Are there still specific pronouns in your world?

[moonflower]

Restriction of certain terms can be, in some circumstances, insisting on using other speech.  

Top-down social change has worked pretty well in the past, imo (by "well" I mean "temporarily effectively"), esp. in the last 20 years.  I don't think the media's role in social change in the US especially in the last 10-15 years has been incidental, random, or ineffective; I think it is deliberate and did change the way people thought.  People watch a lot of TV in the US.

Re: Standard English, I'm pretty conservative.  Having something standardized right now in response to social changes that accompany or drive linguistic changes doesn't make me inclined to change my speech to suit, even in a formal register. There are a lot of social and moral customs in the US that are either common or Standard (that is, legal) or both with which I disagree.

re: putting up with it, yes, I'll say it outright, I think if you want to be treated socially as the sex you are not (that is, be called a woman when you are a man, or visa versa), sometimes you're going to have to put up with people who won't play along.  Many people may either believe that there is such a thing as gender separate of sex, so will be happy to call you whichever you want, but many still won't, and that is part of the consequence of the mental illness.

[regentrude]

9 hours ago, moonflower said:

re: putting up with it, yes, I'll say it outright, I think if you want to be treated socially as the sex you are not (that is, be called a woman when you are a man, or visa versa), sometimes you're going to have to put up with people who won't play along.  Many people may either believe that there is such a thing as gender separate of sex, so will be happy to call you whichever you want, but many still won't, and that is part of the consequence of the mental illness.

Wow.

Gender dysphoria is not a mental illness.

ETA: not just my personal opinion. The WHO and the NHS agree

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/world-health-organization-removes-gender-dysphoria-from-list-of-mental-illnesses/

2nd ETA: Many of the associated psychological issues stem from the societal reaction and the lack of available resources. They are not caused by being trans, but by the environment. From the American Psychological Association:

A psychological state is considered a mental disorder only if it causes significant distress or disability. Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling, which implies that identifying as transgender does not constitute a mental disorder. For these individuals, the significant problem is finding affordable resources, such as counseling, hormone therapy, medical procedures and the social support necessary to freely express their gender identity and minimize discrimination. Many other obstacles may lead to distress, including a lack of acceptance within society, direct or indirect experiences with discrimination, or assault. These experiences may lead many transgender people to suffer with anxiety, depression or related disorders at higher rates than nontransgender persons.

Edited August 18, 2019 by regentrude

[katilac]

10 hours ago, maize said:

The use of comrade as a term of address in communist countries maybe?

Or Beloved Leader in North Korea. I can only think of examples from totalitarian countries.

[Farrar]

I don't actually have an issue with there being negative social consequences for disrespectful language. Nor do I think if I ask someone to call me by a different name or pronoun and they refuse and other people around us then withdraw friendship over their treatment of me that it's anything like a directive from an oppressive government.

[J-rap]

On 8/13/2019 at 4:37 PM, maize said:

It would be interesting to have a poll here to see what percentage have a strong and consistent internal sense of gender and how many don't.

I certainly don't walk around all day with some constant sense of being female. I do however have a sense of being myself.

I wonder...there are some mental health conditions in which an individual struggles with a sense of self, of identity. This is one common experience among people with BPD, for example. Maybe for some people--especially young people--who struggle with finding a secure sense of self there is a need for every bit of identity to be explicit; so if they don't have an explicit sense of being female they think they must not be, at least in a social atmosphere where female is seen as being a matter of personal identity as opposed to a simple biological reality?

 

I think you have something there.  

(Also, I don't walk around all day thinking of myself as a female either.  I'm just me.  I'm comfortable with that.)

[maize]

34 minutes ago, Farrar said:

I don't actually have an issue with there being negative social consequences for disrespectful language. Nor do I think if I ask someone to call me by a different name or pronoun and they refuse and other people around us then withdraw friendship over their treatment of me that it's anything like a directive from an oppressive government.

Social peer pressure is still externally imposed, quite different from the natural organic changes that happen with language over time. 

In this case, the trend itself may be driven by a particular academic elite, which is certainly a version of top down. 

ETA "bullying behavior is OK with me as long as I agree with the bullies" is definitely a thing.

Edited August 18, 2019 by maize

[LMD]

Regentrude, do you have a link for the APA quote please? I'd like to read it in context. 🙂 

[regentrude]

52 minutes ago, StellaM said:

It is a condition of unknown origin that requires treatment from a psychiatrist, psychologists (CBT & DBT) and possibly endrocrinologists and surgeons. Please don't spread this nonsense that it is not a medical condition. That's the way to make sure that kids like mine end up not getting the actual support they need. The DSM decision was taken under extreme political pressure, and any psychiatrist worth their salt is taking it with a grain of salt. ( and the person we see is head of a gender identity clinic for children, not some 'trans are bad' quack).

I did not say it is not a medical condition. I said it is not a mental illness. The trans people in my life do not consider themselves mentally ill.

[regentrude]

2 minutes ago, LMD said:

Regentrude, do you have a link for the APA quote please? I'd like to read it in context. 🙂 

https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender

 

[maize]

13 minutes ago, regentrude said:

I did not say it is not a medical condition. I said it is not a mental illness. The trans people in my life do not consider themselves mentally ill.

It sounds to me like you and your friends may embrace the idea that mental illness is not like other medical conditions, and that a mental illness as opposed to some other medical condition is...something you would definitely not want people to think you have?

Mental illness is simply illness impacting the brain. Gender dysphoria most definitely is primarily something that happens in the brain--it isn't my heart or lungs or genitals that think about being male or female or feel uncomfortable with the body I have!

We do nothing to help tear down the stigma surrounding mental illness when we insist that certain conditions be excluded from the category so as not to be sullied by the stigma.

Edited August 18, 2019 by maize

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, regentrude said:

I did not say it is not a medical condition. I said it is not a mental illness. The trans people in my life do not consider themselves mentally ill.

But I thought the whole big deal as to why kids with gender dysphoria are supposed to be able to seek transitioning socially and medically was because it causes them significant distress. How is that not a mental illness? I thought the big reason society is supposed to permit thirteen-year-olds to “reassign” their sex was because 45% of transgender people have suicidal ideation. 

[moonflower]

The argument for gender dysphoria not being a mental illness, as I understand it, is that people who identify as the gender opposite of their biological sex are not wrong; there is, in this POV, such a thing as gender separate of sex and you can have a gender that is somehow wrong (because it's associated with sex and you have the wrong one, I guess), and the way to fix it is to change the body to match what is in the brain.

If you think the thing in the brain, the idea of gender, is a real thing, and that it can be different from your biological sex, then it's not a mental illness to feel like your body doesn't match what is in your head, because the idea is that what is in the head is real and true. 

Now, we don't have a similar belief, societally, about other bodily dysphorias - if someone thinks they should be disabled, or identify as a disabled person, say a blind person or someone without legs, we don't say oh, you're right, there's this real thing in your head that is either abled or disabled and you were just incorrectly born into an abled body, really in your spirit you're disabled.

Instead, we say, you have a mental illness that causes you to have mental distress about your body.  

For some reason, the prevailing social idea has become that gender dysphoria is somehow different than all the rest of them, and that it's not a mental illness because people with gender dysphoria ARE RIGHT.

I say, BS.  And I'm not (barring interpersonal circumstances, which, who knows, I'm pretty polite in person) interested in changing my language, or my kids' language, to support this incorrect idea.  I don't believe there is such a thing as a sprititual gender that is separate from biological sex, and that you can want to cut off your breasts and sterilize yourself to match the physicality of your body to the idea in your mind without being mentally ill, no more than I believe that you can want to blind yourself without being mentally ill.

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, moonflower said:

The argument for gender dysphoria not being a mental illness, as I understand it, is that people who identify as the gender opposite of their biological sex are not wrong; there is, in this POV, such a thing as gender separate of sex and you can have a gender that is somehow wrong (because it's associated with sex and you have the wrong one, I guess), and the way to fix it is to change the body to match what is in the brain.

If you think the thing in the brain, the idea of gender, is a real thing, and that it can be different from your biological sex, then it's not a mental illness to feel like your body doesn't match what is in your head, because the idea is that what is in the head is real and true. 

Now, we don't have a similar belief, societally, about other bodily dysphorias - if someone thinks they should be disabled, or identify as a disabled person, say a blind person or someone without legs, we don't say oh, you're right, there's this real thing in your head that is either abled or disabled and you were just incorrectly born into an abled body, really in your spirit you're disabled.

Instead, we say, you have a mental illness that causes you to have mental distress about your body.  

For some reason, the prevailing social idea has become that gender dysphoria is somehow different than all the rest of them, and that it's not a mental illness because people with gender dysphoria ARE RIGHT.

I say, BS.  And I'm not (barring interpersonal circumstances, which, who knows, I'm pretty polite in person) interested in changing my language, or my kids' language, to support this incorrect idea.  I don't believe there is such a thing as a sprititual gender that is separate from biological sex, and that you can want to cut off your breasts and sterilize yourself to match the physicality of your body to the idea in your mind without being mentally ill, no more than I believe that you can want to blind yourself without being mentally ill.

Exactly. 

I am sympathetic and supportive towards people with gender dysphoria; I have one very important relative who is transgender and I care very much that they get whatever help is needed. But! They were not somehow born with the wrong gentalia and DNA for their *actual* gender identity. To agree with that would be the same as, for example, saying someone with Anorexia is really meant to be 70 lbs. That we should let them starve down to the weight they feel is “correct”. 

Isn’t there also stacks of evidence that reassigning gender often does not repair the distress of the person with gender dysphoria? It does not fix it because it is a disconnect in the brain and/or mind. 

I know a couple people who are socially and physically transitioned to their new gender, but this does not erase their mental distress. That is certainly because it is a mental illness. 

[regentrude]

1 hour ago, maize said:

It sounds to me like you and your friends may embrace the idea that mental illness is not like other medical conditions, and that a mental illness as opposed to some other medical condition is...something you would definitely not want people to think you have?

Mental illness is simply illness impacting the brain. Gender dysphoria most definitely is primarily something that happens in the brain--it isn't my heart or lungs or genitals that think about being male or female or feel uncomfortable with the body I have!

The trans people I know would strongly disagree that they are suffering from any kind of "illness". They do not consider themselves "sick". 

Edited August 19, 2019 by regentrude

[maize]

3 minutes ago, regentrude said:

The trans people I know would strongly disagree that they are suffering from any kind of "illness". They do not consider themselves "sick". 

That doesn't mean much, it is true of a very high percentage of people suffering from mental illness. Our brains are not at all good at analysing their own condition.

[Pen]

https://people.com/human-interest/berkeley-california-removing-gendered-language/

[LMD]

5 hours ago, regentrude said:

https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender

 

Thanks! There were a lot of 'may lead to's in the paragraph you quoted so I was interested to see their full picture. Still following the links around.

Eta, I was especially interested in how they defined gender and gender identity. What I found was: "Gender identity refers to a person’s internal sense of being male, female or something else" and "Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves."

Edited August 19, 2019 by LMD

[maize]

26 minutes ago, LMD said:

Thanks! There were a lot of 'may lead to's in the paragraph you quoted so I was interested to see their full picture. Still following the links around.

Eta, I was especially interested in how they defined gender and gender identity. What I found was: "Gender identity refers to a person’s internal sense of being male, female or something else" and "Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves."

And that second definition is part of the concern many of us have with the way the current discussions and trends around gender identity are going. If I can only identify as female if I fit into a particular box of socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities and attributes I think we are taking a huge step backwards. I am not female because of socially constructed roles and behaviors and activities and attributes, I am female because I have female biology. 

As a female, I may or may not conform to social roles and expectations; why would I want femaleness to be forced back into a box that we were just making progress in breaking out of?

[LMD]

3 hours ago, maize said:

And that second definition is part of the concern many of us have with the way the current discussions and trends around gender identity are going. If I can only identify as female if I fit into a particular box of socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities and attributes I think we are taking a huge step backwards. I am not female because of socially constructed roles and behaviors and activities and attributes, I am female because I have female biology. 

As a female, I may or may not conform to social roles and expectations; why would I want femaleness to be forced back into a box that we were just making progress in breaking out of?

I agree. My worry about the first definition is it's vagueness. What exactly is an 'internal sense of being male, female or something else' and why should a subjective, unverifiable internal sense be prioritized over objective, observable, physical male or femaleness?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, LMD said:

I agree. My worry about the first definition is it's vagueness. What exactly is an 'internal sense of being male, female or something else' and why should a subjective, unverifiable internal sense be prioritized over objective, observable, physical male or femaleness?

To me, that also brings up questions of people who believe they are trans-species. Someone who believes they are a snake, a tiger, a wolf or a fairy and who will risk health and spend money to alter their tongue to be “forked” or have whiskers implanted in their cheeks or have an eye surgery so their formerly brown iris appears whitish blue is clearly suffering from a mental disorder. 

[bolt.]

4 hours ago, LMD said:

I agree. My worry about the first definition is it's vagueness. What exactly is an 'internal sense of being male, female or something else' and why should a subjective, unverifiable internal sense be prioritized over objective, observable, physical male or femaleness?

The definition of gender (the definition itself) simply settles the issue that the word itself means a specific thing - not another thing. Gender, as a word and a concept, simply does not refer to the physical or medical attributes of biological sex. It refers to thoughts, feelings, presentation, identification, relationships, roles, and various functions of society. It only refers to those things, so it has a very limited function. Sociology is a soft science, and vagueness can be a problem - but as a working definition discribing human complexities it's not bad. 

The proper definition of this word does not, itself, imply that attributes of gender are-or-ought-to-be prioritised over attributes of sex. It simply allows realistic and precise discussion around the possible prioritisation of the two. 

For me, the relative prioritisation of sex attributes and gender attributes is a personal decision. I don't need a role in making that choice for someone else. I'll just respect whatever conclusion each individual reaches in their own life. 

Edited August 19, 2019 by bolt.

[LMD]

14 minutes ago, bolt. said:

The definition of gender (the definition itself) simply settles the issue that the word itself means a specific thing - not another thing. Gender, as a word and a concept, simply does not refer to the physical or medical attributes of biological sex. It refers to thoughts, feelings, presentation, identification, relationships, roles, and various functions of society. It only refers to those things, so it has a very limited function. Sociology is a soft science, and vagueness can be a problem - but as a working definition discribing human complexities it's not bad. 

The proper definition of this word does not, itself, imply that attributes of gender are-or-ought-to-be prioritised over attributes of sex. It simply allows realistic and precise discussion around the possible prioritisation of the two. 

For me, the relative prioritisation of sex attributes and gender attributes is a personal decision. I don't need a role in making that choice for someone else. I'll just respect whatever conclusion each individual reaches in their own life. 

I was talking about the definition of gender identity - which is generally the term now being used in lawmaking, not gender. Vagueness is a big issue in crafting good laws. This is not a personal issue, this is a lets define our terms before we write them into our legal codes issue.

Feminists have been writing clearly about the distinction between gender and sex since the 70s. Vagueness is a cop out.

[bolt.]

2 minutes ago, LMD said:

I was talking about the definition of gender identity - which is generally the term now being used in lawmaking, not gender. Vagueness is a big issue in crafting good laws. This is not a personal issue, this is a lets define our terms before we write them into our legal codes issue.

Feminists have been writing clearly about the distinction between gender and sex since the 70s. Vagueness is a cop out.

Lots of laws are written towards the goal of allowing people to do generally whatever they like within limits. It's the limits that need a specific definition... The 'whatever they like' parts don't tend to need much specificity. 

[LMD]

19 minutes ago, bolt. said:

Lots of laws are written towards the goal of allowing people to do generally whatever they like within limits. It's the limits that need a specific definition... The 'whatever they like' parts don't tend to need much specificity. 

Sure, like the limits of 'woman' for sex segregated prisons? Or 'female' for sports scholarships?

[unsinkable]

I just heard about a program called She Built NYC, to have public art (statues) depict more women in public space in NYC.

Two of the first seven statues are of self-described drag queens. It isn't that they didn't contribute but aren't drag queens biologically men? And if the point is to increase women's representation, why not pick all women?