• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Non-Binary

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I think the idea of gender roles of the past are seen as sexist by today's standards and we have done just about all that is necessary to get rid of them. This idea that only some jobs are for women, and other jobs are for men only; the idea that certain activities are for men only, not women; these ideas are seen as prehistoric sexist ideas that have long been obliterated; and rightly so.
It does have consequences though.

Latchkey childern for starters. Having no stay at home mom to rear and raise the children proper is and has been disastrous.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
I don’t understand the analogy…or rather, the connection.
A conservative commentator did a documentary titled “what is a woman” where he went to knowledgeable people who were very educated, but insisted on divorcing biology from gender, and they were unable to give a exact description of what makes a person a woman. He would get all sorts of circular answers like “a woman is a person who thinks they are a woman” but at the end of the day; nobody could give a reasonable answer. His point was that even the most educated cannot answer the question if they insist on divorcing gender from sex. So my point is, why even use gender in reference to male/female if nobody knows what you mean unless you give further descriptions? (like the widget analogy I presented) why not just use the further descriptions?
 

We Never Know

No Slack
It does have consequences though.

Latchkey childern for starters. Having no stay at home mom to rear and raise the children proper is and has been disastrous.
Do you realize to make it today among married-couple with children that 67% of those families have both parents that are employed.

Whether its different shifts or same shifts I dont know. However same shift working parents according to you have latchkey kids.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Would it have been equally disastrous if they had a father at home?
A parent is essential so either a father or mother is ok. Just that mothers have more experience and connection to their child than a father by way of nature as fathers don't have to carry their child to term as a mother does.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Do you realize to make it today among married-couple with children that 67% of those families have both parents that are employed.
Yes and that is a horrible tragedy since the days with one income that could easily support an entire family , along with the full pension upon retirement that would see the parents through to the very end.

Those days are obviously and clearly gone with some rare exceptions for the few lucky ones who still have such an arrangement.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic Bully ☿
Premium Member
Any surgery or medical procedure a person would get for being transgender
So, would a breast reduction or mastectomy for a young woman without gender dysphoria be treated differently than a young with gender dysphoria? (Keep in mind that 1 out of 8 women will face breast cancer, but breast reduction or mastectomy greatly reduces (no pun intended) the chances of breast cancer developing. Therefore, I have absolutely no problem with young women getting breast reductions or mastectomies, if that is their choice. What I do have a problem with is forcing girls with gender dysphoria ( or without gender dysphoria) to jump through a bunch of extra hoops in order to get it.
 

McBell

Unbound
Such as genders that are not 'man' or 'woman'.
Not a very difficult question.
I mean, if you blindly think gender is directly tied to biology and then further claim that there is only two sexes then why would ask such an asinine question "such as?" instead of simply answering the question?

But since I strongly suspect an "anything but Greek" response:

There are quite a few more lists if that is not enough.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
No; it’s both because gender has always been tied to sex.

Again; gender has always been tied to sex regardless of your thoughts, feelings, and behavior. A Tomboy female has always been considered a woman; a feminine male has always been considered a man. If you disagree, point to a time in history when it was not.

Yeah, but it is not objective. It is intersubjective. There is no emperical evidence that all words must have objective referents. You then make a rule that according to your thoughts/feelings gender can't be connected to thoughts/feeling and we can't have a different word for sex.

You are making an argument besed on how people taught about it and that is the point. It depends on how it is taught about.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Such as genders that are not 'man' or 'woman'.
Not a very difficult question.
I mean, if you blindly think gender is directly tied to biology and then further claim that there is only two sexes then why would ask such an asinine question "such as?" instead of simply answering the question?
Well... but of course gender is not tied to clothing since in 2024 men and women dress exactly the same.
So it must be tied to something else. :)

Big-sis-little-bro.jpg
 

McBell

Unbound
If you disagree, point to a time in history when it was not.
1864​
German writer and philosopher Karl Ulrichs described the idea of a "female psyche caught in a male body"​
1900s​
Doctors like Magnus Hirschfeld distinguished between transgender and homosexual behaviors, and the term "transvestite" was commonly used to describe transgender people​
1950s and 1960s​
Christine Jorgensen brought gender confirming surgery to public attention​
1970s​
The term "transgender" became more common, and transsexualism was first recognized as a psychosexual disorder in the DSM-III​
1980s​
The DSM-III introduced the diagnosis of "gender identity disorder" for children, and "transsexualism" for adolescents and adults​
1987​
The DSM-III-R added "Gender Identity Disorder of Adolescence and Adulthood, Non-Transsexual Type" (GIDAANT)​
2013​
The DSM-V replaced "gender identity disorder" with "gender dysphoria" to avoid the stigma of the term "disorder"

 

SalixIncendium

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
Staff member
Premium Member
A conservative commentator did a documentary titled “what is a woman” where he went to knowledgeable people who were very educated, but insisted on divorcing biology from gender, and they were unable to give a exact description of what makes a person a woman. He would get all sorts of circular answers like “a woman is a person who thinks they are a woman” but at the end of the day; nobody could give a reasonable answer. His point was that even the most educated cannot answer the question if they insist on divorcing gender from sex. So my point is, why even use gender in reference to male/female if nobody knows what you mean unless you give further descriptions? (like the widget analogy I presented) why not just use the further descriptions?
What are "the further descriptions?"

Why not just accept the person who says they're nonbinary is nonbinary or a who says they're a woman is a woman as I've accepted your tool is a widget? How would "knowledgeable people who were very educated" know what I am better than me or what you are better than you?
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
But how does advertising sex in this case work? There are plenty of individual females who are physically stronger than some individual men. While I will concede that women have a good reasons to be cautious around men given sexual assault rates, the perception of gender isn't where the danger lies. In other words, a person who may have a penis doesn't necessarily equal that they are more of a danger or even that their grip strength or bone density is higher. I don't see that as a valid reason people should advertise their biological sex.
I'm sorry, how does the idea of "advertising their biological sex" factor into this question? (I've lost the context here)
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
So, would a breast reduction or mastectomy for a young woman without gender dysphoria be treated differently than a young with gender dysphoria? (Keep in mind that 1 out of 8 women will face breast cancer, but breast reduction or mastectomy greatly reduces (no pun intended) the chances of breast cancer developing. Therefore, I have absolutely no problem with young women getting breast reductions or mastectomies, if that is their choice. What I do have a problem with is forcing girls with gender dysphoria ( or without gender dysphoria) to jump through a bunch of extra hoops in order to get it.
Cancer is a physical issue. GD is a mental condition.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
So, would a breast reduction or mastectomy for a young woman without gender dysphoria be treated differently than a young with gender dysphoria?
What I was suggesting only applies to girls who think they are transgender, but are not.
 

Secret Chief

Vetted Member
Yes and that is a horrible tragedy since the days with one income that could easily support an entire family , along with the full pension upon retirement that would see the parents through to the very end.

Those days are obviously and clearly gone with some rare exceptions for the few lucky ones who still have such an arrangement.
But those days were when women were expected not to follow any sort of career path.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
Such as genders that are not 'man' or 'woman'.
Not a very difficult question.
I mean, if you blindly think gender is directly tied to biology and then further claim that there is only two sexes then why would ask such an asinine question "such as?" instead of simply answering the question?
I know some people like to call "intersex" a 3rd gender, I thought that was where you were going with it. However to answer your question, it's not that I am against it, but rather I don't see them as genders; what you call gender I will probably call something else.
But since I strongly suspect an "anything but Greek" response:

There are quite a few more lists if that is not enough.
I looked at a few and their descriptions

Androgyne: To possess both Masculine and Feminine characteristics.
Isn't that just about everybody? Doesn't everybody of various degrees have a masculine and feminine side?

Bigender: Not solely male or female.
If not 100% male or female characteristics, how is that different from Androgyne?

Femme: Lesbian who presents as feminine

Butch Lesbian who presents as Masculine

There were lots of them, but as I said before, I just don't see them as a gender, but something else.
 

McBell

Unbound
There were lots of them, but as I said before, I just don't see them as a gender, but something else.
What is the something else?
Or is your something else simply "not gender"?
Is the sole reason you think them as something else simply because you are holding on to gender is another word for sex?
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
Yeah, but it is not objective. It is intersubjective. There is no emperical evidence that all words must have objective referents.
I didn't say they had tr be.
You then make a rule that according to your thoughts/feelings gender can't be connected to thoughts/feeling and we can't have a different word for sex.
If gender is based on your thoughts and feelings, because everybody has different thoughts and feelings, does this mean each person will have a different gender?
 
Top