Why was the term "cisgendered" even made in the first place? (border, support)

[Aussiehoff]

Originally Posted by Shiloh1

I have been clear and consistent. I gave you a definition. Not my fault if you are narrow minded and don't understand that words have ranges of meaning and usage.

That is one way in which the word can be used more narrowly it's not the only way. If you want to use observed it does not bother me for it would not change one thing that I posted on here - not one. Why you are so anal about this particular word and how it is being used is odd to say the least.

You are missing the point! Forget the terms and stick to concepts.

What would you call a person who is biologically male but mentally feels female? Does that person have a right to feel this way and be identified as such? It does not really matter what the terminology is as much as understanding these phenomena. Definitions are always being modified given new knowledge and understanding of certain phenomena. Why you are so anal about it? You have a very limited understanding of such phenomena and relish binary, black and white thinking, acting as if definitions fall out the sky from the definition god and match reality perfectly. They don't and never have!

This is the mire in which people like you wallow and miss the whole point of what is going on. It is quit sad!

I understand the concepts very clearly and can clearly see what has happened and why it is happened.
You are pretending that it is because of new knowledge..... Observed and assigned are completely different words with different meanings. Definitions matter. The reason why "observed" or "biological sex" for this purpose are not acceptable to the LGBTQIA+ group is well known and understood. They co-opted medical language used for real assignments for intersex people. They are not intersex but are attempting to redefine words to provide themselves comfort. Just as racist black people redefined the word racist. You would be ostracised for conceding to the use of observed in the offended community.

New knowledge hasn't changed correct terminology like biological sex to sex assigned at birth. An endeavour to not hurt feelings has lead to it.

Oh by the way, the man who feels female is a man. Yes he has a right to feel that way and to be treated with respect and provided the care he needs, but he isn't a man, as you know. Your attempt to a fallacious linking of correct language and an understanding of the drivers of this incorrect usage to a lack of care for people is disingenuous.

Originally Posted by Aussiehoff

I understand the concepts very clearly and can clearly see what has happened and why it is happened.
You are pretending that it is because of new knowledge..... Observed and assigned are completely different words with different meanings. Definitions matter. The reason why "observed" or "biological sex" for this purpose are not acceptable to the LGBTQIA+ group is well known and understood. They co-opted medical language used for real assignments for intersex people. They are not intersex but are attempting to redefine words to provide themselves comfort. Just as racist black people redefined the word racist. You would be ostracised for conceding to the use of observed in the offended community.

New knowledge hasn't changed correct terminology like biological sex to sex assigned at birth. An endeavour to not hurt feelings has lead to it.

Oh by the way, the man who feels female is a man. Yes he has a right to feel that way and to be treated with respect and provided the care he needs, but he isn't a man, as you know. Your attempt to a fallacious linking of correct language and an understanding of the drivers of this incorrect usage to a lack of care for people is disingenuous.

Then how would you distinguish a man who feels like a man and a man that feels like a woman? Or more precisely a man that feels like a woman and crosses the gender role expected of them because of their genitalia being male? Your label 'man' does not capture any of the differences. It lacks any rigorous details of the reality of the phenomena.

And why is your sense of what identity is wrapped up ONLY in sex (male and female). A person's identity is surely more than their sex.

This is why a distinction between gender and sex became important. You are stuck in past ignorance and refuse to see nuances in identity which surround not just a person's genitalia but their mindset, etc.

The actual history of word transgender started with the term 'transgenderism' in 1965 to describe a person that had an 'urge for gender (sex) change.' Here sex and gender are synonyms - biological sex.

Then in 1969 the term 'transgenderal' was used to distinguish the difference from a transsexual (those who physically alter their bodies). Why? Because there were actual people who took on feminine roles in society despite their sex being male and they wanted to distinguish themselves from those who altered their bodies physically.

So it is perfectly reasonable and understandable given these facts to have gender and sex be different even though they were treated as the same prior to these changes.

It was always expected and assumed that what you were biologically you were or should be socially - male=masculine and female=feminine.

That is to simple but seems to be just fine for the simpletons.

What we are dealing with in reality are people that have a biological gender/sex (male and female) and social/mental gender (masculine and feminine).

The two don't always match and thus distinguishing gender and sex is perfectly fine and understandable as well as the terms cisgender and transgender.

It's perfectly reasonable and understandable to enlighten beings.

[JerseyGirl415]

Originally Posted by Shiloh1

You obviously did not follow the conversation regarding the question I asked.

My question was in the vein of a conversation you obviously did not comprehend or even possibly read:

Poster 1 said: No, you are not assigned a sex…

I said: No, many people, parents, doctors, etc. assign sex based upon genital expression.

Poster 2 said: .......assign sex based on genital expression? Nope, the Dr just tells us if it is a boy or a girl.

I said: Based on what?

In other words, if it is not based upon genital expression what does the Dr., when he assigns sex, based on? Never got an answer!

Then you pipe in, ignorantly, and think you know what’s going on in the conversation and said:

The vast majority of people are talking about one's sex … So it is based on genitals.

So you actually just agreed with me. Thanks!

I did read and we do not agree. Sex is not "assigned" at birth for the vast majority of people (excluding the rare intersex where there is ambiguity; but even in that case I do not believe it is "assigned" unless/until someone explicitly decides to, well, pick a sex). It is observed. The rarity of intersex conditions is not large/relevant enough to change terminology, language, meaning; place the same meaning on everyone else whose experience the word does not apply to and that inaccurately describes their experience. My sex was not "assigned," it just is. It was observed at birth and could have been observed before birth, too, if my parents chose for that to happen (they did not). Today, an unborn baby's sex can be determined by testing the mother's blood.

Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415

I did read and we do not agree. Sex is not "assigned" at birth for the vast majority of people (excluding the rare intersex where there is ambiguity; but even in that case I do not believe it is "assigned" unless/until someone explicitly decides to, well, pick a sex). It is observed. The rarity of intersex conditions is not large/relevant enough to change terminology, language, meaning; place the same meaning on everyone else whose experience the word does not apply to and that inaccurately describes their experience. My sex was not "assigned," it just is. It was observed at birth and could have been observed before birth, too, if my parents chose for that to happen (they did not). Today, an unborn baby's sex can be determined by testing the mother's blood.

Given the definition I provided it is assigned and has nothing to do with changing language. It is using language properly.

Assign: "To set apart for a particular purpose or place in a particular category"

Doctors and parents have done this for a long time for social and legal reasons. It is done after they observe, in the majority of cases throughout history, genitalia so as to place them in the social and legal category of male or female. This is not rocket science people!

This is getting stupid - you guys harping on this word assign as if it some sort great argument - it's quit pathetic really. At least you admitted it is assigned under some circumstances which alone makes my point.

I guess these scientist and editors don't understand your great knowledge of the English language and the word 'assign.' Notice in the abstract they do it by observing something. Why don't you get a hold of them and tell them you can't 'assign' a sex you can only observe it.

A Practical Guide for Assigning Sex and Stage of Maturity in Sturgeons and Paddlefish

Article in Journal of Applied Ichthyology 35(1) · December 2017

Abstract:

The goal of this paper is to improve the assignment of sex and stage of maturity for sturgeons and paddlefish by providing both an overview of the gonadal stages of maturity and general guidelines and training needs for the four most commonly used techniques to assign sex and stage of maturity including ultrasound, endoscopy, plasma sex steroid analysis, and biopsy of the gonads via celiotomy. Sturgeons and paddlefish do not express external sexual dimorphism, which can make assignment of sex and stage of maturity challenging. Correct assignment of sex and stage of maturity is important for management of wild populations as well as for aquaculture, whether for conservation or commercial production. Selecting a technique to use when assigning sex and stage of maturity will depend on a number of factors; a comparison among these techniques is provided in this review, including tradeoffs, to help assist in technique selection based on specific research or production goals. The use of more than one technique may be beneficial to determine error rates associated with a single technique. This review is intended to serve as a practical resource when assigning sex and stage of maturity in field or laboratory settings in addition to stressing the importance of correctly identifying sex during research and in the management of populations.

[Aussiehoff]

Originally Posted by Shiloh1

I guess these scientist and editors don't understand your great knowledge of the English language and the word 'assign.' Notice in the abstract they do it by observing something. Why don't you get a hold of them and tell them you can't 'assign' a sex you can only observe it.

A Practical Guide for Assigning Sex and Stage of Maturity in Sturgeons and Paddlefish

Article in Journal of Applied Ichthyology 35(1) · December 2017

Abstract:

The goal of this paper is to improve the assignment of sex and stage of maturity for sturgeons and paddlefish by providing both an overview of the gonadal stages of maturity and general guidelines and training needs for the four most commonly used techniques to assign sex and stage of maturity including ultrasound, endoscopy, plasma sex steroid analysis, and biopsy of the gonads via celiotomy. Sturgeons and paddlefish do not express external sexual dimorphism, which can make assignment of sex and stage of maturity challenging. Correct assignment of sex and stage of maturity is important for management of wild populations as well as for aquaculture, whether for conservation or commercial production. Selecting a technique to use when assigning sex and stage of maturity will depend on a number of factors; a comparison among these techniques is provided in this review, including tradeoffs, to help assist in technique selection based on specific research or production goals. The use of more than one technique may be beneficial to determine error rates associated with a single technique. This review is intended to serve as a practical resource when assigning sex and stage of maturity in field or laboratory settings in addition to stressing the importance of correctly identifying sex during research and in the management of populations.

Wow, that is really quite embarrassing for you. So desperate to pretend that the recent emergence of the term "assigned at birth" in reference to humans is not part of social justice engineering (which is openly acknowledged by most who feel aggrieved by the use of the term "biological sex") you searched for a couple of days and present us with your evidence......... an article on sexing fish that don't have external sexual dimorphism...

[Aussiehoff]

Originally Posted by Shiloh1

Then how would you distinguish a man who feels like a man and a man that feels like a woman? Or more precisely a man that feels like a woman and crosses the gender role expected of them because of their genitalia being male? Your label 'man' does not capture any of the differences. It lacks any rigorous details of the reality of the phenomena.

And why is your sense of what identity is wrapped up ONLY in sex (male and female). A person's identity is surely more than their sex.

How would I distinguish between the two? I don't because I don't care. But they are both men, as you know. And I would (and have) treated both with utmost respect. Gender Dysphoria must be an incredibly difficult condition and the various treatments available hopefully bring comfort to those with the condition. But those treatments do not change the persons sex, as you know.

Originally Posted by Aussiehoff

Wow, that is really quite embarrassing for you. So desperate to pretend that the recent emergence of the term "assigned at birth" is not part of social justice engineering (which is openly acknowledged by most who feel aggrieved by the use of the term "biological sex") you searched for a couple of days and present us with your evidence......... an article on sexing fish that don't have external sexual dimorphism...

Are you still having trouble following along.

The article was not about the ambiguity of external sexual dimorphism nor how recent a word a phrase is - IT WAS ABOUT THE USAGE OF THE WORD ASSIGN AND BEING A COMPLETELY APPROPRIATE USE OF LANGUAGE Einstein in this context.

And by the way "assigned at birth" is not a term it's a phrase Forest!

And where did I mention that this phrase is not a part of social engineering? Is this some other divergence and straw man you wish to employ?

What is embarrassing, FOR YOU, is you complete lack of integrity and ability to actually stick to the points.

[JerseyGirl415]

Originally Posted by Shiloh1

Given the definition I provided it is assigned and has nothing to do with changing language. It is using language properly.

Assign: "To set apart for a particular purpose or place in a particular category"

Doctors and parents have done this for a long time for social and legal reasons. It is done after they observe, in the majority of cases throughout history, genitalia so as to place them in the social and legal category of male or female. This is not rocket science people!

This is getting stupid - you guys harping on this word assign as if it some sort great argument - it's quit pathetic really. At least you admitted it is assigned under some circumstances which alone makes my point.

What is pathetic is the insistence on using terms like "assigned female at birth" to describe a biological woman (or more simply, a woman), but you keep on being woke.

This is all new woke, progressive language, and though I am quite socially progressive, I won't take crap this far. I don't fall for much trans rights activism crap these days, it has gone too far. I used to, but I woke up (no pun intended, ha).

The context of the so called "afab" in woke culture these days means that a person's gender was "assumed" (aka sex was observed), but it was assumed incorrectly because the person has gender dysphoria and is actually trans - "feels like" the other sex or gender if you must. And that is something that could not possibly be known at birth, and the person's biological sex was properly observed no matter how they "feel" on the inside years later. Usually, attempts to discuss intersex people is a red herring, a distraction, when discussing trans issues and rights. Topics/phrases like afab are rarely actually about them; they are about trans people. But intersex people have a genuine condition that makes their sex ambiguous in some way, put very simply; have a better case to say "wait a minute maybe I should be the other sex," than a "normal" (non-intersex) trans person who just very subjectively claims to feel differently. Trans activists often like to use intersex people to fuel the logic behind the movement, but there really isn't much similarity and adopting the language that may be or can be used to refer to the life and experiences of intersex people is wrong imo.

Originally Posted by Aussiehoff

How would I distinguish between the two? I don't because I don't care.

Yet you are on here quibbling about the term 'assign' And if you can't or refuse to answer then stay out the conversation because you can't or won't add anything substantive to understanding this phenomenon.

But they are both men, as you know.

No crap that's what I said

And I would (and have) treated both with utmost respect.

Except you would not and don't care, as stated, about their gender identity just their sex identity. Sounds like disrespecting to me. And, again, where was arguing that you were doing otherwise.

Gender Dysphoria must be an incredibly difficult condition and the various treatments available hopefully bring comfort to those with the condition. But those treatments do not change the persons sex, as you know.

Again, why are you saying this when I did not say anything about what Gender Dysphoria does to a person's sex.

You love straw men and rabbit trails. Add to that irrelevant comments that act like you are saying something important in refuting my points - NOT!