The meaning of the word "Gender"

[Kryztian]

It is frustrating to see people trying to make an argument and using words and concepts in a way they don't understand. These people are sincere and might have a valid point to make, but their misuse of language often defeats the otherwise important message they have to convey. Their adversary in the argument might recognize this and use it to their advantage in making a counter argument, or, they might not, and a completely senseless exchange of sound and fury signifying nothing will ensue.

The most misused and misunderstood word on Project Avalon in 2023 (so far, let's fix this) is "Gender". My saying it it misunderstood has nothing to do with "Wokeism", it has to do with the way these words and concepts have been used for decades and centuries.

Two things that gender is, and one thing that is not:

1. "Gender" is not the same thing as "Biological Sex". One could argue (and I won't) that "biological sex" is changeable by surgery and hormone, but it is clear that if you are born with "XX" or "XY" chromosomes, you are always going to have those chromosomes, and that chromosomes might be the best indicator of biological sex.
   
   
2. Gender is a phenomena of linguistics and grammar. In the English language it is reflected in the use of pronouns, and in other languages it is reflected in articles (like the word "the") and adjective endings. Languages might have two (Spanish), three (English, German) or more genders. In Polish, gender not only denotes whether something is masculine, feminine, or neuter, but also if it is human, animal or an inanimate object.
   
   
   
3. Anthropologists, sociologists and psychologists have been using the word gender to explain human behavior and how humans think about their fellow humans. Gender has a lot to do with biological sex, but not all the time.

The words "masculine" and "feminine" always relates to gender and not biological sex, while the words "man" and "woman" usually refers to biological sex. For instances, you might be discussing three biological males and say about one of them "He's a real man." Of course all three are "men" in the biological sense, but one is more "masculine" than the others, so in this sentence "man" refers to gender (behavior and appearance) and not biological sex.

Also, the concept of what is "masculine" or "feminine" varies between different different cultures. Some cultures would regard gay men as "feminine" and not suitable to serve in the military, but in Japan, gay men are sometimes regarded as masculine and are seen to dominate position in the military and police. In the Victorian times, people would dress their male children in "pink" see that color as too intense for female babies, but at some point, boys were dressed in baby blue and infant girls in soft pink.

So, here are some statements I frequently see on the forum and are just plain wrong

• "There are only two genders" and "Gender isn't non-binary"

The only time this is true is if you are talking about linguistics and only about certain languages. In Spanish, all nouns are either feminine ("la") or masculine ("el"). So yes, Spanish grammatical gender is indeed binary. And English grammatical gender is trinary. But in the Polish language gender can get complicated. The doesn't mean Polish is "more woke" than Spanish.

But this isn't just true at linguistic level. You can discuss two women and say one is more feminine than the other, that is because "femininity" is qualitative/quantitative, it isn't an absolute ("you either are or your not feminine.") Astrologers talk about people and events having a certain number of feminine aspects and masculine aspects.

• "You can't change your gender"

Not only can you change your gender, others might even do if for you. For instance, in German, the definite article (the word "the") could be either "der" (masculine), "die" (feminine) or "das" (neuter). If you are biologically female, but four years old, you are referred to as "das Kind" (the child, neuter) and when you get to be twelve, you might be "das Mädchen" the maiden, neuter. You still have to wait a few more years before you become "die Frau" (the woman, feminine) or "die Dame"(the Lady.) Of course, this is grammatical gender I am talking about.

A biological man might put on a wig, "falsies", shave real well and use make up and a falsetto voice and "become a woman". Your gender becomes female while your biological sex remains the same. This is true whether or not the people around you know your real biological sex or not, as long as the refer to you as "she." Of course one observer might whisper to another "'She' is really a 'He'" which is just another way to say you are a woman in gender but not biology.

• "You can't choose your own pronouns"

Well, Queen Elizabeth did. She always referred to herself as "we" - in the plural form. I don't think this was being woke. Of course this doesn't mean I have to call her "they" and "them" because I do choose my own words and I can chose the pronouns to refer to other people. In the case of people who prefer "they" and "them", (not that I've ever met someone who requested this) I would try not to use pronouns, as to neither offend their sensibility or my own. And the problem with people who call themselves "we" or expect others to call them "they" - this is a matter of grammatical "number"(i.e. singular vs. plural) and not "gender".

I have seen some very intelligent people talk about the problem of gender, pronouns, "wokeism" etc. and they are very careful in their language and understand the gender is not the same thing as biological sex, and I would suggest you do the same.

[Ewan]

Posted by Kryztian (here)
It is frustrating to see people trying to make an argument and using words and concepts in a way they don't understand.

They do understand it, as do the vast majority of listeners. They understand it in the way that modern language is continually using it, in converstaion, in the media, both mainstream and social. At least in the English language.

I am sure everything you said above was correct, it certainly looked right. But everyday language always finds shortcuts, quick soundbytes, that take on a specific meaning in general chat, even if it is a factually incorrect usage. What matters is if the participants in a conversation or exchange understand one another. It invariably comes to light fairly quickly when they don't.

If people are discussing the trans movement for instance and the word gender is used it is almost certainly referring to 'girl/boy' dynamics. Not the femininity/masculinity score of the individual.

However, with all that said, I'm looking at this through my very english-centric speech patterns. I could be completely wrong when it comes to perception/understanding through Spanish/Germanic ones.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I just filled out an official government document and they asked for my gender, not my sex. But there were only the male - female choices.

It used to ask for my sex.

[Kryztian]

Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
I just filled out an official government document and they asked for my gender, not my sex. But there were only the male - female choices.

It used to ask for my sex.

That's another problem with gender. People don't want to use the word "sex" because it could be taken to mean sexual activity. "Gender" seems like a polite word that says "there is no hanky panky going on here."

I was thinking about how the old fashioned "baby shower" is now called a "gender reveal party". Calling it a "sex reveal party" would probably sound like kinky sexual stuff is going on. The party takes place after medical technology reveals what the biological sex is. When you come to the party, you are expected to bring a gift, and since you don't know if it is going to be a boy or girl, you better shop for a non-gender specific gift, and yet, the party is essentially about if it is going to be a boy or girl.

When we talk about all these issues such as "trans", "gender", "pronouns" , etc. we really need clear language, but the way language is misused, the words choices people make don't always express the ideas they wish to convey. No wonder we are all idiots screaming at each other.

[thepainterdoug]

I entered my musical "Hypnotta", about soft ufo disclosure, into a college new musicals call . www.hypnotta.com

it asked me in the application form what are my pronouns etc. WHo gives a ****? Its art, a musical, a 7 year creative effort .

would be funny if the world changed so radically in seven years when I began creating the show, to now the present. for all I know, im already not a candidate, cause homie dont play woke.

d

[atman]

Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
I just filled out an official government document and they asked for my gender, not my sex. But there were only the male - female choices.

It used to ask for my sex.

I think this is the guy to "thank" for that confusing matter:

See this 2016 article:

Justin Trudeau says Canada could introduce gender-neutral identity cards

'That's part of the great arc of history sweeping towards justice'

Canada is considering introducing gender-neutral identification cards, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said.

Mr Trudeau said the government was exploring the "best way" and studying other jurisdictions, as he became the first Canadian prime minister to march in a gay pride parade on Sunday.

(...)

Last month, Ontario introduced a third gender symbol "X" for driver's licenses. Australia, New Zealand and Nepal already use the third gender symbol.

In the same month, Canadian politicians voted overwhelmingly in favour of a bill to change the wording of the country's national anthem to make it gender-neutral.

The bill, passed by members of the Canadian parliament 225 to 74, said they wanted to change the wording from “true patriot love, in all thy sons command” to “true patriot love, in all of us command”.

___________________________


Also, here's the definition of gender on the official website of Statistics Canada (a government agency):

Gender of person

Definition

Gender refers to an individual's personal and social identity as a man, woman or non-binary person (a person who is not exclusively a man or a woman).

Gender includes the following concepts:

- gender identity, which refers to the gender that a person feels internally and individually;

- gender expression, which refers to the way a person presents their gender, regardless of their gender identity, through body language, aesthetic choices or accessories (e.g., clothes, hairstyle and makeup), which may have traditionally been associated with a specific gender.

A person's gender may differ from their sex at birth, and from what is indicated on their current identification or legal documents such as their birth certificate, passport or driver's licence. A person's gender may change over time.

Some people may not identify with a specific gender.

Person refers to an individual and is the unit of analysis for most social statistics programs.

Usage

Sex at birth and gender refer to two different concepts but are interrelated. While sex at birth is primarily understood in terms of physical and biological features such as chromosomes, genitals and hormones, gender is a multidimensional concept that is influenced by several additional factors, including cultural and behavioural norms, and self-identity.

Caution should be exercised when comparing counts for the sex at birth of person variable with counts for the gender of person variable. For most people, their sex at birth corresponds to their gender. However, some people's gender may be different from their sex at birth. For example, in a given population the group of persons of female sex does not necessarily correspond to the group of persons of female gender, although the two groups are generally very similar given the relatively small size of the transgender and non-binary populations.

The concept of gender is also different from that of sexual orientation, which is an umbrella term that includes a person's sexual identity, sexual attraction and sexual behaviour.

Conceptions of gender vary between cultures, regions and countries. This concept is strongly affected by ongoing social change and, as a result, is constantly evolving.

The variable 'gender of person' is expected to be used by default in most social statistics programs at Statistics Canada in accordance with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat's "Policy Direction to Modernize the Government of Canada's Sex and Gender Information Practices" (2018).

The variable 'sex at birth of person' can be used where information on sex at birth is needed, for example, for measuring some demographic and health indicators. It can be used in conjunction with the variable 'gender of person' to estimate the transgender population. These two variables can also be used, together with the variable 'sexual orientation of person', to estimate the gender and sexual diversity populations, which are often represented by the LGBTQ2+ acronym (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, Two-Spirit or another identity of gender or sexual diversity).

In statistical programs, gender may be reported in terms of a person's gender identity or expression, as well as how one is perceived by others, depending on whether information on gender is based on self-reported data or reported by proxy. Information on sex at birth may also be based on self-reported data or reported by proxy depending on the statistical program.

Some people may be reluctant to provide an answer to the question on gender or may give a different answer depending on the context in which it is asked or the order of the questions (for example, whether the question on sex at birth comes before or after the question on gender). The degree of privacy, safety and perceived relevance for collecting this information may impact how a person responds.

The gender question may be asked for persons of any age, including children aged 14 and younger, depending on the survey population.

[Ernie Nemeth]

We had a trans gender person at work last year. We witnessed this person's 'transition' as the months progressed.

From being a man, to starting the transition (growing out the hair, make up, cloths suggestive of female, etc.), to going through the procedures (throat surgery to remove adam's apple, who knows what else) to having new guys say things like, 'who is that hot girl?'. He was never hot in my books.

He was a nice person but he was he to me the entire time I knew him. He never corrected me.

My point is that he made no fuss, did not ask for favoritism, did not insist on pronouns, and in the midst of all those manly men he transitioned. I thought it was really brave and took a lot of courage. How traumatized do you have to be to make that change in such unfavorable conditions. He was ostracized and talked of behind his back. No one wanted to work with him. But I had no problem with him and when it was my turn to manage his work (because so many others refused to work with him) I made it clear that he would not be judged by his sexual orientation but by his merit and skill. He liked that and for a while he followed me around like a puppy dog. Again that made me sorry for him, that for just a little kindness, that every person deserves, he would respond with such loyalty and thankfulness. He was a good worker.
I suppose that in the end it was probably the best place to transition with hundreds of men around. There would have to be a few curious types. I'm sure he did well for himself there and had a few clandestine encounters with fellow workers. No idea about that other than speculation...

[lake]

As this is a thread about 'gender' may I ask for some clarification on other terms!

Would this be correct?

• A heterosexual male is sexually attracted to females
• A heterosexual female is sexually attracted to males
• A homosexual male is sexually attracted to males
• A lesbian (homosexual woman) is sexually attracted to females
• A bisexual is sexually attracted to both male and females
• A transsexual female is sexually attracted to males ... but some are attracted to children
• A transsexual male is sexually attracted to females ... but some are attracted to children
• A pan-sexual is sexually attracted to all people regardless of gender, age, gender identity, or sexual orientation.

Would that be about right?
Just wondering about the levels of madness allowed these days?

For me I have had enough of it ... in private do as you wish (as long as it is with consenting adults and is not sick or twisted or causes unnecessary harm) .... and I DONT want to know what you think you are (I do NOT care .... keep it private as it should be ffs).

BUT LEAVE KIDS OUT OF YOUR SICKNESS .... LEAVE THEM ALONE!

[lake]

And to add to the above post of mine before anyone 'pulls me up on it' ....

Paedophiles are attracted to children, but it would seem that the whole lgbhatysgfjhsjkk (whatever) movement is being used to allow paedophiles to 'pretend' to be something else (apart from sick in the head) and mess about with kids!

[Kryztian]

Posted by lake (here)
As this is a thread about 'gender' may I ask for some clarification on other terms!

Would this be correct?

• A heterosexual male is sexually attracted to females
• A heterosexual female is sexually attracted to males
• A homosexual male is sexually attracted to males
• A lesbian (homosexual woman) is sexually attracted to females
• A bisexual is sexually attracted to both male and females
• A transsexual female is sexually attracted to males ... but some are attracted to children
• A transsexual male is sexually attracted to females ... but some are attracted to children
• A pan-sexual is sexually attracted to all people regardless of gender, age, gender identity, or sexual orientation.

Would that be about right?

I would say that is right except I never heard that transexuals are attracted to children. I've never heard of a trans pedophile.

It's my guess that they would be even less likely to be pedophile than the average person. Trans people are focus on themselves and the perception of themselves, whereas, most attractions are focused on the others.

Also, many pedophiles go after both girls and boys. I think pedophilia may be more about enjoying psychological manipulation than it is physical attraction. I am not an expert on this.

[Michel Leclerc]

I have made my point about “sexualities” on other threads so will not repeat myself here.

Just a linguistic remark (my professional qualification). A little along the lines of your ideas, Kryztian, but not entirely: there is such a thing as linguistic gender but it has little to do with “gender” as it is defined by the gender ideologues. Unless: it is striking that this whole “gender” ideology has been initiated in a linguistic culture (the “Anglosaxonian” one) in which nouns do not have a linguistic gender. “Changing the pronouns” is an idea that has popped up in a culture where only personal pronouns have linguistic gender. In most other languages this is not the case, and it can be quite complex, as you explain Kryztian. I would like to point out that linguistic gender of pronouns or nouns or verb endings etc. is not related to what Anglosaxonia calls gender: it is related to biological sex. Typical of languages is not that they give "gender identities" to people but rather "sexual identities” to things. A "masculine" ending for an inanimate word is given because the concept covered by the word is associated with biological maleness. In Dutch, words for groups of people (words for government, society, company etc.) as well as abstractions (hope, love, fear) tend to be feminine; in Arabic words for species tend to be masculine, words for individuals to be feminine (in "I only eat fish", "fish" is masculine, in "I bought one fish”, “fish” is feminine).

Apart from that, lake, that "some" "transsexuals” (as explained elsewhere, I object to "essentialism" and "essentialisation") would be "attracted to children" strikes me as a very strange way of defining "transsexuals” — but the fact itself is to be expected once one takes the – erroneous – essentialist stance.

Also, I find the use of the word "attraction" strange in this context. Attraction, because we are magnets? What is meant by this idea of "physical attraction"?

Quite unsophisticated reasoning, all this – not to mention the fact that the idea of "love" is nowhere to be found. As if millennia of philosophy (Plato, anyone?), religion (India?), and more than a century of psychoanalysis had never existed.

[Ewan]

Posted by lake (here)

• A heterosexual male is sexually attracted to females ... but some tiny minority are also attracted to children
• A heterosexual female is sexually attracted to males ... but some tiny minority are also attracted to children
• A homosexual male is sexually attracted to males ... but some tiny minority are also attracted to children
• A lesbian (homosexual woman) is sexually attracted to females ... but some tiny minority are also attracted to children
• A bisexual is sexually attracted to both male and females ... but some tiny minority are also attracted to children
• A transsexual female is sexually attracted to males ... but some tiny minority are also attracted to children
• A transsexual male is sexually attracted to females ... but some tiny minority are also attracted to children

I think that list is probably more accurate if you wish to bring children into it. The idea that only transsexuals can be pedophiles, which is what that list seemed to indicate, is nonsense.

I don't know but I suspect an actual pedophile has little to no attraction for anyone over a certain age threshold.

[Bruce G Charlton]

The confusion is not an accident - but confusion has been deliberately inculcated over the past few decades.

Valuable terminology has been replaced by a constantly-shifting code of inverted ethics, covering manipulative power games.

By the time I retired from my academic job specializing in evolutionary theory as it applies to humans; it was becoming very difficult to teach both accurately and honestly. Nowadays, just five years on; it would be impossible.

[Strat]

Posted by lake (here)
BUT LEAVE KIDS OUT OF YOUR SICKNESS .... LEAVE THEM ALONE!

This is my problem with some gay rights parades. I don't think a reasonable person has a problem with a parade where rights are celebrated, you drive around in floats and throw out candy like all the other parades. But sometimes the parades are people flaunting sex rather than their rights in society.

This has nothing to do with orientation in my book, it's just like you said, leave the kids alone. Kids should be playing video games, checking out bugs, riding bikes, etc

[Sue (Ayt)]

Seems like it all started with the extreme focus on sex that has been implemented over the past decades, along with the focus on other physical functions, ie food, wealth, etc.
Focus and glorification of the material vs. the spiritual aspects of humanity. Surely this accentuation has been by design. The focus could have just as easily been shifted by tptb to the other direction using the media.

The 7 deadly sins vs. the 7 virtues.

[lake]

Posted by Ewan (here)
I think that list is probably more accurate if you wish to bring children into it. The idea that only transsexuals can be pedophiles, which is what that list seemed to indicate, is nonsense.

I don't know but I suspect an actual pedophile has little to no attraction for anyone over a certain age threshold.

I posted in the way I did with a purpose.
No straight, gay, les, bi, man or women is sexually attracted to kids.
Only paedophiles are!

So I didn't "leave out" the other groups to define the 'one' group (who was something like 0.0002 %) as paedophiles; I did it to highlight the 'use' of the group to subvert and use the mass.

Here in Bristol .... there is a supermarket I use to go to and (lets say) 10 years ago ... I use to see working in that store a blatantly male being who dressed and acted as a female.
I always thought about the strength they must have to do as they did.
I actually think that their internal belief strengthen me to act as I do currently .... They had no fear and acted as they considered they are!

I am pissed off that people like that staff member are (and have) been used now to promote the abuse of kids!

I knew gay blokes .... nice chaps, didn't need to tell the world, just 'loved' eachother .... Now it is different (as you all know) and the 'real' gays bloody well hate it!

Again it does them (all the real 'alternative' ) no good at all .... and they are being setup as the 'fall guy'.

But we can see (via the media) children ARE being targeted in the name of 'pride' or 'diversity' or 'acceptance' and it MUST stop!

So I do not care any more and someone saying "What about Love?" ....... I have zero 'love' for anyone who wishes to **** around with kids (that includes getting them to not even know if they are male or female and advising them to chop up their young bodies .... which cannot be reversed)

So, no Ewan .... I do not agree with your consideration of my post (we need to stand (and do it without 'love' for those who are doing this) against this sickness)

[Michel Leclerc]

Posted by Strat (here)

Posted by lake (here)
BUT LEAVE KIDS OUT OF YOUR SICKNESS .... LEAVE THEM ALONE!

This is my problem with some gay rights parades. I don't think a reasonable person has a problem with a parade where rights are celebrated, you drive around in floats and throw out candy like all the other parades. But sometimes the parades are people flaunting sex rather than their rights in society.

This has nothing to do with orientation in my book, it's just like you said, leave the kids alone. Kids should be playing video games, checking out bugs, riding bikes, etc

Kids should be playing video games — really, Strat?? That is pornography in my book.

[Ewan]

Posted by lake (here)

Posted by Ewan (here)
I think that list is probably more accurate if you wish to bring children into it. The idea that only transsexuals can be pedophiles, which is what that list seemed to indicate, is nonsense.

I don't know but I suspect an actual pedophile has little to no attraction for anyone over a certain age threshold.

I posted in the way I did with a purpose.
No straight, gay, les, bi, man or women is sexually attracted to kids.
Only paedophiles are!

So I didn't "leave out" the other groups to define the 'one' group (who was something like 0.0002 %) as paedophiles; I did it to highlight the 'use' of the group to subvert and use the mass.



Again it does them (all the real 'alternative' ) no good at all .... and they are being setup as the 'fall guy'.

But we can see (via the media) children ARE being targeted in the name of 'pride' or 'diversity' or 'acceptance' and it MUST stop!

So I do not care any more and someone saying "What about Love?" ....... I have zero 'love' for anyone who wishes to **** around with kids (that includes getting them to not even know if they are male or female and advising them to chop up their young bodies .... which cannot be reversed)

So, no Ewan .... I do not agree with your consideration of my post (we need to stand (and do it without 'love' for those who are doing this) against this sickness)

I apologise Lake, I missed your follow up post here.

Had I seen that I would not have posted my response. Nevertheless it came across as a bit skewed without that follow-up and looked extremely slanted, there are many transgendered people who are, relatively, perfectly well balanced - so I hope you can forgive me.

When the first 'pizza' scandal broke, wasn't it John Podesta's emails, and some scumbags who literally ran a little bar that sold pizza's, (both varieties ), I recall a little video clip from that bar/restaurant, whatever the **** it was, that had some band playing there that were openly speaking about liking children - they were very drag queen types. So I get where you are coming from.

[Strat]

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)

Posted by Strat (here)

Posted by lake (here)
BUT LEAVE KIDS OUT OF YOUR SICKNESS .... LEAVE THEM ALONE!

This is my problem with some gay rights parades. I don't think a reasonable person has a problem with a parade where rights are celebrated, you drive around in floats and throw out candy like all the other parades. But sometimes the parades are people flaunting sex rather than their rights in society.

This has nothing to do with orientation in my book, it's just like you said, leave the kids alone. Kids should be playing video games, checking out bugs, riding bikes, etc

Kids should be playing video games — really, Strat?? That is pornography in my book.

Surely a big topic and if you want to start a new thread on this I'd be happy to chat about it. I'm actually curious about how different cultures raise their kids, it was mentioned on the documentary American Factory.

You write your book and that's ok. In my book suggesting video games are like pornography is an untrue hyperbolic generalization. I believe it's like any other thing that 'could be bad/could be good,' it's generally ok in moderation and under parental supervision. I will say modern games are much more problematic than the ones I played growing up. However I think it's unhealthy to avoid them like the plague and ban your children from them altogether because it may have a bounce back effect when they can do what they want.

[Kryztian]

I think we are pretty off topic here. The subject is of the thread here is the meaning of the word "gender": there are plenty of threads about pedophilia on Avalon where you can share these thoughts. Please put them there.