Who is suggesting it would be too hard? Heck, you could take a currently meaningless phrase like “gruxedemar” and use it to label the concept currently under discussion, if it floats your boat.
You’re childishly accusing others of childishness and over what? “Cis”?
I don’t see anything childish about having a discussion. You, however, can read whatever you want into it.
After I suggested using ‘gender-typical’, this is what was said:
sounds like JR Brown is saying “That’s too hard” to me.
Not going to fall on sword on this one, but as far as I am concerned I am a male. Without getting too technical, I have the gear and I like having it – though I’ve bitched at it a few times for letting me down.
Other than that, call me what you want, not a hill I want to die on.
Though not interested much, I really think it’s amazing all the “shades” that are out there – don’t have a clue about many of them nor do I care.
But hey! Fuck away however you feel.
Don’t worry, be happy.
No, there’s definitely nothing childish about your posts to this thread.
Regards,
PopTart
Sign of a strong and well-supported argument: you have to histrionically declare that those disagreeing with you believe that SOCIETY WILL BREAK DOWN if they don’t get their way.
Thanks for your support, Pop Tart!
Sign of a strong and well-supported argument: you have to put words into other people’s mouths and draw false conclusions based on things they didn’t say.
Historical sidebar, some hijra self-castrate, and some hijra remove more than just the testes. Fatality rates were high due to the relative crudity of the procedure and lack of modern antibiotics.
Well, I can read the “OH NO” in your post, no special 3D glasses required.
Looks like he’s pointing out a nuance that you are, of course, free to ignore.
How did he put words in your mouth? That’s literally what you just said!
Literally? I’m not sure how you can say “That’s literally what you just said” when I didn’t SAY anything, I was asking a question.
It was stated to me that using ‘gender-typical’ would be a burden, because we would have to redefine a word to mean something else. When I pointed out that we have redefined what ‘male’ meant, it was strongly implied that redefining ‘male’ was somehow different, and then “Joan of Arc” and ‘hijras’ were offered as some sort of counter-point that doesn’t seem to address anything in this discussion.
My point is ‘gender-typical’ seems to be the best word to use in this discussion for someone who is not trans-gender. Others seem to be putting forward the argument that ‘gender-typical’ already HAS a meaning, and it would be too difficult to expand upon, unlike ‘male’ or ‘marriage’ which, in their view, were somehow easier to change.
I pointed out that ‘male’ once meant ‘born with a penis’ and that has changed over time, just like ‘gender-typical’ can change. Society has been able to change ‘male’ to mean something else, just like ‘marriage’ can be changed to mean something else. I simply say using ‘gender-typical’ would likewise be something that can change meaning, to include those who are not transgendered. Are you really going to say “No, you can’t use gender-typical, because we already have a word for you, and that is cisgendered”?
Wow. A post that’s longer than two sentences. I didn’t know you had it in you. But I’m still not seeing where Max put any words in your mouth.
Post #502 has THREE sentences!
People say questions. 
I mean, we could nitpick that this entire communication has been literal and not verbal, since it’s all text and such.
Myownballs = male. Gotballs = transgendered.
Possibilities are endless!
Back on earth, not so much.
To nitpick, this entire conversation has been verbal, which means “with words,” and includes both written and oral communication. The SDMB doesn’t have pictures, so it’s all verbal.
Be what you want, call yourself what you want and if in dire need of assistance due to a misnomer, call 6996 – it’s all the same.
A male in addendum to.
I see that you are correct and admit my error; a likely conflation of “verbal” with “vocal”. I’m not sure what “oral” element you’re referencing, though, and arguably the smileys comprise the occasional foray into pictorial communication.
Chew…something?
Scenery? Choo? Bacca?