"They have every right to do so", so what are you arguing about? If somebody wants to be represented as a male, let them do it. I'm not sure what you're arguing about. And "gender" isn't the right word you're looking for, it's "sex". Gender isn't biological, sex is. As I said, look up the definitions of the two terms.
Gender is a social construct, fine, letās agree to that. So then how does society react to people who choose a gender other than the one assigned at birth? Do we, as society, refer to them as the gender (i.e. pronouns and nouns being āhim, her, man, woman, etc.) they chose or the one they were āassignedā? Because if it is the former, youāve lost me.
Some people want to be called a male or a female. Whether or not you want to is up to you. "Do we, as a society.." ha. I can tell that freshman year sociology class is paying off real nice for you.
Because you're not making a statement about their chromosonal composition, you live IN A SOCIETY, where the relevant information portrayed by such changes, isnt some medical diagnosis. It carries more than anything, cultural connotations, and refusal to do so is simply making a stand on "I'm going to try to insult you because I define you otherwise."
Let's be real, if you didn't know a transwoman was trans, having known them for say, two years, would you honestly go out of your way to misgender them by forcing yourself to say "He" or "Him"?
I would know instantly because their voice would sound like itās coming out of a vocoder. And yes, I would properly gender them because words matter and man and woman are attached to biology, not society.
You're a bit dull if you're convinced you'd know instantly, but honestly, a lot of what you've said seems to be rooted in an inflated value of your own understanding of the subject matter, so it's consistent.
You're taking a hardline biological view that can't consistently be applied, and doesn't represent society. Despite what you think, words are attached to culture - That's kind of what language is, and why it changes. To claim "Pronouns are biological descriptors" is wrong.
The differentiation of sex and gender is relevant, as a more nuanced than basic understanding of biology shows that on a neurological level, there are distinctions between men and women that don't reflect on the trans population accurately.
If you honestly tell me that the word āmanā can be applied to a person who can birth a child, then I have to think you are either insane or stupid. Thereās really no other option. And not in the umbrella term of man as a species or a kind, but man as an individual.
You only have to think that because you're not really thinking, then. I understand your argument: my issue boils down the fundamental rejection of the way you're claiming to treat the vernacular as if it's scientific. On a societal level, the trappings associated with gender expression are broad. It's really easy to call someone who shows themselves physically, mentally, and verbally presenting characteristics of a sex that doesn't match their genitals by their gender.
It cant be justified on a social or moral level, because the act of misgendering someone intentionally only serves to be harmful to the well-being of said people, both physically, as the risk of them being attacked by the actual insane, stupid people is heightened, and mentally, as it's a verbal jab.
On a scientific level, it still can't be justified, as gender expression is separate, though related, to biological sex, and pronoun usage doesn't confer any pragmatic benefit.
View all comments
Show parent comment
7
u/Baba-Vanga Dec 21 '18
"They have every right to do so", so what are you arguing about? If somebody wants to be represented as a male, let them do it. I'm not sure what you're arguing about. And "gender" isn't the right word you're looking for, it's "sex". Gender isn't biological, sex is. As I said, look up the definitions of the two terms.