Umm ok

Ah. Dragons. Something that doesn’t exist. But- perhaps both our arguments are flawed. Since dragons could exist. All we have to do is find a new species and call it a “dragon” and poof. Now there are dragons. What we CALL something is a variable- like “X,Y,Z” in math. The word “horse” is not the same in every language is it? We have at least 5 words for horse. The animal “ma” doesn’t exist to an English speaking person. What is a “ma?”it is of course.. a horse of course. That exists. You know what it is no?

So- what I call it doesn’t matter as long as you know what I mean. The secret to words and language is consistency. Your name can be changed as long as you use it consistently. Here you are xvarnah and anyone here would know who that is: you use it consistently. In real life perhaps you aren’t xvarnah to most people or the government? You use another name. They know who you are though.

So- what is a “man?” A horse- we can clearly define without language. Define a man. What does he have that I can see or touch or use to identify him from across a room? Anything on that list I can say some females have or some males don’t have no?

Biological sex- there are 2 in humans that we know of and there are those who combine both, and those without (hermaphrodites and androgynous people.) Both relatively rare. Effectively 2 known sexes. But gender....

Gender is not a synonym for biological sex. It is an identity. A construct. An imaginary thing. It is a word we use that defines s set of characteristics- many of which correlate to biological sex but not intrinsically so.

Do you- xvarnah- believe that a woman’s role is to produce and care for children, care for the home, and be subservient to man? This is a common gender role for women through most of the role for most of history. Is that your belief that a man is the boss, and you are not to argue with him? If not- then you believe that gender roles can change. That what defines a man or a woman can change. If you believe that what makes a man a man and a woman a woman can change- then logic dictates you recognize that there could be additional categories beyond man and woman- or that we could call them “fleep and florp” instead of man or woman so long as we knew what those words meant no?

So- you aren’t a dragon because dragons don’t exist. You can’t grow wings- a physical characteristic of a dragon in your mind. So... then you must, since that was your analogy- believe that men and women have physical characteristics as distinct and intrinsic as wings no? So you must then believe we can clearly define what is a man and what is a woman? So then...

WHAT is it that you call anything that does not fit your definition of a man or a woman? Might it be... another category? Another... gender?

If a dragon has wings- then a dragon like giant fire breathing lizard without wings is not a dragon is it? In fantasy- I believe these are commonly called wyrms or some variant. So if we have a system to classify mythical beasts- and the choices are “dragon” and dragons must have wings, and unicorn- and unicorns must have a horn- and here is a giant wingless hornless lizard... is it a dragon- and we change the definition of dragon, a unicorn, and we change what being a unicorn is, or is it a new option?

Because you choose to call a rat a dragon does not mean you now made the creature considered a dragon now exist. It means we named something else a dragon, which is not what the person calling themselves a dragon was referring to.
.
Dragons are also a fairly well-established concept. So that would literally be like someone saying "I'm a hermaphrodite" and someone else later declares a species of tree a hermaphrodite and says "that person thinks they're a tree!"
.
Clearly the person was never indicating they were a tree.
.
So I'm not sure why we're going over that point.

And on that note gender at the end of the day is tied back to sexuality. It was primarily established based on that. It has deviated since then, but it was, as far as everything i've ever encountered in history has indicated, based on those features. there is some wiggle room there for how you want to identify, but if someone comes up to me and says "my gender is a Ponderosa pine" they've officially gone entirely too abstract for me. And likely the passport and DMV office for that matter
.
Glad I could help ruin the day of someone who evidently wants to identify as a ponderosa pine. Facts ruin lives

Side note:
Wyrm: no wings, several legs
Wyvern: wings. No arms, hind legs.
Dragon: four legs and wings

If we measure official forms as the arbitrator of ones reality- there are a lot of races that don’t or didn’t exist huh? I guess to some person who came from a group not included on those forms and previously not included in a “general group” like “Asian” they must have been mistaken about their place of origin or ancestry because it didn’t exist? That’s circular logic. If it doesn’t exist until it is on the form and recognized- and only recognized and on the form identities go on the form- how did any of those things get there?

Now- if gender is based on sexuality- a man has sex with a woman... so the man is one. The woman the one he has sex with. A woman has sex with a man, a man has sex with a woman- how do we tell which is the man so we know which is the woman? What do we do with other sexualities? If one person is heterosexual, the other bisexual, the other homosexual, the last is asexual... how would they all share one gender based on sexuality if they all have different sexualities?

You’ve done a fine job listing the criteria of fictional lizards. Succinct, precise, accurate. Upvote for that. So... we have at least 3 categories for fictional lizards based on superficial criteria... but for all the diversity in real humans 2 does the trick? Having so well laid out the criteria of said lizards- you have still not laid out the criteria by which we might classify all men and all women however.

Now- personally, I have no idea what “ponderosa pine” is as a gender. It could not be by default that you think you are a tree- because most trees have a gender or are non gendered. Thusly if you believe you are a tree that is a separate issue from your gender- which gender tree are you? That is a valid question. Now- gender of course refers to your gender in human society. The gender identity you associate or in a less caring system are associated with.

So if you plan to get your license from the tree DMV- the example may be apt. From the human DMV- we are referring of course to whatever gender you are in society. So let me ask- what are the gender roles of trees? What color do not trees like? Which tree wears what clothing? Can’t answer? Well then- it’s moot because you don’t know enough about tree gender to answer. So whatever you put no one will know anyway.

Now- since we have established that gender and gender roles exist in other living organisms so wether you think you are a duck or a tree doesn’t factor in to our conversation- just what gender duck or tree you feel you are.

Let’s go forward. Gender is based on sexuality. We know there are more than 2 types of sexuality. Strike 1. “I said it WAS BASED..” ok. So- as asked... define the genders by your standards in modern times. Don’t talk about was. Was is gone. It used to be legal to own humans and human culture has often allowed us to kill people who pissed us off. 2019. Was is gone. You can’t play the fence. It is based on- in which case see 1- or it was in which case that point is irrelevant to is. So define the genders. Not done yet. Call that 2.

And 3. Calling a thing a dragon makes that thing a dragon. That’s how words work. The Brits call a storage compartment on a car a boot. Americans call it a trunk. A trunk in Britain is a piece of luggage or something an elephant has. In America a boot goes on your foot or your cars tire. A trunk is a trunk because you call it a trunk. The object doesn’t change but the word changes. Using the wrong word will refer to the wrong object.

If your country decides all men should be called women and all women should be called men- the people don’t change but the word does- and when someone from another country comes and says they want to marry a nice woman you’re going to introduce them to your pal Steve because that’s what they asked for. That is how words work.

When you encounter something that another word doesn’t describe or doesn’t accurately describe- you need a new word or to repurpose an old word to use for that thing. I give you two buckets. Any object with a rectangular face in bucket A. Any object with no vertices in bucket B. A conveyor belt starts brining you shapes.

Shapes come down. Effectively 2 dimensional rectangles, 3D rectangles. Bucket A those go. Vertices they have. Here come spheres. No vertices, no rectangular faces. Ok we go. Then comes a cylinder. Uh oh. It has a rectangular face... bucket A! But... it has no vertices! Bucket B! Well... now we are stumped aren’t we? Our classification system... it doesn’t have a bucket for this. We can throw it into one bucket or the other- but not being able to say what’s in the bucket kinda makes a shit system of classification no?

Now- your “tree” example. You were lost likely trying to reference how some people may go or be perceived to go to extremes with self identity. Ok. Fair point. We also don’t have an effective classification system of you can say you’re an Apache Helicopter and there’s no way to prove you are one, and no set of defined criteria so you being that and another person. Being that may have nothing in common. What are we to do? How could we prevent abuses and jokers and all the complications of a “choose your own” system?

Derp. I forgot. We did this with religion already. For most of American History some form of Christianity/Catholicism were dominant religions along with Judaism. Chances are a form on religion would ask which you were. Muslim, Sikh any number of other large faiths wouldn’t be recognized. Even the Jews by and large would often go forgotten and people would figure you were some kind of Christian almost by default.

Now we have Jedi! Look at that. How’d that happen, and why isn’t there a “ponderosa pine” religion where people take 365 religious holidays a year to commune with nature, or their religion makes everyone clergy so none of them pay taxes or whatever?

Well my poor @xvarnah- your binary thinking betrays you again. The options aren’t “either we have two genders or we must allow people to think they are trees.” There are many options. Many of them tried and true. One for example- as applied to religion- would require a certain number of people to claim a gender for it to be one that is recognized. It would stipulate that there need be clear and consistent practices and features of this religion. Not 20,000 people all claiming that “do whatever you want” is a religion (or in this case gender.)

The religion a person self identifies as- claims as their own- is their business. It doesn’t have to be legally recognized for them to be that religion. Ever hear of the Prince Phillip Movement? It’s an actual faith that a small group of islanders hold. Worshipping a Duke as a deity. It’s a real faith most people have never heard of. But someone answers “what religion are you?” And you make fun because you don’t recognize it or never heard of it- you’re kinda a piece of shit.

If you see a shrine in a persons home- it isn’t illegal to touch it without their consent if you don’t steal it or damage it. But... what if THEIR faith you do not believe in says not to? What if they specifically ask you not to? That’s pretty damn disrespectful isn’t it? Leaning on a car is legal even if it isn’t yours. Would you like to find me sitting on your car?

That’s respect. For other people. Calling them by their name instead of whatever name you make up for them for example. You look like a John to me xvarnah. But John isn’t your name is it?

Is it ok to call you “Mrs husbands last name” after you tell me to address you otherwise and within reason? Not “queen and superior god” or some nonsense- but perhaps “Ms. or Mrs. maiden name” or perhaps drop the title? It may not be criminal- but that disrespect sure isn’t welcomed is it? Do women deserve respect? Should husbands need consent from their wives or is it their prerogative based on how sexuality “was”?

So on a personal level- you get to choose if you want to respect a fellow human being or if you want to be an asshole because respecting them is too much work for you to bother with a simple request. If my name is Jeffrey and I say call me Jeff because my abusive mother called me Jeffrey- the ball is in your court. Be an asshole or not. You decide who you want to be.

If we are talking about legal genders- as I said. The principals to allow multiple genders without compromising the effectiveness of a gender classification system already exist and some of those principals are applied and apply from religion. Just as it’s your choice to respect other cultures and religions. Being a bigot or inconsiderate aren’t illegal. You can spout vulgarities at a nun or an imam because you personally don’t give a shit about their beliefs. Call a person who identifies as a non binary gender man or woman even after they’ve asked otherwise.

Here’s the tell though- you probably wouldn’t look your bosses boss in the eyes of the police officer who stopped you and say “I don’t care what you’re name is. You are Lucy now.” You wouldn’t have someone who is biologically a male tell you they are a man and then insist they are a woman. Those people with power over you- you’ll respect them. Just not people who don’t have a way to hurt you if you disrespect them. You don’t feel the need to tell other people what gender THEY are- just those you think are “wrong.” You know their gender better than them bunny?

And what does that say about a person? A person who is respectful to those with the power to compel them to be but not respectful to those they see as powerless? The old saying: “respect the janitor like you would a ceo” that’s a measure of character, not a literal instruction that of you do just that you’re a good person. It means that you should treat people with respect even if they can’t make you. That’s your call though. I bet you don’t like being disrespected though do you? So.. it’s ok for you to do to others but not for others to do to you?

stupidest fucking argument i've heard.

Your life must be so charmed.

yours must be empty, to rant on and on, comparing someone's name to someone's gender. hear about the man that identified as female, won a deadlifting comp (or similar) for women, and afterwards, reverted back to male, champion, he surely showed that there's true equality.

I'm not going to read all of that.
.
I started to give it a go, but the tag lead me right to "my poor xvarnah" and now it's just right out the window. I'm not sure how you intended to defend a position of how "all things must be respected at all times by all people, "my gender is Xavier Houston Francine The III/a dragon," while in the same breath devolving into thinly masked condescension .
.
It seems like it almost goes and undermines your whole point there. Weird.
.
Considering you tagged me directly to that part I can only assume you considered it VERY important that I see that, above all else.
.
I will say again since a lot of people seem to have poor eyesight: I said there's some wiggle room for how a person identifies. As far as I can tell gender is literally broken down into a few categories and what happens after that generally tends to be a sexuality issue not a gender one. And don't worry - I'm not particularly tall so you won't need a particularly big yard arm to hang

....Me from for saying that. I also largely don't care how someone chooses to identify. Up until the point their rights start infringing on myself and/or others. Case in point: the bodybuilder iccarus mentioned. Which isn't even relevant to what I was specifically talking about, but since we're here anyway.
.
All that said "Respect for me, not for thee" is not going to fly. So, please, carry on telling everyone how "my binary thinking" is the "perceived problem" when someone says they just transitioned into an avocado. And, of course, how 19,999 other people are feeling green today therefore we must now recognize avocados as a gender. Which makes eating avocados a suddenly VERY questionable activity.
.
20,000 avocados can't be wrong

You seem to be mixed up. It proves my point. You didn’t much like the disrespect of that condescension did you? So you just proved my point quite well. You don’t have to be respectful at all times. I don’t, no one does. But- that disrespectful gesture shit down productive discourse between us. Made you feel unpleasant. Perhaps hurt your view of me and others view of me. The same way that perhaps your “ponderosa pine” comment (which is covered in the long reply but Tl:dr- trees have gender classifications too. So thinking you’re a tree isn’t gender; and you’d still have some gender classification as a tree) could be seen as disrespectful since it misses the issue and trivializes non binary gender people’s identities. Paints them as having a mental disorder.

I can’t teach you respect. That was your parents job. That’s your job to learn. If calling people avocados (again- being another SPECIES isn’t a gender. Other species besides humans have gender.) because they have potentially legitimate cases that they do not fit a traditional gender and would like a categorical expansion is your idea of respect- debating an issue you demonstrate a lack of knowledge or research on from the perspective that dmv forms define human existence, and painting people for not sticking to binary gender or sexuality as having mental illness is respectful to you- that’s your choice to live that way. But you didn’t like being disrespected in my post did you?

You don’t seem to understand your own position. At least 3 times I’ve asked you to define what are the criteria by which a man or woman is defined in gender and 3 times you have not been able to do so. If you can’t tell me what makes a man, or a woman- how can you tell me there can’t be anything else besides those two things when you don’t even know what those two things are? What logical dispute of fact can there be if you haven’t even established what the facts are?

@iccarus- yeah. You nailed it. Anyone who cares about other people and their feelings is likely sad and empty. That poor Bill Gates gives all that money away, those sad celebrities and billionaires- poor Elon musk with all his advocacy and philanthropy. Or.... I type fast and have lots of free time because my career allows lots of flexibility. Who knows. But yes. An intelligent reply. “A person took advantage of this thing once so it’s bad!” Perhaps we should ban marriage, eliminate all social services, etc. because people game those systems sometimes too? Or I dunnoh... we could do what we do with most things and try to close the loop holes but known occasional abuses happen in any system?

never said it was bad, i think it's great, he "identified" as female, won, and reverted back to being a male, that's fair. you're claiming that you think someone's name doesn't exist. please name the 76 genders and clarify each one for me to understand how that works. is there a gender that's attracted to refrigerators, or is that just obesity, or is obesity a gender now?

Ah, I guess we're getting into big brain time now.
.
Alright, riddle me this.
.
My perspective: people deserve basic human decency. That does not include forcing everyone around them to validate every whim they have.
.
Your take on my perspective: there are two genders. Everyone else go die in a hole, you're unworthy.
.
Now, if you look very closely you'll see I never asked for nor demanded respect from you in either scenario. I engaged in conversation. When you proceeded to start preaching rather than defending your point my response was: "if this is what you're resorting to it seems you don't have a point worth defending after all. You've now taken away any incentive for me to continue engaging with you."

I didn't demand you respect me. I didn't scream about how unfair it was. And I'm still not.
.
How you see me not demanding respect as proving your point (about how I don't think people deserve respect by default) is a bit muddy to me, but I'm sure saying it validated your opinion and that's what counts.
.
Meanwhile on your side: "everyone deserves all of the respect in all matters at all times regardless of whether that's physically possible, to infinity and beyond. Everyone. Absolutely everyone. Except you. YOU don't deserve respect because you disagreed with me."
.
I'm, again, a bit foggy on how blatant hypocrisy proves any of your points. Sounds like SJW propaganda to me, but okay.

Additionally I imagine at least one of those "three" times you mentioned is in the spiel we already established I wasn't going to read. If it was so important to you you'd think that would-be the part you tagged me to. Alas, poor Yoric. It seems it wasn't so important after all.
.
Either way I'm not sure why you can't grasp me repeatedly saying there is some wiggle room around the gender issues. I'm not sure if you want to write it down this time. Or continue ignoring it to make your point?
.
Just a reminder: the original point revolved around gender being comparable to someone's first name or their occupation in terms of variety (oddly with being born male or female being equivalent to a crackwhore in your scenario). In your world: gender is the same as as these. But comparing it to any other object is ridiculous.
.
So, again, feel free to replace "ponderosa pine," "avocado," and "dragon" with "William Blaire Nebodeneezer" or "rocket engineer" if that makes you more comfortable.

I'm not sure what you get out of these tactics. I'm truly not. You don't like the points I was discussing, so you try to make the argument about things I never said or about the parts of them that aren't actually relevant. But since you refuse to NOT do that, once again tedium dictates I move on.
.
And don't worry - I'm leaving here with a much broader scope on your brand of respect now, so hopefully you can rest easier tonight >.>

At least for mind end, long ago I acknowledged those analogies were imperfect. If you want to debate the accuracy of the analogy that’s not the same as debating the issue at hand. As I said- and likely where I will leave this: No no one can make you respect people. You’ve made it clear that to you- the idea of a person not being male or female is laughable. You consider such people misguided, delusional, mentally ill. You STILL haven’t defined what the classifications for either gender are the 5th time I’ve asked. What is there to discuss if you cannot articulate your point? How can we determine what genders there should be or how many when you cannot define the two there are? I sleep soundly every night, but I’d thank you to keep your thoughts off of me in bed no matter how hard that might be for you. But- I can’t stop you. As has been the point- I’m asking you, it’s your choice to respect that.

How one night he physically unable to call someone a word other than “man” or “woman” I am lost on though. You don’t seem to have a good grip on your argument, can’t define what either gender is, and think that species and gender or occupation (rocket scientist) and gender are interchangeable. Despite a lengthy explanation (twice) on how language works you also don’t seem to understand what a variable is. Abstract thinking is hard for many people though so I can understand you having difficulty with it.

how's that list of 76 coming along?

Not my job to make a list. I’ll listen. I’ll respect other people. That’s where a sea of ignorant folk get mixed up. You don’t have to march on Congress or go out of your way and put up some grand effort to personally change the social norm of gender. You just gotta listen and respect other people. That’s all. Simple. Enough people do that and all those individuals a society do make. Theist writes itself at that point by those genders which have been established through usage.

It takes more effort to fight people over pronouns than it does to just nod and say “ok.” Did you know there are actually FIVE medically recognized sexes- with the last 3 being categorized together as “intersex” despite being distinct from each other? 5 sexes (or more according to some...) and... 2 genders.... you don’t have to be a math whiz to figure out those aren’t related 1/1. We also know there are more than 2 types of sexual attraction. So... how do any of these numbers line up to 2 genders?

Men, women, gay, lesbian, trans, +72 made up potatos.
if i fuck a goat and then a sheep, does that add 2 more genders to it?

Trans isn't a gender, it's a descriptive word. Also guest, you're doing great

two genders, rest are just preferences

No one calls gay and lesbian genders, those are sexualities. Gender is determined by society, so one can basically whatever they want.

you're right, only male and female are classified as genders, the rest are just preferences

Sexuality is basically just a preference. You're straight? You have a strong preference for your gender's opposite. You're gay? You have a strong preference for the same gender. You're bi? Your preference is to love all genders.
As for gender, it is separate from sex, and one can choose a gender, or choose not to have one. It all comes down to one's own preference.

We should all accept that there are 76 genders, condemn anyone who even implies otherwise, and never ever ever ever ever EVER laugh at humor that might offend someone.
.
Just the other day I laughed at a joke about murder. I automatically became a serial killer. I've killed 14 people so far. Put a gun right to their heads. Pulled the trigger, now they're dead. I can no longer stop. Please send help..

The difference between putting a knife in a man and laughing or laughing at the idea of a man getting a knife put in him is a far cry from making fun of someone. There’s nothing wrong with topical or edgy humor- but there’s a HUGE difference in laughing at society and making fun of a group of people. Especially when those people are so marginalized by society that it either thinks they don’t exist, shouldn’t exist, or are mentally ill for existing.

If you gotta actually kill someone to be a murderer- but to be a bigot, to repress a person or group, all you have to do is say a few words or trivialize them- then there should hopefully be a clear difference there- even to you.

But you aren’t just laughing at the joke are you? I laughed at it. It’s funny as an imaginary line of dialog. Funny at how abrupt and ignorant the man in the second panel is. Dark humor. But the line that separates humor from propaganda is often found in the comments. I laughed at this- but I also acknowledge that people deserve the right to respect and that there can be more than 2 genders. When you come to the comments and argue for the second panel- you are saying there is truth to the jest. You aren’t laughing with the target you are laughing at them. There’s one critical litmus test you can use. You don’t become a bigot by laughing at people the same as you don’t become a murderer when the knife goes in. You already were. You just needed opportunity and a victim.

....didn't mean to make you cry.
Carry on, carry on.

how about this, two genders, male and female, the rest is just preferences