UniLang

Posted: **2015-10-02, 6:01**

Koko wrote:Kay, so I saw a few videos for kpop, and a lot of male kpop artists look really androgynous. Is this the style for male Koreans? (and do they see it as androgynous, or simply as male, I wonder?)

This is probly the wrong thread for this question actually. :whistle:

Maybe the Random Thread…

Posted: **2016-04-11, 9:27**

razlem wrote:
Lauren wrote:You should only use the pronouns that the person has indicated you should use.

They is a catch-all though. While it would be wrong to misgender them (i.e. using apronoun that has a gender assigned to it), "they" has no gender attached and can be used in place of any other. But if they've expressed a preference for a specific pronoun, you'd use that first.

How about Actually having a proper gendered neutral pronoun — we could base it on he, on it or on they. Or we could borrow from a different language, this would actually be quite trivial to do.
People would get used to it quite quickly.

Posted: **2016-04-15, 18:51**

RubyH wrote:
razlem wrote:
Lauren wrote:You should only use the pronouns that the person has indicated you should use.

They is a catch-all though. While it would be wrong to misgender them (i.e. using apronoun that has a gender assigned to it), "they" has no gender attached and can be used in place of any other. But if they've expressed a preference for a specific pronoun, you'd use that first.

How about Actually having a proper gendered neutral pronoun — we could base it on he, on it or on they. Or we could borrow from a different language, this would actually be quite trivial to do.
People would get used to it quite quickly.

There are people who promote this, but it hasn't been very successful in English, and I believe part of the reason for this is that "they" already exists and is gender-neutral.

Posted: **2016-04-16, 1:10**

vijayjohn wrote:
RubyH wrote:
razlem wrote:
Lauren wrote:You should only use the pronouns that the person has indicated you should use.

They is a catch-all though. While it would be wrong to misgender them (i.e. using apronoun that has a gender assigned to it), "they" has no gender attached and can be used in place of any other. But if they've expressed a preference for a specific pronoun, you'd use that first.

How about Actually having a proper gendered neutral pronoun — we could base it on he, on it or on they. Or we could borrow from a different language, this would actually be quite trivial to do.
People would get used to it quite quickly.

There are people who promote this, but it hasn't been very successful in English, and I believe part of the reason for this is that "they" already exists and is gender-neutral.

I think it's more of the culture contains an element of ‘we want to make a point about how we express gender in our language.’

Posted: **2016-04-16, 22:12**

dEhiN wrote:To be honest, I think now that I'm starting to separate out gender from biological sex, I need to find or figure out a defintion of gender that works for me. I looked this up recently, and most of what I found basically gave the idea that gender is a mix of societal and cultural beliefs, attitudes, and ideas associated with a particular biological sex. This definition is even used by the APA (American Psychological Association) which publishes the DSM and which Canada, even though we have our own version of the APA, uses.

The American Psychiatric Association publishes the DSM, actually, but I would imagine both would have a similar operational definition of gender. The problems with it is that it doesn't capture the psychological experience of gender as innate, and it also doesn't explain how genderqueer people fit into that framework.

Posted: **2016-04-18, 11:14**

let me start with saying

as for either sex or gender being a societal construct,

This is a use mention error best case the very best, Sex or gender however you wish aren't fundamentally different.
however both Gender/Sex however we deem to make the distinction are biologically based and certainly programmed into our species, HUMANS ARE SEXUALLY DIMORPHIC. \
gender // sex as it is perceived plays a huge role in things like sexual attraction.

Asides how exactly you wish to apply this distinction as consistent with how each of use the word Etymology seams important and their is nothing in the definition as far as I can tell that presumes that it is somehow socially constructed the word is even used quite similarly in the context of grammar where by to be very clear grammar isn't a social construct, Grammar is a property of language, which isn't socially constructed it is transmitted culturally and their is a psychological, historic, biological especially neurological, even anatomic basis for language.

Besides in my quite frankly etymological evidence ought to be a large degree be important in how we define such words, for 3 reasons:
1, Definitions are accepted as citing Etymology as part of their definition.
2, Words to give example those borrowed from latin or greek or other languages take their meaning etymologically, even though we may assign them new meanings.
3, Quite frankly using etymology helps us ground definitions and, gives a verifiable account of how we came to use a particular structure in such a peculiar way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ssigT1dOWU
One notice how apparent isolation for such a long time with clear,
even if it had common origin it'd be from a very long time ago as for areal distribution it's not perfect, and also I would like to maybe quite pedantically point out a bit of cultural relativism how cultural influences get incorporated borrowed depends on the culture so yeah. different rates of change and it differs even if it means it slows down and speeds up depending on various factors.

To clarify I’m not saying social constructs are imagined,
in anyway but I don't think ones using the term correctly,
if one doesn't consider the above as maybe evidence that it's
in no way a socially constructed even by any other name but rather
maybe it's a Product of biology, and not sociology.

Posted: **2016-04-18, 16:44**

RubyH wrote:[gender is not socially constructed and is the same as sex]

Bruh, no.

Posted: **2016-04-19, 20:03**

All the evidence you need that gender is socially constructed is that we were just mainsplained to by a woman.

Posted: **2016-04-19, 22:09**

I am a heterosexual male, and I'm also monotheistgender - that is, a gender specific of a person whose life is - and tries to be - in relation to God, as it is described in the Bible and Gospels.

Posted: **2016-04-20, 8:22**

Even if gender is biological (and it partly is) that still doesn't make it the same thing as sex. The Latin meaning of gender definitely doesn't matter in English; we use fucked-up etymologies for things all the time. It's called semantic drift.

Posted: **2016-04-20, 16:49**

mōdgethanc wrote:Even if gender is biological (and it partly is) that still doesn't make it the same thing as sex. The Latin meaning of gender definitely doesn't matter in English; we use fucked-up etymologies for things all the time. It's called semantic drift.

And the argument that we should "go back to the roots" of word to explain its present meaning is a specific kind of informal fallacy known as the etymological fallacy.

Moreover, it's particularly odd to invoke the Latin etymology of genus in order make an essentialist argument for binary gender given that, in a linguistic context, the most common division was tripartite (although more complex schemes exist, e.g. masculine, feminine, neuter, common (dual or trial), and epicene).

Posted: **2016-08-29, 9:14**

What's funny about the "gender and sex are the same" argument is that there would still be more than two genders if we were to define gender by sex — which is defined by genitalia (or chromosomes, but how can you see one's chromosomes?? A very impractical definition). There are gentalia other than the penis and vagina that are recognized and relatively common. Not to mention intersex people exist?? How would expect them to identify? "Pick one??" Nah.

Anyways, on me: So a while ago I went through a stage where i didn't really care about my gender and stuff, and barely felt any connection at all to anything gender related. But after interacting with a lot more nonbinary and trans people, I am much more comfortable with identifying with gender (but you know, it's still not a very large part of my identy, not like with others). I still identify as demiboy.

I'm also wondering if I can identify as two-spirit. I fit the being-First-Nations criterion, but a lot of people define two-spirit as being both masculine and feminine ("having both a masculine soul and a feminine soul"). Yet another minority say it's any gender that is "other" (for lack of a better term). So do demigenders* fit the bill even if, in my case, the part of me that isn't male isn't necessarily feminine?

I'm sure i'm asking the wrong audience here, but who else can i?

* well, any NB gender in general i guess where one part is not masculine/feminine

Posted: **2016-08-29, 16:34**

Obviously everyone should be forced to have a karyotype done at birth to determine their lifelong permanent fixed-in-stone identity as one of two Only True Pure Sexes and intersex people will just be euthanized and tossed into a dumpster behind the hospital.

Posted: **2016-08-29, 22:59**

Oh of course that's the only reasonable solution to avoid complete chaos!

( :lol:

)

Actually that would make for such a cool novel.

Posted: **2016-08-30, 3:27**

I just realized that's basically the plot of Divergent with elements of The Giver. YA paperback market, here I come!

Posted: **2016-08-30, 4:14**

I haven't read The Giver but yeah, that does sound a lot like Divergent.
(Ew, i just remembered i have English in the second semester… that's gonna suck)

Posted: **2016-08-30, 4:28**

mōdgethanc wrote:YA paperback market, here I come!

At first, I read "YA" as an alternative spelling of "YEAH." PAPERBACKS! FUCK YEAH! :lol:

Posted: **2016-08-30, 5:24**

Koko wrote:I haven't read The Giver but yeah, that does sound a lot like Divergent.
(Ew, i just remembered i have English in the second semester… that's gonna suck)

Unlike second-semester English, The Giver does not suck. Give it a read sometime.

Posted: **2016-08-30, 5:26**

Cool! I'll try and catch a copy… eventually.

Posted: **2016-09-02, 9:39**

Cree gender terms!!

Napêhkân interests me :hmm:

I wonder if a demiboy is technically a "fake male" ( :lol:

it sounds so weird in English), cause if ever i have to describe my gender in Cree, i would possibly use this, since I am not a trans woman. And since the meaning of ayahkwêw is debated, i'm not sure. And then if i fit the image of a napêhkân, i would love to be able to call myself two-spirit :3 Knowing my people, I'm sure there is flexibility in any of those terms (heck, they're not even that salient in traditional Cree culture (the terms)).

UniLang

Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread

Re: Gender thread