Thank you. 
Indeed. For all the cries of “but…this is such an unbearable burden, oh waily, waily, waily!”, ‘he’ takes the same physical effort to say as ‘she’.
Right, it’s like the fallacy that allowing transgender women to compete with cisgender women is all a plot to deprive “real” American women of medals.
Do you include sex and/or gender in your list of traits of the type of human you like to have sex with?
This actually captures an important distinction between gender identity and gender expression. Gender identity is deep, probably hardwired, and enduring–the gender you know yourself to be. It’s part of what makes you, you. Gender expression is the equivalent of the tee-shirts, face paint, and tats, the way you look on the outside in terms of dress, toy preferences, haircut, and so forth. Gender expression can vary considerably over the course of a lifetime–or a week, in the case of many teenagers. Gender identity doesn’t, although a person’s understanding of it might.
A boy who likes Barbie dolls is gender variant when it comes to expression, but not identity unless he says she’s a she. Not all transgirls like Barbies–not all transgirls are girlie girls. Gender expression is largely determined by culture (pink is associated with femininity in this culture but not that) and personality, gender identity is not.
So when my little tyke liked Barbies, I thought I had a gender variant boy. Turns out I have a girl who recognized that in this culture, girls play with dolls and boys most often don’t.
And yet, nobody would claim that you are inherently and uncontrollably a fan of that given team. You are a fan because you choose to be one.
No expectant parent I have ever talked to has answered the question “What are you having?” by saying “We’re not sure yet, we’ll find out in four or five years when we see what kind of toys it likes.”
And this has nothing to do with anything. A complete nonsequitur.
Although I am curious to know if any of the expectant parents you spoke to replied “We’re having a man! That’s right - I’m giving birth to a man in February!”
A new parent says “we’re having a boy” or “we’re having a girl”, not “we’re having a human who will eventually develop an internal perception of its personal identity based on biochemistry, social cues, and its personal comfort zone, thereby informing us as to what gender it is”.
That’s because when a child is born, it doesn’t have much of a sense of personal identity, so the only assumption (and it’s not always straightforward) one can make about its gender is physical, which was almost exactly the point I was trying to make.
As that child develops a sense of identity, that identity may not align with the physical configuration of the person’s body - that is - sometimes, it turns out that the initial assumption was not correct. Such is the nature of assumption.
The identity is the person.
Yes, and I am saying that a newborn baby is not a complete, developed person by this definition.
And the person gets to make the best of life with the body they have. The fact that the body they have might not be the body they want doesn’t mean they get to insist that they somehow metaphysically are a person possessing the body they want.
Why are you so hung up on genitalia?
Bullshit. Says who? You?
Did God deliver that to you on a mountain or something?
Some people choose to change their bodies. Others may choose not to, but still identify with a gender that’s different than their biological sex. If you want to be a kind and decent person, then I think the right thing to do is to respect these individual’s wishes as to their gender identity. It costs you absolutely nothing, and is in line with both the dictionary definition and common use of the word “gender”.
Assumes facts not in evidence.
I neglected to post this earlier, but since you’re persisting…
The word “gender” has traditionally referred to how nouns are classified in language. Many of the European languages use genders to indicate male, female, or neuter, but other languages use gendered nouns to indicate other characteristics, like whether something is alive or not, or other strange discriminations (I read these in The Language Instinct about 15 years ago so don’t recall perfectly). English doesn’t have gendered nouns, but pronouns still have it.
The word “sex” was traditionally the one you wanted to use when referring to whether a creature is physically male or female. In the 20th century, the word “sex” made school kids giggle, so increasingly the word “gender” came to be used as a euphemism. But as soon as it did, it took on a slightly different meaning than “sex.” It indicates more than the genitalia or chromosome configuration - it’s the identity of a person in society. Any dictionary definition you can find notes this.
So if you’re insisting that gendered pronouns be used strictly in accordance with genitals or chromosomes, it’s you who is trying to redefine words. You’re not somehow standing up for traditional definitions here, you’re trying to revise based on your narrow views.
Why is that an “and yet”? I don’t recall claiming otherwise, nor does that difference ruin my point. For what it’s worth, I would say that I am uncontrollably a fan of that given team, though not inherently.
Whatever outward expression someone chooses of their personal identity, it need not indicate that that outward expression is an intrinsic part of that identity.
QFT.