Jump to content

A question about those who identify as intergender or bigender...


R_1

Recommended Posts

Why is it I have never heard of people who feel as if they are intersex or wants to be medically intersex?

Link to post
Share on other sites

there are a lot of people who want to appear physically genderless (like me tbh...) but medical technology doesnt allow for any of this. given the choice i would want No hormones (neither testosterone nor estrogen) but you know, osteporosis is a thing.

also,

gatekeeping is a huge problem, and therapists will refuse to believe someone is trans (and thereby restrict their access to healthcare) if said person is not on the gender binary. theres actually a lot of really bad binarism out there, so if you actually read up on this, you'd know that there are tons of people out there who would love to do just that, but are restricted by a transphobic healthcare system.
(Also theres such a thing as "genital nullification" that i've heard mention of, but i don't know if people do it ever. probably dont look it up)

(realize though that intersex does not apply here as that word is specifically for people's birth sex.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

people who feel as if they are intersex

Because intersex is a biological condition, not a gender identity.

wants to be medically intersex?

There is a word for this: neutrois

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mostly Peaceful Ryan

Why is it I have never heard of people who feel as if they are intersex or wants to be medically intersex?

I'm Pangender but pretty much sometimes my parts match how I feel and sometimes it doesn't so why do surgery to change around stuff just to part of the time feel right anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites

people who feel as if they are intersex

Because intersex is a biological condition, not a gender identity.

wants to be medically intersex?

There is a word for this: neutrois

Neutrois isn't exactly the term that is perfect for that description, but it does come very close. Is there a closer label?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutrois isn't exactly the term that is perfect for that description, but it does come very close. Is there a closer label?

I'm not sure, but I can assure you that using "intersex" as a gender label is much farther away from "neutrois"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutrois doesn't exactly describe that.. For example I wish to have no sex organs, but I'm still agender (because I'm genderless, whereas neutrois is regarded as having a gender still).

You probably haven't heard of those who wish to be medically intersex because it's impossible to transition to. As Robin pointed out - it's a **congenital** condition.

You can be neutrois and transition, though, or be agender and transition. Whether you have dysphoria or not doesn't define your gender.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay i am not trying to be mean, I am literally ignorant about this so please don't judge me to harshly.

Being intersex is a medical condition in the way that being male is a medical condition, isn't it?

I mean there both the sex that you are born with.

I understand what appropriation is but isn't there a difference between someone using it to seem cool and someone who actually has dysphoria in that direction?

Please enlighten me, I am not intersex. But I want to understand, why people get so upset about this. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe... You mean androgynous? It means appearing like something between female and male. And yes, there is lots of people who feel this way and who want to transition into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay i am not trying to be mean, I am literally ignorant about this so please don't judge me to harshly.

Being intersex is a medical condition in the way that being male is a medical condition, isn't it?

I mean there both the sex that you are born with.

I understand what appropriation is but isn't there a difference between someone using it to seem cool and someone who actually has dysphoria in that direction?

Please enlighten me, I am not intersex. But I want to understand, why people get so upset about this. Thanks

If we really wanted to get technically, the medical community regularly thinks of three sexes (5 if you're talking about Fausto-Sterling and her piece called "the five sexes; when male and female are not enough) male, female, and intersex. You technically cannot become "male" or become "female" like you can become "man" or "woman". In general these terms are used interchangeably but they can mean greatly different things depending on what you're reading.

That being said, Dysphoria is terrible. I think there is a difference in saying you would like to be like someone who is intersex (using that as a description) and someone who is saying "I want to be intersex". The community tends to have better terms to describe someone who'd like to have that physical or mental anatomy. Bigender (being a combination of both masculine and feminine).

“Intersex” is a general term used for a variety of conditions in which a person is born with a reproductive or sexual anatomy that doesn’t seem to fit the typical definitions of female or male. For example, a person might be born appearing to be female on the outside, but having mostly male-typical anatomy on the inside. Or a person may be born with genitals that seem to be in-between the usual male and female types—for example, a girl may be born with a noticeably large clitoris, or lacking a vaginal opening, or a boy may be born with a notably small penis, or with a scrotum that is divided so that it has formed more like labia. Or a person may be born with mosaic genetics, so that some of her cells have XX chromosomes and some of them have XY. Taken from http://www.isna.org/faq/what_is_intersex

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neutrois is having a gender, which is neutral. Many Neutrois want to appear void from secondary sex characteristics (Eg, no breasts, no facial hair and so on).

Androgyne would probably be the closest to what we're thinking in this thread (both male and female), and being an Androgyne is completely different to Neutrois.

Think of Neutrois as something completely seperate from man/woman, but at the same time, it isn't both man and woman, it's a neutral gender in its own right. But many Neutrois would probably want an androgynous appearance.

Maybe... You mean androgynous? It means appearing like something between female and male. And yes, there is lots of people who feel this way and who want to transition into it.

Yeah as a gender identity, it would be Androgyne. Androgynous is simply a mixture of masculine and feminine.

Neutrois are not Androgynes, and do not identify as intersex (which is usually referred more as a biological condition).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't understand why somone can't say like FTI or MTI. Obviously you can't become male. Oooh wait a minute, like it's a trans man, not trans male. So intersex is the sex while, adrogyne? Would be the gender? So it would be FTA? That makes more sense, it was just confusing me because male and man are often used interchangably, but intersex didn't really seem to have a gender term for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we don't hear about people who "want to be intersex" as often simply because there is no good word for it. So instead, we hear of people who want to transition to having no sexual characteristics, or to having some combination of them that they weren't born with. But that doesn't register as "wanting to be intersex" for a few reasons: first, saying "I want to be intersex" is a problematic phrase due to the discrimination and oppression of born-intersex people, and secondly, it's purely a medical term used by doctors. It wasn't until recently that people became open about having that diagnosis in a public way. And even more recently, when the term is starting to be reclaimed as an identity by intersex people.

Instead, what words people tend to use are "null" or "androgyne", or simply "nonbinary" for describing transitions that are nonbinary. The next bit gets very anatomical, so I'll spoiler it just in case. I use purely biological terms, but I do use explicit biological terms to describe transitions. I'll be describing different transitions I know are possible and/or I've met people who want or have done, that are not to a strictly binary sex.

Null refers to a transition that creates a body with no sexual characteristics; it can be as simple as electrolysis to get rid of male-pattern facial hair, or top surgery to get rid of female-pattern chest bumps. Or it can include genital surgery to get rid of any female-like sexual characteristics (vagina opening, labia, etc) or male-like sexual characteristics (penis, testicles), and create a genital region that functions for waste disposal but is devoid of sexual organs.

Androgyne refers to wanting a combination of sexual characteristics, sometimes as many of them as possible or sometimes only select ones. This is a confusing term though, because it has developped in such a way as to be used both for the gender and the physical transition, so often people will say "physically androgynous" to make it clear they mean a physical transition. This can include, for example, HRT but no surgery for someone, or any other combination they feel they want. Someone who is AMAB can grow breasts, for example, without losing their facial hair or genitals. Someone who is AFAB could grow facial hair but keep their breasts and genitals, etc. These are only some examples of things I've actually heard of people wanting and/or doing, but I'm sure there are many more variations out there.

And, of course, nonbinary is an umbrella term for any transition that is not to a binary physicality.

And yes, FTA and MTA can be used, and I know at least one person in the past who has used this to describe themselves. I have also seen FTN and MTN, for transition to Null.

I hope that helps a bit...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

And unless you actually are intersex, you can't "feel as if you are intersex".

The issue with this is uh one can say the same thing about being male/female unless you apply the same logic to those. If that's the case, then your logic is consistent. Yes, there are people who do want to be perceived as intersex. Nothing you say will change that. Asides, androgyne isn't a much better alternative to neutrious, and androgyne can describe people who dresses up as a mix of two socially perceived gender. Actually, there's just no good word to describe people who wants to be literally intersexed by the medical community.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trans women are women and therefore female. Trans men are men and therefore male. Besides that, intersex! Trans! People! Exist! Stop using a false analogy!

I'm not using a false analogy. I'm simply pointing out the hypocritical stance of yours whereas you claim that trans-males/trans-females feel male/female and yet you can argue that transgendered individual has absolutely no basis for claiming they feel that way as they aren't born with how one would classify a male/female from the essentialism perspective. That being said, there isn't really any evidence against existence of individuals who strongly feel as if they're supposed to be intersexed. And asides, I don't remember you being a representative of a the intersex community, and I don't think you speak for individuals who actually do find themselves with the belief that they feel as if they're intersexed. So tell me, why is it people cannot feel intersexed and of course they have no obvious reference as to what it's like to be one, and yet one can feel a male/female while having no reference what it's like to be considered biologically one from the essential perspective. Recent evidences suggests males and females aren't that different, and there are practically zero good evidence of differences in thought processes, but we don't deny that trans-individuals have the rights to be treated as how they want to be treated as, and many people can respect their identity or the way that they feel.

My point? My point is that you either believe people can feel any kind of body and fit into any kind of mindset, or you don't. You can't just support a double standards without ignoring the inconsistency within your logics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we don't hear about people who "want to be intersex" as often simply because there is no good word for it. So instead, we hear of people who want to transition to having no sexual characteristics, or to having some combination of them that they weren't born with. But that doesn't register as "wanting to be intersex" for a few reasons: first, saying "I want to be intersex" is a problematic phrase due to the discrimination and oppression of born-intersex people, and secondly, it's purely a medical term used by doctors. It wasn't until recently that people became open about having that diagnosis in a public way. And even more recently, when the term is starting to be reclaimed as an identity by intersex people.

Instead, what words people tend to use are "null" or "androgyne", or simply "nonbinary" for describing transitions that are nonbinary. The next bit gets very anatomical, so I'll spoiler it just in case. I use purely biological terms, but I do use explicit biological terms to describe transitions. I'll be describing different transitions I know are possible and/or I've met people who want or have done, that are not to a strictly binary sex.

Null refers to a transition that creates a body with no sexual characteristics; it can be as simple as electrolysis to get rid of male-pattern facial hair, or top surgery to get rid of female-pattern chest bumps. Or it can include genital surgery to get rid of any female-like sexual characteristics (vagina opening, labia, etc) or male-like sexual characteristics (penis, testicles), and create a genital region that functions for waste disposal but is devoid of sexual organs.

Androgyne refers to wanting a combination of sexual characteristics, sometimes as many of them as possible or sometimes only select ones. This is a confusing term though, because it has developped in such a way as to be used both for the gender and the physical transition, so often people will say "physically androgynous" to make it clear they mean a physical transition. This can include, for example, HRT but no surgery for someone, or any other combination they feel they want. Someone who is AMAB can grow breasts, for example, without losing their facial hair or genitals. Someone who is AFAB could grow facial hair but keep their breasts and genitals, etc. These are only some examples of things I've actually heard of people wanting and/or doing, but I'm sure there are many more variations out there.

And, of course, nonbinary is an umbrella term for any transition that is not to a binary physicality.

And yes, FTA and MTA can be used, and I know at least one person in the past who has used this to describe themselves. I have also seen FTN and MTN, for transition to Null.

I hope that helps a bit...

Actually, most doctors will rarely use the word "intersex" because it's considered an outdated term - yet they will use the H-slur to describe intersex people.

I didn't know that. I was under the impression that it was the other way around; the H term was considered outdated and a slur, and intersex was what people used nowadays. Maybe this depends on where in the world you are (which would make sense). Is there a newer term than intersex?

And just as a general note: I encourage discussion, but when it comes to emotionally charged topics, please be careful to remain as open as possible, and assume that whoever's post you're reading is writing it in good intents. If this gets too heated, I may ask for the discussion to go over to hot box, but for now I'm just going to encourage productive discussion :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trans women are women and therefore female. Trans men are men and therefore male. Besides that, intersex! Trans! People! Exist! Stop using a false analogy!

I'm not using a false analogy. I'm simply pointing out the hypocritical stance of yours whereas you claim that trans-males/trans-females feel male/female and yet you can argue that transgendered individual has absolutely no basis for claiming they feel that way as they aren't born with how one would classify a male/female from the essentialism perspective. That being said, there isn't really any evidence against existence of individuals who strongly feel as if they're supposed to be intersexed. And asides, I don't remember you being a representative of a the intersex community, and I don't think you speak for individuals who actually do find themselves with the belief that they feel as if they're intersexed. So tell me, why is it people cannot feel intersexed and of course they have no obvious reference as to what it's like to be one, and yet one can feel a male/female while having no reference what it's like to be considered biologically one from the essential perspective. Recent evidences suggests males and females aren't that different, and there are practically zero good evidence of differences in thought processes, but we don't deny that trans-individuals have the rights to be treated as how they want to be treated as, and many people can respect their identity or the way that they feel.

My point? My point is that you either believe people can feel any kind of body and fit into any kind of mindset, or you don't. You can't just support a double standards without ignoring the inconsistency within your logics.

You can't transition to a congenital condition. Why is this so hard for apparently 75% of the dyadics on this site to understand?

And neither you can transition to what makes up a biological male/female entirely according to the essentialism perspective and going deeper than just looks. What's your point exactly? People can feel as if their body is male or female, and yet they can't feel they're intersex or thinks they should be intersex? You see the problem with your inconsistent logic?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trans women are women and therefore female. Trans men are men and therefore male. Besides that, intersex! Trans! People! Exist! Stop using a false analogy!

I'm not using a false analogy. I'm simply pointing out the hypocritical stance of yours whereas you claim that trans-males/trans-females feel male/female and yet you can argue that transgendered individual has absolutely no basis for claiming they feel that way as they aren't born with how one would classify a male/female from the essentialism perspective. That being said, there isn't really any evidence against existence of individuals who strongly feel as if they're supposed to be intersexed. And asides, I don't remember you being a representative of a the intersex community, and I don't think you speak for individuals who actually do find themselves with the belief that they feel as if they're intersexed. So tell me, why is it people cannot feel intersexed and of course they have no obvious reference as to what it's like to be one, and yet one can feel a male/female while having no reference what it's like to be considered biologically one from the essential perspective. Recent evidences suggests males and females aren't that different, and there are practically zero good evidence of differences in thought processes, but we don't deny that trans-individuals have the rights to be treated as how they want to be treated as, and many people can respect their identity or the way that they feel.

My point? My point is that you either believe people can feel any kind of body and fit into any kind of mindset, or you don't. You can't just support a double standards without ignoring the inconsistency within your logics.

You can't transition to a congenital condition. Why is this so hard for apparently 75% of the dyadics on this site to understand?

And neither you can transition to what makes up a biological male/female entirely according to the essentialism perspective and going deeper than just looks. What's your point exactly? People can feel as if their body is male or female, and yet they can't feel they're intersex or thinks they should be intersex? You see the problem with your inconsistent logic?

There's no such thing as an intersex body. You can have a body that has ambiguous genitals, but that's not the definition of intersex. People can feel as if they are/want to be physically or mentally between genders or sexes. That's not what intersex means though. You could use the term androgyne.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no such thing as an intersex body. You can have a body that has ambiguous genitals, but that's not the definition of intersex. People can feel as if they are/want to be physically or mentally between genders or sexes. That's not what intersex means though. You could use the term androgyne.

Of course there's no such thing as a intersex body. Still doesn't change that ambiguous genitalia is one indicator of a intersex condition. Androgyne term is still a problematic term as it still doesn't always mean wanting to be perceived as phenologically ambiguous. I guess the better term is ambiguous. What actual word there exists that is actually better than a problematic term like androgyne?
Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I see a problem with your willfull ignorance. Intersex people have said, over and over and OVER again, that dyadic people can not become intersex.

A dyadic person pretending to be intersex, saying that they're "transitioning to intersex", is actively harming the intersex community because doctors often perform medically unnecessary surgeries on little intersex kids, surgeries that many intersex people who've had them grow up to regret and that take away their fertility and ability to experience sexual sensation and that leave their bodies and minds irrevocably harmed, in order to make their bodies closer to dyadic norms. If a dyadic person pretend to be intersex, then it's that much easier for dyadic people to claim that intersex people can become dyadic and therefore, genital surgeries are harmless.

No one is saying that dyadic people can't be nonbinary, or that nonbinary dyadic people can't transition to a physical state that relieves their dysphoria. We're saying that that doesn't make you intersex.

Right... Meanwhile, if you have read any posts of mine in the past, I know that not all intersex conditions involves ambiguous genitals. As for your post on defining intersex, some people uses fractional approaches to defining individuals' sex, but that's really arbitrary, but at that point it's pretty much only the medical community which can accurately describe individuals' sex in case of complicated set of chromosomes, genitals, and so on. Androgyne seems to be the more politcally correct term, but in some way it is worse than saying "I feel intersex or I feel that my body is a mix of female and male" because it doesn't always get to the point because of nebulousness of the word. "Ambiguous" as a term has other set of issues. Oh, and just to let you know, some people don't really count hormones as sex indicator. "Physically Androgyne" is easy to forget as a set of word to describe individuals like these.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I see a problem with your willfull ignorance. Intersex people have said, over and over and OVER again, that dyadic people can not become intersex.A dyadic person pretending to be intersex, saying that they're "transitioning to intersex", is actively harming the intersex community because doctors often perform medically unnecessary surgeries on little intersex kids, surgeries that many intersex people who've had them grow up to regret and that take away their fertility and ability to experience sexual sensation and that leave their bodies and minds irrevocably harmed, in order to make their bodies closer to dyadic norms. If a dyadic person pretend to be intersex, then it's that much easier for dyadic people to claim that intersex people can become dyadic and therefore, genital surgeries are harmless.No one is saying that dyadic people can't be nonbinary, or that nonbinary dyadic people can't transition to a physical state that relieves their dysphoria. We're saying that that doesn't make you intersex.

Right... Meanwhile, if you have read any posts of mine in the past, I know that not all intersex conditions involves ambiguous genitals. As for your post on defining intersex, some people uses fractional approaches to defining individuals' sex, but that's really arbitrary, but at that point it's pretty much only the medical community which can accurately describe individuals' sex in case of complicated set of chromosomes, genitals, and so on. Androgyne seems to be the more politcally correct term, but in some way it is worse than saying "I feel intersex or I feel that my body is a mix of female and male" because it doesn't always get to the point because of nebulousness of the word. "Ambiguous" as a term has other set of issues. Oh, and just to let you know, some people don't really count hormones as sex indicator. "Physically Androgyne" is easy to forget as a set of word to describe individuals like these.
"politically correct" is this your way of pouting because intersex people are angry about dyadic people appropriating our culture and experiences, and invading our community? Are you pouting about those dumb bunny hermaphrodites having the nerve to define their own identities and demand a space free of their oppressors? How dare intersex people, amiright?

"Politically correct" means there isn't a viable alternative which is apparently the least offensive while the term itself isn't very coherent. There's 3-4 alternatives to androgyne and while some of them are more coherent, they have their own set of problems. And, I'm just gonna say this, I wouldn't speak for every intersex individuals if I were intersex, and I have no business speaking for other asexuals as one who can qualify as an asexual.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ChillaKilla

I'm also intersex and agree with Arodynamic. If a marginalized group tells you no, that isn't an invitation to flex your debate skills.

Time and time again intersex individuals have spoken out on how dyadics taking the intersex/intergender label is appropriative, but you refuse to acknowledge them by saying "they don't represent everyone".

However, I'd bet a fair amount that if you found just one intersex person who didn't think it was appropriative, you'd cling onto that and use them as your token intersex person defending your appropriation, even though they obviously don't represent the majority opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also intersex and agree with Arodynamic. If a marginalized group tells you no, that isn't an invitation to flex your debate skills.

Time and time again intersex individuals have spoken out on how dyadics taking the intersex/intergender label is appropriative, but you refuse to acknowledge them by saying "they don't represent everyone".

However, I'd bet a fair amount that if you found just one intersex person who didn't think it was appropriative, you'd cling onto that and use them as your token intersex person defending your appropriation, even though they obviously don't represent the majority opinion.

A individual or two samples (You and Arodynamic) aren't enough to be representative of a very large group (approximately about 4.5 million) and that isn't how debates work. Not even a few hundreds will do. Asides, you are literally speaking to someone who arguably belong to a marginalized group according to the evidences presented so far although us being marginalized for being asexual or being a varient of asexual to a relevant level is a whole another question.

No. I see a problem with your willfull ignorance. Intersex people have said, over and over and OVER again, that dyadic people can not become intersex.A dyadic person pretending to be intersex, saying that they're "transitioning to intersex", is actively harming the intersex community because doctors often perform medically unnecessary surgeries on little intersex kids, surgeries that many intersex people who've had them grow up to regret and that take away their fertility and ability to experience sexual sensation and that leave their bodies and minds irrevocably harmed, in order to make their bodies closer to dyadic norms. If a dyadic person pretend to be intersex, then it's that much easier for dyadic people to claim that intersex people can become dyadic and therefore, genital surgeries are harmless.No one is saying that dyadic people can't be nonbinary, or that nonbinary dyadic people can't transition to a physical state that relieves their dysphoria. We're saying that that doesn't make you intersex.

Right... Meanwhile, if you have read any posts of mine in the past, I know that not all intersex conditions involves ambiguous genitals. As for your post on defining intersex, some people uses fractional approaches to defining individuals' sex, but that's really arbitrary, but at that point it's pretty much only the medical community which can accurately describe individuals' sex in case of complicated set of chromosomes, genitals, and so on. Androgyne seems to be the more politcally correct term, but in some way it is worse than saying "I feel intersex or I feel that my body is a mix of female and male" because it doesn't always get to the point because of nebulousness of the word. "Ambiguous" as a term has other set of issues. Oh, and just to let you know, some people don't really count hormones as sex indicator. "Physically Androgyne" is easy to forget as a set of word to describe individuals like these.
"politically correct" is this your way of pouting because intersex people are angry about dyadic people appropriating our culture and experiences, and invading our community? Are you pouting about those dumb bunny hermaphrodites having the nerve to define their own identities and demand a space free of their oppressors? How dare intersex people, amiright?
"Politically correct" means there isn't a viable alternative which is apparently the least offensive while the term itself isn't very coherent. There's 3-4 alternatives to androgyne and while some of them are more coherent, they have their own set of problems. And, I'm just gonna say this, I wouldn't speak for every intersex individuals if I were intersex, and I have no business speaking for other asexuals as one who can qualify as an asexual.

You have no business speaking for intersex people at all. I do.

You don't speak for over 4 million people (intersex population according to ISNA and mathematics), and I don't speak for the possibly 70 million asexuals in the world. I can only speak for myself and especially when I can arguably belong in that group of should be 70+ million people in the Planet Earth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ChillaKilla

I'm also intersex and agree with Arodynamic. If a marginalized group tells you no, that isn't an invitation to flex your debate skills.

Time and time again intersex individuals have spoken out on how dyadics taking the intersex/intergender label is appropriative, but you refuse to acknowledge them by saying "they don't represent everyone".

However, I'd bet a fair amount that if you found just one intersex person who didn't think it was appropriative, you'd cling onto that and use them as your token intersex person defending your appropriation, even though they obviously don't represent the majority opinion.

A individual or two samples (You and Arodynamic) aren't enough to be representative of a very large group (approximately about 4.5 million) and that isn't how debates work. Not even a few hundreds will do. Asides, you are literally speaking to someone who arguably belong to a marginalized group according to the evidences presented so far although us being marginalized for being asexual or being a varient of asexual to a relevant level is a whole another question.

No. I see a problem with your willfull ignorance. Intersex people have said, over and over and OVER again, that dyadic people can not become intersex.A dyadic person pretending to be intersex, saying that they're "transitioning to intersex", is actively harming the intersex community because doctors often perform medically unnecessary surgeries on little intersex kids, surgeries that many intersex people who've had them grow up to regret and that take away their fertility and ability to experience sexual sensation and that leave their bodies and minds irrevocably harmed, in order to make their bodies closer to dyadic norms. If a dyadic person pretend to be intersex, then it's that much easier for dyadic people to claim that intersex people can become dyadic and therefore, genital surgeries are harmless.No one is saying that dyadic people can't be nonbinary, or that nonbinary dyadic people can't transition to a physical state that relieves their dysphoria. We're saying that that doesn't make you intersex.

Right... Meanwhile, if you have read any posts of mine in the past, I know that not all intersex conditions involves ambiguous genitals. As for your post on defining intersex, some people uses fractional approaches to defining individuals' sex, but that's really arbitrary, but at that point it's pretty much only the medical community which can accurately describe individuals' sex in case of complicated set of chromosomes, genitals, and so on. Androgyne seems to be the more politcally correct term, but in some way it is worse than saying "I feel intersex or I feel that my body is a mix of female and male" because it doesn't always get to the point because of nebulousness of the word. "Ambiguous" as a term has other set of issues. Oh, and just to let you know, some people don't really count hormones as sex indicator. "Physically Androgyne" is easy to forget as a set of word to describe individuals like these.
"politically correct" is this your way of pouting because intersex people are angry about dyadic people appropriating our culture and experiences, and invading our community? Are you pouting about those dumb bunny hermaphrodites having the nerve to define their own identities and demand a space free of their oppressors? How dare intersex people, amiright?
"Politically correct" means there isn't a viable alternative which is apparently the least offensive while the term itself isn't very coherent. There's 3-4 alternatives to androgyne and while some of them are more coherent, they have their own set of problems. And, I'm just gonna say this, I wouldn't speak for every intersex individuals if I were intersex, and I have no business speaking for other asexuals as one who can qualify as an asexual.
You have no business speaking for intersex people at all. I do.
You don't speak for over 4 million people (intersex population according to ISNA and mathematics), and I don't speak for the possibly 70 million asexuals in the world. I can only speak for myself and especially when I can arguably belong in that group of should be 70+ million people in the Planet Earth.
Look, do you honestly expect every single intersex person in the world to come together and decide whether your terminology is okay? That's awfully entitled. Is it that hard to listen to two people who are saying that it's not okay? If other people are fine with it, then that's okay, but your appropriating is causing harm, and you should probably listen when you're told to stop. You asked why not, we explained, and you blatantly ignored that and tried to challenge our authority in the subject.

Also, why is your minority status relevant? Minority races can be racist. LGB people can be transphobic. And asexuals can be( and are being) intersexist.

If I ran around saying you and all asexuals have a low libido and I got called out on it, I wouldn't stubbornly insist that I'm right even when the group actually affected by my ignorance is telling it to my face. I certainly wouldn't say "you're not every asexual so you can't tell me I'm wrong". I wouldn't say "there's no better alternative to say so I'll just continue to be disrespectful because I find changing my term usage to be inconvenient" even though people actually become more marginalized by the untruths being spread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also intersex and agree with Arodynamic. If a marginalized group tells you no, that isn't an invitation to flex your debate skills.

Time and time again intersex individuals have spoken out on how dyadics taking the intersex/intergender label is appropriative, but you refuse to acknowledge them by saying "they don't represent everyone".

However, I'd bet a fair amount that if you found just one intersex person who didn't think it was appropriative, you'd cling onto that and use them as your token intersex person defending your appropriation, even though they obviously don't represent the majority opinion.

A individual or two samples (You and Arodynamic) aren't enough to be representative of a very large group (approximately about 4.5 million) and that isn't how debates work. Not even a few hundreds will do. Asides, you are literally speaking to someone who arguably belong to a marginalized group according to the evidences presented so far although us being marginalized for being asexual or being a varient of asexual to a relevant level is a whole another question.

No. I see a problem with your willfull ignorance. Intersex people have said, over and over and OVER again, that dyadic people can not become intersex.A dyadic person pretending to be intersex, saying that they're "transitioning to intersex", is actively harming the intersex community because doctors often perform medically unnecessary surgeries on little intersex kids, surgeries that many intersex people who've had them grow up to regret and that take away their fertility and ability to experience sexual sensation and that leave their bodies and minds irrevocably harmed, in order to make their bodies closer to dyadic norms. If a dyadic person pretend to be intersex, then it's that much easier for dyadic people to claim that intersex people can become dyadic and therefore, genital surgeries are harmless.No one is saying that dyadic people can't be nonbinary, or that nonbinary dyadic people can't transition to a physical state that relieves their dysphoria. We're saying that that doesn't make you intersex.

Right... Meanwhile, if you have read any posts of mine in the past, I know that not all intersex conditions involves ambiguous genitals. As for your post on defining intersex, some people uses fractional approaches to defining individuals' sex, but that's really arbitrary, but at that point it's pretty much only the medical community which can accurately describe individuals' sex in case of complicated set of chromosomes, genitals, and so on. Androgyne seems to be the more politcally correct term, but in some way it is worse than saying "I feel intersex or I feel that my body is a mix of female and male" because it doesn't always get to the point because of nebulousness of the word. "Ambiguous" as a term has other set of issues. Oh, and just to let you know, some people don't really count hormones as sex indicator. "Physically Androgyne" is easy to forget as a set of word to describe individuals like these.
"politically correct" is this your way of pouting because intersex people are angry about dyadic people appropriating our culture and experiences, and invading our community? Are you pouting about those dumb bunny hermaphrodites having the nerve to define their own identities and demand a space free of their oppressors? How dare intersex people, amiright?
"Politically correct" means there isn't a viable alternative which is apparently the least offensive while the term itself isn't very coherent. There's 3-4 alternatives to androgyne and while some of them are more coherent, they have their own set of problems. And, I'm just gonna say this, I wouldn't speak for every intersex individuals if I were intersex, and I have no business speaking for other asexuals as one who can qualify as an asexual.
You have no business speaking for intersex people at all. I do.
You don't speak for over 4 million people (intersex population according to ISNA and mathematics), and I don't speak for the possibly 70 million asexuals in the world. I can only speak for myself and especially when I can arguably belong in that group of should be 70+ million people in the Planet Earth.
Look, do you honestly expect every single intersex person in the world to come together and decide whether your terminology is okay? That's awfully entitled. Is it that hard to listen to two people who are saying that it's not okay? If other people are fine with it, then that's okay, but your appropriating is causing harm, and you should probably listen when you're told to stop. You asked why not, we explained, and you blatantly ignored that and tried to challenge our authority in the subject.

Also, why is your minority status relevant? Minority races can be racist. LGB people can be transphobic. And asexuals can be( and are being) intersexist.

If I ran around saying you and all asexuals have a low libido and I got called out on it, I wouldn't stubbornly insist that I'm right even when the group actually affected by my ignorance is telling it to my face. I certainly wouldn't say "you're not every asexual so you can't tell me I'm wrong". I wouldn't say "there's no better alternative to say so I'll just continue to be disrespectful because I find changing my term usage to be inconvenient" even though people actually become more marginalized by the untruths being spread.

Every? Why are you continuing to speak as if you and Aro represent the intersex community when it's clear that you and Aro do not ever have the right to speak for the entire intersex community and I do not ever have the rights to speak for the entire asexual community. And of course, I have every rights to ignore requests and like we both know, no one has the authority on the subject. And asides, I know that there exists intersex who knows that there is the huge issue of lacking a good word/term to describe people who wants to be considered a mix of physically female/male and last time I checked, androgyne is only decent, but still awful as it's a incoherent term by itself. There's really just no good word to describe people like those. I would really like to find a word that's not awful or has issues by itself.

And if someone says all asexual has no libido/little libido has a consistent logic, I'm not going to argue simply because there are several different interpretation of what is sexual/asexual, sexuality, and so on and to be fair, most of them has validity to them as sexuality itself is incoherent. As for why I think my minority status is relevant is that I am simply pointing out that other individuals of other minorities acknowledge that minorities and majorities are both not authority on debates at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the previous conversation in saying that two intersex people don't speak for themselves whole of that group, let's try another tact- A (as in one single individual) trans person says it's all right if you call them a tranny. You then proceed to call all trans people you meet trannies and wonder why they're pissed off because you know so and so who's trans and they were okay with it.

There's just logic here. If multiple people in a given group find the use of a term apropriative, likely a good majority of that group would agree. The arguing of semantics is just a pissing match at this point because the one outsider wants to be right and can't stand being called out on their actions. Just calling it as I see it, since a lot of threads seem to be devolving into this I'm right, you're wrong, now let me find a way to invalidate your existence crap lately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's just logic here. If multiple people in a given group find the use of a term apropriative, likely a good majority of that group would agree. The arguing of semantics is just a pissing match at this point because the one outsider wants to be right and can't stand being called out on their actions. Just calling it as I see it, since a lot of threads seem to be devolving into this I'm right, you're wrong, now let me find a way to invalidate your existence crap lately.

If by multiple, you mean a good percentage of the group, sure. But, 2 out of 4.5 million people or 1 out of 70 million people certainly can be ignored because the error of margin of likelihood they would represent the majority of the group is very high. Some people actually understands that individuals do not matter in the grand scheme of things. I don't matter, and you don't matter when representing a large group. You're irrelevant as well as I am. And asides, we're offtopic, and I'm thinking there's really got to be a better alternative to androgyne.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ChillaKilla

There's just logic here. If multiple people in a given group find the use of a term apropriative, likely a good majority of that group would agree. The arguing of semantics is just a pissing match at this point because the one outsider wants to be right and can't stand being called out on their actions. Just calling it as I see it, since a lot of threads seem to be devolving into this I'm right, you're wrong, now let me find a way to invalidate your existence crap lately.

If by multiple, you mean a good percentage of the group, sure. But, 2 out of 4.5 million people or 1 out of 70 million people certainly can be ignored because the error of margin of likelihood they would represent the majority of the group is very high. Some people actually understands that individuals do not matter in the grand scheme of things. I don't matter, and you don't matter when representing a large group. You're irrelevant as well as I am. And asides, we're offtopic, and I'm thinking there's really got to be a better alternative to androgyne.

Well you're not going to solve that lack of a proper term by appropriating something that has been acknowledged as not for dyadics

Also, congrats on completely missing Char's point

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's just logic here. If multiple people in a given group find the use of a term apropriative, likely a good majority of that group would agree. The arguing of semantics is just a pissing match at this point because the one outsider wants to be right and can't stand being called out on their actions. Just calling it as I see it, since a lot of threads seem to be devolving into this I'm right, you're wrong, now let me find a way to invalidate your existence crap lately.

If by multiple, you mean a good percentage of the group, sure. But, 2 out of 4.5 million people or 1 out of 70 million people certainly can be ignored because the error of margin of likelihood they would represent the majority of the group is very high. Some people actually understands that individuals do not matter in the grand scheme of things. I don't matter, and you don't matter when representing a large group. You're irrelevant as well as I am. And asides, we're offtopic, and I'm thinking there's really got to be a better alternative to androgyne.

Well you're not going to solve that lack of a proper term by appropriating something that has been acknowledged as not for dyadics

Also, congrats on completely missing Char's point

And the point is? Few people actually matters when representing a far larger number, ok... I see the point. That asides, do you have any actual suggestion of a word that they can use? I can literally name what dyadics who believes that that they are in the middle of two sexes/genders can use whether it's for them or not, and see pros/cons and how it can be interpreted and what are their issues, but I think you already know those issues and none of them actually work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...