Gender, Sexuality and Genitalia

As the Banter thread seemed to be wandering into this topic, I thought I would throw up a new thread...

BTW- the test has me as 86% confident that I'm female, and I'm 43% gay (as a male, which is the plumbing I was born with).

Hmmmm-

Well the title says a lot, and from what I have figured out through talking with many people, learning about human (embryological, not psychological) development, and so forth- here is what I've come up with (which isn't much- sorry about the big build up)!

We can examine human sexuality in three parts. The *simplest* is by genitalia, and that is the standard by which some think that all should go by: 'innies' are girls and 'outies' are boys- which then goes on to define our gender roles and sexuality. Of course- during development, a lot of things can happen; simply put- the female *form* is the default provided by our genes. The Y-chromosome doesn't do a lot, but the enzymes and proteins that it codes for are the blueprint for nudging development towards the 'male' phenotype (i.e. form). Note that this includes changes to the development of nearly every organ system of the body- to include the brain, but also to the muscles, skeleton, etc. Further remember that development continues at least through puberty- there is a genetic change in which the receptor for testosterone is not produced correctly, the babies are *genetic* boys, but come out as *phenotypic* girls- and are raised as such. Much to everyone's surprise, at puberty the production of testosterone increases dramatically and at the age of thirteen or so, these young girls now have to cope with being turned into boys (including all changes to plumbing).
Clearly, there is more to gender and sexuality than simply what your genes say...

Sexuality pretty much has to do with who (what) turns you on- if anything. To some extent that is psychological, but I have heard of (though not read) a recent study that shows that some of it is hardwired into us as well-- and that the higher one's birthnumber, the more likely one is to be gay. (i.e. firstborn children are less likely than the fourth or fifth...) Which seems like a reasonable biological reaction to overpopulation. Of course- in many places, sexuality is tied up with politics to a great extent. From my personal point of view- unless you are particularly interesting in sleeping with *me*, I couldn't care less who you are interested in sleeping with (which, BTW, does not mean I'll sleep with anyone, but I need to take an interest, if only to say 'No, thanks'!), nor is your choice of partner(s) any of my business- with the one exception that pedophilia is (I think) everyone's business, and needs to be stamped out!

Whew- ok, almost done!

'Gender' is (and this is *mainly* from my roommate, with whom I have been having some interesting discussions of late), the social roles played by people with a given set of genitalia-- that's over-simplistic, but- for example- a man who likes to wear women's clothing- is dissatisfied not with his sexuality (necessarily, though he might be), nor his genitalia (again, though he might be), but rather the role he is required to play to be a member of our society. Some societies have roles for those that don't fit in to the norms, but many do not, and Western society is one that doesn't.

OK-- now I have a headache from trying to keep all this straight in my head, so I am going to pass the ball to whomever cares to run with it-- and forgive me please if I have rehashed some of what has already been covered!

ex animo-

Lutra

I've really got nothing to add to that, other than to say that I believe the three aspects to be mostly independant.

And TheSpark stuck me right in the middle of the male/female scale.

Not much to add here, except that while those three traits you've specified do not and a one-on-one correlation, they do show some correlation.
Eg. the percentage of homosexuals throughout the history has been almost constant, around 7-10%; accounting bisexuality, this black/white scale needs to be adjusted into a b/w spectrum (is that an oxymoron?) but it still shows a characteristic J shape (both ends go up, heterosexual higher) Or perhaps an asymmetric W, with a third maximum around the center. But it is not random.

One further thing. Technically not all of the male characteristic are coded by the Y chromosome; it just has the trigger gene. Eg. there's generally no difference between the body hair genes of men and women...

Yeah, gender is very complex in humans, and not a simple matter of plumbing. There seem to be a lot of genetic factors, different types of changes, and a lot of shades of grey. It's not really as simple as just male and female. Personally I find the entire subject very interesting. Not as interesting as some other subjects, but interesting. What I find more interesting is the common tendency for people to ignore these facts, and rigidly continue to define themselves by the set structure of "male and female." They even go so far as to perform surgical alteration on infants which are born hermaphodites. Personally I find that disturbing.

I'd like to add that in what I've known of types of people, often their sexuality gets "re-wired" if during childhood they have a shock or lack of relationship with a parental figure of appropriate gender. (ie father for boys, mother for girls). It can be that some go the other way out of rebellion, even if sub-conscious, and it then gets hard wired into their mind-set.

Never underestimate the power of the human spirit and emotion, over their physical development. The 3 are quite closely linked. (Take manic-depressants and hypochondriacs for example, whose own depressive emotions can cause them to become ill!)

It's late at night, so I'm just going to paste in something I wrote in one of my own files in another late night session. I'll comment sensibly tommorrow, hopefully ;)

Too often the concepts of “gender” and sexual orientation are confused. To begin with, a couple of definitions: a person’s gender is their sexual identity. Most people are regarded as male or female. There are arguments for there being “many genders” but this is a subject that can be debated at length in itself. A person’s sexuality orientation is something entirely different, and is determined by who they’re attracted to. It is said that a person attracted to those of the opposite sex is heterosexual (the “normal” and most common orientation, since the orginal biological purpose of sex is procreation), while a person who is attracted to the same sex is homosexual (about 10% of people) and a person attracted to both sexes is considered bisexual.

Homosexuality and bisexuality are touchy subjects. Many find both offensive since neither is normal, nor does it contribute to the continued existence of the human race, which, ultimately, is the biological point in sex. Of course, sex is a common recreational activity, and because of this it could be wrongly concluded that homosexuality is a form of hedonism. Fortunately over the past few decades it has been learned that homosexuality is not a choice, but a feature of an individual in the same way as the colour of their hair, and probably determined by a combination of genetic and environmental factors.

It is possible that homosexuality occurs because we are social mammals. It occurs in other such social mammals such as monkeys. Many species of mammal form communities in which all members contribute to the survival of others, searching for food, looking after young together. In many circumstances sex is used as a community bonding technique, and homosexual sex takes place as well as heterosexual. In some cases only alpha males and females breed while other animals sustain the community. Since procreation is not necessary, homosexual activity to maintain the group’s bonds is perfectly understandable.

What we have in humans is an extension of this. If monkeys are capable of tolerating those of a differing sexual orientation, why should humans not do the same? As with social mammals, sex is not the most important thing in a human’s life. We do not all need to procreate, and an individual can contribute much to society and the good of the species without doing so. Perhaps homosexuality could even be a natural response to the massive human population boom. With such a huge and unsustainable increase in humans surely the more homosexuals we have, the better!

It may be partly 'hard-wired' genetically to be atracted to the opposite sex, after all species would die out otherwise. But I think society has played a huge historical role in saying that it is 'wrong' to be atracted to the same sex. Who knows, if society had never had that 'taboo'....
Interesting point, did you know that homosexual behaviour has been observed in the animal kingdom? Certain primates, chimpanzees I think, have been recorded as having same-sex partners. Cats and dogs, too, have no problem with it as a way of strengthening relationships.

I post, and then see Swarm has just said it so much better

I think that a lot of the stigma against homosexuality is not necesarily a targeting of homosexuality per se, but that it is rather a part of a much larger effort by human society to label ALL non-procreative forms of sexuality as "bad". Thus, stigma against homosexuality is merely a subset of an attempt to stigmatize sexuality in general.

As for why sex has been stigmatized, I believe that it has to do with controlling the paternity of children. In the days before detailed knowledge of genetics (i.e. all of history and prehistory before the 20th century), the ONLY way to be certain of the identity of a child's father is for the mother to have had one, and ONLY one, sexual partner during the time when the pregnancy could have begun.

Paternity mattered for more than just the family's peace of mind as well. If children are to inherit whatever titles and property their father owned upon his death, then it becomes vitally important to be certain that they ARE in fact his children. This is especially important among the nobility, where being accused of being a bastard child can result in not being allowed to inherit.

I post, and then see Swarm has just said it so much better

Thanks...and don't worry, I do that all the time when I'm browsing a thread at the same time as someone else.


'Gender' is (and this is *mainly* from my roommate, with whom I have been having some interesting discussions of late), the social roles played by people with a given set of genitalia-- that's over-simplistic, but- for example- a man who likes to wear women's clothing- is dissatisfied not with his sexuality (necessarily, though he might be), nor his genitalia (again, though he might be), but rather the role he is required to play to be a member of our society. Some societies have roles for those that don't fit in to the norms, but many do not, and Western society is one that doesn't.

OK-- now I have a headache from trying to keep all this straight in my head, so I am going to pass the ball to whomever cares to run with it-- and forgive me please if I have rehashed some of what has already been covered!

Interesting point. I wonder if we'd have less transsexuals if the social differences weren't so major (ie. only the people who really care about their genitals having a sex change, rather than those who who perhaps think differently to those of their gender...since that simply wouldn't matter)?

Interesting points from everyone in fact. I look forward to further such.

I think you gotta be a bit careful when you use the argument "It's built in to my genetic code so it must be ok!" Some people are more naturally inclined to certain things than others, but that doesn't mean it's okay for them to do it. I can imagine an accused homicide standing before a court and saying "Why am I being thrown away for being different? I'm a natural born killer it's what I do!"

Okay, so homicide and homosexuality are a leeeetle bit different, but I'm sure you see where I'm coming from as far as using the argument is concerned! ;)

I think you gotta be a bit careful when you use the argument "It's built in to my genetic code so it must be ok!" Some people are more naturally inclined to certain things than others, but that doesn't mean it's okay for them to do it. I can imagine an accused homicide standing before a court and saying "Why am I being thrown away for being different? I'm a natural born killer it's what I do!"

But homosexuality isn't something one does. It's something one is. A homosexual is a person sexually attracted to the same sex, not necessarily someone who sleeps with someone of the same sex. (Heterosexual females often "experiment" with lesbianism, for example, but they are still heterosexual; in the same way, homosexuals often hide their true feelings and pretend to be heterosexual to the extent of marrying someone of the opposite sex, but they are still homosexual, no?)

Gender roles seriously annoy me, as well as the common assumption that only two genders exist. Heck, even if you're speaking purely biologically, there's way more than just XX and XY - you have XO, XXX, XXY, XYY, XXYY and so on, and you have XY's who develop as females instead of males.

I'm a non-op transgender. Whenever I tell people that, they always assume I'm an FtM. Then they get all confused and weirded out when I correct them and say, "No, I'm female-to-intersex." I sometimes use the term "androgynous," without mentioning transgenderism, but that always winds up more confusing when they ask, "So you're a hermaphrodite?" --;; I feel like I've been raised in a culture that counts in binary and I'm one of the few who's discovered decimal. (Whee, I make comparisons to math. Aren't I geeky? ^_^)

Good point there, ketsuban. and good comparsion to maths. Since sex and gender are no black/white scales, but there are a lot of colours, it would be too simplistic to say, between ilustrated chatmates, either "man" or "woman". I mean, intersexed people exists, also, people is nothing but a fine mixture from both female and male. To simplify, we just use the one which influence more the person, but the fact is that noone is fully male, without any female characteristic.

So, as you can see, ketsuban was right to say he was raised in a binary world. Even I am not free of that binary compulsion.

All good points raised here. I too hate the way society is full of pre-concieved, stereotyed gender-roles. Heck, I see it all the time now. I would love for the whole world to be more tollerant, if eveyone had met the people I did when I was at uni they might be. I was in the LGBT (Lebian Gay Bi Trans) society. We had quite a few types in there, including a gay couple that became a lesbian couple. If society as a whole accepted multiple genders (not just biologicaly speakiing) it would be great. I don't consider myself 100% the gender my genitalia would suggest, dunno if my chromosomes would agree (In fact, just how would one go about finding out? And would I really want to?). That's why I havn't picked up on anyone in these forums when they've used a gender-specific pronoun to refer to me.
Once again I find myself thinking the world would be a better place with TF technology.

I agree. :cheers:
What?? You want TMI? OK let's just say I am a male bisexual lesbian.:hammer: :hammer: Working hard to balance drugs for diabetes, a kidney transplant and fibromyalgia there is no room for hormone treatment let alone surgery. Maybe I was done a favour, heck I'll never know.
I wonder that maybe there are millions of different sexualities.

Quoth the welsh cat: 'male bisexual lesbian'

and strangely I know exactly what that means

I agree with the points Ketsuban's post makes, especially on homosexuality

I think there's something about EGS, and the way Dan presents him, that attracts TG individuals of all types like a magnet.

As for myself, I'm heading towards what might well be a similar destination to Ketsuban, from the opposite direction ;)

.

I agree with the points Ketsuban's post makes, especially on homosexuality

I think there's something about EGS, and the way Dan presents him, that attracts TG individuals of all types like a magnet.

As for myself, I'm heading towards what might well be a similar destination to Ketsuban, from the opposite direction ;)

.

Quite simple... the chance to read about sci-fi related to gender changes... Oh, btw... since you're kinda "outing" yourselves, I'm saying I've gone thru SRS this June... any TG ppl would know what's SRS ... (MtF SRS)

Yuppity. I didn't guess at all! I often wonder if I'll ever go that far...mentally, I might end up having to go there. Then again, I might not, and I think it's currently too early for me to judge (despite already having driven myself crazy for years).

Who would have thought a web comic would bring people together like this to share such personal stuff.
And since people are outing themselves...
Oh, why not? Everything about me says bisexual girl, except my body. There i said it. The power of cyber-group-therapy :D

Lol... so we are not just bunnies... We are Cyber-theraphy-bunnies

well, anyway... we have said nothing that bad... I mean... noone of us is a serial killer or something... just different people. And I'm glad to not be what's called "normal"... Anyway... I'm not sure what's "normal", since I know noone matching that definition

i think we're all a bit off (mentally) we talk about gender, sexuality and genitalia on a forum for a webcomic....


anyway back on topic, i believe there is a bit of a grey area around the entire area of sexuality and gender, doesn't seem to be 1's and 0's, though i bet i could come up with a system of representing something like that in binary...

Genetic Gender - 3bits
Sexual preference - 2bits
Behavioral preference - 2bits

Genetic Gender
000 - XY
001 - XX
010 - XO
011 - XY (Testosterone difficulties)
100 - XXY
101 - XXX
(i didn't include any YY's because from biology i remember that if an embryo has two Y's it usuall [99.999%] aborts itself because it cannot survive properly, could be wrong)

Sexual preference
00 - Heterosexual
01 - (personally i think the term homosexual is offensive, though i'm not one, i'm just against PC because its just another way to label people)
10 - Bisexual
11 - Unknown/Nothing people who aren't attracted to anything

Behavioral
00 - 'Abnormal' behavoir, neither male nor female
01 - 'Normal' Male behavoir
10 - 'Normal' Female behavoir
11 - Combined 'Normal' behavoir (to any large degree, prefering to press wild flowers and put on womens clothing and hang around in bars...)

this would make me
0000001

Yeah but even then you can have confusing situations. There have been people born genetically XX but who have naturally male genetalia. It's extremely uncommon, but it's happened. Would you classify someone with male genitalia but is XX the same as someone who has female genitalia but is XX the same except for behavioral? That doesn't quite seem right... And there are other complications you haven't taken into account either.

Like I said, gender isn't all that simple in humans.

Yeah but even then you can have confusing situations. There have been people born genetically XX but who have naturally male genetalia. It's extremely uncommon, but it's happened. Would you classify someone with male genitalia but is XX the same as someone who has female genitalia but is XX the same except for behavioral? That doesn't quite seem right... And there are other complications you haven't taken into account either.

Like I said, gender isn't all that simple in humans.
LALALA i'm not listening, hehe
i never said that was completely difenitave, and i thought most if not all of those people had klienfelters syndrome (XXY i think)?

LALALA i'm not listening, hehe
i never said that was completely difenitave, and i thought most if not all of those people had klienfelters syndrome (XXY i think)?
Yep-- without 'Y', (or surgery), one cannot get male genitalia. XXY- one never has *both* X's active at the same time- on a per cell basis one or the other 'X' is inactivated. 'XXXY' I think spontaneously aborts, as does 'YY'; the first for TMI, the second for too little. I really need to take a developmental biology course... (We covered this topic slightly in Physiology, but two weeks on reproductive biology hardly makes me an expert).

In any case, Simcop's schema for classification only has seven bits of information in it-- giving us a grand total of only 128 'genders', which I would argue is not nearly enough. Where would you fit Tess (Tedd when he's taking a 'vacation') on that scale? How about any post-op TS? (Or pre-op, for that matter).

BTW- Congrats to Shanara99-- hope it works out, and don't I wish there was a TF gun available so no-one would ever have to mess about with Sx?

And on the subject of coming out...

Who would have thought a web comic would bring people together like this to share such personal stuff.
And since people are outing themselves...
Oh, why not? Everything about me says bisexual girl, except my body. There i said it. The power of cyber-group-therapy :D

Interestingly, everything about me says 'gay man', except to whom I am attracted! (Oh yes-- my dark shameful secret- I *love* Abba- and even more, I love A*Teens)!

Whew-- ciao for now all!

Whoops, my mistake. I was sure I'd heard of that happening.

Whoops, my mistake. I was sure I'd heard of that happening.
And you might have-- you can hear all kinds of things, even through normally 'reliable' news sources (such as CNN, or (ha ha) Fox), but I would be willing to bet that there is no medically documented case of a person with 'XX' genes having male genitalia (although the reverse *does* occur (see above)).

ex animo-

Actualy there are at least 1 documented case of a person having XX cromosomes and male genitalia. Think it was recorded on Carlos Haya Hospital, at Malaga, Spain. 1 among 3000, I think.

Actualy there are at least 1 documented case of a person having XX cromosomes and male genitalia. Think it was recorded on Carlos Haya Hospital, at Malaga, Spain. 1 among 3000, I think.
Where did you find that? I am very interested! As I said- 2 weeks of phys hardly makes me an expert in the field, but I know enough to be able to get through some complex papers! Hmmm- I know that the development of male genitalia is determined by testorone during gestation-- which is not normally produced in the 'XX' child-- so- ... sensitive enough testorone receptors to be activated by the mother's (small) levels of testosterone? Mutation in the regulatory region -- hmmm, no, I don't buy that-- testosterone isn't a protein hormone...
I've got to know!

:)

Congrats to Shanara99.
The list of sexualities is a bit limited ie there are some divisions between people who label themselves bisexual (feelings vary over time) and pansexual (attracted to individuals generally).
Like I said 'the'y can see some differences in the brain, but it's hardly sophisticated (yet).
Then there is uniquely plushie (there must be some people out there), people who like table lamps etc.
OK I am being silly, but there is a serious side to this.

I think the second of PC's laws is The Universe abhors a definition. :evil:

Congrats to Shanara99.
The list of sexualities is a bit limited ie there are some divisions between people who label themselves bisexual (feelings vary over time) and pansexual (attracted to individuals generally).

That is an excellent point-- and *whatever* definition comes up, must include a time variable in any case- for while there are certainly people whose attractions do not change over time (and circumstance), with others they do.


Then there is uniquely plushie (there must be some people out there), people who like table lamps etc.
OK I am being silly, but there is a serious side to this.

Only a little silly, I think (although there is a website for 'furniture sex' out there for anyone who wants to see an ottoman and a footstool going at it (all in humor, that one) I'll try to either edit this post or add a new post later this weekend with the link if I can dig it up again...

But that does raise a serious question, where on the spectrum does the desire to be 'nonhuman' fit in terms of sexuality? Again, I think that looking at it in one or even two dimensions is far too simplistic.

Alas-- I have to run to work, but I look forward to seeing what y'all come up with by tonight!

ex animo

Genetic Gender
000 - XY
001 - XX
010 - XO
011 - XY (Testosterone difficulties)
100 - XXY
101 - XXX


NO NO NO NO. Binary=BAD.

When I made the reference, I meant that people see gender as binary: There are only two possibilities. However, even a decimal system (what most societies use to count with) would be inadequate for counting genders. I myself use a base infinity system in that instance - and don't you dare tell me infinity isn't a number!

There are 10 kinds of people in this world - those who understand binary, and those who don't.

In any case, Simcop's schema for classification only has seven bits of information in it-- giving us a grand total of only 128 'genders', which I would argue is not nearly enough. Where would you fit Tess (Tedd when he's taking a 'vacation') on that scale? How about any post-op TS? (Or pre-op, for that matter).
ok then, lets add two more bits, to the MSB (left)

Transgender category
00 - as born
01 - Tess like
10 - TG Pre-Op completion
11 - TG Post-Op completion

(i consider pre-op being hormones but not yet 'corrective' surgury)

this gives up to 512 genders, hows that?

NO NO NO NO. Binary=BAD.

When I made the reference, I meant that people see gender as binary: There are only two possibilities. However, even a decimal system (what most societies use to count with) would be inadequate for counting genders. I myself use a base infinity system in that instance - and don't you dare tell me infinity isn't a number!

There are 10 kinds of people in this world - those who understand binary, and those who don't.
(this isn't a double post, he posted while i did)

i understand why binary is inadequete for this topic, thats part of the reason why i did it, as lutra pointed out there wasn't enough.

and i dont believe an infinete base would even be enough, because in the decimal system, between 1 and 0 there are an infinete number of choices, what you would need is some amount of a multidimensional system, for simplicities sake i somewhat divided up the bits in my binary system like this, but it still wouldn't be able to express the needed variance between individuals, it would require a bit of rounding still, all systems would, at least if you wanted to express them to someone else, because you can bet that most people will be irrational on any counting base :)

Lutra, I did not find that anywhere... I met that person, since I was patient at that hospital. I've seen her (she is TS) cariotype, and it was XX. Those are plain facts. I have read not theory 'bout that... but I've always said, human are mystery.

On the binary... Most people just take it as it were male and female... (1 for male, of course, and 0 for female). That's most ppl opinion. So that's the binary reference. Other people see a "third gender" on homosexuality.geez... That people must be nuts...

Well I've been thinking... I agree with simcop... there's nneed of a n-dimensional matrix to take care of gender-sex on human beings. So axis would be sex (physical), gender (self perception of it), cromosomal predisposition, sexual behaviour and inner fantasies. So, my point is we are talking about a 5 dimensions space. And, when working on that kind of spaces there's only a quote: "Sir, you have blown my mind up". No human being can even imagine a 5 dimension space.

So there are not just 512 genders... but a whole ... (1=point, 2 = line, 3 = space..... ) .... never mind... a whole whatever it's called a 5-dimensional matrix space.

So there are not just 512 genders... but a whole ... (1=point, 2 = line, 3 = space..... ) .... never mind... a whole whatever it's called a 5-dimensional matrix space.
to represent this 5 dimensional system wouldn't really be a matrix unless you can occupy more than one point in ... can't think of the term after hyperspace (thats the 4th) ... it would just be 5 variables to describe it, each with an infinete amount of discrimination between the extremes, this would give us an infinete amount of genders in all directions, meaning that nobody would be the same, though i doubt we'd ever be able to idenify where anyone is or what each dimension is

You've goint my point pretty well...

That is... There are NOT two person that are the same...

Hmmm- so we've concluded that everyone is (sexually) different- which, when you use a fine enough classification system is obviously true. Still, we (or *I*, at least) like to categorize and analyze.

It does seem that there is some consensus so far that, while not *unimportant*, one's genitalia bear little relation to the gender of that person. And it seems to me that aside from those involved in fiddling with one another's genitalia, (oh- get your minds out of the gutters, I am including medical personnel as well as lovers :) ) that the ethics of how a person is treated (or how they behave) should be indifferent to their plumbing.

Hmmm- Am I being clear in what I just said? I do tend to ramble a bit...

I guess I would like to widen the scope of this thread to include some of the social ramifications of how people are treated with regard to gender.

ex animo-

Lutra, I did not find that anywhere... I met that person, since I was patient at that hospital. I've seen her (she is TS) cariotype, and it was XX. Those are plain facts. I have read not theory 'bout that... but I've always said, human are mystery.

Ah blast-- I was hoping for something I could look up in a journal or some such. More to figure out the biological/genetic mechanism involved with a male phenotype and 'XX' genes. Ah well- c'est la vie. Thanks for bringing it (her, that is) up!

ex animo-

It does seem that there is some consensus so far that, while not *unimportant*, one's genitalia bear little relation to the gender of that person. And it seems to me that aside from those involved in fiddling with one another's genitalia, (oh- get your minds out of the gutters, I am including medical personnel as well as lovers :) ) that the ethics of how a person is treated (or how they behave) should be indifferent to their plumbing.

Hmmm- Am I being clear in what I just said? I do tend to ramble a bit...

I guess I would like to widen the scope of this thread to include some of the social ramifications of how people are treated with regard to gender.


The problem is that most people do act within the expectations of their genitalia, although I'd say quite a few might do so less if it weren't for the constricts of our society.

Changing society so everyone is treated as they should be is always difficult. Look at women compared to men - look how long it's taken women (50% of the human population) to be treated as they should be...and they're still not entirely there yet! Look at homosexuals, about 10% of the human population, who again have taken many years and still suffer discrimination.

Unfortunately we're a very small minority. I think it'll be many years yet before we can achieve what we hope for, although trying to change people's opinions as much as possible always helps :)

[Long post...]
First off, sexuality cannot be expressed with binary, decimal or any other system if you use only whole numbers. You'd need a continuum. There are infinite shades of gray...
But I'd still apply this only to one's sexual orientation, since physically there are only so many variants. Your genitalia either includes a penis or it doesn't, there is no alternative to speak of.

Which brings me to another point here — is it really a sexual impulse if you want to alter your gonads? Shouldn't it be possible in a society understanding enough to express one's sexuality regardless of the physical traits? I consider surgical alteration a sign of low physical self–esteem, even if it is "to be able to be what I am". (That's what anorectics, 100% tattooed people and many other freaks say too.)
(Or did someone say this already?)

Perhaps homosexuality could even be a natural response to the massive human population boom. With such a huge and unsustainable increase in humans surely the more homosexuals we have, the better!
Not exactly. The urge to reproduce is separate from generic sexual lust; therefore many lesbian, and surely some gay couples too, want to have children on their own too. Heck, even basically asexual people have the instict to get offspring!
Though applying adoption to this, it would slow down the population explosion a little.

Lutra, I did not find that anywhere... I met that person, since I was patient at that hospital. I've seen her (she is TS) cariotype, and it was XX. Those are plain facts. I have read not theory 'bout that... but I've always said, human are mystery.
Probably a crossover of the male trigger gene from Y to X. The X and Y do excange genes, but much sparser than any other gene pairs (since they are not of the same size). And I bet it's much rarer than 1 : 3000 - add 2–4 more zeros and you'd be getting closer.

(personally i think the term homosexual is offensive, though i'm not one, i'm just against PC because its just another way to label people)
Why exactly do you think that "homosexual" is an offensive word? Sheesh, maybe "heterosexual" is offensive too. And "blue" too, it is associated with sadness and is therefore unacceptable when referring to the color. Use "light with a wavelenght of 450 nm" instead! :grumble:

Lutra - I tried to post this before, but I think it got eaten... :(

I was hoping for something I could look up in a journal or some such. More to figure out the biological/genetic mechanism involved with a male phenotype and 'XX' genes.

I was Googling on this a while back, trying to figure out some of the plot twists in Ellen Hayes' "Tuck" (which is a very cool story; might appeal to some EGS fans), and I found quite a bit under "congenital adrenal hyperplasia". Apparently that gives an ordinary XX genetic female what appears to be male plumbing. Don't know if this'll be of any use, or if it's stuff you already know about...

Why exactly do you think that "homosexual" is an offensive word? Sheesh, maybe "heterosexual" is offensive too. And "blue" too, it is associated with sadness and is therefore unacceptable when referring to the color. Use "light with a wavelenght of 450 nm" instead! :grumble:
to me it just seems waaayy too much like a label, i've never liked the idea in anyway of labeling people, and yes i do find some offense in heterosexual, i'm just strange... i just wish for the day when people are no longer male/female hetero/homo etc./etc. but we are just people.

I don't see any offence in the terms homosexual and heterosexual. They come from latin homo - meaning the same and hetero - .... presumably meaning different.
Now, terms like 'fag' 'poof' 'faggot' 'bent' these I can see being offensive. I sudenly realise there are far less offensive terms for bisexuals.

I agree, they should be regarded as discriptions of a person in the same way as "she has ginger hair", "he has pale skin". We shouldn't argue something isn't when it is, although it doesn't neccessarily effect a person's personality (except perhaps because of social reasons in some cases of, for example, skin colour perhaps...people are expected to act in certain ways).

yea but its considered politically correct to call them that, personally i dont think political correctness is a solution, just a way to agree on labeling everyone

Labeling is useful sometimes. Especially when the labels have a simple corresponding function in the real life. Labels such as "busty" or "childish" are difficult to define, and can be considered inappropriate sometimes, but "homosexual" is a pretty clear definition. It's only offensive when referring to a heterosexual homophobic...

Banning specific words "if they're used in a bad sense" doesn't help. The mockers can always just pick another word and start using that as an insult. Did you know that the word "whore" was born in this manner? Its old meaning was the same as "darling", but it apparently underwent some severe mutilation over centuries...

I don't see any offence in the terms homosexual and heterosexual. They come from latin homo - meaning the same and hetero - .... presumably meaning different.
Now, terms like 'fag' 'poof' 'faggot' 'bent' these I can see being offensive. I sudenly realise there are far less offensive terms for bisexuals.


Homo = Same. Hetero = different. Those are, indeed, latin prefixes. There's no ofense in that, except what you want to see. We can talk about an homogeneous group of ppl, to say they are all then same kind of people, more or less, or we can say Heterogeneous group of ppl, to say they are different. Since science has been using lating and Greek prefixs, no one should be insulted... That would be like finding offensive being called "Homo Sapiens Sapiens" (Well... Homo also means Man... but those are homophones).

Fag, Faggot, Queer, Sissi... Those term are offensive, since they talk about what a person does... I mean... take "duck" (I'ce heard this word related to homosexuals). Duck is used to express that they are always ducking in order to being penetrated... Well... I do not know you... but I'm not that homophobic... so, each time I heard this kind of words, I call whoever has said it "Reproducters" or "Baby farms".

About labeling... Since human being kwnos the universe because they have labeled it, there no way that even us are stop doing this. We are called to label EVERYTHING.

Labels such as "busty" or "childish" are difficult to define, and can be considered inappropriate sometimes, but "homosexual" is a pretty clear definition. It's only offensive when referring to a heterosexual homophobic...
What's so difficult about the word "busty"? I know exactly what to expect with such an adjective! LOL :D

What's so difficult about the word "busty"? I know exactly what to expect with such an adjective! LOL :D
Spoken like a heterosexual male.












And if you're not...... sorry

Which brings me to another point here — is it really a sexual impulse if you want to alter your gonads? Shouldn't it be possible in a society understanding enough to express one's sexuality regardless of the physical traits? I consider surgical alteration a sign of low physical self–esteem, even if it is "to be able to be what I am". (That's what anorectics, 100% tattooed people and many other freaks say too.)
(Or did someone say this already?)


On the contrary, I still feel that there are definite things about people that their genitals don't fit.
*garbage edit* ie that immutable parts of our bodies and minds really *do* clash.
I believe the considered wish to alter ones body to that extent to be fair. If there are personal stressful things to be overcome first then so be it. I consider that more people should ask opinions before having their noses done! To compare with anorexia is totally wrong, also there's nothing wrong with being tattooed (unless you think you may need to disappear someday) :)
Sex change radical Genesis P Orridge, bless him/her, seems inevitably in the Vanguard (see punk industrial dreamspace etc) Look out- you may become your own parents! :classic:

This is where our opinions divert, then. There's a difference between what one actually is and what one wants to be. We have raised a point that a person's mind is not tied to their physical appearence, so a sex change operation should account under the second category.

And my opinion is that in most cases, including this, cosmetic surgery is unnecessary. Since that's pretty much what sex change operations are. "If it's not broken don't fix it."

I would have to disagree with you Tropylium. There are many people who would say sex-xhange operations are not the same as cosmetic surgery. You point out a difference between what someone is and what they want to be... What about those that feel with every fibre of their being that the opposite gender is what they should be, that their whole life they have been the 'wrong' sex? That's not cosmetic, that's fundemental

So sue me. While I don't really object to someone getting such an operation, I still think that one can be happy with what they have; ie. that there's no case where someone just couldn't live in the body they were born with. At least a part of this is (IMHO!) actually caused by the prejucides that there are of men and woman — that these people feel that they cannot be accepted as themselves, in the body they have.

(snip) there's no case where someone just couldn't live in the body they were born with. (snip)
Your opinion that may be, but I can understand (and others here have experienced) the feeling that they absolutely cannot 'live in the body they were born with.' That's why people go through the procedure, and it's not something that's undertaken lightly.

If I understand correctly, there are a whole battery of psychological and physiological tests that must be taken before undergoing the surgery- it is not something that is performed on a person's desire. (NB that *some* surgery is performed on a whim- in Denver, a radio station payed some guy $50k to get breast implants for a year; but the surgical change of genitalia is a much more complex procedure than putting a couple of bags under a person's skin).

So- is it truly 'cosmetic' surgery? I wouldn't call it so, and I am willing to bet that the doctors which perform the surgery do not refer to it as such either. I must admit though, I do not know for sure. Anyone?

There are, iondeed, tons of test before undergoing SRS (sex reasignement Surgery). So, no way someone going witohout REALLY NEEDING it... so it's false that SRS is cosmetical. It's main objetive is to fit a person into real life, since she/he cannot live trully in a body not of hers/him.

My point... when you are alnoe in your room, you still crying... not for not being talked as a woman, but for having some parts of yours that don't fit.. It's the same as getting chopped one arm in an accident, but this can be solved...

Are you saying that, if a person could reimplant an arm or a leg, lost in an accident... that would be cosmetic??????

If you say SRS is cosmetic, you're saying that too... And if you're saying that... Well... best of lucks in real world... as soon as you arrive here, lad

Even more relevant would be the case of someone who had reconstruction surgery on a breast. Ok you could stick with the special bags in your bra, but some people are only to keen to have implants. Or there's facial reconstruction. Is this cosmetic surgery?
As for SRS, I think this is far preferable to taking surgery to someones soul.

Surgery for transsexuals ranges...I think it is right that serious cases undergo SRS, for the reasons people have put forward already. However in the case of other cosmetic surgery, for example on the face...well, that's exactly that, cosmetic. Some transsexuals go to the extreme of image obsessed individuals and try and resculpt every part of their body in an attempt to make themselves as beautiful as possible, and merely end up looking horribly fake. There's surgery and there's surgery.

Yup... too bad... I call those "Barbies", since they are made from plastic... Anyway... I support SRS only as a non cosmetical surgery... Any other surgery is merely cosmetical... except extreme cases...

BTW... which was the point of this thread? I just forgot...

I was scored at an 80% for woman. I'm a guy.

Aparently a guy with a female mindset

And apparently a guy who is only 23% gay, which is less than the average straight guy. So, would that make me a lesbian in mindset?

I have no idea

where are you people getting the XX% gay part from, mine never told me that?

It's a different test, and I got a 23% on it. That's supposed to be less gay than your average straight guy, but would that make me a lesbian by mindset?

where are you people getting the XX% gay part from, mine never told me that?
It's a different test.

The only problem with those test (at least the ones from TheSpark) is that your only choice is straight or gay. No choice for bi, grrr

i got a 17% gay... but my female counter part got 81% (she is her own personality)

Result: You are a straight guy with healthy lesbian fantasies

... Too many lesbians?

Nah... There are NEVER too many lesbians :P

If you say SRS is cosmetic, you're saying that too... And if you're saying that... Well... best of lucks in real world... as soon as you arrive here, lad
That's beside my point... :grumble: SRS may not be all about just looking different, but it's no match for a liver change operation or other such inevitable operations.

Anyway, I meant that not getting along with your body (yes, that's possible, I agree on that) can also be solved by getting better self esteem. By "cosmetical", I'm merely saying that SRS is done because you're not happy with the way your body looks. That is a fair claim, isn't that? There are 2 solutions for the problem:
1) learning to live in the body you have
2) getting a different body.
There's many ways you can be unhappy with what life has given to you. Your gender is perhaps one of the worst cases, but there's also height, skin color, personality, nationality... I view this in a sense that learning to live with these fundamental features should be the adviced choice. Are eg. those tattooed-whiskerimplant-robotictail überfurries really that different a case? Their goals are different, but the problem is the same.

Bear in mind that I'm not against SRS or anything here, I'm just claiming that it's not inavoidable.

But it is.. in some cases at least. Transexuality is a problem that make your discomfort grow with time. So, that's a matter of time for true transexual to die if they do not get SRS... much as liver or heart problems... That's why I dare to compare SRS to heart transplant.

As for your comparsion... Well... I hate my country, my city, my language, my country's culture, my skin colour, my height, my weight and my nose... oh, also my knees, which are damaged for live, and my right eye, which is inoperative... Hey... I can live hating so many things. I can stand those crappy matters... But I would have died without an SRS.

Not every "disease" affects body... some of them affects mind... and a depression is really nasty... it may cause suicide. If there is ANY surgery that prevent a person to die from depresion.... how can you call it cosmetic? How can you say it aboidable?

Hey, I like your country...

The thing is Tropylium, if people can't really stand where they live, they can move...since we currenly haven't got the cloning or brain transplant technology to "move" from bodies, many people have to simply change it.

SRS prevents suicide? Good argument, but still, isn't suicidity a mental condition which should be taken care in other sense? Imagine person X telling that they'll commit suicide if person Y doesn't marry them. Is the primary solution to force Y to wed X, or to stick X in psychotherapy?
(Of course there is the difference that nobody suffers from SRS, but you can substitute any other obsession if you want to. "Obsession" not intended in a bad sense.)

"Cosmetic" still stands here (in the most general sense) for "mainly affects the way you look". (At least so far.) You cannot deny that, though the reasons for getting one may vary.

With not being happy with your body and eg. not being happy with your skin color, there's here the difference that your gender does not harm you, though your skin color may get you in trouble.

-A new thought though... if wanting a new body is an aspect of personality... that means the person's personality is incompatible with their body. So, the solution would be either modifying the body or the mind. There are cases where everyone agrees that the body should be modified (getting an artificial leg) and cases where everyone agrees that the mind should be modified ("I'm Napoleon!"). The question here is, where does the border go?

(Technically there is no definite border though, alike that there's no definite border separating black from white, huge from small, a cup from a plate...)

I've said nothing about "teling to commit suicide", but being bont to commit it, without warning. This would be the same as getting an artificial leg, since results of this surgery, you get a new functional body part. That is... you change a non functional body part, or a part which you can't make functional, for a functional part. That, apart from preventing suicide, should be enough reason to think about SRS as non cosmetic.

Also, psycotherapy has proven to be unsuccsesfull in these cases... Do you want to go back to electroshock treatments?

Yep, it's surgery on the soul, the gentle touch does not work.
I believe that the truth behind the pain of gender dysphoria has been distorted by the media. Just because it is a bit easier to get (better) operations now doesn't make the pain go away. I had a double transplant which was hell and I reckon healing was easier than if it had been SRS, that's not simply cosmetic. Also: don't get a few alterations in the face confused with the importance of genital surgery, that's where you can draw the line :)
Oh and those tests are drawn up by stereotype Rednecks.

Here's a test for 'am I a male lesbian'.
a) do you prefer lesbian porn or porn for lesbians? (And do you seek it out?)
b) do you prefer to use your fingers your tongue or your ****.

result: if you need to read this you don't qualify!!

Also, psycotherapy has proven to be unsuccsesfull in these cases... Do you want to go back to electroshock treatments?
Electroshock Therapy *twitch*cured me *twitch*without any side effects *twitch*

Yeah... suuuure......

(This guy frighten me...)

Hey! It's a demonic duck!!!

(Shanara99 runs at lighting speed)

Do you suppose Demonic Duck has a direct line to the running reflex?? :Puzzled:

That is... you change a non functional body part, or a part which you can't make functional, for a functional part. That, apart from preventing suicide, should be enough reason to think about SRS as non cosmetic.
There is a difference between "doesn't work" & "doesn't want to use". Can we stick SRS into the gray area?
—BTW, should impotents get new body parts too?

Also, psycotherapy has proven to be unsuccsesfull in these cases... Do you want to go back to electroshock treatments?
Well, not quite :) but ... um ...

<runs out of arguments>

...Ahh, screw it. Actually I've been purposely making my views sharper here just since you can get a better debate if there's some disagreement too... :clown:

<runs out of the argument>

Cool. It's a fair argument, provided there are no bigots. I feel these things are always up for discussion. Like some people might feel that having your vocal chords scraped is vital or cosmetic, or even stupid.
Impotents don't usually need new body parts, usually its just down to hormones etc. Nanites would be useful. :)

This thread suddenly makes me happy that I am clear and confident with my sexuality and gender. Gender reassaignment surgery to me doesn't seem like cosmetic surgery as cosmetic surgery to me covers all non essential operations (weather getting a boob job to further your career in the porn buisness counts as non essential or not i'll leave to the medical insurers)

I used to be interested in what my sexuality was, and for a while I could cleary define it. Now i'm not concerned in being gay or bi, or straight. My affections are what are important, not the pigeonholing.

And as for what gender you are I would consider this by genitalia. Either your female, hermaphrodite or male. Psychologically you could be anything inbetween but that's far too complex for me. So I say now that I am male in the classic, physical sense.

I, Am in all actuality, Male and Female, I have Male and Female Gentalia.

heres a hypothetical question for you guys.

Say we have a guy like Ranma Saotome (he was cursed with becoming a girl when coming in contact with cold water, he would return to a boy with hotwater, yes Anime i know), he still is only attracted to Girls no matter what form, what is his sexuality? Bisexual? Lesbian? or Heterosexual because he was born a guy?

I'd say he's heterosexual. He's naturally a guy, and would be a guy were there no curse involved. Warping his body does not change his mind--that's why he's still the same female-attracted male underneath.

I must say... he would be an heterosexual biological guy, and also a transexual heterosexual boy...

Crappy

It's an iffy subject though, which undermines the idea of "solid" sexuality...something I don't believe in. Most people are attracted to one sex, or the other. Some are attracted to both. I believe given certain social conditioning, people have the potential to find either attractive in addition to those they are "naturally" attracted to. This kind of conditioning probably wouldn't be exactly pleasant (the Spartans for example forced homosexuality upon boys from an early age, and then when they were older expected them to marry a woman and produce children, causing massive confusion in many individuals...but it worked)

I, Am in all actuality, Male and Female, I have Male and Female Gentalia.
....Reeeallly...?

For some reason I'm a little sceptical here.

Hermaphrodite is less confusing than male and female.

To be honest, I'm with Tropylium...

Er...in what way?

I'm a M-F transgirl, and I've been on hormones for a year now. One thing I've noticed is that they didn't effect my sexuality in any way. I was attracted to girls before, and I'm still attracted to girls now.

Interesting, I've heard reports of bisexuality in others as a result. It might well be that the people in question were bisexual all along however, and the hormones "loosened" them somewhat...

Possibly... I mean I've had crushes on guy celebs, but they were definately there before the hormones... I'm particularly fascinated with ex-Limp Bizkit guitarist Wes Borland.

Even though I like him, wouldn't ever sleep with a guy.

As I said...Yes I am male and female. I have both sets of equipment. I have a Penis and a Vagina. Yes it does cause me troubles in school. Mainly because my teachers don't know what gymclass to put me in..

And just how big a coincidence it is that one of the, what, 200 hermaphrodites out of all the 6 000 000 000 people in the world, happens to be an EGS fan?

And I really don't dare to ask for proof.

Probably 150... don't ask me why

guess dan really is a master story teller...

I think there are way more than 200. The support group I used to go to did stuff with intersexed kids in the UK, so there must be more than that for it to be included.

I watched a documentery where these two children were introduced to each other, one had had an opperation to removed the male-ness so they could be a girl, and the other was undecided. She later decided to live life as a girl too.

I don't think there are much more than 200 true hermaphrodites around the world... Sure intersexed and transexuals... but not hermaphrodites

Hermaphroditism can't be that rare, can it?

It's probaly not as sensationalised as much as other rare abnormalites (I feel bad putting it that way, but technically it's true. Then again, I think hetro and homo sexuality are abnormalites) Like the one John Merrick suffered from. I forget what it's called but when the skin goes crazy and decides it needs to produce a lot more of itself.

I was going to say something about transexuality, but I forgot what it was. Except Iv'e been roleplaying a male post op squirrel and it never struck me as odd. It's not odd really, and there was anothger point I was going to make but i'm so tired that I can't seem to focus on anything for more than a minute.

Maybe I should head over to the random forum.

I think this should have been in Random to begin with. I think life is an abnormality. Beware people who think they are normal (and think cuban cigars make good sex toys).

Mmm let's state this... in a country where they live 40 millions of human souls (within, maybe 80 million of bodies... too much Pratchett) as it's Spain... I now only 2 hermaphrodites. Since I'm in good relations (and even managed one) with non gubernamental transexual and intersexual organizations, I thnk I can state, there must be no more than 10 in Spain... Just make your numbers... sure there are not 200000 hermaphrodites in thw world...



P.D. 6 a.m. here... need some sleep... I do not understand anythig more complex than ZzZzZzZzZzZ...

According to some of the medical records I've seen, there are a lot more than that.

Boy, what an odd first post.

I'm sure they probably number in thousands...remember, this is a world with billions of people.

i wonder what the odds are that there is at least one who's body is completely functional, feminine hip, one ovary, one testical (there are only two places either one can form, couldn't have two of each) be kind freaky if you ask me, i'd have to wonder what would happen if.... nah it wouldn't work...

I'm sure they probably number in thousands...remember, this is a world with billions of people.


capitalist Billions! There are only a few thousand million humans on this planet.

Now to give each of those a toothbrush, and two hundred hours of a lit light bulb (60watt), how many resources would you need?

Simple maths, big numbers, super fun mega challenge where I will be happy if someone does it!

Remember there's about a billion Chinese (British billions that is)...and most of them are peasants, not capitalists.

Now to give each of those a toothbrush, and two hundred hours of a lit light bulb (60watt), how many resources would you need?



Do we need to include the cost of building the infrastructure (power plants and power lines to distribute it) where it doesn't already exist? :)

it would require an infinete amount of resources, just ask Benoit Mandlebrot about that one!
The british coast is longer than the distance from the earth to the sun!

The british coast is longer than the distance from the earth to the sun!
Depends how you measure the distance to the Sun, maybe that's infinite too?
(Yeah, I read 'Chaos' too).
I have wondered when people do big numbers on the world's population, how do they stop breeders from doing it long enough?

*Sigh* No one believes me when I say I'm a Hermaphrodite. At least not untill they see my medical records or I show them my self ._.

OK Katt-Laina I believe you. ;)
I find this tendency of intersex people to be persuaded into a female role a bit disturbing. A society that gave a true choice would be wonderful.

*Sigh* No one believes me when I say I'm a Hermaphrodite. At least not untill they see my medical records or I show them my self ._.
Prove it :) :hammer:


I find this tendency of intersex people to be persuaded into a female role a bit disturbing. A society that gave a true choice would be wonderful.
i think part of it might be the hormones nesscesary to provides a stable life and normal development (normal mental development, at least as much as possible, i know imbalances between estrogen and testorone can cause problems early on) are out of balance in most hermaphrodites, and the easiest way to bring them into boundries that are known to be safe for the person is to give them feminine hormones. IANAD, so i could be completely off, i have no actual experiance about this, just short amounts of research i did for biology and such.

Yes, there, in fact, are several degrees of hermaphroditism and probably more than 200 people who are not born physically 100% male or female. But having both a penis and a vagina is surely not the most common case, I bet here's less than 200 of those people around.

What'd you figure to be the odds to find someone who has a curly hair, is fluent in Nenetsi (a Siberian language) and listens to The Corrs? Surprizingly small. Add "likes root beer" or any other seemingly unsuspicious trait and you'll quickly reach the amount of zero human beings fulfilling the conditions.

Similarily...
This thread has gotten around 1000 pageviews. If we add sexual minority attraction factor for this thread AND EGS itself, it can be probably boosted up to at most ca. 600000 Average Person Equivalents (APEs). That's 1 : 10000 of the world's population. However, we must compare the 600000 APEs to only the Internet using population in the world; let's say that it's under 600 million. So we get a probability of under 1‰.
On the other hand, even if there's 6000 of Katt-Laina's kin in the world, that's still 1 out of 1000000.
And finally, the probability for hem (damn these gender specific pronouns!) to stumble here accounts as 1 : 1000000000. One out of a thousand million.

Do I need to approximate the probability for someone coming here to fake being hermaphrodite, or do you take it without saying that it's much bigger than the above-derived one for hem to be for real?

Katt-Laina, I'm not saying that you ARE fake, but the odds really are against you. It's kinda like telling "Hello, I'm the former king/president/dictator/etc. of <insert obscure 3rd world nation here> and I wonder why nobody is answering my pleas to help me retrieve my Swiss bank savings even though I'd offer a fair share for the helper."

And finally, remember, "sceptical" doesn't mean "believes something to be false", it means "doesn't believe in either choice without proof"

capitalist Billions! There are only a few thousand million humans on this planet.

Now to give each of those a toothbrush, and two hundred hours of a lit light bulb (60watt), how many resources would you need?

Simple maths, big numbers, super fun mega challenge where I will be happy if someone does it!

38 resources.
(On today's "Language Rules", we learn e.g. the difference between "much" and "many".)

BTW, we call 1000000000 "miljardi" in Finnish.

Ah, I used to think like that. Then I found a lot of people thinking like that when I knew a lot of stuff to be true. Then I found that where there WAS evidence for stuff to be true, a lot of people ignored it, supressed it or demanded even more evidence.
I have found that: humans are wonderful, anecdotal evidence is often better than any other.
If it doesn't cost anything much, believing people for a while is more profitable than saying 'I don't believe that, it's just one person/ anecdotal evidence'. The alternative is often just upsetting people who might know something to your advantage (or astonishment).
So, I either agree with people or ignore them. It actually works. :)

In addition to my earlier request, yes the question involves making the infastructure and the extra resources needed to make the factories and mine the material and the food to feed the workers.

Also, There are titles such as Mister, Missus, Miss and Ms. But how do you adress someone who can be either or no gender?

And if a male was to loose his penis, testicles and prostate would he be male?

Also, There are titles such as Mister, Missus, Miss and Ms. But how do you adress someone who can be either or no gender?

Unfortunately in English there is no such generic term, which is another reason why I prefer Japanese (titles in Japanese are gender-neutral unless they refer to family or marital relationships).

And if a male was to loose his penis, testicles and prostate would he be male?

Depends on whether it was willingly or not. If it was unwillingly, then he would be a disabled male (since his mindset would still be "masculine" excepting for the loss of hormones).

There are some cases of intersexed or hermaphodite pepole choosing male gender. Also, they are known personally by me. Sure it's not the normal thing, but I, and scientist whit I've discussed this topic, think that's it's related to a gen within X cromosome being a mutated version. This way (too complex to write it here... more in english... I know not enough technical words in English..) it would be easier to have a female mindset than a male one, so that's explain that lack of "male" intersexuals.

2- I believe you, Katt-Lania. why not? I'm just stating that there are not much odds of getting more than 30 cases here, at EGS forums.

3- For the tittle..... Just call that one "person" I've no problem with that, since, as Andaluza, I'm "leista". Leism (from leista) is a gramatical incorrection in which you use Indirect objet pronuon (le) instead of Direct objeto pronuon (lo or la). Le it's non sex related... so no prob for me... Also, I can use the arcaic word for the second person (usted, derived from Vuesa merced). So... no gender at all... Well... Let's translate that into english... mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

This is hard.... Mmmmmmmm

Got it... Use Thou as title... That would be the same... more or less. Nowadays not too much ppl knows this Thou thing, since it's arcaic... Just use it. So, it would be Thou Katt-Lania?

Titles belong to a Class society, so they are not such a bother in a society that recognises a genderless person. Maybe they could have an honourary doctorate :) I hate having to have a title myself for the same reason. What do you use for him/her/it/they in that situation? (always liked 'per').
Interesting theories about the gender of intersexed people there. I used to believe that it was easier to change the genitals to a female (though not always fertile).

If I'm not sure of someones gender (IE, someone on a forum with a neutral name) I use the term "they". Which also doubles up as being a good way to adress someone with MP who is sensitive about it.

Although personally I don't mind being reffered to as "him". There's only one personality I use when talking or writing at a time. Otherwise things would get confusing.

I refer to persons of indeterminate gender as 'sie'. Too many herms on furry MUCKs, you get used to it...

Personally, I think the decision is effected by the state of hormones in the child... If they like the idea of playing pretend, then they may well decide to be a girl.

If they like the idea of playing with fire trucks and running around a lot, then they may well prefer to be a boy.

They may well make the choice based on their friends too. If they like being part of a female social group, then it's probable that they'll want to be a girl too, and vice versa.

Then there's my theory that's a little more far out... What sort of a child, given a choice, would want an extra appendage? True, this could be biased on my count of being a transgirl, but if you were a kid who had the choice, who knew the difference between male and female, would you want rid of the extra equipment?

Maybe the psycology of getting rid of the visible organ would equate to getting rid of the problem?

I'll just mention FTM transexuals to that point, Kasumi. They want an extra appendix, even not fully functional...

Also... nowadays, girls play with trucks (my sister) and boys play pretend games ( a neigbour of mine)... not having to be intersexed ppl.

You need to get rid of that part of your body... but that not mean everyone else wants. There are people who love that part! For those, having a pussy would be a torture... So... what's your point? extra appendage?... Nah... For those who need that, it would be no extra apendage... it is for you, it was for me (now I can see it from another angle... and understand it better) but no way its extra for any man, transexual, intersexed, hermephrodite or biological

Yay. Someone believes me. I dont really have the ability to prove that I'm a Herm. Some people never believe me. Oh and..A doctor told me once that I have a perfect balence of hormones, And I found this place by chance. I'm really sorry if it seems a lil bit Impossible. But it doesnt really mean much to me. To thine self be true.

if its not too much to ask, i'm curious did you edit your post, i was reading it looking for that list and i got confused until i realized what happened, i know it doesn't say anything.. ok i lost my train of thought, stupid drew barrymore... anyway... i was going to say something else but when i realized you changed your message (if you did) it didn't make any sense

Well, I only know too well that people will never have the same opinion as me... I was purposely cautious stating that comment.

But I mean, a child doesn't really value their genitalia, all it knows is that other people are making a fuss over it at that age.

Who was talking about childs?

Yeah, you have to be old enough to make a decision don't you? Katt-Laina? :Puzzled: