Welcome to Gaia! ::

Dandrogyny
I'm starting to notice that you operate on some weird sort of circular reasoning but I can't really identify it.

1. That's stupid. If it wasn't for gender then there would be no "she" and no "he". There would be no sexuality, and no masculine/feminine. These things ARE real, even if they are "constructed" and "man-made". Do I need to explain to you that the computer you are using is real again?
2. To most people, there is a lot more to life than mating potential. There is a lot more to their identities than what they want to ******** and have babies with. My gender identity has to do with my understanding of my very own body, not my role in "mating". Besides, I'm gay anyway. I wouldn't be able to impregnate my boyfriend regardless. So that mating role is pointless.
3. Fortunately that is not relevant to our current existence. I don't care about "universal significance" because as it stands now we are very insignificant anyway.

1. What the hell? There isn't in the first place. There is only XY and XX which determines what role we will have in the mating process. He and She were concepts dreamt up by the human mind to give a name to the combination of ******** up gender roles and chromosomes that ended up hand in hand as culture developed. They're just ideas, and you don't have to agree with them or even think about them. It takes a conscious mind to formulate a gender identity. But it's just like how people make up there own imaginary friends or Gods or whatever else. It's just a way of describing something else, but society pins unnecessary importance to it. I doubt I will ever understand what it means to you. But most of the people I know simply say, "Oh, I am the sex I was born as. I serve one specific purpose in mating. Maybe I don't wanna do that, then I'm gay. Either way it's cool."
2. Yup. But not within the realm of assigned sex.
3. My point exactly.

I'm not arrogant and I don't think I'm the norm. I just think so many people waste time trapped within the confines of some idea thought up by some insignificant species that lives on some tiny little planet somewhere out in space. Our ideas of gender change, and like it or not your ideas about yourself change depending on your culture. Maybe if you were born 100 years earlier or later you would think differently about yourself. Neither of us will never know.
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness

You have a teddy bear. Is it a human? Not "factually." However, one could chose, if they so wanted, to treat and relate teddy bears as though they are human. I'm not simply talking about treating them like a person here, but rather treating and relating to the the teddy bear as if it were actually human(e.g. considering that the teddy bear has human physiology).

I think I can have a pretty good guess at what Sweetrolls's issue is, but that will have to wait a minute or two as I have to go do something quickly.
Um, do you mean... personifying it? It sounds like you're saying that the idea that sex relates to gender at all is an opinion. I would say, "no, it isn't!" because my gender identity is tied in closely with my sex (as in envisioning myself with my male body, transitioning, etc). However, that's my "opinion," right? I mean I guess some people's identities DON'T tie in with their sex at all.


More than that: I am speaking of considering the teddy as actually belonging to the category of humans. That they humans evolved from apes. That they have the physiology of a human. That they live like a human and think like a human. That you could place a teddy bear and a human beside each other in a photo and use them in a biology textbook as example of the human race.

Well, how you should be treated and classified by people is a matter of values.

What you feel like isn't. One will always feel how they feel, whatever that happens to be, no matter what anyone says.
See, now that makes no sense to me. It would no longer be a teddy bear. That's a person.


Well, that is the point actually: it is being treated as if it is completely human(this is more than simply personalising the teddy in the sense of how a child might consider their teddy), even though it is "factually" not one a all.
How, exactly, is this relating to our understanding of sex?
Ooo, I like where this is going!
Desideraht's avatar

Dapper Phantom

Sweetrolls
Dandrogyny
I'm starting to notice that you operate on some weird sort of circular reasoning but I can't really identify it.

1. That's stupid. If it wasn't for gender then there would be no "she" and no "he". There would be no sexuality, and no masculine/feminine. These things ARE real, even if they are "constructed" and "man-made". Do I need to explain to you that the computer you are using is real again?
2. To most people, there is a lot more to life than mating potential. There is a lot more to their identities than what they want to ******** and have babies with. My gender identity has to do with my understanding of my very own body, not my role in "mating". Besides, I'm gay anyway. I wouldn't be able to impregnate my boyfriend regardless. So that mating role is pointless.
3. Fortunately that is not relevant to our current existence. I don't care about "universal significance" because as it stands now we are very insignificant anyway.

1. What the hell? There isn't in the first place. There is only XY and XX which determines what role we will have in the mating process. He and She were concepts dreamt up by the human mind to give a name to the combination of ******** up gender roles and chromosomes that ended up hand in hand as culture developed. They're just ideas, and you don't have to agree with them or even think about them. It takes a conscious mind to formulate a gender identity. But it's just like how people make up there own imaginary friends or Gods or whatever else. It's just a way of describing something else, but society pins unnecessary importance to it. I doubt I will ever understand what it means to you. But most of the people I know simply say, "Oh, I am the sex I was born as. I serve one specific purpose in mating. Maybe I don't wanna do that, then I'm gay. Either way it's cool."
2. Yup. But not within the realm of assigned sex.
3. My point exactly.

I'm not arrogant and I don't think I'm the norm. I just think so many people waste time trapped within the confines of some idea thought up by some insignificant species that lives on some tiny little planet somewhere out in space. Our ideas of gender change, and like it or not your ideas about yourself change depending on your culture. Maybe if you were born 100 years earlier or later you would think differently about yourself. Neither of us will never know.
1. a) No... XY and XX do not solely determine that role.There ARE people BORN male with XX chromosomes, and vice versa, as well as XXY, XO, etc. These persons are infertile. If a person is genetically "normal," they still could be infertile. FERTILITY itself, which contains a number of factors, determines reproductive POTENTIAL. No one is OBLIGATED to follow that role.
1. b) It doesn't really matter if you think he and she are "made up". They are constructed and therefore are a real aspect of the human social organism. We are a social species.
1. c) Gender identity is not "formulated". We each identify with our bodies, or we don't. You are fortunate enough to "not identify with anything". This is rare. Also, I have reasons to believe you are just suppressing something about yourself that you don't want to accept. I used to tell people gender was stupid. Then I realized I was repressing my transsexuality.
1. d) Transsexuals are not "most people". Those people you are talking to have cisgender privilege. Do you even know what that means?
2. The "realm of assigned sex" isn't relevant in this matter. It's also a "realm" you just made up and pulled out of your a**.Seriously now. That's retarded as ********.
3. No it's not. Your point is the exact opposite, that the insignificance means it shouldn't matter right now. Actually it is precisely due to that insignificance, AND our finite existence, which makes it matter more than anything. Again, just because YOU are indifferent towards life doesn't mean the rest of us have to be.
Desideraht's avatar

Dapper Phantom

Sweetrolls
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness


More than that: I am speaking of considering the teddy as actually belonging to the category of humans. That they humans evolved from apes. That they have the physiology of a human. That they live like a human and think like a human. That you could place a teddy bear and a human beside each other in a photo and use them in a biology textbook as example of the human race.

Well, how you should be treated and classified by people is a matter of values.

What you feel like isn't. One will always feel how they feel, whatever that happens to be, no matter what anyone says.
See, now that makes no sense to me. It would no longer be a teddy bear. That's a person.


Well, that is the point actually: it is being treated as if it is completely human(this is more than simply personalising the teddy in the sense of how a child might consider their teddy), even though it is "factually" not one a all.
How, exactly, is this relating to our understanding of sex?
Ooo, I like where this is going!
This isn't going where you want it to. Willow has already decided you make no damn sense and probably thinks I'm kind of stupid for trying to get you.
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness

You have a teddy bear. Is it a human? Not "factually." However, one could chose, if they so wanted, to treat and relate teddy bears as though they are human. I'm not simply talking about treating them like a person here, but rather treating and relating to the the teddy bear as if it were actually human(e.g. considering that the teddy bear has human physiology).

I think I can have a pretty good guess at what Sweetrolls's issue is, but that will have to wait a minute or two as I have to go do something quickly.
Um, do you mean... personifying it? It sounds like you're saying that the idea that sex relates to gender at all is an opinion. I would say, "no, it isn't!" because my gender identity is tied in closely with my sex (as in envisioning myself with my male body, transitioning, etc). However, that's my "opinion," right? I mean I guess some people's identities DON'T tie in with their sex at all.


More than that: I am speaking of considering the teddy as actually belonging to the category of humans. That they humans evolved from apes. That they have the physiology of a human. That they live like a human and think like a human. That you could place a teddy bear and a human beside each other in a photo and use them in a biology textbook as example of the human race.

Well, how you should be treated and classified by people is a matter of values.

What you feel like isn't. One will always feel how they feel, whatever that happens to be, no matter what anyone says.
See, now that makes no sense to me. It would no longer be a teddy bear. That's a person.


Well, that is the point actually: it is being treated as if it is completely human(this is more than simply personalising the teddy in the sense of how a child might consider their teddy), even though it is "factually" not one a all.
How, exactly, is this relating to our understanding of sex?


There were a couple of ways that I had in mind. The first was that just because someone has a particular biological make-up, it doesn't necessarily have mean that they generally get treated as having that biological make-up. So, for example, you could, instead of being treated as having the biology you do, be treated as though you have a different one. Of course, such a conception would have to be limited in scope, as otherwise you might get people pretending that transsexuals were simply the sex the identified as and their was no issue at all.

Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
Dandrogyny
Sweetrolls
Dandrogyny
I'm starting to notice that you operate on some weird sort of circular reasoning but I can't really identify it.

1. That's stupid. If it wasn't for gender then there would be no "she" and no "he". There would be no sexuality, and no masculine/feminine. These things ARE real, even if they are "constructed" and "man-made". Do I need to explain to you that the computer you are using is real again?
2. To most people, there is a lot more to life than mating potential. There is a lot more to their identities than what they want to ******** and have babies with. My gender identity has to do with my understanding of my very own body, not my role in "mating". Besides, I'm gay anyway. I wouldn't be able to impregnate my boyfriend regardless. So that mating role is pointless.
3. Fortunately that is not relevant to our current existence. I don't care about "universal significance" because as it stands now we are very insignificant anyway.

1. What the hell? There isn't in the first place. There is only XY and XX which determines what role we will have in the mating process. He and She were concepts dreamt up by the human mind to give a name to the combination of ******** up gender roles and chromosomes that ended up hand in hand as culture developed. They're just ideas, and you don't have to agree with them or even think about them. It takes a conscious mind to formulate a gender identity. But it's just like how people make up there own imaginary friends or Gods or whatever else. It's just a way of describing something else, but society pins unnecessary importance to it. I doubt I will ever understand what it means to you. But most of the people I know simply say, "Oh, I am the sex I was born as. I serve one specific purpose in mating. Maybe I don't wanna do that, then I'm gay. Either way it's cool."
2. Yup. But not within the realm of assigned sex.
3. My point exactly.

I'm not arrogant and I don't think I'm the norm. I just think so many people waste time trapped within the confines of some idea thought up by some insignificant species that lives on some tiny little planet somewhere out in space. Our ideas of gender change, and like it or not your ideas about yourself change depending on your culture. Maybe if you were born 100 years earlier or later you would think differently about yourself. Neither of us will never know.
1. a) No... XY and XX do not solely determine that role.There ARE people BORN male with XX chromosomes, and vice versa, as well as XXY, XO, etc. These persons are infertile. If a person is genetically "normal," they still could be infertile. FERTILITY itself, which contains a number of factors, determines reproductive POTENTIAL. No one is OBLIGATED to follow that role.
1. b) It doesn't really matter if you think he and she are "made up". They are constructed and therefore are a real aspect of the human social organism. We are a social species.
1. c) Gender identity is not "formulated". We each identify with our bodies, or we don't. You are fortunate enough to "not identify with anything". This is rare. Also, I have reasons to believe you are just suppressing something about yourself that you don't want to accept. I used to tell people gender was stupid. Then I realized I was repressing my transsexuality.
1. d) Transsexuals are not "most people". Those people you are talking to have cisgender privilege. Do you even know what that means?
2. The "realm of assigned sex" isn't relevant in this matter. It's also a "realm" you just made up and pulled out of your a**.Seriously now. That's retarded as ********.
3. No it's not. Your point is the exact opposite, that the insignificance means it shouldn't matter right now. Actually it is precisely due to that insignificance, AND our finite existence, which makes it matter more than anything. Again, just because YOU are indifferent towards life doesn't mean the rest of us have to be.
1a) XXY is a genetic mutation. Mutations don't serve a tailored purpose in nature.
1b) Humans are social creatures, but it is up to us whether or not to partake in a social lifestyle. We don't need a sex unless we are seeking out a mate.
1c) I identify with my body. I like my p***s. That's about as far as it goes.
1d) These people I am talking about are heterosexual males and females.
2) By "realm of assigned sex," I mean people who identify with their natural sex.
3) Yeah? How so? I am not indifferent to life, by the way.
The Willow Of Darkness
Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
That's exactly what I've been trying to get across.
Sweetrolls
The Willow Of Darkness
Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
That's exactly what I've been trying to get across.


Now for the bit you won't like.

What is the difference between "man" and "carpet" in this instance?
The Willow Of Darkness
Sweetrolls
The Willow Of Darkness
Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
That's exactly what I've been trying to get across.


Now for the bit you won't like.

What is the difference between "man" and "carpet" in this instance?
Well, they are both words to describe the same thing. But that "thing" is just a stereotype of the XY's role in society. And it's a stereotype that changes significantly slower than society changes.
Desideraht's avatar

Dapper Phantom

The Willow Of Darkness
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness
Dandrogyny
The Willow Of Darkness


More than that: I am speaking of considering the teddy as actually belonging to the category of humans. That they humans evolved from apes. That they have the physiology of a human. That they live like a human and think like a human. That you could place a teddy bear and a human beside each other in a photo and use them in a biology textbook as example of the human race.

Well, how you should be treated and classified by people is a matter of values.

What you feel like isn't. One will always feel how they feel, whatever that happens to be, no matter what anyone says.
See, now that makes no sense to me. It would no longer be a teddy bear. That's a person.


Well, that is the point actually: it is being treated as if it is completely human(this is more than simply personalising the teddy in the sense of how a child might consider their teddy), even though it is "factually" not one a all.
How, exactly, is this relating to our understanding of sex?


There were a couple of ways that I had in mind. The first was that just because someone has a particular biological make-up, it doesn't necessarily have mean that they generally get treated as having that biological make-up. So, for example, you could, instead of being treated as having the biology you do, be treated as though you have a different one. Of course, such a conception would have to be limited in scope, as otherwise you might get people pretending that transsexuals were simply the sex the identified as and their was no issue at all.

Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
By most people's definition, the first example would be "enabling delusion". Personally I like my transsexuality to be acknowledged. If it wasn't then no doctors would take part in my sex change. People would treat me like I AM male but I would still have dysphoria (which I do believe you acknowledged with the last sentence there).

Well, no. My identity is not based on traits that I HAVE. For instance, I identify with a flat chest. I have breasts (albeit small; yes, I feel a need to emphasize that) that I am scheduling to be removed next year.

If the word for having male parts was called "carpet," then I suppose yes. But it is not.
Desideraht's avatar

Dapper Phantom

Sweetrolls
Dandrogyny
Sweetrolls
Dandrogyny
I'm starting to notice that you operate on some weird sort of circular reasoning but I can't really identify it.

1. That's stupid. If it wasn't for gender then there would be no "she" and no "he". There would be no sexuality, and no masculine/feminine. These things ARE real, even if they are "constructed" and "man-made". Do I need to explain to you that the computer you are using is real again?
2. To most people, there is a lot more to life than mating potential. There is a lot more to their identities than what they want to ******** and have babies with. My gender identity has to do with my understanding of my very own body, not my role in "mating". Besides, I'm gay anyway. I wouldn't be able to impregnate my boyfriend regardless. So that mating role is pointless.
3. Fortunately that is not relevant to our current existence. I don't care about "universal significance" because as it stands now we are very insignificant anyway.

1. What the hell? There isn't in the first place. There is only XY and XX which determines what role we will have in the mating process. He and She were concepts dreamt up by the human mind to give a name to the combination of ******** up gender roles and chromosomes that ended up hand in hand as culture developed. They're just ideas, and you don't have to agree with them or even think about them. It takes a conscious mind to formulate a gender identity. But it's just like how people make up there own imaginary friends or Gods or whatever else. It's just a way of describing something else, but society pins unnecessary importance to it. I doubt I will ever understand what it means to you. But most of the people I know simply say, "Oh, I am the sex I was born as. I serve one specific purpose in mating. Maybe I don't wanna do that, then I'm gay. Either way it's cool."
2. Yup. But not within the realm of assigned sex.
3. My point exactly.

I'm not arrogant and I don't think I'm the norm. I just think so many people waste time trapped within the confines of some idea thought up by some insignificant species that lives on some tiny little planet somewhere out in space. Our ideas of gender change, and like it or not your ideas about yourself change depending on your culture. Maybe if you were born 100 years earlier or later you would think differently about yourself. Neither of us will never know.
1. a) No... XY and XX do not solely determine that role.There ARE people BORN male with XX chromosomes, and vice versa, as well as XXY, XO, etc. These persons are infertile. If a person is genetically "normal," they still could be infertile. FERTILITY itself, which contains a number of factors, determines reproductive POTENTIAL. No one is OBLIGATED to follow that role.
1. b) It doesn't really matter if you think he and she are "made up". They are constructed and therefore are a real aspect of the human social organism. We are a social species.
1. c) Gender identity is not "formulated". We each identify with our bodies, or we don't. You are fortunate enough to "not identify with anything". This is rare. Also, I have reasons to believe you are just suppressing something about yourself that you don't want to accept. I used to tell people gender was stupid. Then I realized I was repressing my transsexuality.
1. d) Transsexuals are not "most people". Those people you are talking to have cisgender privilege. Do you even know what that means?
2. The "realm of assigned sex" isn't relevant in this matter. It's also a "realm" you just made up and pulled out of your a**.Seriously now. That's retarded as ********.
3. No it's not. Your point is the exact opposite, that the insignificance means it shouldn't matter right now. Actually it is precisely due to that insignificance, AND our finite existence, which makes it matter more than anything. Again, just because YOU are indifferent towards life doesn't mean the rest of us have to be.
1a) XXY is a genetic mutation. Mutations don't serve a tailored purpose in nature.
1b) Humans are social creatures, but it is up to us whether or not to partake in a social lifestyle. We don't need a sex unless we are seeking out a mate.
1c) I identify with my body. I like my p***s. That's about as far as it goes.
1d) These people I am talking about are heterosexual males and females.
2) By "realm of assigned sex," I mean people who identify with their natural sex.
3) Yeah? How so? I am not indifferent to life, by the way.
1a) So is transsexualism. Does this put anything into perspective?
1b) You may dismiss yourself but most of us are extroverted. You can't drag us all down with you.
1c) Cisgender privilege.
2) And we're talking about transsexuals here, too.
3) Because after I'm dead, there will be no more existence. This is all that matters to my experience. Also you do seem pretty indifferent to life, like you're an apatheist and a nihilist.
Desideraht's avatar

Dapper Phantom

Sweetrolls
The Willow Of Darkness
Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
That's exactly what I've been trying to get across.
But Willow isn't saying literally a "carpet". This is just a semantic analogy.

At least I don't think they are. My MALE identity aligns with my MALE sexual identity. It's about having a male form. There are social ties with that, humans being a social species.
Dandrogyny
Sweetrolls
The Willow Of Darkness
Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
That's exactly what I've been trying to get across.
But Willow isn't saying literally a "carpet". This is just a semantic analogy.

At least I don't think they are. My MALE identity aligns with my MALE sexual identity. It's about having a male form. There are social ties with that, humans being a social species.
I am going to attempt to address this post as well as your last one.

1a) And just as a hermaphrodite wants to be one sex, so does a transsexual.
1b) Understandably. So one would simply go with there sex -- whether natural or chosen.
1c) At the time of puberty, most people formulate an idea of whom they want to mate with. Before that, they are simply trained to do as their parents did.
2) uhmmm... yeah, so...?
3) Dunno what you're looking for in terms of an answer here.

Dandrogyny
But Willow isn't saying literally a "carpet". This is just a semantic analogy.

At least I don't think they are. My MALE identity aligns with my MALE sexual identity. It's about having a male form. There are social ties with that, humans being a social species.

But that's my point. If you were told from a young age, "This is how carpets act. This is what carpets do." You would believe yourself to be a carpet when you realized that you fit that mold.
Sweetrolls
The Willow Of Darkness
Sweetrolls
The Willow Of Darkness
Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
That's exactly what I've been trying to get across.


Now for the bit you won't like.

What is the difference between "man" and "carpet" in this instance?
Well, they are both words to describe the same thing. But that "thing" is just a stereotype of the XY's role in society. And it's a stereotype that changes significantly slower than society changes.


That is incorrect. In this instance "man" is being used for nought but to describe a person how has a particular biological nature. Stereotypical roles have nothing to do with it. This is where you are miscommunicating with Dan to some degree. Him being a "man" has nothing to do with anything but biological traits.

Of course, this is not to say that the present of people identifying as "male" in this manner can not encourage the usage of stereotypes, as it uses the same word as a category which does, but it renders attacks that Dan must be identifying with stereotyping category himself void.

Now you might argue that people should stop identifying as "male" completely to eliminate the usage of the stereotypical category, but the problem is that their is really no alternative way of effectively communicating their nature: "male" is the only term that really effectively communicates the nature of having the particular body in question, as gender stereotypes and sex are often equated. For someone who is desperate to be seen how they actually feel, and stop being constantly defined as something they are not, there is no alternative but to use a term that comes with the baggage of sharing a term with a category that defines stereotypical categories. Until this changes, the use of "male" and "female" in this context will continue and to make a case that people shouldn't is to reduce the capacity for them to actually be seen as they are buy others.
Desideraht's avatar

Dapper Phantom

Sweetrolls
Dandrogyny
Sweetrolls
The Willow Of Darkness
Another way is in how people describe their identity. I mean you identify as male, presumably on account of that being the terms used to identify those with the biological traits that you feel you have. What is the group with the biological traits you feel you have was called "carpet?" Would you still identify as "male?" No, you would most likely, assuming you used the same reason you did for male, identify as "carpet."
That's exactly what I've been trying to get across.
But Willow isn't saying literally a "carpet". This is just a semantic analogy.

At least I don't think they are. My MALE identity aligns with my MALE sexual identity. It's about having a male form. There are social ties with that, humans being a social species.
I am going to attempt to address this post as well as your last one.

1a) And just as a hermaphrodite wants to be one sex, so does a transsexual.
1b) Understandably. So one would simply go with there sex -- whether natural or chosen.
1c) At the time of puberty, most people formulate an idea of whom they want to mate with. Before that, they are simply trained to do as their parents did.
2) uhmmm... yeah, so...?
3) Dunno what you're looking for in terms of an answer here.
1a) I fail to see the relevance.
1b) We do not have to obey our sex. A crucial aspect of transition is to live SOCIALLY as our new role BEFORE the sex change. Doctors require this. It is also most comfortable for us. What's with your hang up with sex, anyway? Why do people have to follow what their sex is?
1c) I don't think you know what cisgender privilege is. Also people generally conceptualize who THEY want to be in sex. As a cisgender person, you didn't even have to THINK about it. "God" gave you a d**k, LUCKY YOU. Well, I didn't get one, but I knew that's what I wanted to ******** with. As I said before, cisgender privilege-- the privilege to not have to think about these things at all.
2) You just said "within the realm of assigned sex" meaning cisgender people in relation to mating potential. Transsexuals are not "within that realm". Are you really losing track of the conversation here? I don't think you are part of a conversation anymore honestly.
3) At least you finally admit it.


Quote:
Dandrogyny
But Willow isn't saying literally a "carpet". This is just a semantic analogy.

At least I don't think they are. My MALE identity aligns with my MALE sexual identity. It's about having a male form. There are social ties with that, humans being a social species.

But that's my point. If you were told from a young age, "This is how carpets act. This is what carpets do." You would believe yourself to be a carpet when you realized that you fit that mold.
I already explained that my identity has literally nothing to do with gender roles.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games