Canadian baby 'first without gender designation' on health card - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=FlakTheMighty;52433407]Suuuuper late here. It used to be trans[i]sexual[/i] but that didn't accurately depict gender dimorphism, because gender is and always has been a social thing, ships are a "she" for example. So it became trans[i]gender[/i] which accurately represents it.[/QUOTE] I'm not going to say one way or the other if transsexual and transgender used to be conflated, but they are two distinctly different terms in modern nomenclature. To describe them, the difference between sex and gender needs to be first established. In a nutshell: Sex refers to biological disposition, EG having a penis and testicles for [i]male[/i], or having a vagina and ovaries for [i]female[/i]. There are of course individuals who fail to fall into this dichotomy due to a variety of genetic reasons, such as the aforementioned intersex, as well as hermaphroditism (having both penis & testicles and vagina & ovaries) and being born with no sexual organs at all. Gender, in turn, refers to the mindset of the individual and whether or not they identify more closely with what their society considers to be [i]masculine[/i] and consider themselves a [i]man[/i], or if they identify more close with what their society considers to be [i]feminine[/i] and consider themselves a [i]woman[/i]. Like sex, there is a space in between that people can fall, such as feeling that neither man nor woman describes them properly, feeling that both describe them in various significant degrees, or switching between them. With that in mind, [i]transgender[/i] refers to when a person who was classically identified as either a man or a woman - be it by their own identification, or an identification forced upon themselves, such as friends and family assuming that they're a man if male, or they're a woman if female - instead elects to actively identify as the other gender (EG classically they were considered a man, but elect to identify as a woman; or classically they were considered a woman, but elect to identify as a man). Much like transgender is the analogue to gender, [i]transsexual[/i] is the analogue to sex, where a person elects to have medical procedures that will change their biology from one sex to another, such as having their penis and testes removed for a vagina in a male-to-female operation, or having their vagina and ovaries replaced with a penis and testes in a female-to-male operation. Transsexuality can also target secondary sex characteristics, such as breasts, and other biological operations such as hormone treatments. As one may suspect, it is decidedly common for transgenderism and transsexualism to be closely linked, with many people who identify as transgender also either already being or wishing to be transsexual. It is, however, not a 1-to-1 link, with some transgender people electing to not pursue sexual reassignment and becoming transsexual for one reason or another. Theoretically, it is possible for someone to be transsexual but not transgender, but I suspect that is far, far less common. To keep things simple: If it involves the physical human body in any way - hormones, breasts, genitals, etc - then it's related to sex and transsexuality. If it involves psychology, thoughts, and identity in any way, then it's related to gender and transsgenderism. They are all very closely related, and it's understandable why they often get conflated. But they are, technically, all separate terms. And it's always a good idea to be educated, even if you never find yourself in a situation where you need the information.

This has to be the stupidest fucking thing I've read this year. :v: At least wait until they are old enough to form their own opinions and explore their own identity for fuck sake.

[QUOTE=Spetsnaz95;52430653]Sex is biological - you're either a boy or girl. Gender is a social construct.[/QUOTE] Sex is biological. (mostly binary but there are exceptions to this as well) Gender identity is what you identify as. Gender roles are standards how men and women should behave and express themselves. Only those standards are a social construct (and nobody should care about those anymore). If gender is a social construct then a mother of three who's a truck driver who loves to drink beer and watch football must be a man and cannot identify as a woman. [editline]5th July 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Duck M.;52433074]What are you responding to that you think I support? Why should certain arbitrary gender roles be placed on kids when it can prevent them from doing things they may enjoy? If we let gender roles dictate the path for our childrens development girls wouldnt be able to play baseball or football, boys wouldnt be able to dance, sing, cook, or wear pink, and girls wouldnt be able to go into certain fields like engineering, computer science, and other STEM fields where there's a dominant male bias.[/QUOTE] How is calling your daughter a girl and referring to her as "she" equal to placing arbitrary gender roles on her? Can't you refer to your daughter as "she" and let her play football?

[QUOTE=The golden;52431084]Your amazing display of transphobia has been noted. Thanks for being such a nice person. I'd love to know what great injustice this person did to you that warrants you mistreating them and insulting them.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=The golden;52431109] This parent is giving their child the ability to choose who he/she wants to be in the future. An incredible choice many of us were never given. I have incredible respect for that.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=1239the;52433061]The default response to anything like this from FP seems to be an instant resort to projecting all kinds of insane shit on the people. "Oh they must be massive SJWs, I bet they're going to have a mental breakdown the moment someone misgenders them!!" It's fucking dumb.[/QUOTE] Why is it when any criticism or any opinion is given about a trans person, you label them as transphobic? If a trans person acts shitty, does shitty things, and also impacts the lives of others doing said shitty things, is it not alright to call them out on it because they are trans? Please stop trying to turn comments about individuals into a personal attack on all trans people. This parent is projecting their own beliefs onto their child and they deserve to be called out on it, especially when it will effect his life. They're not protecting his gender identity by doing this, this has nothing to do with gender, it has everything to do with sex. You can't change your sex. They won't even issue a birth certificate because of this, and they're even going to court just so they don't have to put his sex on his health card. This just seems like a huge publicity stunt to get attention. [QUOTE=]"When I was born, doctors looked at my genitals and made assumptions about who I would be, and those assignments followed me and followed my identification throughout my life," Kori Doty said.[/QUOTE] Yeah no, sorry, that's just bullshit. You're not [i]assigned[/i] a sex at birth, it's what you're born with. The doctors didn't cause you trauma because they put your sex on your birth certificate, they don't decide your gender identity, it's whoever raises you and who you grow up around. The doctors did their jobs. They're just looking for someone to blame for their troubles, and they're projecting this onto their child. It's really sad.

[QUOTE=geel9;52432090]You do not [I]decide[/I] your gender identity. If you could, there would be absolutely no troubles for transgender people, because they could just choose to be whatever is the easiest in society. It's just like saying you can decide to be gay. What a ridiculous notion. [editline]4th July 2017[/editline] Also, this entire thing is fucking ridiculous. The most liberal estimate I can find is that [B]0.435% of US persons[/B] are transgender, yet the claim is that raising every child in a "gender neutral" environment is a good idea because "what if they are transgender?" Well, based on statistics, it's incredibly likely that they're not. You're essentially saying that [B]99.56% of all people[/B] should have their entire identity fucked with from birth so that [B]0.435%[/B] of them might have an easier time. That sounds like a great way to have an incredibly dysfunctional generation.[/QUOTE] "Gender neutral" isn't just for the benefit of potentially transgender children, it's for the benefit of society. Gender norms are stupid and lead to things like stereotypes and underrepresentation of men/women in fields where there's no reason for them to be underrepresented (e.g. women dominate nursing, men dominate engineering). Knocking down these stereotypes and roles starts with raising children in a non-gendered environment, where boys aren't treated or expected to behave in a certain way, and girls another.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52434962]"Gender neutral" isn't just for the benefit of potentially transgender children, it's for the benefit of society. Gender norms are stupid and lead to things like stereotypes and underrepresentation of men/women in fields where there's no reason for them to be underrepresented (e.g. women dominate nursing, men dominate engineering). Knocking down these stereotypes and roles starts with raising children in a non-gendered environment, where boys aren't treated or expected to behave in a certain way, and girls another.[/QUOTE] You know these stereotypes exist because it's something that both sexes commonly do? Gender norms were only created because the norms were something the both sexes just normally did. No one sat down one day and just charted out gender norms or stereotypes. I was raised in a way were I wasn't expected to behave a certain way and I still do tons of stereotypical guy stuff. Those people are underrepresented not because someone made them that way it just so happens that more women prefer nursing then men do. Before you pull something like women should become Doctors or something all of my life all of my family doctors and whenever I went to the hospital were mostly women

[QUOTE=Steam-Pixie;52433917]This has to be the stupidest fucking thing I've read this year. :v: At least wait until they are old enough to form their own opinions and explore their own identity for fuck sake.[/QUOTE] That's exactly what they're trying to do.

why the fuck would you ever do this to a child? do you even think about the real-life ramifications? imagine the mountain of paperwork and difficulty signing up for shit just because your gender is marked as "undisclosed".

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52434962]"Gender neutral" isn't just for the benefit of potentially transgender children, it's for the benefit of society. Gender norms are stupid and lead to things like stereotypes and underrepresentation of men/women in fields where there's no reason for them to be underrepresented (e.g. women dominate nursing, men dominate engineering). Knocking down these stereotypes and roles starts with raising children in a non-gendered environment, where boys aren't treated or expected to behave in a certain way, and girls another.[/QUOTE] Why is it necessary not to tell children if they are a boy or a girl in order not to force gender roles on them? I'll ask this question again. Can't you call your daughter a "she" and let her play football?

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;52434051] How is calling your daughter a girl and referring to her as "she" equal to placing arbitrary gender roles on her? Can't you refer to your daughter as "she" and let her play football?[/QUOTE] Yes, I addressed this in a later post [QUOTE]That's as far as I go on this issue personally. I don't care if people call their kids the pronouns that correspond to their sex because that's a common sense measure that I would do myself. Where I draw the line is making my kid wear blue and play football because that's what a young man should do.[/QUOTE] My philosophy is letting my kids be involved in anything that they want (within reason) and not place any pressures or assumptions on their character because of their gender so that they feel comfortable with who they are and are free to express themselves. Although obviously, I expect [QUOTE] I was raised in a way were I wasn't expected to behave a certain way and I still do tons of stereotypical guy stuff.[/QUOTE] This to happen because of the cultural associations and pressures that exist outside of parental rearing.

[QUOTE=thisguy123;52431082]In the case of clowns I disagree.[/QUOTE] What do you got against clowns, punk?

..This is the dumbest thing I've read all week. The likelihood of the kid being trans is nil and doing this is likely as harmful as pressuring a trans child into being their physical sex. Shit like this part of the reason why transgender people get so much crap, too.

[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;52435612]What do you got against clowns, punk?[/QUOTE] You ain't seen the shit I've seen man, You have not heard the shit I have heard. [URL="https://youtu.be/Uo0S_7gmZqs"]Clowns are the great enemy.[/URL]

[QUOTE=Duck M.;52435364]Yes, I addressed this in a later post My philosophy is letting my kids be involved in anything that they want (within reason) and not place any pressures or assumptions on their character because of their gender so that they feel comfortable with who they are and are free to express themselves. [/QUOTE] Right, so why did you equal identifying newborn's child sex to [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1570169&p=52433074&viewfull=1#post52433074"]"placing certain arbitrary gender roles on kids"[/URL]? Like, nobody has a problem with you being against gender roles. The problem is when you propose opposing gender roles by not assigning sex to newborns and not referring to children as "she" or "he".

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;52435885]Right, so why did you equal identifying newborn's child sex to [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1570169&p=52433074&viewfull=1#post52433074"]"placing certain arbitrary gender roles on kids"[/URL]? Like, nobody has a problem with you being against gender roles. The problem is when you propose opposing gender roles by not assigning sex to newborns and not referring to children as "she" or "he".[/QUOTE] Where did I equivocate the two? If I haven't made it clear that's not what my position on the issue is, I apologize. The meaning behind that sentence is literal -- but what I mean by "arbitrary gender roles" has nothing to do with pronoun usage.

[QUOTE=1239the;52432968]love how threads about trans people doing anything brings the writhing transphobia and hatred of anything non-binary in FP out into the open. transman gives birth? haha that's gross. trans person doesn't look like the gender they identify as? self-righteous refusals to use their pronouns abound. child is non-binary? impossible, there are only two genders and I refuse to read anything to the contrary. what do you want? 1000 genders? 10000000 genders?? parents choose not to force gender roles on a child prematurely? they must be awful terrible parents someone call child protection services.[/QUOTE] okay how bout we instead ignore scientific fucking fact that the child either has a dick or a vagina knowing that that might cause medical complications if a doctor needs to know that for purposes of treatment will that make you happy

[QUOTE=Duck M.;52435936]Where did I equivocate the two? If I haven't made it clear that's not what my position on the issue is, I apologize. The meaning behind that sentence is literal -- but what I mean by "arbitrary gender roles" has nothing to do with pronoun usage.[/QUOTE] Okay, it's just that you replied to someone with argument about gender roles when he was talking about the sex assignment. Sorry if I misunderstood.

This is why we should just stop using "sex" and "gender" interchangeably. They're effectively different things. Not to mention that "male" and "female" bodies basically use all the same bits. Aside from some hormone production levels, the physical difference is tantamount to resizing some organs and slapping different names onto them, then turning some of them on or off (hence why transitioning between genders is even possible.) Gender identity, on the other hand, varies entirely based on the individual in question. We might as well judge people's personalities based on their eye colour, or whether or not they like the taste of licorice.

[QUOTE=Ona;52438846]Not to mention that "male" and "female" bodies basically use all the same bits. Aside from some hormone production levels, the physical difference is tantamount to resizing some organs and slapping different names onto them, then turning some of them on or off (hence why transitioning between genders is even possible.)[/QUOTE] it's not as simple as that. women and men have entirely different fat and muscle distributions, they perceive things visually differently, men tend to be stronger and bigger, the organs are not only different in terms of size but sometimes how they work as well. entirely different skeletal structures too to boot transitioning between genders can only change so much - for instance skeletal structure is very hard to change (and almost impossible to change through hormones, surgery, etc after puberty) and you would be easily able to tell them apart based say their hips for instance

[QUOTE=Ona;52438846]This is why we should just stop using "sex" and "gender" interchangeably. They're effectively different things. Not to mention that "male" and "female" bodies basically use all the same bits. Aside from some hormone production levels, the physical difference is tantamount to resizing some organs and slapping different names onto them, then turning some of them on or off (hence why transitioning between genders is even possible.) Gender identity, on the other hand, varies entirely based on the individual in question. We might as well judge people's personalities based on their eye colour, or whether or not they like the taste of licorice.[/QUOTE] Er. No. There's a massive difference between men and women. This can especially be seen in how they process certain drugs. For example, women (5mg) require a lower dose of Ambien than men (5-10 mg). There's also different risk factors for illnesses and determining that risk factor is heavily based on sex, which is seen in calculating heart disease risk and cholesterol.

[QUOTE=The golden;52431152]I think you need to reread the article. Firstly: It doesn't say anywhere in the article that the parent would be withholding any information from them whatsoever. Secondly: The child is most likely intersex. Meaning that it's not exactly easy to determine their biological sex sometimes. Here is what the parent actually said: I see nothing wrong with this. It seems like good parenting to me. Again: I wish I was raised this way.[/QUOTE] Your posts are detrimental to my mental health. I sometimes forget people like you exist. How the fuck do you survive in the real world?

[QUOTE=SadisticGecko;52439064]Er. No. There's a massive difference between men and women. This can especially be seen in how they process certain drugs. For example, women (5mg) require a lower dose of Ambien than men (5-10 mg). There's also different risk factors for illnesses and determining that risk factor is heavily based on sex, which is seen in calculating heart disease risk and cholesterol.[/QUOTE] Iirc this is less to do with the sex itself and more about general physicality/metabolism, which are indeed related to genetics and hormones, but not strictly speaking sex. Drug dosages, for one, vary a lot from person to person, but this is based on how fast your metabolism is, what hormones you have and your general body shape. Things like fat placement and so on actually change during hormone treatment, although some things don't, like bone structure as was mentioned. Either way, my point is that "sex" is entirely physical /genetic and is subject to change through medical application, while "gender" is a psychological aspect and is therefore generally set one way or another. Also, "male" and "female" bodies are still cast from the same mould. I wasn't implying that they were idntical, though. For instance, the ovaries and testes are - technically - the same organ, but they serve vastly different (though undeniably related) purposes and even grow in different areas. Same goes for the uterus and prostate; same organ in a different place and serving a much different fuction. Presumably this is all the work of witchcraft and/or aliens. But if I'm remembering my old Biology lessons correctly, we're all built using the same basic setup.

what the fuck will birth certificates in the future just state CHROMOSOME: X & Y or X & X?

[QUOTE=angelangel;52443035]what the fuck will birth certificates in the future just state CHROMOSOME: X & Y or X & X?[/QUOTE] Not my kids' ones that's for sure

People seem to care about things like this with such furvo[u]r because it seems to be important to their own identity to be seen to be doing "the right thing" to other members of their chosen social group.

[QUOTE=Ona;52443022]Iirc this is less to do with the sex itself and more about general physicality/metabolism, which are indeed related to genetics and hormones, but not strictly speaking sex. Drug dosages, for one, vary a lot from person to person, but this is based on how fast your metabolism is, what hormones you have and your general body shape. Things like fat placement and so on actually change during hormone treatment, although some things don't, like bone structure as was mentioned. Either way, my point is that "sex" is entirely physical /genetic and is subject to change through medical application, while "gender" is a psychological aspect and is therefore generally set one way or another. Also, "male" and "female" bodies are still cast from the same mould. I wasn't implying that they were idntical, though. For instance, the ovaries and testes are - technically - the same organ, but they serve vastly different (though undeniably related) purposes and even grow in different areas. Same goes for the uterus and prostate; same organ in a different place and serving a much different fuction. Presumably this is all the work of witchcraft and/or aliens. But if I'm remembering my old Biology lessons correctly, we're all built using the same basic setup.[/QUOTE] Metabolism and hormones are related to sex, and I strictly mean all this in terms of someone who's not transitioning. If someone is transitioning with HRT, that adds a whole 'nother layer of complexity. A man is going to have a different metabolism than a woman (frequently seen as a higher calorie need) in general. As for metabolism speed, that's more based on age than anything and has to do with the efficiency of the liver/kidneys in filtering out metabolites/drugs. Metabolism is frequently "slower" in the elderly because their liver isn't as efficient in filtering things out, so drugs will stay in their system longer. Anyway, this is why it's important for the doctor(s) of a transgender person to know about their transitioning. The hormones being taken can affect various different processes in the body and increase different risks. Transmen are at risk for higher cholesterol levels, for example, while transwomen have the risk of bloodclots. This can even vary based on the dose being taken. S'why many endos will require yearly blood tests and why self-medding is so dangerous. For transwomen, no, bone structure won't change. For transmen, it does to a degree...Mostly in the facial structure, but that's just an effect of testosterone in general. I would argue that the term "sex" be divided into two different terms. Genetics are, with current science, mostly set in stone. The physical aspects can be changed with hormones/surgery, however. Let "sex" be used to indicate chromosomes, "gender" indicate the sense of self, and "presentation" indicate how someone presents themselves to the world. It's honestly all a bit of a muddy mess, to be honest. -- Side note since I'm a lurker extraordinaire: I'm a transman who's currently slogging his way through pharmacy school...Mostly because I'm expecting someone to try and scream "transphobia" since I think the article is idiotic.

[QUOTE=angelangel;52443035]what the fuck will birth certificates in the future just state CHROMOSOME: X & Y or X & X?[/QUOTE] it would be pretty simple to change just print X or Y instead of M or F, boom

[QUOTE=angelangel;52443035]what the fuck will birth certificates in the future just state CHROMOSOME: X & Y or X & X?[/QUOTE] To be fair I don't actually see what would be so outlandish about this. It would also allow for more clear designations for various sex chromosomal aneuploidies, however uncommon. Listing M or F under a SEX: designation works just fine imo, but your solution doesn't seem so strange or unreasonable to where it's a punchline.

This is bad. Men and women have different medical issues. This is where the semantics matter and I think a line has been crossed here

[QUOTE=angelangel;52443035]what the fuck will birth certificates in the future just state CHROMOSOME: X & Y or X & X?[/QUOTE] Listing exact chromosomes would probably actually be more medically useful than trying to shoehorn deviations into "M" or "F" (because that's pretty much all the forms expect). That'd be neat.