Like a good Texan would!!! LYNCH WHAT WE DON'T LIKE, RA RA RA!!! HOOK EM!!!

Why will nobody think of the hermaphodites!?!?

And to say that you live in a culturaly diverse city is irrelvant, if you never leave the thinking space of the academic instutions.

Because academic places take diversity and merge it into sameness.

Just because this is the only post you've made that's worth a response, you get one response.

You are overly caught up in labels, and I believe it is a source of great confusion in your life. Most of us see in greyscales better than we give each other credit for. I do not feel any deep-rooted confusion over say, Celina (who is female and feminine and also shows a fair number of masculine traits) or Shiri (who is male and neither masculine or feminine) or Josun (who has a female player but handled masculinity well enough). They are, in fact, only one thing: that list has two women and one man, and normal people do not get caught up in an individual's "gender," mostly because the majority of the English-speaking world is beyond that.

You've dug up a rather disparate list to try to prove your point. The concept of "two-spirit" refers solely to flexibility in traditional gender roles and does little more than illustrate how woefully intolerant most Native American cultures were. The idea of a woman who could lead decisively or a man who could display deep empathy was such a baffling idea to them that it just had to be supernatural. In modern America, we call this "personality" or "talent," and we sure as hell don't dance around the bonfire and offer sacrifices because our society risks a woman becoming CEO. Likewise for anything coming out of India. These are the people who gave us the world's most ridiculous caste system, and it also extended to male and female roles. It's also worth noting that, even in this, Indians are biased--you rarely hear women spoken of as hijra, which is a huge part of the reason that most Westerners just use the term "eunich."

The modern examples aren't really any different. Transgender movements are a result of an opener attitude towards gender roles. You want to fill a male role? Great, go do it. You want to abolish the concepts of masculinity and femininity? I won't be there helping, but I won't stand in your way either. Transsexuality borrows from the same open attitude and the miracles of modern science - hijra, now with 50% less oppression and an operation that goes all the way! Intersexuality is so incredibly rare that, quite frankly, it doesn't count. Self-identify and move on.

There's another side to this, though. It's the side of the activists who, somewhere along the way, lost hold of reality. You're not much different than a racist African-American. You get some measure of tolerance because crappy things happened to people who are not you but could have been you, and because most of us acknowledge that the problem isn't entirely gone. You still get to wear the "bad person" badge of honor with Stangmar, though. You see, just like racist African-Americans, you're part of the problem. You create issues where there are no issues. You draw the wrath of sympathetic souls with your whining.

Normal people do not freak out over colloquial usages. Shiri can't tell the difference between a biscuit and a cookie to save his life, but we don't harass him except out of fun. Normal people also do not freak out over categories. I like snuggling in bed, cooking, flowers, and things that smell sweet. I like language more than math, I enjoy romantic comedies, and I played with more stuffed animals than trucks or superheroes when I was growing up. All the same, if I'm faced with a form that says Gender: M/F, I am not going to freak out about accurately describing how I fit into society, I am not going to be offended at the intrusion into my personal life, and I'm not going to scratch out "gender" and replace it with "sex" out of principle. I'm going to circle M. Why? Because that's what they wanted me to do.

You know, for someone who's all upset because of discrimination, you sure are using a lot of snotty comments. I used to live in Texas and my sister was born there. You're upset because folks are using 'gender' inappropriately, well I'm starting to get peeved at your very obvious bias against Texans.

Fact: When you act like this, people stop taking your arguments seriously.
edit: And yes, I did see where Celina threatened to throw a dictionary at you. But it's hardly the first time you've said things like that.

I'm not upset about discriminiation. Get it straight. I said using gender in place of sex is wrong and inaccurate. It can lead to discrimination of those people who do not conform to societies gender roles.

I am a Texan and if I want to knock the culture, I can...I know it, I grew up in it. I remember James Earl Byrd who was drug behind a truck until his head popped off...because someone didn't like the color of his skin.

.
And if you do everything that you are asked...you've got a problem.

There are a-holes in every state. Texas doesn't have a monopoly on them. And saying you're not upset about discrimination and then saying something leads to discrimination is kind of... wonky.

Because academic places take diversity and merge it into sameness.

Ameri, let's see some references. At the moment a significant quota of your points resemble a house of cards waiting for a light breeze. If you want the forum community to take your points seriously, you're going to have to cite. The WHO stuff is a perfectly reasonable start, but links/citations would be appreciated.

You're also going to have to keep it PG-13 (I've removed one of your posts).
That says a considerable amount about your alma mater, I fear. It was very much the opposite at mine.

WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: www.who.int/gender/whatisgender/en/

Canadian Institutes of Health Research: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/32019.html

Start with those, and if all else fails GOOGLE Difference between gender and sex

edit: And yes, I did see where Celina threatened to throw a dictionary at you. But it's hardly the first time you've said things like that.

YEEHAW

Besides, if you really want to be technical, since it's a text colt it doesn't have any physical sex anyways, all it can have is gender because it will seem one way or the other but not actually be one way or the other in physical sense.

I suppose I should admit at this juncture that I didn't bother to do more than skim any page but this one and what I was really looking for was a citation to support this:

"The tying of sex to gender was a culturally and political method of control and discrimination. "

My suggestion that you cite was based upon an extrapolation that the rest of your posts were in this vein (which, broadly, they aren't), and that citation would therefore be helpful.

With the notable exception of the point above, which I disagree with on a number of levels, your points seem reasonable enough. I can certainly buy the argument that that traditional gender based stereotyping can have adverse effects on a certain type of individual and that sex and gender should have different meanings. Of course, the premise of your opening post is that they (sex and gender) do already - which obviously they don't, a point that Valestrix rebutted well.

Added to that the idea that before 1850 sex and gender were never mixed. I'd really like to see a source for that piece of academic wisdom.

Kettle, pot, pot, kettle. The idiot part, anyway.