Members profile: Why was info about profession and gender removed?

[elroy]

I’m not going to comment here about surgery or teaching/exams, as both are off-topic.

If police is after me and they ask you what nationality I am and you think I am Czech, then the sentence is utterly normal.

That is not the scenario I was thinking of. If you tell me you’re Slovak yet I insist on referring to you as Czech because that’s how I “perceive” you, then that’s problematic because it’s at best disrespectful to you and at worst psychologically damaging.

I wouldn't have guessed that it refers to binary system which is supposed not to exist.

It’s only a reference to a binary system that many people have historically believed exists and many people today believe exists. It doesn’t mean you believe that that binary system exists.

Gender dysphoria is still classified as mental illness.

Not all people with a non-traditional gender identity have gender dysphoria.

I think people should be aware that providing inclusive gender options is entangled with a belief system which enables those surgeries.

That’s an all-or-nothing fallacy. Even if you disagree with the surgery you can still support people’s right to disclose their true gender identity.

 

[siares]

That is not the scenario I was thinking of. If you tell me you’re Slovak yet I insist on referring to you as Czech because that’s how I “perceive” you, then that’s problematic because it’s at best disrespectful to you and at worst psychologically damaging.

If I only speak native-level Czech, I would expect you describe me as Czech-sounding person who claims is Slovak or presumed a bilingual speaker.

Not all people with a non-traditional gender identity have gender dysphoria.

Sure, but we mentioned mental illness in the context of giving consent to surgeries.
I am aware that people fight for the right to have surgeries even when they don't have dysphoria. In the absence of illness, the surgeries would cease to be a 'treatment'.

That’s an all-or-nothing fallacy. Even if you disagree with the surgery you can still support people’s right to disclose their true gender identity.

Sure, demand for surgeries is just one of the contradictions (gender identity is unconnected to bodies; change to bodies is needed).

Do you support the right of members to disclose their lack of gender identity, along with biological sex?

 

[elroy]

If I only speak native-level Czech, I would expect you describe me as Czech-sounding person who claims is Slovak or presumed a bilingual speaker.

This is not relevant to the point I made.

In the absence of illness, the surgeries would cease to be a 'treatment'.

The surgery is not meant to be a "treatment," at least not in all cases.

one of the contradictions (gender identity is unconnected to bodies; change to bodies is needed)

I already addressed this:

Not all non-binary people seek sex reassignment surgery. Some do, because it makes them feel more comfortable in their body. No one said that biological sex is "kept out of the equation." What we're saying is that, for example, having a penis does not equate to having male gender. You can have a penis and identify as female, and, as a female, you may or may not seek sex reassignment surgery, depending on the relevance of what your body looks like to your psycho-socio-emotional well-being. So biological sex is relevant; it just doesn't neatly align with gender.

Sex reassignment surgery is not needed, at least not in every case. It's an option that some people choose to avail themselves of.

Do you support the right of members to disclose their lack of gender identity, along with biological sex?

Are you referring to someone who identifies with the gender traditionally associated with their biological sex, in other words, a cis-male or a cis-female? If so, then I support their right to check "male" or "female," since that would be the gender they identify with.

To clarify, when I say "identifies with the gender traditionally associated with their biological sex," I mean that if asked "What gender are you?" as an open-ended question, they would say "male" or "female." If their response is anything else, then they have a different gender identity (not "male" or "female") that would need a different label/description.

 

[siares]

Sex reassignment surgery is not needed, at least not in every case. It's an option that some people choose to avail themselves of.

Thanks. It would be great if insurance companies thought so and didn't pay for it; for the sake of patients, not money.

Are you referring to someone who identifies with the gender traditionally associated with their biological sex, in other words, a cis-male or a cis-female? If so, then I support their right to check "male" or "female," since that would be the gender they identify with.

No, I am talking about someone who doesn't have a gender identity, but knows their sex and has gendered language where people are referred to and addressed not just in pronouns but elsewhere too based on their perceived sex.

To clarify, when I say "identifies with the gender traditionally associated with their biological sex," I mean that if asked "What gender are you?" as an open-ended question, they would say "male" or "female."

Can all languages, of members reading this thread at least, pose such a question?

 

[elroy]

No, I am talking about someone who doesn't have a gender identity, but knows their sex and has gendered language where people are referred to and addressed not just in pronouns but elsewhere too based on their perceived sex.

Are you referring to the language this person uses, or the language people use to refer to this person (and that this person is comfortable with)?

Can all languages, of members reading this thread at least, pose such a question?

Probably not (yet).

 

[siares]

Are you referring to the language this person uses, or the language people use to refer to this person (and that this person is comfortable with)?

Both. In practice on the forum if somebody says they are a female native speaker, a learner of that language will expect them to refer to themselves in a correctly gendered forms, and the would try to talk to that speaker in correctly gendered form too, to practice verbs.
In real life comfort would come into it if the person talked about is known, but that is not that often the case in lessons which here at least use exercises in textbooks.

 

[elroy]

It is not relevant what pronouns User A uses to refer to other people. That's a whole other kettle of fish that is unrelated to the topic of this thread.

Second, as far as User A's own situation, there are two aspects:
(1) what their gender is
(2) what their pronouns are

They may choose to reveal (A) only their gender, (B) only their pronouns, or (C) both. This would look like this, for example:

(A) Gender: Female
(B) Pronouns: she/her/hers
(C) Gender: Female; Pronouns: she/her/hers

(C) is the most informative and instructive. This way, users know what gender to use in reference to User A, and what pronouns to use to refer to her.

(A) and (B) are a bit trickier. Under (B), we know what pronouns to use but we don't know what her gender is (it may be non-binary). Under (A), we know what their gender is but we don't know what their preferred pronouns are (they may be "they/them/theirs," for example).

We can only be held responsible for what we know. If we don't know what a person's gender is or what their pronouns are, then of course we can't be expected to know how to refer to them. We can play it safe by using "they" as a gender-neutral pronoun [EDIT: I just realized I unconsciously did this above when writing points (1) and (2)!] and by avoiding an explicit reference to gender.

As I said in an earlier post, at its core this is not about what other users may choose to do with the information given. It's about every user's right to be able to give that information in the same way, should they choose to do so.

 

[siares]

It is not relevant what pronouns User A uses to refer to other people.

But user A could be talking to and about other members, or about celebrities.

(C) Gender: Female; Pronouns: she/her/hers

I really think we should have separate 'sex' category too, for the reasons I've given. If there is every user's right to give information about oneself.

(2) what their pronouns are

Verb forms would be needed too, especially for nonbinary genders - maybe they are neuter, or contain @, or some newly invented ones.

If there are any non-traditional combinations, there would have to be some kind of warning so that learners don't copy those forms that will make them lose exams if learned.

 

[elroy]

But user A could be talking to and about other members, or about celebrities.

How is this relevant to what options should be available to User A?

I really think we should have separate 'sex' category too, for the reasons I've given.

What reasons?

Verb forms would be needed too, especially for nonbinary genders - maybe they are neuter, or contain @, or some newly invented ones.

Yes, the situation is more complicated than just pronouns, depending on the language. But we can't fix the world in one day. Allowing users to provide pronouns in the "Gender" field is a great start. They can perhaps provide supplementary information about verbs in the "About" section.

If there are any non-traditional combinations, there would have to be some kind of warning so that learners don't copy those forms that will make them lose exams if learned.

I don't agree. We're not responsible for anyone's exam outcomes.

 

[siares]

How is this relevant to what options should be available to User A?

They are available to user B too, whom user A could be talking about. But this is more relevant with verbs I think. Using feminine pronoun and plural verb form, for example.

What reasons?

That some languages don't have gender and some people don't have gender identity.

I don't agree. We're not responsible for anyone's exam outcomes.

But I think standard language, no chatspeak etc. is required so that learners are not misled.

 

[elroy]

They are available to user B too, whom user A could be talking about. But this is more relevant with verbs I think. Using feminine pronoun and plural verb form, for example.

Sorry, I still don't understand what you're getting at.

That some languages people don't have gender

No one is required to share anything. If the languages they use and the languages people use with them don't have gender or if this is not an issue, then they don't have to post anything. We already addressed this (many posts ago).

some people don't have gender identity

Everyone has a gender identity, even if it's "I don't identify with a specific gender" ("agender"). I think you might be referring to cis-gender people, i.e. people who don't identify as anything other than "male" or "female" based on the sex they were assigned at birth. If so, then they can check "male" or "female," or neither if they so choose. I don't see a problem.

As I said, biological sex is only a physical feature so I don't think it deserves to get a field of its own. And it has nothing to do with what options should be available for the "gender" category.

But I think standard language, no chatspeak etc. is required so that learners are not misled.

The scenarios you're presenting are totally unrealistic. If an exam describes a male character, then the expectation is that the student should use male pronouns. If a WR user identifies as female even though they were assigned male sex at birth, that's a different situation and it would be totally absurd to assume that that means you should use female pronouns with anyone who was assigned male at birth. That just doesn't make any sense.

 

[siares]

Everyone has a gender identity

Let me quote something back at you

what gives you the right to presume to know whether or not somebody else's experience is valid or not?

I absolutely do not have a gender identity, and I don't need to be proselytized to that I definitely do have it, just don't notice it.
I don't wish to be included in someone else's beliefs that there exists gender identity (or immortal soul, personality based on reincarnation or bloodtype etc.) If any of these options are provided when signing up, I want an option to tick: none.

If a WR user identifies as female even though they were assigned male sex at birth, that's a different situation and it would be totally absurd to assume that that means you should use female pronouns with anyone who was assigned male at birth. That just doesn't make any sense.

This goes with the thing I didn't explain well, with person A talking about person B.
Person B, called Daisy, uses she, they pronouns and verbs about herself and person A goes along with that.
A says about B: I agree with Daisy. I'll just add that where she used 'X', in my neck of the woods we would say Y, and where they used....

In gendered languages with verb agreement those two coloured words match based on the sex (pronoun), and plural pronoun requires plural verb.

If somebody signs u with a gender of genderfae and talks to somebody of genderfaunet or genderfloren, their conversation could look ungrammatical like that, with unmatching parts.

 

[elroy]

I absolutely do not have a gender identity, and I don't need to be proselytized to that I definitely do have it, just don't notice it.
I don't wish to be included in someone else's beliefs that there exists gender identity (or immortal soul, personality based on reincarnation or bloodtype etc.) If any of these options are provided when signing up, I want an option to tick: none.

I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not you have a gender identity. If you believe that you don't have one, you can write "No Gender Identity" in the write-in field.

In gendered languages with verb agreement those two coloured words match based on the sex (pronoun), and plural pronoun requires plural verb.

I'm still not sure I understand the example.

 

[siares]

I'm still not sure I understand the example.

Ohh... I feel sleepy now. Might try to think of something to add later... Or other people reading the thread!

 

[elroy]

I think at this point it’s a dialogue between the two of us.

Dobrú noc!
(Not “Dobrou noc” because I don’t think you’re Czech. )

 

[siares]

Thank you.

 

[pollohispanizado]

bienvenid al foro

Bienvenide

 

[merquiades]

On the subject of native language, if your parents, siblings, friends, school, work and society in general where you live speak one common language, there is, of course, no problem declaring which is your language.
But imagine there is more than one language used in a given area. One of them could be your mother tongue, another one could be the language you habitually use, and another could be the language you identify with.

I have read that depending on how a language survey question is worded you get very different answers in a place like the Ukraine.
Also immigrants to another country could reject or treasure their parents' language regardless of their ability to speak it.
This could be the case in an area that has a heritage language. You identify with Irish, are proud of it and you learned it but in reality you never use it.


Anyway I'm sure some people in WR answer the language question thinking of identification rather than mother tongue or actual daily use or ability. Maybe the other way around too....

Perhaps we ought to find a way to focus on language skills. Which language(s) do you know best?

 

[pollohispanizado]

Perhaps we ought to find a way to focus on language skills. Which language(s) do you know best?

This is a sticky question too for the same reason as the native language. Since language is as much a tool as part of one's culture and identity, one could be able to speak at length about a certain topic in a given language but not in another, even though in other situations they have a native level. Languages are weird and unique for this.