How many teachers use Mx?

[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.

I think your gender is whether you feel yourself to be male or female. I don’t think that wearing makeup makes you a woman on the inside. I don’t think wearing pants and having short hair makes you a man. If you believe otherwise, I’m beginning to see why people are so confused about these things.

[Anonymous]

Here are some just-googled definitions of 'gender':

https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/48642.html
"Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, expressions and identities of girls, women, boys, men, and gender diverse people. It influences how people perceive themselves and each other, how they act and interact, and the distribution of power and resources in society. Gender identity is not confined to a binary (girl/woman, boy/man) nor is it static; it exists along a continuum and can change over time. There is considerable diversity in how individuals and groups understand, experience and express gender through the roles they take on, the expectations placed on them, relations with others and the complex ways that gender is institutionalized in society."


Or maybe wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here are some just-googled definitions of 'gender':

https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/48642.html
"Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, expressions and identities of girls, women, boys, men, and gender diverse people. It influences how people perceive themselves and each other, how they act and interact, and the distribution of power and resources in society. Gender identity is not confined to a binary (girl/woman, boy/man) nor is it static; it exists along a continuum and can change over time. There is considerable diversity in how individuals and groups understand, experience and express gender through the roles they take on, the expectations placed on them, relations with others and the complex ways that gender is institutionalized in society."


Or maybe wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender

The wiki page doesn't help PP who thinks that gender is who is wearing makeup and when.

"Gender includes the social, psychological, cultural and behavioral aspects of being a man, woman, or other gender identity.[1][2] Depending on the context, this may include sex-based social structures (i.e. gender roles) and gender expression.[3][4][5] Most cultures use a gender binary, in which gender is divided into two categories, and people are considered part of one or the other (boys/men and girls/women);[6][7][8] those who are outside these groups may fall under the umbrella term non-binary. Some societies have specific genders besides "man" and "woman", such as the hijras of South Asia; these are often referred to as third genders (and fourth genders, etc.). Most scholars agree that gender is a central characteristic for social organization.[9]

"In the mid-20th century, a terminological distinction in modern English (known as the sex and gender distinction) between biological sex and gender began to develop in the academic areas of psychology, sexology, and feminism. Before the mid-20th century, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories.[3][1] In the 1970s, feminist theory embraced the concept of a distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender. Most contemporary social scientists,[10][11][12] behavioral scientists and biologists,[13] many legal systems and government bodies,[14] and intergovernmental agencies such as the WHO,[15] make a distinction between gender and sex."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think your gender is whether you feel yourself to be male or female. I don’t think that wearing makeup makes you a woman on the inside. I don’t think wearing pants and having short hair makes you a man. If you believe otherwise, I’m beginning to see why people are so confused about these things.

So maybe you are confused, because you are defining words in a different way than everyone else?

You think that gender solely is about how you think about yourself in relationship to biological aspects of sex (hormones/chromosomes/genitals)? I guess that's part of it, but seems very narrow. There's a whole lot of other things that people would use to characterize gender, and those are related to interactions between people, not just what's going on in our heads.

Also, are you saying, then, that gender is just how we think/feel about our sex, and is therefore is solely related to feelings? I mean, I can get behind this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are some just-googled definitions of 'gender':

https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/48642.html
"Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, expressions and identities of girls, women, boys, men, and gender diverse people. It influences how people perceive themselves and each other, how they act and interact, and the distribution of power and resources in society. Gender identity is not confined to a binary (girl/woman, boy/man) nor is it static; it exists along a continuum and can change over time. There is considerable diversity in how individuals and groups understand, experience and express gender through the roles they take on, the expectations placed on them, relations with others and the complex ways that gender is institutionalized in society."


Or maybe wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender

The wiki page doesn't help PP who thinks that gender is who is wearing makeup and when.

"Gender includes the social, psychological, cultural and behavioral aspects of being a man, woman, or other gender identity.[1][2] Depending on the context, this may include sex-based social structures (i.e. gender roles) and gender expression.[3][4][5] Most cultures use a gender binary, in which gender is divided into two categories, and people are considered part of one or the other (boys/men and girls/women);[6][7][8] those who are outside these groups may fall under the umbrella term non-binary. Some societies have specific genders besides "man" and "woman", such as the hijras of South Asia; these are often referred to as third genders (and fourth genders, etc.). Most scholars agree that gender is a central characteristic for social organization.[9]

"In the mid-20th century, a terminological distinction in modern English (known as the sex and gender distinction) between biological sex and gender began to develop in the academic areas of psychology, sexology, and feminism. Before the mid-20th century, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories.[3][1] In the 1970s, feminist theory embraced the concept of a distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender. Most contemporary social scientists,[10][11][12] behavioral scientists and biologists,[13] many legal systems and government bodies,[14] and intergovernmental agencies such as the WHO,[15] make a distinction between gender and sex."

I'm cool if we are all agreeing that gender is in the head, and has nothing to do with appearance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think your gender is whether you feel yourself to be male or female. I don’t think that wearing makeup makes you a woman on the inside. I don’t think wearing pants and having short hair makes you a man. If you believe otherwise, I’m beginning to see why people are so confused about these things.

So maybe you are confused, because you are defining words in a different way than everyone else?

You think that gender solely is about how you think about yourself in relationship to biological aspects of sex (hormones/chromosomes/genitals)? I guess that's part of it, but seems very narrow. There's a whole lot of other things that people would use to characterize gender, and those are related to interactions between people, not just what's going on in our heads.

Also, are you saying, then, that gender is just how we think/feel about our sex, and is therefore is solely related to feelings? I mean, I can get behind this.

What I believe is that if someone does something outside the norm, like a guy wearing makeup, but does not believe himself to be a woman…his gender is male.

Do you believe that if someone steps outside of these very rigid set of rules, that their gender changes? Like if a little girl plays with trucks…is she of the male gender now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think your gender is whether you feel yourself to be male or female. I don’t think that wearing makeup makes you a woman on the inside. I don’t think wearing pants and having short hair makes you a man. If you believe otherwise, I’m beginning to see why people are so confused about these things.

So maybe you are confused, because you are defining words in a different way than everyone else?

You think that gender solely is about how you think about yourself in relationship to biological aspects of sex (hormones/chromosomes/genitals)? I guess that's part of it, but seems very narrow. There's a whole lot of other things that people would use to characterize gender, and those are related to interactions between people, not just what's going on in our heads.

Also, are you saying, then, that gender is just how we think/feel about our sex, and is therefore is solely related to feelings? I mean, I can get behind this.

What I believe is that if someone does something outside the norm, like a guy wearing makeup, but does not believe himself to be a woman…his gender is male.

Do you believe that if someone steps outside of these very rigid set of rules, that their gender changes? Like if a little girl plays with trucks…is she of the male gender now?

Male is not a gender.

I think that a person wearing makeup and a beard could say they would prefer the honorific "Mx." and that would be fine, regardless of their other characteristics. Would you be ok with "Mx." for the person you've described?

I think where we are disagreeing is perhaps about self-identification (which I support) and how things are organized around a gender binary (at least presently in the U.S., for the most part). I think you see gender solely about self-identification? Yes? A person with long hair in a dress wanting to be called "sir" and identifying as a man would be ok in your book? If so, I agree.

[Anonymous]

**to add: If beard-and-lipstick ASKED you to use the honorific "Mx" for them, would you? Not suggesting you assume.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think your gender is whether you feel yourself to be male or female. I don’t think that wearing makeup makes you a woman on the inside. I don’t think wearing pants and having short hair makes you a man. If you believe otherwise, I’m beginning to see why people are so confused about these things.

So maybe you are confused, because you are defining words in a different way than everyone else?

You think that gender solely is about how you think about yourself in relationship to biological aspects of sex (hormones/chromosomes/genitals)? I guess that's part of it, but seems very narrow. There's a whole lot of other things that people would use to characterize gender, and those are related to interactions between people, not just what's going on in our heads.

Also, are you saying, then, that gender is just how we think/feel about our sex, and is therefore is solely related to feelings? I mean, I can get behind this.

What I believe is that if someone does something outside the norm, like a guy wearing makeup, but does not believe himself to be a woman…his gender is male.

Do you believe that if someone steps outside of these very rigid set of rules, that their gender changes? Like if a little girl plays with trucks…is she of the male gender now?

Male is not a gender.

I think that a person wearing makeup and a beard could say they would prefer the honorific "Mx." and that would be fine, regardless of their other characteristics. Would you be ok with "Mx." for the person you've described?

I think where we are disagreeing is perhaps about self-identification (which I support) and how things are organized around a gender binary (at least presently in the U.S., for the most part). I think you see gender solely about self-identification? Yes? A person with long hair in a dress wanting to be called "sir" and identifying as a man would be ok in your book? If so, I agree.

PP here. Yes, this is how I feel…so I guess we agree. I can’t seem to find the conciliatory handshake emoji, but I would post it if I could 👍

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think your gender is whether you feel yourself to be male or female. I don’t think that wearing makeup makes you a woman on the inside. I don’t think wearing pants and having short hair makes you a man. If you believe otherwise, I’m beginning to see why people are so confused about these things.

So maybe you are confused, because you are defining words in a different way than everyone else?

You think that gender solely is about how you think about yourself in relationship to biological aspects of sex (hormones/chromosomes/genitals)? I guess that's part of it, but seems very narrow. There's a whole lot of other things that people would use to characterize gender, and those are related to interactions between people, not just what's going on in our heads.

Also, are you saying, then, that gender is just how we think/feel about our sex, and is therefore is solely related to feelings? I mean, I can get behind this.

What I believe is that if someone does something outside the norm, like a guy wearing makeup, but does not believe himself to be a woman…his gender is male.

Do you believe that if someone steps outside of these very rigid set of rules, that their gender changes? Like if a little girl plays with trucks…is she of the male gender now?

Male is not a gender.

I think that a person wearing makeup and a beard could say they would prefer the honorific "Mx." and that would be fine, regardless of their other characteristics. Would you be ok with "Mx." for the person you've described?

I think where we are disagreeing is perhaps about self-identification (which I support) and how things are organized around a gender binary (at least presently in the U.S., for the most part). I think you see gender solely about self-identification? Yes? A person with long hair in a dress wanting to be called "sir" and identifying as a man would be ok in your book? If so, I agree.

PP here. Yes, this is how I feel…so I guess we agree. I can’t seem to find the conciliatory handshake emoji, but I would post it if I could 👍

High fives!

[Anonymous]

We don’t come up with new ways to classify cars and trucks just because of the El Camino.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think your gender is whether you feel yourself to be male or female. I don’t think that wearing makeup makes you a woman on the inside. I don’t think wearing pants and having short hair makes you a man. If you believe otherwise, I’m beginning to see why people are so confused about these things.

So maybe you are confused, because you are defining words in a different way than everyone else?

You think that gender solely is about how you think about yourself in relationship to biological aspects of sex (hormones/chromosomes/genitals)? I guess that's part of it, but seems very narrow. There's a whole lot of other things that people would use to characterize gender, and those are related to interactions between people, not just what's going on in our heads.

Also, are you saying, then, that gender is just how we think/feel about our sex, and is therefore is solely related to feelings? I mean, I can get behind this.

What I believe is that if someone does something outside the norm, like a guy wearing makeup, but does not believe himself to be a woman…his gender is male.

Do you believe that if someone steps outside of these very rigid set of rules, that their gender changes? Like if a little girl plays with trucks…is she of the male gender now?

Male is not a gender.

I think that a person wearing makeup and a beard could say they would prefer the honorific "Mx." and that would be fine, regardless of their other characteristics. Would you be ok with "Mx." for the person you've described?

I think where we are disagreeing is perhaps about self-identification (which I support) and how things are organized around a gender binary (at least presently in the U.S., for the most part). I think you see gender solely about self-identification? Yes? A person with long hair in a dress wanting to be called "sir" and identifying as a man would be ok in your book? If so, I agree.

PP here. Yes, this is how I feel…so I guess we agree. I can’t seem to find the conciliatory handshake emoji, but I would post it if I could 👍

High fives!

🙌

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We don’t come up with new ways to classify cars and trucks just because of the El Camino.

We did with the SUV, though.

And apparently it's just one guy in Michigan who defines what type a car is, for EPA standards.

[Anonymous]

One is too many.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One is too many.

Way too many, especially for little kids who’d never otherwise care.