the Espy awards

[wfooshee]

Every cell in his body carries an X chromosome.

Taking drugs to grow boobies and then cross-dressing does not make you a woman, it makes you a decently-endowed drag queen. I acknowledge that there is some personal courage required to go through this, especially as such a publicly-known figure. However, it has absolutely nothing to do with Jenner as an athlete, which is what I thought the ESPYs were supposed to be about.

My personal preference for courage shown by an athlete is Liam Dwyer.

Peppered by shrapnel in 2006 in Iraq as a US Marine since late 2000, he returned to civilian life in 2007. Seeking a way to get that adrenaline rush he learned to drive competitively, built a car, did track days, went to driving school.

He re-enlisted in 2009 and was deployed to Afghanistan. Stepped on an explosive booby trap in 2011 and lost his leg, almost lost the other leg and an arm, and truth be told, nearly lost his life. Many surgeries and much therapy later, he's learned not only to walk again (defying all expectations) he's actually driving. Professionally. He fastens prosthetic leg to the clutch pedal and drives a Miata in the Continental Tire Challenge. He's driven the class-winning car twice in the series, so far.

He only races part-time, though. He uses his leave time to race, because even after everything else, he's still an active duty Marine!!!

But nobody knows who he is, so he can't get any popularity votes.

Which brings me back on topic: the ESPYs. They serve no purpose other than self-promotion by ESPN. Being awarded by popular vote rather than any actual sports achievement, they are meaningless and hollow as far as "awards" go.

 

[Northstar]

Do you not see what's courageous about being publicly trans, and the de facto public face of transgender people?

While I would say it's certainly courageous, it's not like it's the first time it's been done (she's not even the first celebrity) and most people that have done it certainly don't have the support net that Caitlyn has had (I'm sure quite a few have even been ostracized by their own families).

Considering that even on GTP, one of the most civil discussion sites I've ever seen, trans women are called "he", and people still call her Bruce?

That's the point, that even on a site like this which is basically as good as it gets on the internet, people still can't just use the name and gender she identifies as. This is as good as it gets. I don't even want to imagine how bad it gets.

People have a hard time with change, it's why people write last years date after the calender turns, sign their pre-marriage name, write their old address/phone number, etc...

Sure there are probably some that mean it maliciously, but most people are probably stuck in their old habit, it's human nature and it's hardly fair to shame people over it.

 

[Carbonox]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about the ESPY awards, not Brucie's expensive masquerade.

 

[Spurgy 777]

No, they're not... "he" isn't the same as "male". Bruce Jenner's a good example of that. We're off-topic now, you should probably Google the difference and prepare to be amazed

Definition of "he" - used to refer to a man, boy or male animal previously mentioned or easily identified

Definition of "man" - an adult human male.

It's quite clear that "he" is used to refer to an adult human male. Care to explain how this supports your point as it doesn't appear to.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about the ESPY awards, not Brucie's expensive masquerade.

Read the thread, it was an ESPY award.

It's quite clear that "he" is used to refer to an adult human male. Care to explain how this supports your point as it doesn't appear to.

That's your mis-definition, not mine... if English isn't your first language then I can understand the confusion. There are good language and gender references available, I'm hardly quoting a fact so unknown that I need to source the meaning of the words to an English speaker from this century.

Masculine gender is not exclusive to male organisms just as feminine gender is not exclusive to female organisms. It's not so complicated to understand.

 

[Carbonox]

Read the thread, it was an ESPY award.

Well this is awkward.

 

[Spurgy 777]

That's your mis-definition, not mine... if English isn't your first language then I can understand the confusion. There are good language and gender references available, I'm hardly quoting a fact so unknown that I need to source the meaning of the words to an English speaker from this century.

Masculine gender is not exclusive to male organisms just as feminine gender is not exclusive to female organisms. It's not so complicated to understand.

No it's not my mis-definition, I looked it up using several dictionaries as a reference and they all said the same thing.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/he

"Pronoun - Used to refer to a man, boy or male animal.

Noun - A male"

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/He

"Used to refer to the male person or animal"

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/he

"The male person or animal"

http://i.word.com/idictionary/he

"Pronoun - That male one

Noun - A male person or animal"

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/he

"Pronoun - Used ... to refer to a man boy or male animal

Noun - A male"

That was the first 4 dictionaries I came across on my google search, and Cambridge's definition thrown in for good measure. All of them say virtually the same thing.

So according to your links and all of these dictionaries, "he" is used to refer to the sex of a person, not their gender as they use male and not masculine.

And adding this all up as I understand it, Caitlyn should be referred to as "he", as he is male, despite his gender being feminine.

Did I miss anything?

 

[TenEightyOne]

No it's not my mis-definition, I looked it up using several dictionaries as a reference and they all said the same thing....

You read all those and still don't know the difference between sex and gender? Try again

 

[Spurgy 777]

You read all those and still don't know the difference between sex and gender? Try again

So you're just going to reply like an arrogant tool and not address any of my points or add anything to the discussion? The only thing I can take from that is either you're just an arse or you think I'm right but you're too embarrassed to admit it.

My argument and reasoning is clearly spelled out right infront of you, all you needed to do was point out exactly where I went wrong, but clearly that is too difficult for you.

 

[TenEightyOne]

So you're just going to reply like an arrogant tool and not address any of my points or add anything to the discussion?

What's to add to established meanings of words? Okay, I'll take the links slowly for you, they're the same ones that you may not have read. Gender and Sex are not the same thing. Gender is societal while sex is biological. Wiki has a well written article on gender that you should take in, again. People sometimes think sex and gender are the same (as you seem to be doing).

The only thing I can take from that is either you're just an arse...

I have my moments.

...or you think I'm right but you're too embarrassed to admit it.

That sex and gender are the same thing? Really? Do you think they are? I guess if the answer was "yes" then that would explain a lot.

...clearly that is too difficult for you.

The references are the same, they're simple to understand, they're not high-falutin' or scientific. If you genuinely can't get what they're saying then I'll try to find something else.

 

[Spurgy 777]

Maybe you're misunderstanding my argument so I will spell out what I think the misunderstanding is;

I'm not saying gender and sex are the same thing, I agree with you that they are not, and I think I understand quite well why they're not thanks to your links.

I'm saying the word "he" refers to a persons sex and not their gender. The reason I came to that conclusion is that all the definitions for "he" say that it refers to a male, and that according to the definition of "male" and your links, male refers to the sex of a person, and not their gender.

So in the case of Caitlyn, based on my understanding, his sex is male (so should be referred to as "he"), and his gender is feminine.

Does that help clarify my argument? If you disagree then your argument should be that "he" refers to a persons gender and not their sex.

 

[TenEightyOne]

So in the case of Caitlyn, based on my understanding, his sex is male (so should be referred to as "he"), and his gender is feminine.

So to clarify; if you worked with Sarah who was overtly feminine, who dressed as a woman, made themself up as a woman and wished to be addressed as a woman but you knew that Sarah had been Sam and still had a man-winkle... would you insist on referring to Sarah as "he", "him" etc.?

 

[BobK]

Do you not see what's courageous about being publicly trans, and the de facto public face of transgender people? Considering that even on GTP, one of the most civil discussion sites I've ever seen, trans women are called "he", and people still call her Bruce?

That's the point, that even on a site like this which is basically as good as it gets on the internet, people still can't just use the name and gender she identifies as. This is as good as it gets. I don't even want to imagine how bad it gets.

I'll concede that some small smidgeon of courage may be involved. But enough to get an award for? Give me a break.

 

[Spurgy 777]

So to clarify; if you worked with Sarah who was overtly feminine, who dressed as a woman, made themself up as a woman and wished to be addressed as a woman but you knew that Sarah had been Sam and still had a man-winkle... would you insist on referring to Sarah as "he", "him" etc.?

No, because although it would technically be correct English to refer to Sarah as him, I would be a bit of an arse to insist on using correct language around him if I knew it upset/offended him. But when referring to someone I don't know and who isn't part of the conversation I'm going to use correct terms.

A bit hypocritical yes, but it avoids unnecessarily upsetting someone.

 

[TenEightyOne]

No, because although it would technically be correct English to refer to Sarah as him, I would be a bit of an arse to insist on using correct language around him if I knew it upset/offended him. But when referring to someone I don't know and who isn't part of the conversation I'm going to use correct terms.

Except it wouldn't be correct as you refer socially to people by gender. At least that's the social norm. Do you see where the important difference lies between anatomical sex and social gender?

 

[Joel]

People have a hard time with change, it's why people write last years date after the calender turns, sign their pre-marriage name, write their old address/phone number, etc...

Sure there are probably some that mean it maliciously, but most people are probably stuck in their old habit, it's human nature and it's hardly fair to shame people over it.

You don't think "he's still a he", "brucie's expensive masquerade", "a well endowed drag queen" and sarcastically calling her "he/she or Bruce/Caitlyn" is malicious?

 

[Spurgy 777]

Except it wouldn't be correct as you refer socially to people by gender. At least that's the social norm. Do you see where the important difference lies between anatomical sex and social gender?

I don't refer to people based on gender though. In your Sarah example, my decision to refer to him as she would have nothing to do with his gender, the only thing I take into consideration is what he wants to be referred to as. Same applies to everyone else, if anyone, regardless of gender, wants me to refer to them using he/she incorrectly, i.e. using the opposite word for their sex, I will be happy to oblige as it requires little effort on my part and will make them feel more comfortable.

However I feel no obligation to use terms incorrectly when I don't know the person and I'm not talking to them.

 

[Famine]

Still, how far should people be willing to go to appease someone who believes that their identity doesn't necessarily match their physical appearance?

Should we adopt a gender neutral pronoun like "xe/xer/xim" (and "xe/xem/xyr") if someone believes that they are gender-fluid, non-binary, or genderfree? Should we come up with new pronouns to describe individuals who are wolf-kin, squirrel-kin, or any other otherkin?

And then there's this asshole:

She's white, but "identifies as" black.


Where's the line? If' we're okay with saying that people who've had cosmetic surgery to look like the gender in their head are actually the second gender, surely we should be okay with saying that people who have cosmetic surgery to look like a cat actually are cats? If not, why not?

 

[DK]

I'd imagine that identifying as a different ethnicity to your own is a completely different kettle of fish to identifying as identifying as feminine/masculine despite having been born with male/female genitalia.

 

[Omnis]

Still, how far should people be willing to go to appease someone who believes that their identity doesn't necessarily match their physical appearance?

Should we adopt a gender neutral pronoun like "xe/xer/xim" (and "xe/xem/xyr") if someone believes that they are gender-fluid, non-binary, or genderfree? Should we come up with new pronouns to describe individuals who are wolf-kin, squirrel-kin, or any other otherkin?

And then there's this asshole:

​

She's white, but "identifies as" black.


Where's the line? If' we're okay with saying that people who've had cosmetic surgery to look like the gender in their head are actually the second gender, surely we should be okay with saying that people who have cosmetic surgery to look like a cat actually are cats? If not, why not?

Because that's racis.

 

[Famine]

I'd imagine that identifying as a different ethnicity to your own is a completely different kettle of fish to identifying as identifying as feminine/masculine despite having been born with male/female genitalia.

In both cases they are the belief that what your genes are manifesting as - your phenotype - is not what you are. Each is just the production, or absence of production, of a single protein (testosterone and melanin).

I see zero reason to laud gender identity issues or cosmetic gender surgery that should not be repeated to race identity issues or cosmetic racial surgery. Or species identity issues and cosmetic species surgery.

Similarly, if we're going to insist that people should call others by the pronoun they request to be called in the case of transgendered people, we can't object to calling others by the pronoun they request when they're genderfluid, non-binary, genderqueer or genderfree - or otherkin.

If Caitlyn Jenner is a "she" to you as a result of their preferred pronoun and cosmetic alteration to superficially (and externally) resemble a female, you cannot deride those who insist on xe/xer/xim pronouns.

 

[FoolKiller]

People have a hard time with change, it's why people write last years date after the calender turns, sign their pre-marriage name, write their old address/phone number, etc...

Sure there are probably some that mean it maliciously, but most people are probably stuck in their old habit, it's human nature and it's hardly fair to shame people over it.

There is a difference between, "Oops, I wrote 2014 again, let me fix that," and, "I don't care what you say the year is, I am writing 2014 anyway."

It is one thing to be talking about someone transgender and accidentally call them by their genetic pronoun. It is another thing to make it blatantly obvious that you are purposefully ignoring that they identify as the opposite gender and wish people around them would recognize that.

And while I get that some people will associate the anatomy to the gender, would you also keep showing a gay male straight porn, pointing out hot chicks, etc? The other thought is if you met someone after a gender transition, never knew they were transgendered, and then found out years later. Would you suddenly switch pronouns or would the way you identify them decide the pronouns you use? I wonder how many would view Caitlyn Jenner if they never knew of Bruce Jenner.

 

[Tornado]

You don't think "he's still a he", "brucie's expensive masquerade", "a well endowed drag queen" and sarcastically calling her "he/she or Bruce/Caitlyn" is malicious?

No, no, yes and no.

 

[DK]

Honestly, I had no idea that xe/xer/xim were gender-neutral pronouns until I looked them up, and I really couldn't care less. Most of the time if I ever read an article interviewing transgender people (I remember the BBC writing one about transgender children in the past year) they say something along the lines of "I knew from a very young age that I was born in the wrong body" - I can't say the same for "otherkin".

 

[Joel]

No, no, yes and no.

I'll give you the last one, but what's the difference between the first 3? The first three are all essentially saying that Caitlyn isn't actually a woman, but just dressing and acting as one. Why is calling her a drag queen malicious, but calling her transition an expensive masquerade or saying "he's still a he" isn't? It's certainly more harsh to say "well endowed drag queen", but to me the underlying meaning is pretty much the same, the intent is to diminish her transition as nothing more than a facade which isn't worthy of our respect.

I point those out as malicious with thinking along the same lines as FK's last post.

There is a difference between, "Oops, I wrote 2014 again, let me fix that," and, "I don't care what you say the year is, I am writing 2014 anyway."

It is one thing to be talking about someone transgender and accidentally call them by their genetic pronoun. It is another thing to make it blatantly obvious that you are purposefully ignoring that they identify as the opposite gender and wish people around them would recognize that.

If people make an honest mistake or ask an unknowingly rude question it's one thing. I have a really hard time believing that "he's still a he" or "an expensive masquerade" are said in good faith as a way to gain further understanding, or out of an honest mistake.

 

[Famine]

Honestly, I had no idea that xe/xer/xim were gender-neutral pronouns until I looked them up, and I really couldn't care less.

Then you should also not care less about calling Caitlyn Jenner "Bruce" or "he".

Most of the time if I ever read an article interviewing transgender people (I remember the BBC writing one about transgender children in the past year) they say something along the lines of "I knew from a very young age that I was born in the wrong body" - I can't say the same for "otherkin".

How many otherkin* people have you seen interviewed?

There are people who insist that the standard two gender norm isn't appropriate for them and they knew at a young age that they were neither male nor female - or both sometimes. They prefer genderless pronouns because they don't feel that gender is appropriate to them.


Like Bruce/Caitlyn and many other transgendered people, these people feel that the body that their genome has created for them is not the one they have in their head. There is literally no difference, yet people will happily dismiss otherkin and things like genderqueer and pangender as ludicrous fads or fantasy while praising Bruce/Caitlyn for bravery and demand you accept their cosmetic change as an actual change of gender along with appropriate name and pronouns.

This seems oddly contradictory to me.


*Otherkin specifically refers to people who feel that they are not human. Usually this has furry connotations - wolf-kin and squirrel-kin being pretty common - but it was first described by people who felt themselves to be elf-kin or dragon-kin...

 

[wfooshee]

You don't think "he's still a he", "brucie's expensive masquerade", "a well endowed drag queen" and sarcastically calling her "he/she or Bruce/Caitlyn" is malicious?

No, no, no, and no.

It's not a "she," it's a "he." What it wants to be is completely and totally irrelevant to me.

I want to be rich. Going out and saying I'm rich hasn't made it so, which is quite disappointing. And dang it, no one is respecting my wishes, either, and talking about me as "that rich guy from Florida." It's really pissing me off that you guys don't respect me any more than that.

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT UTTERLY RIDICULOUS CONCEPT AND BRUCE JENNER'S UTTERLY RIDICULOUS CONCEPT.

 

[TenEightyOne]

No, no, no, and no.

It's not a "she," it's a "he." What it wants to be is completely and totally irrelevant to me.

I want to be rich. Going out and saying I'm rich hasn't made it so, which is quite disappointing. And dang it, no one is respecting my wishes, either, and talking about me as "that rich guy from Florida." It's really pissing me off that you guys don't respect me any more than that.

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT UTTERLY RIDICULOUS CONCEPT AND BRUCE JENNER'S UTTERLY RIDICULOUS CONCEPT.

Have you tried looking rich, acting rich, and living the life of a rich person? That's probably where you went wrong.

 

[DK]

@Famine, you have a point, I have never seen an otherkin person being interviewed, just an Internet meme spawned by a teenage boy saying in a documentary that "on all levels except physical, I am a wolf." Hell, I even searched for "otherkin" on /r/askreddit just now, and even there there's not many [Serious]-tagged threads that are discussing it - even then, those threads rarely hit double-digits in the number of comments they have. One poster suggested that otherkin is a sort of coping mechanism for trauma, as an alternate persona for themselves that wouldn't have the flaws they see in themselves.

 

[Famine]

One poster suggested that otherkin is a sort of coping mechanism for trauma, as an alternate persona for themselves that wouldn't have the flaws they see in themselves.

That's also been suggested for gender dysphoria.


And actually for homosexuality too.