Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 > > > > The " gender norms " are a law given to us by the > patriarch. Since they > > are so obsessed that women and men MUST be > different ( or the men > > would be women), these stupid rules govern > society. Women are forced > > to get rail thin (female invisibility to make > fearful men more > > comfortable) > ---------Well, we *are* different..... the blessing comes in that we don't have to be ruled by those differences anymore, and have choices. Nanne ===== " Let's go get drunk on light again---it has the power to console. " -- Seurat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 >... My uncle learned how to sew by taking a sewing class at one of those >material stores. He told me the women encouraged him, supported him, >helped him out. Also, did you ever stop to think how many chefs are male? > >Men DISCOURAGE other men from taking these courses, saying sewing is > " woman's work " , or that guys that do that are " sissies " . Some of the handful of people at the pinnacle of the " teddy bear world " are men. Men who make teddy-bears. Men who sew well enough to get $1,000 for a single bear. There also are several very successful married couples (traditional man/woman marriages) who make and sell teddy bears. I have no idea whether any of the bear-making men took sewing or " Home Ec " at school. May depend on their age, more than anything else. Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 --- wrote: > > > > How does one pronounce those pronouns? Is the x > pronounced like a " z " > > as in the first x of Xerox? > > Yes. > > X is pronounced like Z. > > Xe rhymes with he. > > Xyr rhymes with her. > > Xem rhymes with them. > > > ----------And the point of doing that is.......? Nanne ===== " Let's go get drunk on light again---it has the power to console. " -- Seurat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 --- Jane Meyerding wrote: > >...Incidentally, what is the meaning of the > >term that has been used in reference to the fellow > in charge of > >Autreat? Does that mean " other " or...? > > Yes, it means " other. " Intersexual. > > If I were at work, I could give you the URL for > xyr [non-gendered pronoun form for his/her] web > site. > > Jane --------What is intersexual? Nanne > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 > > Yes. > > X is pronounced like Z. > > Xe rhymes with he. > > Xyr rhymes with her. > > Xem rhymes with them. > ----------And the point of doing that is.......? As I said earlier in this thread, Jim (a pseudonym) is intersexed. Born anatomically neither male nor female. It wouldn't make sense to call xem " he " or " she " as if xe were male or female, since xe is not. You can read more about intersexuality at: http://www.jimsinclair.org/ -- " Professional advocates talk about empowering their clients when they're actually, at best, acting on behalf of their clients' expressed interests and, at worst, making decisions of their own on behalf of a client whom they feel is not capable of making 'responsible' decisions " -Rae Unzicker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 > It wouldn't make sense to call > xem " he " or " she " as if xe were > male or female, since xe is not. Yes, and it's a matter of respect, to acknowledge xyr as the person xe is. Just as using Mr. or Mrs., or Sir or Madam would be pigeon-holing xyr into whichever appellation a person thought xe was, using gender specific pronouns regarding xym is a kind of violation of xyr individual rights. I understand that, but what I don't understand, (not bothered by, just don't understand), is why xe and others use the non-gender specific pronouns talking about others, who are obviously he's and she's. It just doesn't compute. Clay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 Hi, " Intersexual " is simply a more modern replacement for the term " hermaphrodite. " That is, a person who has the complete (or partial) reproductive organs of both sexes, someone who is genetically XY but externally male (androgen insensitivity syndrome) or someone who is a chromosonal mosaic (some cells are XX, some XY). Re: Multi-rant --- Jane Meyerding wrote: > >...Incidentally, what is the meaning of the > >term that has been used in reference to the fellow > in charge of > >Autreat? Does that mean " other " or...? > > Yes, it means " other. " Intersexual. > > If I were at work, I could give you the URL for > xyr [non-gendered pronoun form for his/her] web > site. > > Jane --------What is intersexual? Nanne > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 --- Clay wrote: > I understand that, but what I don't understand, (not > bothered by, just don't understand), is why xe and > others use the non-gender specific pronouns talking > about others, who are obviously he's and she's. It > just doesn't compute. > > Clay > ------If there is no leaning toward male or female, why is xe called " Jim " ? (I looked at that link, and still don't understand what intersexual is...is it hermaphroditism?) Nanne ===== " Let's go get drunk on light again---it has the power to console. " -- Seurat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 --- Jane Meyerding wrote: > Nanne wrote: > >--------What is intersexual? > > Androgynous. A body that has both typically male and > typically female characteristics. Neither one nor > the other. ---------sorry, this is confusing.... is it both, or is it neither? If it's both, why isn't it called hermaphroditism? Nanne ===== " Let's go get drunk on light again---it has the power to console. " -- Seurat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 Okay, thanks, Nanne --- Newstead wrote: > Hi, > > " Intersexual " is simply a more modern replacement > for the term " hermaphrodite. " That is, a person who > has the complete (or partial) reproductive organs of > both sexes, someone who is genetically XY but > externally male (androgen insensitivity syndrome) or > someone who is a chromosonal mosaic (some cells are > XX, some XY). > > > Re: Multi-rant > > > > --- Jane Meyerding wrote: > > >...Incidentally, what is the meaning of the > > >term that has been used in reference to the > fellow > > in charge of > > >Autreat? Does that mean " other " or...? > > > > Yes, it means " other. " Intersexual. > > > > If I were at work, I could give you the URL for > > xyr [non-gendered pronoun form for his/her] web > > site. > > > > Jane > > --------What is intersexual? > > Nanne > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 Hi, " Intersexed " is a broader term. Hermaphrodites used to be in two categories-- " true " hermaphrodites and " pseudo " -hermaphrodites. The first have the complete sexual organs of both sexes, while the second may have one complete set and one partial. " Intersexed " was adopted as an umbrella term to include those and some of the other conditions mentioned. Re: Multi-rant --- Jane Meyerding wrote: > Nanne wrote: > >--------What is intersexual? > > Androgynous. A body that has both typically male and > typically female characteristics. Neither one nor > the other. ---------sorry, this is confusing.... is it both, or is it neither? If it's both, why isn't it called hermaphroditism? Nanne ===== " Let's go get drunk on light again---it has the power to console. " -- Seurat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 > " Intersexual " is simply a more modern replacement for the term > " hermaphrodite. " That is, a person who has the complete (or partial) > reproductive organs of both sexes, someone who is genetically XY but > externally male (androgen insensitivity syndrome) or someone who is a > chromosonal mosaic (some cells are XX, some XY). Or in this case, someone who has *neither* set of reproductive organs. (Usually the ones you talk about get more attention, so the " neither " thing is not as well-known.) -- " Day after day, they take some brain away, then turn my face around to the far side of town. They tell me that it's real, then ask me how I feel. " - Bowie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 In a message dated 8/9/2003 11:35:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ceruleaniwa@... writes: > > --------What is intersexual? > > Nanne > it is both sexed. or having another sexual chromosomal abnormality XXY, XXX, XYY, and XXYY. and is a lost more common than peoples think, yes, as many go undiagnosed for most their lives. common reasons for identification is developmental delay and adolescence, yes, during puberty. from: <A HREF= " http://www.dor.kaiser.org/genetics/OurServices/XXY-XYY-XXXMain.html#FAQ2 " > http://www.dor.kaiser.org/genetics/OurServices/XXY-XYY-XXXMain.html#FAQ2</A> " Sex chromosome abnormalities are some of the most common chromosome abnormalities. Approximately 2 to 3 babies are born with a sex chromosome abnormality every day in California. Most of these individuals will never know that they have a sex chromosome abnormality because there is usually nothing out of the ordinary about their behavior, appearance, or mental development. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 > ------If there is no leaning toward male or female, > why is xe called " Jim " ? Because xe apparently needed a pseudonym for MAAP (gather this from their old newsletter archive) and picked a name at random (xe uses a different name in non-autism contexts). And since xe was raised with people thinking xe was a girl, xe's less comfortable getting mistaken for a " she " than for a " he " , even though xe's pretty adamant about not being a " he " either. > (I looked at that link, and still don't understand > what intersexual is...is it hermaphroditism?) Yes, as well as other sexes that are neither male nor female (rather than the famous " both " thing). Xe has neither the sexual organs of a male nor the sexual organs of a female (thus none of the hormone-producing bits either), and was born this way. -- " Organising a group of autistics is rather like herding cats. " -FAQ, alt.support.autism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 Clay wrote: >I understand that, but what I don't understand, (not >bothered by, just don't understand), is why xe and >others use the non-gender specific pronouns talking >about others, who are obviously he's and she's. It >just doesn't compute. For the same reason as many feminists prefer to use Ms. for all women. Using Mrs. and Miss depending on whether a woman is maried or not implies that a woman's marital status matters in every situation (whereas it's actually irrelevant except when there is courting behavior contemplated). Women were discriminated against for decades in employment on the basis of their marital status. Usine Ms for all is a way of refusing to " play along with " that system of discrimination. Similarly, using gender-neutral pronouns is a way of saying that a person's gender is irrelevant in most instances and circumstances of public life. And it also leaves room for the existence of those who are neither male nor female. It " levels the playing field. " Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 Nanne wrote: >--------What is intersexual? Androgynous. A body that has both typically male and typically female characteristics. Neither one nor the other. And the non-gendered pronouns are a way to make the existence of non-male/non-female people visible in the world. There are more intersexual people (born androgynous) in the world than most of us realize. In the past, most have been " assigned " to one gender or the other by whatever doctor was " in charge " at the birth. (This would be in the relatively recent past, obviously; men didn't use to be in charge of childbirth.) But now more intersexual people are deciding to (insisting on) being who/what they are, not taking on either gender, living as intersexuals. Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 In a message dated 8/10/2003 12:28:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, adamsCLAYADAMS@... writes: > I understand that, but what I don't understand, (not > bothered by, just don't understand), is why xe and > others use the non-gender specific pronouns talking > about others, who are obviously he's and she's. It > just doesn't compute. > because they can essentially be 'either' or 'or', yes. i had an Y chromosome but it remained mostly inactivated during fetal development, yes, but still played out in some of mine cells, yes. i also had extra X chromosome, . i did suffer developmental delay yes, and during puberty had to be put on hormone therapy, yes, to be made more female as i had functional ovaries, yes. my nephew does also have and extra X chromosome, kleinfelter syndrome, he is male, but will be infertile. hormone therapy (if he wants) in his teens will keep him from developing breasts. Kleinfelter syndrome is at 1 of 600 births. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 > >> The " gender norms " are a law given to us by the patriarch. Since they > >> are so obsessed that women and men MUST be different ( or the men > >> would be women), these stupid rules govern society. Women are forced > >> to get rail thin (female invisibility to make fearful men more > >> comfortable) > > and responded: > >Then the patriarch must be a really recent invention, because standards > >for female beauty are different across cultures and have changed toward > > " rail-thin " very recently (within the lifetime of some of the people on > >this mailing list, I'll bet). > > There's a theory that men-in-power (definitely a sub-set > of the gender as a whole) impose on " their women " whatever > appearance the time-period accepts as proof of wealth. > So, when s was painting, for example, a wealthy man's > wife would show his wealth by being " eseque " (what > today would be called fat). He could afford to buy her > lots of food and let her live a life of leisure rather > than hard work. Her size proclaimed his wealth to the > world. > > These days, lower-class women are likely to be bigger > (because of the food available, mostly, which provides > more bulk than nutrition if it's cheap food affordable > by poor people), whereas rich women (rich men's wives) > can afford expensive diet foods and memberships in gyms > and hours spent on their bodies instead of work (in- > home or out). > > Because " everyone " aspires to upper-class values, even > those who are not rich want " their women " to be thin > now, and women have taken on the value system, too. > > Jane Well thats ironic, as now here i have been linked with the taliban and the ruling parties of america in that wonderfully rich patriarchy post provided by jeanette, and yet people who know me from other lists will know that i have always stated a large preferance for the larger women. Although i do see where jane is coming from, and it is a good explanation of why one body fashion appears to be in place, it just goes to show that a man (i.e me) who beleives in his manlieness and doesnt wish his penis away can still have a healthy mind that is an individual mind. I lost my virginity with a fat woman and will always remember one particular fat woman. Big is beautifull. Gareth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 > > > > > The " gender norms " are a law given to us by the > > patriarch. Since they > > > are so obsessed that women and men MUST be > > different ( or the men > > > would be women), these stupid rules govern > > society. Women are forced > > > to get rail thin (female invisibility to make > > fearful men more > > > comfortable) > > > ---------Well, we *are* different..... the blessing > comes in that we don't have to be ruled by those > differences anymore, and have choices. > > Nanne > Quite! but do you see where she came from originally- that if it wernt for men, women and men would be the same- thats the starting point for femenism, that underlying beleif of sameness. oh, im sure now youve pointed it out she will have all sorts of rational to correct her slip of the tongue, but still now the secret is out. She said that if men didnt pass down rules onto men, men are terrified they would be just like women! thats the difference, that brand of femenism (ie militant) is all about changing equality from its original meaning, into saying that men and women are the same. masculism is about acnowledging God given differences, and saying that they are all groovy differences, and lets stop fighting against them. Gareth. oh, and ill repeat, in a population of billions, there will be millions of obvious exceptions. thats fine, thats how nature works. there will be allsorts imbeetween, but the fact wether its liked by femenists or not is that by mean average there are many many wholesome differences beetween the sexes. and especially now that it is being suggested that newly diagnosed autistics and aspergics are to be directed to a website all about having no sexuality, without the correlate opposite to allow for informed choice, the virtues of manliness need to be pointed out in this effeminate arena now more than ever. Aspergic men like myself have been bullied to high heaven, (so have women by being bitched at). It takes corrective therapy for one not to be afraid of ones manliness, for fear of one immitating the bullies or feeling a failure. ones manlieness is a good thing, a very good thing. Gareth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 > >--------What is intersexual? > > Androgynous. A body that has both typically male and > typically female characteristics. Neither one nor > the other. And the non-gendered pronouns are a way > to make the existence of non-male/non-female people > visible in the world. There are more intersexual > people (born androgynous) in the world than most of > us realize. > > In the past, most have been " assigned " to one gender > or the other by whatever doctor was " in charge " at > the birth. (This would be in the relatively recent > past, obviously; men didn't use to be in charge of > childbirth.) But now more intersexual people are > deciding to (insisting on) being who/what they are, > not taking on either gender, living as intersexuals. > > Jane having men " in charge " as you say of childbirth makes no difference. Where are the outcries of " where have all our transgendered people gone " having " men in charge " as you say has made no difference. In fact, as these things are more often recorded, you will see a rise in cases. Gareth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 > >I understand that, but what I don't understand, (not > >bothered by, just don't understand), is why xe and > >others use the non-gender specific pronouns talking > >about others, who are obviously he's and she's. It > >just doesn't compute. > > For the same reason as many feminists prefer to use > Ms. for all women. Using Mrs. and Miss depending on > whether a woman is maried or not implies that a > woman's marital status matters in every situation > (whereas it's actually irrelevant except when > there is courting behavior contemplated). Women > were discriminated against for decades in employment > on the basis of their marital status. Usine Ms for > all is a way of refusing to " play along with " that > system of discrimination. > > Similarly, using gender-neutral pronouns is a way > of saying that a person's gender is irrelevant in > most instances and circumstances of public life. > And it also leaves room for the existence of those > who are neither male nor female. It " levels the > playing field. " > > Jane in other words, it attempts to equalize people out of existance, based on a small minority of people who *feel* inferior and must therefore fight against the world to change things in their favour. Like femenism nowadays, in fact. Gareth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 wrote: > Xe has neither the sexual organs of a > male nor the sexual organs of a female (thus none of the > hormone-producing bits either), and was born this way. I'm jealous. Well, not really; I don't really experience that particular emotion much at all, but I have wished I could be free of mine for a long time. The only thing useful about a penis that I can think of is making it easier to urinate standing up. The rest of it is just dead weight that secretes nasty stuff into my blood.... yuck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 gareth wrote: > in other words, it attempts to equalize people out of existance, > based on a small minority of people who *feel* inferior and must > therefore fight against the world to change things in their favour. > > Like femenism nowadays, in fact. I do not know much about feminism, as a lot of what I have heard came through the filter of the conservative Republicans, but from what I know, it makes sense to me. I have never felt compelled to be the one making all of the decisions in a relationship... nor have I really been comfortable with the assumed role as far as being the one to ask someone out. I certainly do not feel as if I should have to pay for the female's meal, movie tickets, et cetera, on a date. I think that is an anachronism from a time in which women did not have money of their own, and men were the sole providers of that money and the things it buys. This presented a problem with my first (and so far only) girlfriend, whom I went with from 1990-1991. Though she was in college learning electrical engineering technology (that last word essentially means " lite " in this context; she tried to be a full-on EE student but couldn't cut it), she had this idea that she did not want to make more than the man she marries, and she expected to have him dominate her, make decisions for her, and pay for everything they did together. I did none of those, and she did not like it. I remember debating with my mother's boyfriend about something like this. He related a story on TV where a classroom was supposedly so full that one little girl did not have a desk at which to sit. He said that every boy in the class should have insisted that she have his desk instead. Notwithstanding the fact that desk assignments are the decision of the teacher, not the kids, this made no sense to me. Is a little girl somehow more deserving of a desk than a boy? Or maybe it's that, being female, she is so fragile that not having a desk will damage her worse than a boy? I couldn't quite grasp why a male should automatically give up an asset to a complete stranger based on her sex. He went on to ask whether I would, on a crowded bus, give up my seat to a woman that was standing. I said that I would not even have thought about it. If I got the seat fair and square... in other words, I got there first, I don't know why I would automatically give it up to a female any more than I would to a male. If it was a very old person or another person that seemed to be having difficulty, I would offer the seat if it occurred to me, but I would not if she was a female with no apparent difficulties. This debate was going on not long after Lynch became famous, so my mom's boyfriend commented that maybe things had changed; now we have female soldiers, which was not the case when he was in Vietnam. I do not like the stereotypical, old-style female gender script. If I want subservience, I will get a dog. I like females that are not afraid to speak their minds and use their intelligence. I certainly do not want to always have to be the one to initiate dates, sexual activity, or what have you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 In a message dated 8/10/2003 10:53:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, amanda@... writes: > I *also* pointed out that Jim Sinclair's site -- the *autism* part -- > would be good on that list of introductory autism stuff. Because > whether you agree with everything xe says or not, xe was one of the > early autistic self-advocates and there's historical interest in a lot > of the articles (some of which are now widely published in literature on > autism) on xyr site. And it's also autism-positive, as that list of > sites was that was being formed. > it was a good site as mine nephew has Klienfelter syndrome (well XXY syndrome, not a big deal, no). autism has been associated with forms of Klienfelter (or is it Klinefelter?) Syndrome, yes, (as well as learning disabilities and language problems, But besides the point that is) Thanks, Juli ASD mother to Nicollette Rett Syndrome w/autism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 In a message dated 8/10/2003 10:55:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, szo701@... writes: > Here we go again. Your patriarchal fear is showing! Gareth, no one ever > said you don't have the right to exist. You aren't Israel, here. > LOL. Juli ASD mother to Nicollette Rett Syndrome w/autism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.