any gender or leaning more ambiguously. As I said, we all have femininity and masculinity but we are almost always more lineant towards one or the other and very few "neutral" people - gender wise - exist. I personally think that the feelings of dysphoria have to be felt from a younger age, prepubescent age, for one to be considered "genderless".

I sincerely enjoy seeing things get all debate-y up in here, though.
Rohzek 
15004 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 2/4/15
I would find it difficult to believe someone can have no gender. Social constructions are malleable, but to completely obliterate them is another thing. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that over time there have been third genders, which medieval people subscribed to. It's not anything I am well familiar with, but the scholarship is significant.
Posted 2/4/15
I can't think of a reason why it couldn't exist, though I have no idea what pronoun would be appropriate. Also I am confused by otherkin thing, specifically neopronouns, are they as completely arbitrary as they seem?
14947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Massachusetts
Offline
Posted 2/4/15
And this is why we don't start debates over nuanced social/biological science topics on internet forums
41693 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/4/15 , edited 2/4/15

nooneinparticular wrote:

I can't think of a reason why it couldn't exist, though I have no idea what pronoun would be appropriate. Also I am confused by otherkin thing, specifically neopronouns, are they as completely arbitrary as they seem?




Most of them including the posers use they/them; which is not always correct grammatically but it's not the worst you can get. As for neopronouns and nounself ones, I personally consider them the butchering of the english language. The whole definition of pronouns is that they're suppsoed to describe one's gender, that they are impersonal and substitutes for one's actual name or a nickname. People personalizing them just goes against language itself.

Most other languages besides english actually have no nuetral pronouns that can be used singularly, so not only would nounself and neopronouns not translate to other languages well other languages additionally have restricted pronouns with no neutral, singular one among the bunch.

What pesters me the most is when people use "it" though. I feel like they're dehumanizing themselves and reducing themselves to an object or an animal without identified gender. "It" is not a human pronoun and I do not enjoy seeing it used by humans as a primary, or auxiliary pronoun. Leave the object pronouns to the objects and animals of unidentified gender.

Lastly, my opinion on otherkin as is follows: if it's a spiritual connection to something then it's not too bad. I can understand that. I feel a huge connection with cats myself. But if you actually think you ARE ANYTHING BUT HUMAN, or you USE AN ANIMAL OR SOMETHING AS A GENDER, or even worse you deem yourself a fictionkin and essentially try and assume an identity of a character as if you know them better than the author knows them, mainly when the author has developed coherent canon for them? If you think any of those things that's unacceptable, juvenile, and kiddish in my eyes.

In regards to my my other stigmas with neopronouns, nounself, and it? There's a personal disdain i have because SJWs, including one who's stalked me on CR and tried to report me falsely, and another who has tried to assist the aforementioned to get me to attempt suicide, use them as well. Not only do I dislike them being used because they're stupid specialization and nothing more, they're also used by people who literally dogged me to kill myself.

I actually tried to take my personal conquest and arguments against social justice warriors to tumblr, and when I told people that them having an alleged "panic attack" or "disscoations" because of an update and glitches was impossible, because I've had those problems at least once; twice, and in the case of panic attacks constantly, and I know that they're not triggered by trivial crap; i basically got called "ableist" - for saying therapists were valid and self diagnosis was not and that people needed to shut the hell up, stop trying to garner sympathy since i, as someone who does have panic attacks finds that disgusting, and many others do as well - they basically bullied me off there. Then they found my insta and started insulting my physical appearance. That was where I drew the line.
36990 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Bellingham WA, USA
Offline
Posted 2/4/15
As an old timer who doesn't understand the 10 new gender identities that crop up every day amongst all the high school aged girls in America, this school of thought is a bit more my speed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3wcxHiorJ4
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.