gender neutral now legal

From the news:

"A Sydney resident who fought to be legally recognised as being of non-specific sex has hailed a High Court ruling that New South Wales laws do permit the registration of a category of sex other than male or female.

Norrie was born male but had a sex change and now does not identify as specifically male or female.

After a four-year legal battle, Norrie has won the right to be legally recognised as being of non-specific sex.

Norrie, who had been quietly confident of winning the case, says the historic verdict is a big win for the wider transgender community.

"I screamed a squeal of delight. Very loudly. It's very thrilling, very exciting," Norrie said.

At 4/2/2014 7:04:52 AM, rross wrote:
http://mobile.abc.net.au...

Is this the law in other countries too? And should we refer to such people as "he" or "she" or maybe ask first? And what happens if they go to prison? Or maybe prisons will be mixed from now on.

It's surprising to me but I think it's good. In another way I'm not sure what to think of it.

At 4/2/2014 7:14:08 AM, rross wrote:
From the news:

"A Sydney resident who fought to be legally recognised as being of non-specific sex has hailed a High Court ruling that New South Wales laws do permit the registration of a category of sex other than male or female.

Norrie was born male but had a sex change and now does not identify as specifically male or female.

After a four-year legal battle, Norrie has won the right to be legally recognised as being of non-specific sex.

Norrie, who had been quietly confident of winning the case, says the historic verdict is a big win for the wider transgender community.

"I screamed a squeal of delight. Very loudly. It's very thrilling, very exciting," Norrie said.

Yay!!!!!! My heart is delighted too. How touching. How sad that the law pretends that people like they don't exist.

At 4/2/2014 7:34:38 AM, rross wrote:

At 4/2/2014 7:04:52 AM, rross wrote:
http://mobile.abc.net.au...

Is this the law in other countries too? And should we refer to such people as "he" or "she" or maybe ask first? And what happens if they go to prison? Or maybe prisons will be mixed from now on.

It's surprising to me but I think it's good. In another way I'm not sure what to think of it.

Looking at the prison conditions and rape rate of prisoners, I don't think the gov cares enought about peoples well being for it to make a big difference. Anyway, gender queer persons aren't messing up the prison system; the prison system was already messed up in relation to gender queer people and we are only now trying to fix it.

If I were you, I'd ask what the person would like to be called. I tend to go with they by default.

Oh f*** me.

So now individuals are forcing everyone else to share their personal delusions by law... Talk about prosecution.

At 4/2/2014 1:39:58 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh f*** me.

So now individuals are forcing everyone else to share their personal delusions by law... Talk about prosecution.

what prosecution?

At 4/2/2014 12:26:02 PM, kbub wrote:

At 4/2/2014 7:14:08 AM, rross wrote:
From the news:

"A Sydney resident who fought to be legally recognised as being of non-specific sex has hailed a High Court ruling that New South Wales laws do permit the registration of a category of sex other than male or female.

Norrie was born male but had a sex change and now does not identify as specifically male or female.

After a four-year legal battle, Norrie has won the right to be legally recognised as being of non-specific sex.

Norrie, who had been quietly confident of winning the case, says the historic verdict is a big win for the wider transgender community.

"I screamed a squeal of delight. Very loudly. It's very thrilling, very exciting," Norrie said.

Yay!!!!!! My heart is delighted too. How touching. How sad that the law pretends that people like they don't exist.

=)

Looking at the prison conditions and rape rate of prisoners, I don't think the gov cares enought about peoples well being for it to make a big difference. Anyway, gender queer persons aren't messing up the prison system; the prison system was already messed up in relation to gender queer people and we are only now trying to fix it.

No, I just meant how would they pick which prison Norrie got sent to? Or which swimming team to participate in for sports, say? Does Norrie get to choose or is there some rule? Just wondering.

If I were you, I'd ask what the person would like to be called. I tend to go with they by default.

OK fine. "They" will just have to mean third person singular unspecified gender. You're right.

At 4/3/2014 2:13:47 AM, rross wrote:

At 4/2/2014 1:39:58 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh f*** me.

So now individuals are forcing everyone else to share their personal delusions by law... Talk about prosecution.

what prosecution?

As I said, forcing everyone else to falsely believe something that is not true by law.
It is the definition of the wishful thinking fallacy. Transexuals wish they were from the opposite gender, well, unfortunately they are not. Napoleon wishes he was taller, unfortunately he is not. Bob wishes he had a harley that can fly and travel in time, unfortunately, he doesn't. John wishes he was rich and omniscient, unfortunately, he is not.
We can have an unlimited amount of wishes. However, believing that pretending that our wish is true will make it true is no different from "The emperor's new clothes". Pretending they are something they are not is not compassionate or tolerant, it is lying to them and ourselves.

Law should apply to everyone. It doesn't make sense to make special exceptions that render rules meaningless for people who define their gender based on mutable sexual behaviors while ignoring objective reality.

At 4/3/2014 12:12:01 PM, Dragonfang wrote:

At 4/3/2014 2:13:47 AM, rross wrote:

At 4/2/2014 1:39:58 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh f*** me.

So now individuals are forcing everyone else to share their personal delusions by law... Talk about prosecution.

what prosecution?

As I said, forcing everyone else to falsely believe something that is not true by law.

Why is it a false belief?

It is the definition of the wishful thinking fallacy. Transexuals wish they were from the opposite gender, well, unfortunately they are not.

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

Napoleon wishes he was taller, unfortunately he is not.

But he was not born with a mind that was of a tall person, now was he?

Bob wishes he had a harley that can fly and travel in time, unfortunately, he doesn't.

But was his brain structure that of a person that can fly and travel in time? No.

John wishes he was rich and omniscient, unfortunately, he is not.

Again, was his brain structure one of someone who is rich and omniscient?

We can have an unlimited amount of wishes. However, believing that pretending that our wish is true will make it true is no different from "The emperor's new clothes". Pretending they are something they are not is not compassionate or tolerant, it is lying to them and ourselves.

What is it that makes a person who they are? Everything we attribute to people (outside of the actual appearance) is caused by the brain. A person is their brain, and if their brain happens to be of the opposite gender then they have the right to be seen as a different gender.

Law should apply to everyone. It doesn't make sense to make special exceptions that render rules meaningless for people who define their gender based on mutable sexual behaviors while ignoring objective reality.

Your "objective reality" is still subjective on what defines a person as being a person.

Ok, good.

I mean I think gender neutral and a pangender or bigender should be accepted. Norrie is great for being an expressing Norrie's individuality. At least that's my opinion.

At 4/3/2014 12:26:47 PM, SNP1 wrote:

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

uh...what?

If there are statistical differences in brain structure between men and women, they would be differences of tendency. By this I mean any differences between the sexes are minor compared with the variation of individual differences.

For example, men are taller than women, on average, but that's no reason to say that a short man has a woman's body structure, or that a tall women would be better off as a man.

Don't get me wrong - I kind of like the idea of gender neutrality. But this idea of brain structure is a bit much.

At 4/3/2014 6:29:02 PM, rross wrote:

At 4/3/2014 12:26:47 PM, SNP1 wrote:

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

uh...what?

If there are statistical differences in brain structure between men and women, they would be differences of tendency. By this I mean any differences between the sexes are minor compared with the variation of individual differences.

For example, men are taller than women, on average, but that's no reason to say that a short man has a woman's body structure, or that a tall women would be better off as a man.

Don't get me wrong - I kind of like the idea of gender neutrality. But this idea of brain structure is a bit much.

Actually, the brains of females are a lot more symmetrical than the brains of men (not including those born bisexual, homosexual, and transsexual. When you are bi it is still closer to your normal gender's structure, homosexuality is even more different than a bi's, a transsexuals is closer to that of the opposite gender).

At 4/3/2014 6:33:09 PM, SNP1 wrote:

At 4/3/2014 6:29:02 PM, rross wrote:

At 4/3/2014 12:26:47 PM, SNP1 wrote:

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

uh...what?

If there are statistical differences in brain structure between men and women, they would be differences of tendency. By this I mean any differences between the sexes are minor compared with the variation of individual differences.

For example, men are taller than women, on average, but that's no reason to say that a short man has a woman's body structure, or that a tall women would be better off as a man.

Don't get me wrong - I kind of like the idea of gender neutrality. But this idea of brain structure is a bit much.

Actually, the brains of females are a lot more symmetrical than the brains of men (not including those born bisexual, homosexual, and transsexual. When you are bi it is still closer to your normal gender's structure, homosexuality is even more different than a bi's, a transsexuals is closer to that of the opposite gender).

Do you have any evidence?

At 4/3/2014 6:33:52 PM, rross wrote:

At 4/3/2014 6:33:09 PM, SNP1 wrote:

At 4/3/2014 6:29:02 PM, rross wrote:

At 4/3/2014 12:26:47 PM, SNP1 wrote:

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

uh...what?

If there are statistical differences in brain structure between men and women, they would be differences of tendency. By this I mean any differences between the sexes are minor compared with the variation of individual differences.

For example, men are taller than women, on average, but that's no reason to say that a short man has a woman's body structure, or that a tall women would be better off as a man.

Don't get me wrong - I kind of like the idea of gender neutrality. But this idea of brain structure is a bit much.

Actually, the brains of females are a lot more symmetrical than the brains of men (not including those born bisexual, homosexual, and transsexual. When you are bi it is still closer to your normal gender's structure, homosexuality is even more different than a bi's, a transsexuals is closer to that of the opposite gender).

Do you have any evidence?

I will look for the bisexual scans again (harder to find then the others, which are readily available).

Homosexual:
http://www.newscientist.com...

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Transsexual (a little harder to find):
http://mindhacks.com...

http://www.newscientist.com...

It still is not completely confirmed if homosexuality and transsexuality are direct results of the brain structure, but it is more supported that the brain structure does play a role than saying it has no impact.

At 4/3/2014 6:41:43 PM, SNP1 wrote:

At 4/3/2014 6:33:52 PM, rross wrote:

At 4/3/2014 6:33:09 PM, SNP1 wrote:

At 4/3/2014 6:29:02 PM, rross wrote:

At 4/3/2014 12:26:47 PM, SNP1 wrote:

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

uh...what?

If there are statistical differences in brain structure between men and women, they would be differences of tendency. By this I mean any differences between the sexes are minor compared with the variation of individual differences.

For example, men are taller than women, on average, but that's no reason to say that a short man has a woman's body structure, or that a tall women would be better off as a man.

Don't get me wrong - I kind of like the idea of gender neutrality. But this idea of brain structure is a bit much.

Actually, the brains of females are a lot more symmetrical than the brains of men (not including those born bisexual, homosexual, and transsexual. When you are bi it is still closer to your normal gender's structure, homosexuality is even more different than a bi's, a transsexuals is closer to that of the opposite gender).

Do you have any evidence?

I will look for the bisexual scans again (harder to find then the others, which are readily available).

Homosexual:
http://www.newscientist.com...

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Both those articles seem to be based on the same study:

http://www.pnas.org...

Which found the following rates of cerebral volume left hemisphere/ right hemisphere:

straight women: 100%
gay women: 99%
straight men: 98%
gay men: 100%

I don't think you can talk about women having brains that are "a lot more symmetrical" from this data. In any case, the brain is plastic. It forms to a large extent in response to our experiences, so it's unclear what meaningful conclusions can be drawn from any small differences.

Transsexual (a little harder to find):
http://mindhacks.com...

http://www.newscientist.com...

Here's the study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Again we're talking about overlapping distributions, so it doesn't make sense to talk about a male brain structure and a female brain structure.

It still is not completely confirmed if homosexuality and transsexuality are direct results of the brain structure, but it is more supported that the brain structure does play a role than saying it has no impact.

You were saying something a lot stronger than this in your previous post.

Also worth noting is that gender is a socially constructed idea... so the idea that those of us who are genderqueer must have abnormal brains is a bit off-putting, because that basically means that anyone who is genderqueer and does not have an abnormal brain is delusional/lying.

At 4/3/2014 6:29:02 PM, rross wrote:

At 4/3/2014 12:26:47 PM, SNP1 wrote:

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

uh...what?

If there are statistical differences in brain structure between men and women, they would be differences of tendency. By this I mean any differences between the sexes are minor compared with the variation of individual differences.

The areas in trans men's brains which connect to sexual identity (among other things) are more similar to those found in cis men (as opposed to with cis women) with the same trend presenting itself in trans women as compared to cis women. I did a debate with Medic maybe a year ago with some preliminary info on the topic.

For example, men are taller than women, on average, but that's no reason to say that a short man has a woman's body structure, or that a tall women would be better off as a man.

Don't get me wrong - I kind of like the idea of gender neutrality. But this idea of brain structure is a bit much.

At 4/4/2014 12:34:39 AM, Citrakayah wrote:
Also worth noting is that gender is a socially constructed idea... so the idea that those of us who are genderqueer must have abnormal brains is a bit off-putting, because that basically means that anyone who is genderqueer and does not have an abnormal brain is delusional/lying.

I think one can accept the fact that some individuals are born trans while still maintaining that most of what many experience as gender is constructed. But it's a balance. Too far to social constructionism IMO is what causes a lot of trans phobia from within contemporary rad feminism (though it thankfully isn't very widespread). I think the constructionism/inherent debate surrounding trans or non-cis gendered people is largely a matter of overdetermination honestly.

This is just f*cking sad and pathetic.

At 4/3/2014 12:26:47 PM, SNP1 wrote:

At 4/3/2014 12:12:01 PM, Dragonfang wrote:

At 4/3/2014 2:13:47 AM, rross wrote:

At 4/2/2014 1:39:58 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
Oh f*** me.

So now individuals are forcing everyone else to share their personal delusions by law... Talk about prosecution.

what prosecution?

As I said, forcing everyone else to falsely believe something that is not true by law.

Why is it a false belief?

It is the definition of the wishful thinking fallacy. Transexuals wish they were from the opposite gender, well, unfortunately they are not.

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

So? Taxi Drivers have extremely similar brain structure. It is called brain plasticity, the patterns are the results not the cause. People can convince themselves of very bizarre things if they dwell on it enough.

Napoleon wishes he was taller, unfortunately he is not.

But he was not born with a mind that was of a tall person, now was he?

Bob wishes he had a harley that can fly and travel in time, unfortunately, he doesn't.

But was his brain structure that of a person that can fly and travel in time? No.

John wishes he was rich and omniscient, unfortunately, he is not.

Again, was his brain structure one of someone who is rich and omniscient?

Are you implying that gender neutrals are objectively born with an immutable gender neutral brain? I would like to learn how you came to this conclusion.

The emperor have no clothes, he only set himself for embarrassment. People suffering from anorexia aren't helped by giving them "surgical help" or pretending to see what they see in the mirror.
People with gender identity disorder or gender dysphoria also aren't helped by helping them relive a fantasy. Especially when obsession can get to the point of chopping of functional genitalia and breasts.

We can have an unlimited amount of wishes. However, believing that pretending that our wish is true will make it true is no different from "The emperor's new clothes". Pretending they are something they are not is not compassionate or tolerant, it is lying to them and ourselves.

What is it that makes a person who they are? Everything we attribute to people (outside of the actual appearance) is caused by the brain. A person is their brain, and if their brain happens to be of the opposite gender then they have the right to be seen as a different gender.

Oh come on. I thought biological determinism was discarded years ago. May I learn the basis behind reviving this concept?
What the brain tells us is not always right, nether do desires alone provide a justification for behavior. When it does not make logical sense, then it is a red flag. When the claim contradicts reality, then it is a double red flag.

So let me give you an example:
An African with a dark skin tone is enslaved a couple hundred years ago. However, he is dreaming about freedom and there is something that urges him to be free. So he concluded that he is actually a white person trapped in a black body.
Therefore, he believes that he have the right to have the same freedom as any white man while everyone black should still remain enslaved.

Law should apply to everyone. It doesn't make sense to make special exceptions that render rules meaningless for people who define their gender based on mutable sexual behaviors while ignoring objective reality.

Your "objective reality" is still subjective on what defines a person as being a person.

So let me get this clear: Your definition of a transsexual is a perso- er... I mean brain who is trapped in the opposite gender. Something along these lines.

Out of curiosity, what is your definition of male, female, & gender roles?

At 4/4/2014 1:50:19 AM, Noumena wrote:

At 4/3/2014 6:29:02 PM, rross wrote:

At 4/3/2014 12:26:47 PM, SNP1 wrote:

They actually have a brain structure extremely similar to the opposite gender, meaning it is also very different from their born gender.

uh...what?

If there are statistical differences in brain structure between men and women, they would be differences of tendency. By this I mean any differences between the sexes are minor compared with the variation of individual differences.

The areas in trans men's brains which connect to sexual identity (among other things) are more similar to those found in cis men (as opposed to with cis women) with the same trend presenting itself in trans women as compared to cis women. I did a debate with Medic maybe a year ago with some preliminary info on the topic.

Yes, you referred to this study:

http://www.transgendercare.com...

I've put a different link because yours only gave the abstract. There was another study you cited but I couldn't get the link to work.

In the study that you linked, the findings don't really support your statements about brain structure. They found that the BSTc volume for trans men and trans women was lower than for cis men. There was no difference between trans men and trans women.

Also, you can see on the charts they provide that there is substantial overlap between the populations. Therefore, there's no "male" or "female" brain structure, we're just talking about statistical differences, as I said before.

I was a bit disturbed by the language that the researchers used. We wouldn't say that an 180 cm tall woman was "man-sized" or that a 55 kg man was "woman-sized", and yet that's the sort of language they used in this paper. It makes me wonder if they had some kind of political agenda when carrying out this research.

At 4/4/2014 4:00:45 PM, InvictusManeo wrote:
This is just f*cking sad and pathetic.

Which part?

At 4/4/2014 1:56:13 AM, Noumena wrote:

At 4/4/2014 12:34:39 AM, Citrakayah wrote:
Also worth noting is that gender is a socially constructed idea... so the idea that those of us who are genderqueer must have abnormal brains is a bit off-putting, because that basically means that anyone who is genderqueer and does not have an abnormal brain is delusional/lying.

I think one can accept the fact that some individuals are born trans while still maintaining that most of what many experience as gender is constructed. But it's a balance. Too far to social constructionism IMO is what causes a lot of trans phobia from within contemporary rad feminism (though it thankfully isn't very widespread). I think the constructionism/inherent debate surrounding trans or non-cis gendered people is largely a matter of overdetermination honestly.

Overdetermination? How so?