Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 08-25-2010, 09:07 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,281
Default

Gender is in the brain, not between the legs.

It's not about reproduction only. I appreciate you wanting to simplify things, Neon, I just think it's dismissive.

An intersexed person I know has a V chromosome, like a Y with the bottom knocked off.

Quote:
"Psychobabble" in this case is taking an old idea and acting like it's new just because someone thought of a cool-sounding word for it.
It's not "cool," it's more accurate. For me. I'd feel stupid using the word bisexual instead, at this point.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

There's no lying in polyamory!

I'm a 58 year old woman with 2 partners:
miss pixi, my live-in gf, 36 (together since Jan '09)
Ginger, bf, 61, married, lives nearby (together since Jan '12)
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 08-25-2010, 09:09 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn View Post
Gender is in the brain, not between the legs.

It's not about reproduction only. I appreciate you wanting to simplify things, Neon, I just think it's dismissive.

An intersexed person I know has a V chromosome, like a Y with the bottom knocked off.

Do these V-chromosomes actually exist under a microscope, or is it just something that sounds good on paper?

Chromosomes aren't actually SHAPED like the letters of the alphabet, are they?

Last edited by NeonKaos; 08-25-2010 at 09:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 08-25-2010, 09:16 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

It's also "dismissive" to say that bisexual people can't be attracted to someone with ambiguous gender. "Androgynous" is not synonymous with "extra" or "additional". Androgynous people combine aspects of the male and female genders. It is not a discreet "third gender".

Last edited by NeonKaos; 08-25-2010 at 09:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 08-25-2010, 09:18 PM
Derbylicious's Avatar
Derbylicious Derbylicious is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 1,604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
Do these V-chromosomes actually exist under a microscope, or is it just something that sounds good on paper?

Chromosomes aren't actually SHAPED like the letters of the alphabet, are they?
Actually they kind of are
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg index.jpeg (5.4 KB, 4 views)
__________________
Everything will be ok in the end. If it's not ok it's not the end.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 08-25-2010, 09:21 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derbylicious View Post
Actually they kind of are

Which alphabet is that? They look like hieroglyphics to me.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 08-25-2010, 09:26 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,632
Default

Actually I have had and have two friends who have chosen to identify as "genderless" until they feel they can identify as something other than male, or female. I have never known anyone who is intersexed who has identified as one or the other other than to present someway in public and to me until they knew I was cool with them being/identifying as whatever.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 08-25-2010, 10:30 PM
jkelly jkelly is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn View Post
Gender is in the brain, not between the legs.

It's not about reproduction only. I appreciate you wanting to simplify things, Neon, I just think it's dismissive.
Right. Many cisgendered people cannot reproduce, but that doesn't mean that they lack gender (or biological sex, which is what is being discussed here). As has been pointed out, biological sex is more complicated than just male, female, and hermaphrodite, so it shouldn't be surprising that people's experience of gender is more complicated than that, as well.

Being cisgendered, it's sometimes hard for me to keep in mind that other people's experience of gender can be that complicated. It's a real privilege to conform to cultural norms about gender presentation and performance! But those of us who are cis- are typically the ones who have done the least struggling with gender, and should be the ones who approach the subject as something to be open to learning about instead of thinking that we're the ones who have the answers. Especially when those answers render invisible other people's lived experience.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 08-25-2010, 10:35 PM
rabbit rabbit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 33
Default

Sorry for using the wrong word. So is genderqueer the best word for someone that does not identify with either gender?

At least from a science perspective there is a differentiation between sex and gender. Sex is biological and gender is societal. In colloquial speech they are used interchangeably a lot of the time. I think some of the disagreement in this discussion could be from that distinction. It reminds me of a disagreement my fiance had with his classmate when they were talking about being inclusive of children that did not have a father (they are teachers). She was saying "but everyone has a father!" and he was trying to explain that saying that to a child could be hurtful, because while everyone has a male "sperm donor" not everyone has a father in the sense that someone plays that role in their lives. So along those same lines, biologically there are a limited amount of sexes (even including XXY etc - there are still a limited amount of viable combinations), but socially there could be many or theoretically even just one/none depending on the culture.

(For the record all the chromosomes look like X's, including somatic chromosomes that are identical between sexes and do not affect physical sex characteristics. The Y chromosome is small and stubby. Also it depends what stage of the cell cycle you're talking about - when cells are not dividing you cannot see any shape to the chromatin and when they divide the X's are torn into two straight lines).

Back to the discussion at hand, I think it is important to have a definition that is both accurate and does not marginalize anyone. I don't personally think that there has to be this huge distinction between "people that are attracted to males and females" and "people that are attracted to males females and everything in between" because there are so many intricacies in attraction already that do not get their own labels. I know a lesbian couple where one woman has zero attraction to men and never has, and the other has had male partners long term as well as an MFF triad, and considers herself lesbian. I don't think it's necessary to assign them each their own word even though their actual preferences are slightly different. When we are dealing with a culture that is not very accepting of non-straight orientations still, I think it can be counterproductive to keep adding new words instead of promoting the idea that sexual orientation is nuanced and ultimately comes down to an individual's preference on a case-by-case basis anyway.

For another analogy, most of us call ourselves poly but in practice there are so many lifestyles under the poly label. I think there is a much bigger difference between the various poly lifestyles than between "attracted to males and females" and "attracted to males females and other sexes and genders" yet we are not trying to label every variation on poly with its own name.

I have absolutely no problem with people identifying as pansexual rather than bisexual. It just bothers me when it is presented as this thing that is so radically different from bisexuality or if it is presented in a way that makes it look like bisexuals exclude transsexuals from their attraction possibilities. As mentioned on other threads recently, when you're bi it can feel like you're being misunderstood by both ends of the spectrum, and when you have other people with the same or extremely similar attraction patterns to you creating their own exclusive group... it can just be a sensitive subject.

Last edited by rabbit; 08-25-2010 at 10:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 08-25-2010, 11:43 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,632
Default

@rabbit, can you give me an example of how pansexuals have represented as something radically different? I just have known most bisexuals to be quite firm that they are not interested in people who appear or identify in anything other than typical.

For the record, hemaphrodite=intersexed... I believe the latter is now preferred by that population?
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog

Last edited by redpepper; 08-26-2010 at 02:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 08-26-2010, 12:08 AM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit View Post
I have absolutely no problem with people identifying as pansexual rather than bisexual. It just bothers me when it is presented as this thing that is so radically different from bisexuality or if it is presented in a way that makes it look like bisexuals exclude transsexuals from their attraction possibilities. As mentioned on other threads recently, when you're bi it can feel like you're being misunderstood by both ends of the spectrum, and when you have other people with the same or extremely similar attraction patterns to you creating their own exclusive group... it can just be a sensitive subject.
This is basically it for me too. Sorry about yanking everyone's chain. I've been having a bad week and needed to blow off some steam, and besides that, S.Cat is so cute when she's irked by the things I say.

I don't care what anyone identifies as, as long as they are happy and not hurting anyone else and have their pets spayed or neutered.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:43 AM.