[BigV]

Good morning hq.

Originally Posted by henry quirk

"Ibby's genitals being her business, not yours"

Agreed. What is my business, however, is the demand to ignore what is real (Ibby being male) in favor of making him 'feel' better about himself.

Do you have a cite for this assertion? I don't remember any demand from Ibby to ignore anything. This seems to be your main complaint, the keystone of this thread you started. Where did this happen? I am trying to see things from your perspective. You don't like to be told what to do, especially when it is in direct conflict with your thoughts on the matter. That's completely understandable.

BUT, there are parts where I have trouble extending this line of thought, the first being no memory or knowledge of such a demand. If you can, would you please show me where this demand is being made?

Secondly, the whole idea of what pronoun to use is not something that is always unambiguously definite. We use pronouns with some latitude all the time. I refer to you as "he", but that's just a convention. I don't know you, I don't know about your genitals, your state of mind, your attitudes, your chromosomes, none of that. In fact, what I can say about you with confidence is that I type posts in response to posts associated with your username. Those posts have no gender. But I use that pronoun nonetheless.

What is right and fair to be referred to as "he" is widely variable, and so is what is right and fair to be considered "male". I get being hung up on language--I do. I couldn't let Pam's remarks about a penis being a physical deformity go unchallenged. Just language, right? But I had to respond. And I did, and so did she, it got worked out. I see your tilting at this windmill in this light. We, humans, use language to work stuff out. Your inability/refusal to capitulate to Ibby's demands is clearly justified, to you. To me, and to others who have commented here, it is not justified, it is simply a rejection of broadly accepted conventions of cellar etiquette, social norms, and casual usage of language among regular people. You're just saying "no".

That's fine, fine, really. But it's not "right". You might be able to say with a great deal of certainty something about Ibby's chromosomes, you might be able to confidently aver to a physical description of his genitals. Those kinds of things are amenable to objective measurement. Being male is not as objectively, atomically measurable. And the usage of a given pronoun is even less so. You can choose to use whatever words you like, but the logic of your argument--Ibby has xy chromosomes therefore has a penis therefore is male therefore requires the use of the pronoun "he"--breaks down under scrutiny in our immediate frame of reference. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is what your logic looks like from here.

****

Originally Posted by henry quirk

within the context of the 'source' of maleness, the source of femaleness.

As I say in post 164...

'XY imparts certain characteristics to the flesh (as a whole). You possess these characteristics because you are XY (male, 'he'). How you choose to accentuate or diminish those characteristics is up to you. Your reasons or reasoning for accentuating or diminishing these characteristics is yours to suss out and is wholly irrelevant to me (or this thread). The source of those characteristics, however, remains the same (regardless of 'where' or 'when' you happen to be, or, what you want, or perceive yourself, to be).'

I don't agree. xy imparts certain characteristics to the flesh, like a penis. But that's not all that makes me male, and importantly, there is MUCH about me, much of what I do that manifests my maleness that has nothing to do with my penis. It's a part (a big part, ha ha) of my maleness, but not the majority.

Think about the experiences you have throughout the day, using a very helpful linguistic handle like a pronoun that is masculine or feminine, but without actually knowing about genitals. The cues used to reach that grammatical conclusion are the kinds of things I'm talking about that justify "he" or "she". I use those, and so do you, without actually knowing what's in their pants. It is the running total of these inputs that is the "source of maleness, the source of femaleness". A penis or a vagina, the direct physical result of one's chromosomes, contributes to this running total, and in most folks, it is a reinforcing contribution. But not always. You have certainly had the experience, or at least can imagine dealing with someone you assessed to be male only to find out later that that person didn't have a penis. In that case, her genitals aren't adding to that running total. I reckon in Pam's case, or Ibby's case, or Calpernia's case, their genitals are a factor that detract from that running total; their sum total is female *despite* their genitals, not because of them. Genitalia is a factor in gender, not a conclusion. I believe you are confusing causation and correlation.

tl;dr

hq=penis is male, V=no it is not.

****

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Sun,

"HQ is referring to Calpernia as "he"."

Because he's a guy.

Given your standards for determining what gender pronoun to use (chromosomes, genitalia), how can you support this statement?