How many teachers use Mx?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

DP. Gender was invented, back in the day, based upon physical characteristics. And that is still the case. You are on the nurture side of the debate when nature controls the majority of behaviors, preferences, etc.

Is the increase in non-binarism due to endocrine disruptors in plastics, other chemicals or hormones in our SAD lifestyle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

DP. Gender was invented, back in the day, based upon physical characteristics. And that is still the case. You are on the nurture side of the debate when nature controls the majority of behaviors, preferences, etc.

Is the increase in non-binarism due to endocrine disruptors in plastics, other chemicals or hormones in our SAD lifestyle?

So you agree that gender is invented, that your gender is invented, and yet it is real. Glad we share that perspective. That puts to bed the question of whether Mx. is 'real' or not.

Why is the use of Mx. erasing women?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

When I call someone “Mr” or “Mrs” though I’m not talking about their sex, I’m just signaling respect and politeness. Certainly gender as much as sex if not more, but most importantly I’m calling them whatever is called for by the social situation and then whatever they tell me they prefer if it’s not that. It’s not about their sex organs. Mx is easy accommodation that I’m happy to make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

NP. You’re talking about historical modes of dress, not gender. Those men were of the male sex, and male gender. Wearing makeup and a wig does not change their gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

NP. You’re talking about historical modes of dress, not gender. Those men were of the male sex, and male gender. Wearing makeup and a wig does not change their gender.

LOL. Gender is norms, behaviors, expressions (like dress), roles, etc. Gender has changed over time. Roles have changed over time. If you are saying, as I suspect you are, that gender is connected to biology, then please tell me how gender has changed over time without an attendant change in biology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

NP. You’re talking about historical modes of dress, not gender. Those men were of the male sex, and male gender. Wearing makeup and a wig does not change their gender.

LOL. Gender is norms, behaviors, expressions (like dress), roles, etc. Gender has changed over time. Roles have changed over time. If you are saying, as I suspect you are, that gender is connected to biology, then please tell me how gender has changed over time without an attendant change in biology.

DP. Gender hasn't changed over time (or at least not until the past couple years). There has been men and there has been women. In different cultures, the degree that men and women can dress (women wearing pants or men wearing skirts for example) or do (women CEO or breadwinner and SAHD for example) the other gender has varied. For a brief period, we tried to separate sex and gender but we have finally given up and have merged them again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

NP. You’re talking about historical modes of dress, not gender. Those men were of the male sex, and male gender. Wearing makeup and a wig does not change their gender.

LOL. Gender is norms, behaviors, expressions (like dress), roles, etc. Gender has changed over time. Roles have changed over time. If you are saying, as I suspect you are, that gender is connected to biology, then please tell me how gender has changed over time without an attendant change in biology.

DP. Gender hasn't changed over time (or at least not until the past couple years). There has been men and there has been women. In different cultures, the degree that men and women can dress (women wearing pants or men wearing skirts for example) or do (women CEO or breadwinner and SAHD for example) the other gender has varied. For a brief period, we tried to separate sex and gender but we have finally given up and have merged them again.

LOL. "Gender hasn't changed over time". Sir/Ma'am, I have to now believe that you are a troll. Maybe you have no concept of history, or all of the reports on how gender roles have changed, or or or....?

You can't with a straight face argue that gender hasn't changed over time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

NP. You’re talking about historical modes of dress, not gender. Those men were of the male sex, and male gender. Wearing makeup and a wig does not change their gender.

LOL. Gender is norms, behaviors, expressions (like dress), roles, etc. Gender has changed over time. Roles have changed over time. If you are saying, as I suspect you are, that gender is connected to biology, then please tell me how gender has changed over time without an attendant change in biology.

No, actually I’m not saying that. What I’m saying is that wearing a wig does not change your gender. Wearing a dress or nail polish or makeup is not the difference between the male and female genders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None. And I doubt this happened, either. Sounds similar to the FCPS sub thread. Is this the new thing? Spamming forums with this seemingly innocuous question just to stir stuff up?

YES! 1000%

Exactly.

(“But I was just doing thank you notes!”)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

NP. You’re talking about historical modes of dress, not gender. Those men were of the male sex, and male gender. Wearing makeup and a wig does not change their gender.

LOL. Gender is norms, behaviors, expressions (like dress), roles, etc. Gender has changed over time. Roles have changed over time. If you are saying, as I suspect you are, that gender is connected to biology, then please tell me how gender has changed over time without an attendant change in biology.

DP. Gender hasn't changed over time (or at least not until the past couple years). There has been men and there has been women. In different cultures, the degree that men and women can dress (women wearing pants or men wearing skirts for example) or do (women CEO or breadwinner and SAHD for example) the other gender has varied. For a brief period, we tried to separate sex and gender but we have finally given up and have merged them again.

LOL. "Gender hasn't changed over time". Sir/Ma'am, I have to now believe that you are a troll. Maybe you have no concept of history, or all of the reports on how gender roles have changed, or or or....?

You can't with a straight face argue that gender hasn't changed over time.

Someone isn't arguing in good faith. And it's not me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

NP. You’re talking about historical modes of dress, not gender. Those men were of the male sex, and male gender. Wearing makeup and a wig does not change their gender.

LOL. Gender is norms, behaviors, expressions (like dress), roles, etc. Gender has changed over time. Roles have changed over time. If you are saying, as I suspect you are, that gender is connected to biology, then please tell me how gender has changed over time without an attendant change in biology.

No, actually I’m not saying that. What I’m saying is that wearing a wig does not change your gender. Wearing a dress or nail polish or makeup is not the difference between the male and female genders.

Please provide your definition of "gender". Because I don't think you are using the term as it is understood by most everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Male and female aren’t “genders” - they’re biology, which is “real” in a way that
feelings about invented genders are not - sure, they may “feel real” to the person and sure, the person themself is real, but come on, this distinction is very simple

We aren't talking about biology, we are talking about gender.

All gender is invented. Your gender is invented. I bet you feel like your invented gender is 'real'.

I’m talking about biology, which is what Mr and Ms and Mrs referred to for like centuries, up until about a year ago - and what they still mean in the eyes of almost everyone

If you get hit by a car today the medical examiner will not know your “gender” - just your sex - so you tell me which one is more real

This whole conversation is about a new use of honorifics that, unlike what preceded ir, is detached from biology

You don’t seem ESL so I assume you are just being obtuse to troll me - successfully, I guess!

All gender, the thing we are talking about, varies according to time period and culture, and seems only very loosely attached to chromosomes, hormones, or genitals (biology). Men used to wear wigs and makeup. That was a standard. Was their biology dictating that then? Why do they not do it now? Has their biology significantly changed? Women used to not wear pants (much). Now it's standard. Doesn't really seem to flow from biology.

Also, "Ms." as an honorific is fairly new (google says early 1900s). It is not "centuries old". Fascinatingly, we have been able to adopt new honorifics over time.

NP. You’re talking about historical modes of dress, not gender. Those men were of the male sex, and male gender. Wearing makeup and a wig does not change their gender.

LOL. Gender is norms, behaviors, expressions (like dress), roles, etc. Gender has changed over time. Roles have changed over time. If you are saying, as I suspect you are, that gender is connected to biology, then please tell me how gender has changed over time without an attendant change in biology.

No, actually I’m not saying that. What I’m saying is that wearing a wig does not change your gender. Wearing a dress or nail polish or makeup is not the difference between the male and female genders.

Please provide your definition of "gender". Because I don't think you are using the term as it is understood by most everyone else.

DP. She is using the term as it is understood by everyone else but you.