Humans are of 2 genders: male and female
Comments
-
@Bill_Coley posted
gender identity. (see the article to which I previously linked)
I find the article very confusing in its use and (re)defining of terms, etc.
Now, perhaps you can define "gender" for me? what actually is "gender"? what is "male" and what is "female"? what is "identity"?
I think I have made my understanding these terms (also from a Biblical perspective) rather clear ... and I am obviously confused because the rather simple definitions and meanings of terms I have known for six decades seem to be invalid or incorrect or perhaps "correct, but also ..."
-
@reformed posted:
Here is the absurdity of the gender argument.
I feel like I am actually a woman therefore I am.
So, by the same logic, I can say, I feel like a MLB Center Fielder therefore I am one and should be treated as such.
Conservative trash! [Say, that IS a powerful argument, isn't it? 😋]
-
@Wolfgang posted:
Now, perhaps you can define "gender" for me? what actually is "gender"? what is "male" and what is "female"? what is "identity"?
I think I have made my understanding these terms (also from a Biblical perspective) rather clear ... and I am obviously confused because the rather simple definitions and meanings of terms I have known for six decades seem to be invalid or incorrect or perhaps "correct, but also ..."
The meaning of the word "gender" has changed in recent decades. When I was a kid in the 1960's, if we used the word at all - and I don't think we did, at least not very often - it referred to the binary distinction between males and females, what today is called our sexual assignment. That is, in decades past, gender and sex were synonyms; today, they're not.
I am no expert on these issues, so I encourage you to read widely among informed and respected sources, but my take on the word "gender" is that it is now understood to be a person's personal awareness of their identity on what might be considered the male-female continuum. So the difference between gender and sex is that while a person's genitalia at birth assigned that person to one of the two SEXES (male or female) as that person ages and becomes aware of their personal experience of identity, their GENDER might be different from the sex assigned to them by their genitalia.
Bottom line: Sex is physical (body parts) and in some sense social/cultural (see @Mitchell's witness about Japanese culture earlier in this thread). Gender is personal.
To be "male" or "female" involves physiological, social/cultural, and personal dimensions. Genitalia almost always report one or the other. Social/cultural expectations may impose unwelcome limitations ("macho," for example). Personal awareness (gender identity) may coincide with one's physical realities and social/cultural norms, but perhaps not.
That's my best effort, off the cuff, to summarize what I understand about these matters. Hope it helped.
-
No, that's the actual reality of it. It's relativism.
-
Wolfgang,
It depends on how you define each. What's your attitude toward it each. Are you willing to receive members of this people group into your family or church? LGBTQ =
"Stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning (or queer). Find out more about what these labels mean, and what sexual orientation and gender identity are all about".
See, Wolfgang, there is much for you, yet, to learn. Check out the sources above, learn, and find out the connections. Again, what does the acronym Lgbtq stand for?
The initialism LGBTTQQIAAP (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, ally, pansexual) has also resulted, although such initialisms are sometimes criticized for being confusing and leaving some people out, as well as issues of placement of the letters within the new title.
Behold what's ahead to learn: LGBTQ psychology -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_psychology
See also in the forums my three threads:
- Pansexuality: Fad, Perversion, Sin or Mis-understood?-https://www.christiandiscourse.net/discussion/266/pansexuality-fad-perversion-sin-or-mis-understood/p1
- Trans-gender -- A Third Gender or A Perversion? -- https://www.christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/14553#Comment_14553
- Homosexuality: Innate, Perversion or Choice?--https://www.christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/5724#Comment_5724
Happy reading. CM
-
LGBTQ all of those labels equal one thing. A person living in open defiance of God. Living in sin.
-
@Bill_Coley posted
The meaning of the word "gender" has changed in recent decades. When I was a kid in the 1960's, if we used the word at all - and I don't think we did, at least not very often - it referred to the binary distinction between males and females, what today is called our sexual assignment. That is, in decades past, gender and sex were synonyms; today, they're not.
There is the problem ....=> the REALITY of what is GENDER (namely, there are two, male and female, rather clearly defined by natural realities of male and female organs) is still the very same as it has always been ...
In order for those not accepting that reality to gain equal acceptance terminology has been re-defined in what I perceive as utter non-sense and by no means helpful to anybody (both those who THINK / BELIEVE that they are not male / female / etc.; as well as the rest of society who by ideological pressure is urged dto accept such as "normal" or even "natural".
Well, "gender" and "sex" are definitely still synonyms in the context (!!) we are talking about ... unless one screws up existing language for some no good reason. By the way, in German there is only one term ("Geschlecht") to translate both "gender" or "sex" ...
-
Indeed ... either you define it correctly in harmony with reality or you adjust your definitions - re-define - to somehow match false realities.
If there is a SQUARE table in the kitchen and someone believes that this "SQUARE" table is actually a "ROUND" table and therefore re-defines "square" as "round", he or she is certainly free to do so and live in his/her false "world" .... BUT then please do not think that such new peculiar definition is correctly reflecting the reality of what that table is and all others have to accept it as a valid and correct definition.
In my simple opinion, such a person would have a false idea in their head regarding the shapes of "square" and "round" ... and there may be differernt reasons for that error. Depending on the severity of the person's conviction and/or (un)willingness to accept the simple true reality of the shape of that table, the problem could be easily solvable or perhaps be at a level of a person being "possessed" (not really in control) in their mind.
What's your attitude toward it each. Are you willing to receive members of this people group into your family or church?
I happen to have someone in my extended family who grew up perfectly normal as a wonderful girl into a young woman, and - for whatever undisclosed reaason - more or less suddenly decided she was a man and began to insist on being a man and has taken steps to look like a man. The lady has a severe problem in her mental capabilities and is mentally deranged and is self-deceived because all those attempts of becoming her supposedly "real gender identity" (male) will be in vain and lead nowhere .. she CAN NEVER be a man.
I call the spade a spade ... she is NOT a he. She does not have a vagina/penis problem but a mind problem. It is very simple. I think that even worse in this case is that the immediate people around her were emotionally duped into "well, that's how it is nowadays, it's ok, it's normal, if she thinks that is the real her/him, ...." and even support and solidify the problem.
-
Wolfgang,
Thanks for sharing a glimpse of your extended family experiences. My heart goes out to you. Continue to love him (her) as a member of the family.
On the other hand, you said:
Indeed ... either you define it correctly in harmony with reality or you adjust your definitions - re-define - to somehow match false realities.
If there is a SQUARE table in the kitchen and someone believes that this "SQUARE" table is actually a "ROUND" table and therefore re-defines "square" as "round", he or she is certainly free to do so and live in his/her false "world" .... BUT then please do not think that such new peculiar definition is correctly reflecting the reality of what that table is and all others have to accept it as a valid and correct definition.
In my simple opinion, such a person would have a false idea in their head regarding the shapes of "square" and "round" ... and there may be differernt reasons for that error. Depending on the severity of the person's conviction and/or (un)willingness to accept the simple true reality of the shape of that table, the problem could be easily solvable or perhaps be at a level of a person being "possessed" (not really in control) in their mind.
Wolfgang, you described perfectly, the U. S. President, Donald Trump. CM
-
@C_M_ posted
Thanks for sharing a glimpse of your extended family experiences. My heart goes out to you. Continue to love him (her) as a member of the family.
What do you think when talking about "love him (her) as a member of the family? Condoning the matter and agreeing as others in the family have done?
Wolfgang, you described perfectly, the U. S. President, Donald Trump. CM
Get of your Trump hate horse ... your hate makes you blind, so much so that you seem not to recognize what others have written
-
@Wolfgang posted:
There is the problem ....=> the REALITY of what is GENDER (namely, there are two, male and female, rather clearly defined by natural realities of male and female organs) is still the very same as it has always been ...
In reality, "gender" now refers to more than the information about a person's sex provided by their body parts. You're of course welcome to deny that reality, but your denial won't change it.
In order for those not accepting that reality to gain equal acceptance terminology has been re-defined in what I perceive as utter non-sense and by no means helpful to anybody (both those who THINK / BELIEVE that they are not male / female / etc.; as well as the rest of society who by ideological pressure is urged dto accept such as "normal" or even "natural".
You're welcome to your views about the "utter non-sense" of the modern meaning of the word "gender," and the "ideological pressure" you believe is applied to move society to accept that "non-sense" as "'normal' or even 'natural.'" As one member of the society to which you claim said pressure is applied, I testify that I have not felt it in any way or from any source, and I formed my personal point of view on these matters without the influence of such pressure.
Well, "gender" and "sex" are definitely still synonyms in the context (!!) we are talking about ... unless one screws up existing language for some no good reason. By the way, in German there is only one term ("Geschlecht") to translate both "gender" or "sex" ...
"Gender" and "sex" are still synonyms in this context for you. They're NOT synonyms for me or, MUCH more importantly, for experts in the field or the professional literature to which they contribute.
I happen to have someone in my extended family who grew up perfectly normal as a wonderful girl into a young woman, and - for whatever undisclosed reaason - more or less suddenly decided she was a man and began to insist on being a man and has taken steps to look like a man. The lady has a severe problem in her mental capabilities and is mentally deranged and is self-deceived because all those attempts of becoming her supposedly "real gender identity" (male) will be in vain and lead nowhere .. she CAN NEVER be a man.
I call the spade a spade ... she is NOT a he. She does not have a vagina/penis problem but a mind problem. It is very simple. I think that even worse in this case is that the immediate people around her were emotionally duped into "well, that's how it is nowadays, it's ok, it's normal, if she thinks that is the real her/him, ...." and even support and solidify the problem.
I hope your extended family has been helped by your point of view that she has "a severe problem in her mental capabilities and is mentally deranged and is self-deceived," and that you (or people who hold your views) have been a constructive, redemptive presence for those you believe were "emotionally duped." Typically, however, at least in my experience, assertions of mental derangement and emotional duping tend to block rather than create avenues of constructive intercession.
-
@Bill_Coley posted
Typically, however, at least in my experience, assertions of mental derangement and emotional duping tend to block rather than create avenues of constructive intercession.
"A man (or woman) convinced against his (her) will, is of the same opinion still" ... but if all condone and there is no one representing the convincing position, theree will never be any chance of conviction, and no intercession can take place.
"You can lead a horse to water but you can not make him drink." ... but if all stay away from the water then there is no one to lead to the water and absolutely no possibility to drink of the water, and thus no intercession can take place.
Actually, those sharing your points of view among my extended family have accepted the total non-sense and regard the woman to be a man ... eh, perhaps some will go as far and join the mess by doing hormone treatments to make themselves look like a man without a penis. Now, you tell me who is in their sound mind and who is deranged and sick between their ears.
Reading your mails, one could get the impression that I should consider myself to have the mental problem while the others are smart and with the times and its experts ???
-
@Wolfgang posted:
Actually, those sharing your points of view among my extended family have accepted the total non-sense and regard the woman to be a man ... eh, perhaps some will go as far and join the mess by doing hormone treatments to make themselves look like a man without a penis. Now, you tell me who is in their sound mind and who is deranged and sick between their ears.
Why does ANYBODY in your family situation have to be "deranged and sick between their ears"? For all I know - and my assumption certainly is - you're ALL of sound mind.
Reading your mails, one could get the impression that I should consider myself to have the mental problem while the others are smart and with the times and its experts ???
Please quote for me the section(s) of my posts that prompted you to ask whether I think you should consider yourself to be a person with "the mental problem." I know of no such section, hold no such thought, and hence have made no effort to communicate such a message. Again I ask, why does ANYBODY in your family situation have to have "a mental problem"?
-
In 2018 the World Economic Forum ranked Japan as 110 out of 144 country on the issue of Gender Equality (link). However, in light of what Bill has shared maybe the ranking was incorrect since the ranking seems to identity gender Ineqaulity on based on one's biological sex or it seems to be equating sex and gender?
-
@Mitchell posted:
In 2018 the World Economic Forum ranked Japan as 110 out of 144 country on the issue of Gender Equality (link). However, in light of what Bill has shared maybe the ranking was incorrect since the ranking seems to identity gender Ineqaulity on based on one's biological sex or it seems to be equating sex and gender?
From my brief review of the World Economic Forum's actual report (found HERE) it's clear that the organization considered the terms "gender" and "sex" to be synonyms, and hence, its use of them should be read accordingly. For example, the report says...
- "Our aim is to provide a snapshot of where men and women stand with regard to some fundamental outcome indicators related to basic rights such as health, education, economic participation and political empowerment. Indicators related to country-specific policies, rights, culture or customs...."
- "Our aim is to focus on whether the gap between women and men in the chosen indicators has declined, rather than whether women are winning the so-called 'battle of the sexes.'"
I'm confident we all agree that among the first questions we should address when we engage others' written or spoken points of view is what did the writer or speaker mean by the words they chose. In my view, the WEF clearly meant "gender" as synonymous with "sex."
-
Gender as an identity is redefining words and has no basis in reality. These people are sick and need therapy.
-
@Bill_Coley posted
Why does ANYBODY in your family situation have to be "deranged and sick between their ears"? For all I know - and my assumption certainly is - you're ALL of sound mind.
So, the woman who claims to be a man is in her right mind and of a sound mind? Those who think she is correct are of a sound mind ??
Isn't correct thinking in harmony with the reality? Does thinking determine the reality? In other words, the reality of her body is that the girl is FEMALE. Correct and sound thinking is accepting that reality. Thinking she is male and has the wrong reality is unsound, and it also does NOT change the reailty of her body into male, does it?
Please quote for me the section(s) of my posts that prompted you to ask whether I think you should consider yourself to be a person with "the mental problem." I know of no such section, hold no such thought, and hence have made no effort to communicate such a message. Again I ask, why does ANYBODY in your family situation have to have "a mental problem"?
If there is no mental problem, then what is the problem when a man thinks he is a woman or a woman thinks she is a man? If that is not the person with the mental problem, then it logically follows that the one thinking there is a mental problem must be the one with the mental problem. Simple, plain, clear.
Post edited by [Deleted User] on -
@reformed posted
Gender as an identity is redefining words and has no basis in reality. These people are sick and need therapy.
It seems that the claims of "gender" being an "identity" disregard simple and plain language and twist vocabulary to their liking as is convenient for whatever purpose ... I agree that such twisting and redefining of terms is no more than an attempt to "make popular" and "make appear acceptable" and further "make right" what in reality is plainly false and wrong. Therefore, I would consider those disregarding plain truth realities of male and female with their "gender" claims to be in the position of needing a correction of their views.
On the other hand, even their use of the term "identity" in their claims really is linked to and basically the same as "sex" ... a person is of the male sex, so normally they would be of male gender; a female gender person is normally of female sex. Obviously therefore, a person of male sex claiming female gender is insane, just as I would be insane if I claimed that I as a human being identified myself as a dog or a cat or an elephant.
Why is such a simple truth -- that gender <=> sex, and there are male and female defined by natural realities, and that has been known among humans since the beginning of mankind -- all of a sudden no longer true and in need of being "corrected" ? Since when does truth need a correction or adjustment?
-
@C_M_ posted
Thanks for sharing a glimpse of your extended family experiences. My heart goes out to you. Continue to love him (her) as a member of the family.
@Wolfgang said: What do you think when talking about "love him (her) as a member of the family? Condoning the matter and agreeing as others in the family have done?
- When I talk about "love him (her) as a member of the family," Talk with "him," share meals, and try to understand his feelings. Look beyond his faults and see her needs. Acknowledge "his" presence at family gatherings above all list to "him" (life's story). Believe it, or not, "his" tears and fears are real. Receive "him" as a human being with a different opinion of self, dress, and behavior. You can't change "him" to the"her," you knew. For the simple reason, you didn't change her to him. Be honest in your opinion of "her," but don't let your love for a fellow human change. Isolation, finger-pointing, shaming and shunning are not going to change "him," to the "her" you knew. Be compassionate.
@Wolfgang , you described perfectly, the U. S. President, Donald Trump. CM
@Wolfgang @Wolfgang said: Get of [off] your Trump hate horse ... your hate makes you blind, so much so that you seem not to recognize what others have written
- @C_M_ Response: I don't hate Trump. A simple analogy, just connecting the dots. Why would you say I hate Trump? Holding up a mirror to Trump's public behavior is hatred? The last time I checked, identification is not hatred. Do you want and expect me to suspend with commonsense and reality of your beloved, President? Mr. Trump is a prevaricator (equivocator). And by any other name, you admire a Pathological lying, also known as mythomania and pseudologia fantastica. You said a transgender person "has the wrong reality is unsound," etc., and Mr. Trump is whole sound and stable?
- Besides, what credentials do you have to label transgender people the way you have above? This side of the return of Jesus, people will think thoughts, form opinions and attitudes, and act on them. These are the rights God gave to all humans. Of course, choices have consequences. Be the change you want in others-- A friend. CM
-
@C_M_ posted
When I talk about "love him (her) as a member of the family," Talk with "him," share meals, and try to understand his feelings. Look beyond his faults and see her needs. Acknowledge "his" presence at family gatherings above all list to "him" (life's story). Believe it, or not, "his" tears and fears are real. Receive "him" as a human being with a different opinion of self, dress, and behavior. You can't change "him" to the"her," you knew. For the simple reason, you didn't change her to him. Be honest in your opinion of "her," but don't let your love for a fellow human change. Isolation, finger-pointing, shaming and shunning are not going to change "him," to the "her" you knew. Be compassionate.
Guess what? I don't have any ambition to change her ... as the only human who can change her is herself. Joining in with her and her "supportives" only solidifies the error and confirms her that the lie she believes is supposedly the truth. Your suggestions lack speaking the truth and favor supporting the lie.
-
@Wolfgang said:
Guess what? I don't have any ambition to change her ... as the only human who can change her is herself. Joining in with her and her "supportives" only solidifies the error and confirms her that the lie she believes is supposedly the truth. Your suggestions lack speaking the truth and favor supporting the lie.
Absolutely, Not! You acknowledge "him" (her) living outside the norms of society, but love the person or the being in front of you. Don't deny him (her) the necessities of life (e.g., family, food, fellowship, compassion, safety, and an opportunity to hear God's Word without a non-judgmental attitude or way). With "him" (her) be the Christian you say you are. Christians do go around damning everything and everyone. You do the loving and let Jesus do the changing-- on his timetable and His way. Be Jesus, hate the "sin", but love the person.
Many times, people who don't feel loved or accepted create their world and reality. Take a day out and talk. You would be surprised by the fruitful outcome. SEE THE INNER SOUL. It's only through Christ's eyes, you're able to discern the actual person. CM
-
@Wolfgang posted:
Isn't correct thinking in harmony with the reality? Does thinking determine the reality? In other words, the reality of her body is that the girl is FEMALE. Correct and sound thinking is accepting that reality. Thinking she is male and has the wrong reality is unsound, and it also does NOT change the reailty of her body into male, does it?
My response here returns to the meaning of the word "gender," about which you and I disagree. I contend that gender is now considered to be more than one's physiological components, which means "the reality of [your family members'] body" is NOT the only determinant. It also means one's gender identification does not necessarily have to match one's physiological makeup.... Again, about this matter I acknowledge that you and I disagree.
If there is no mental problem, then what is the problem when a man thinks he is a woman or a woman thinks she is a man? If that is not the person with the mental problem, then it logically follows that the one thinking there is a mental problem must be the one with the mental problem. Simple, plain, clear.
Perhaps this is no more than a matter of word meanings, but the option to which I sought to call your attention was that you were simply mistaken about the implications of your family member's gender claim. NOT "deranged." NOT "sick." NOT the victim of "a mental problem." Mistaken. I believe it's possible to be mistaken about something without being deranged or mentally ill. I read your previous post to convey a belief that SOMEBODY in your family's situation - either your family member or you - had to have a "mental problem." In the way I use that term, I don't think that's correct. But if you meant only that one of you is mistaken about the matter, then please disregard this paragraph because you and I agree. 😀
-
@Wolfgang posted:
It seems that the claims of "gender" being an "identity" disregard simple and plain language and twist vocabulary to their liking as is convenient for whatever purpose ... I agree that such twisting and redefining of terms is no more than an attempt to "make popular" and "make appear acceptable" and further "make right" what in reality is plainly false and wrong. Therefore, I would consider those disregarding plain truth realities of male and female with their "gender" claims to be in the position of needing a correction of their views.
I disagree with your conclusion, but concur with your word choice. People can be incorrect about matters without also being "deranged," or in possession of "a mental problem," or "insane."
On the other hand, even their use of the term "identity" in their claims really is linked to and basically the same as "sex" ... a person is of the male sex, so normally they would be of male gender; a female gender person is normally of female sex. Obviously therefore, a person of male sex claiming female gender is insane, just as I would be insane if I claimed that I as a human being identified myself as a dog or a cat or an elephant.
Alas, our common ground was fleeting, but satisfying while it lasted.
As I noted in a previous post, gender identification is solely and wholly intra-species.
Why is such a simple truth -- that gender <=> sex, and there are male and female defined by natural realities, and that has been known among humans since the beginning of mankind -- all of a sudden no longer true and in need of being "corrected" ? Since when does truth need a correction or adjustment?
We used to think the sun orbited the earth, and that our planet was the center of the universe. Those "truths" needed correction because they weren't true. Sometimes even "simple truth" needs correction.
-
@Bill_Coley posted
I contend that gender is now considered to be more than one's physiological components, which means "the reality of [your family members'] body" is NOT the only determinant. It also means one's gender identification does not necessarily have to match one's physiological makeup....
What reality other than their biological body component then determines a person's gender identity?
I am a male gender person BECAUSE of the male sex biological body I happen to have ... that reality determines my mental gender identification. Just as the physical human body determines my species identity as a human.
If I now seriously believe, claim and identify myself ass a person of female gender (sex), I am INSANE, CRAZY, MENTALLY ILL. (If I make such claims just for the sake of illustration or as a more or less stupid joke, I would not actually identify as a female and thus still be in my right mind and sane.
I believe it's possible to be mistaken about something without being deranged or mentally ill.
There is an obvious boundary, and that woman has in her mind crossed that border and actually thinks of herself and believes herself to really be a man, and blames "nature" for the mistake which mother nature supposedly made in the process of her conception and development and being born a healthy female human baby. IF she did not know the difference between male and female, man and woman, she might just be mistaken and if so would most likely correct her thinking error once it were pointed out ... but this is not the case with her (nor with any other "transgender" I have heard or read about) ... there is no "being mistaken" with them, there is straight forward "an insane mind" or "reprobate mind" as Scripture calls it.
As I noted in a previous post, gender identification is solely and wholly intra-species.
Sure, "gender" identification is ... but the same problem and discrepancy between "reality" and "identification" could be seen regarding other fields, such as "species identity". You have the same components: (a) the reality given by natural facts, (b) the mental identification. I have a human body as reality, I could identify as a dog and start barking instead of talking and crawling around on all four instead of walking upright. So what then? Would my "identification" (a process that happens in my mind !!) be correct and reflect a sound mind, or would it be utterly incorrect to a level where one should commit me to a psychiatric institution due to insanity??
-
@C_M_ posted
Be Jesus, hate the "sin", but love the person.
Jesus loves the sinners, but not their sin? Why would he then declare that some who come to him with "lord, lord" he never even knew? Why is there encouragement in NT epistles to disassociate with certain in the church who continue to live sin??
-
Let me correct my statement first:
Be Jesus, hate the "sin", but love the person.
It should have read: Be LIKE Jesus, hate the "sin", but love the person or sinner.
Before we go through a theological discussion, are you willing to do what I suggested to and with the family member?
"...acknowledge "him" (her) living outside the norms of society, but love the person or the being in front of you. Don't deny him (her) the necessities of life (e.g., family, food, fellowship, compassion, safety, and an opportunity to hear God's Word without a non-judgmental attitude or way). With "him" (her) be the Christian you say you are...."
It's better to show love, to one whom God created, than to engage in a theological discussion or debate and remain aloof or detached. Though I raise, discuss, explain understand all theological nuances, and don't show any love, to one in need, you "become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal...faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love" (1 Co 13:1 --New American Standard Bible: 1995 update. (1995).
No, I am not telling you what to do. I am strongly suggesting, to the point of urging, you to be a conduit of love, before engaging in a long back-and-forth discussion. Is this too much to ask, Mr. Wolfgang? CM
PS. I will address your three questions, hopefully, in my next post. CM
-
@C_M_ posted
It's better to show love, to one whom God created, than to engage in a theological discussion or debate and remain aloof or detached.
I do not engage her in a theological discussion, I point out what I perceive to be truth and what I perceive to be a perversion, and I provide scriptural and logical reasoning to consider when evaluating whether what I say is indeed true and makes sense or not.
You know, I call spade a spade, and a monkey is a monkey while a human is a human, etc. Male is male and female is female, short is short and long is long, black is black and white is white and red is red. And I point out that one who defines red as white and green as black is incorrect, and depending on the situation may be just mistaken or may be insane.
-
Exactly. Just look at the biology and the chromosomes.
-
Bill_Coley posted: I agree that the Bible references two biological sexes, but by definition biological sex is different from gender identification. (link)
I took a little time away from the forums to ask people at work and around town the concept of 'Gender Identification' (性同一性/seidouitsusei) in an attempt to gather some opinions and from those around me. The majority of people I ran into had never heard of the term and assumed it was the same as being gay or Lesbian. The very few I found who had heard of the concept knew it as Gender Identity Disorder 性同一性障害/Seidouitsuseishougai). Overall the basic sentiment seemed to have been as long as people with GID do not publicly disturb the social order or try to standout and push their philosophy on others they will be accepted just like everyone else. I imagine that Gender Identity Disorder 性同一性障害 is probably not considered to be political correct in west but this term is the one that I believe major news outlets use and apparently the government of Japan too. The Japanese Ministry of Health Labour and welfare describes this term here (link). This term is also the one that comes up most in the search results of my trusty Casio XD-Z20000 when I do search on all the included dictionaries. Of course I did not have enough time to do any real research or surveys on the subject.
In Japan terms like 男性/Dansei (Male) and 女性/Jousei(female) are completely related to one's sex. The character 性(sei) has a range of means but basically it means one's nature/sex. It you look closely at that character you will notice that the right side of it has radical/primitive 生 meaning life/birth and the component of the on the left side of 性 is a stylized version of 心 (shin / kokoro) meaning heart. The character 性（sei) meaning one's nature is combined with the either with the character 男(man) or the character 女（woman) to form new compound characters with either the meaning male and female. Maybe, the meaning of the words will change in the future? I doubt it though.
Grace and Peace
-
@Mitchell posted
I imagine that Gender Identity Disorder 性同一性障害 is probably not considered to be political correct in west but this term is the one that I believe major news outlets use and apparently the government of Japan too. The Japanese Ministry of Health Labour and welfare describes this term here (link).
Indeed ... the Western world's political correctness regards "a disorder" as if it is "the norm" or "just another equally valid norm". Instead of realizing that the problem is a MENTAL DISORDER when a person "identifies" in regards to sex as something they are actually not, they go as far as blöaming nature for having behaved "disorderly" when giving the person the wrong natural body who thinks he is a she or who thinks she is a he ... And indeed, the Western "culture" has been corrupted so badly that not even natural realities (such as male and female gender/sex and which combination forms naturally a matching couple) are accepted as the norm, and unnatural disorders are regarded as equally "natural" and valid.
When insanity becomes normal, sanity has been turned into a disorder.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
