Not to rain on your parade, but I was born a woman and my ring finger is longer than my index. This sounds like one of those urban myths (that link hand size and penis length, for example), unless you have a cite.
I don’t have the cite, but there is some scientific-y stuff out there about relative finger length being a testosterone based characteristic, and used as a way to identify gay males. This despite no shortage of long fingered gay men and short fingered straight men.
You have to wonder why Tim ends up trying to take home some many transvestites.
If you can’t tell from the face, hair, clothing, or boobs, then the butt is the place to look. I’ll even check out their butts if I already know they’re female, just to be sure.
This study: http://www.narth.com/docs/newstudy2.html found a slight correlation between “male type finger length” and homosexuality in women. Seems to me it’s more likely that it’s just a naturally occuring variation like with everything else mentioned in this thread, and probably has nothing at all to do with sexual orientation (though may have to do with testosterone exposure. TBD)
Wow I just realized after the fact that I linked to NARTH, a well known anti-gay organization. Take that with a grain of salt.
I would wager Tim has never actually done this, but is just making a pattented durr-hurr doper joke so many of you people are fond of. Trans* people are lulzy! :rolleyes:
I read the finger thing somewhere, and did an informal study of the dozen or so people in my office. Most conformed, but not all.
As for transvestites, you are usually better off checking the *eleventh *finger if you really need to be sure.
The article tells you where the line is: “Between 0.1% and 0.2% of live births are ambiguous enough to become the subject of specialist medical attention, including surgery to disguise their sexual ambiguity,” that .1% to .2% being a subset of the 1% that “exhibit some degree of sexual ambiguity”; obviously up 80-90% of that 1% is not considered ambigious enough for sugery to be a consideration.
Hips. “She’s got child-bearing hips.”
How about this then? Morg or Imorg?
From this article: The model in those pics is Andrej Pejic
(How do you tell a boy chromosome from a girl chromosome?
Just pull down their genes.)
Yes, thanks. My reading comprehension’s just fine. But that wasn’t my point. It absolutely does not tell you where the line is. You have decided that “ambiguous enough to consider surgery” is enough criterion to look at someone’s genitals and decide their gender for them, and it simply doesn’t work that way. (being why I even brought up trans people) Sometimes even the doctors chose wrong, when they do choose.
I notice you didn’t bother to address why it’s suddenly okay to entirely disregard a portion of the population because they’re a minority.
If that’s true, my right hand is male, and my left hand is a hermaphrodite.
Wait, what?
It’s obvious this is a sensitive subject for you. But I think you’re reading things that weren’t written.
I mean, yeah, Tim’s posts were pretty objectionable, I get that. But what’s elfkin done to you?
“Entirely disregard”? Really? I don’t see anyone - not even Tim - doing that. No one’s suggested transgendered (wo)men aren’t really (wo)men, or that we should infringe on their rights or go beat them up.
Disregard for the purposes of this discussion, perhaps, but that’s because anyone who is actively trying to look like the gender that their body isn’t (like a pre-op transman or transwoman, or in crossdressing or drag) is trying to subvert the very traits the OP is asking about. Likewise, ambiguously gendered or cogendered or ungendered or otherwise not cisgendered people are pretty much by definition beside the point when the point is how you identify cisgendered people.
(Oh, and my fingers say I’m a man, but my genitalia tells another story.)
Did you not see:
Whatever her intention, the suggestion here is that since “medically interesting” intersex people make up only about 1 in a 1000 births we can just use genitals as a legitimate method of determining gender. I don’t see how that isn’t disregarding those real people for who that method simply does not work.
Also, really? The point is how to identify cisgendered people? I got news for you: bodies don’t tell that story.
Since I never answered the OP:
There’s absolutely no way to be 100% sure by looking at someone what gender they identify as, what sex they are, which set of genitals they have, or any number of things. You can, based on the answers people have given here be fairly certain to some degree but nothing will always be right. There are cisgendered women with adam’s apples and men with soft features.
So essentially this question is pointless.
I did see that, I just didn’t interpret it the way you did.
No. The point is how YOU identify cisgendered people. And how elfkin identifies cisgendered people. And how I identify cisgendered people. It’s a survey, not an exam. There is no right answer here.
If this question is pointless, then would you be offended if someone referred to you by the wrong gender? If this question is pointless, then do you think a computer like Watson should have known to differentiate male and female and should have known with so-called “common sense” that Richard Nixon is male and Pat Nixon is female? If this question is pointless, then would you care about knowing the gender of your dog so you can spay or neuter it or refer to it by “he” or “she” rather than refer to the creature like an object?
Are you serious? So you think using the methods listed here, including “turning a person upside down and looking between their legs” is a useful way to avoid misgendering people?
If you’re really concerned about not misgendering someone, then the only polite thing is to either find out their name/what pronouns other people are using in situations that warrant it, or for a stranger on the street- just mind your own damn business and not decide something like that for another person.
I would need to know the sex of my dog for this purpose. I don’t believe the dog has a gender as I understand the concept.
If you’re going to come back at me and suggest then that the point of the thread is to determine people’s sex, then I’d say that’s really no one’s business.
I think you may not understand what the word cisgendered means.
Pretty sure I do. Men who are born with penises and testicles who identify with the male gender, and women born with vulvas and uteruses who identify with the female gender. aka “gender-normative”, aka cissexual.
But why don’t you actually tell us what you’re thinking? It took me until now to figure out what you were actually upset about.
Like, if you had said, “elfkin, according to current thinking, sex and gender are only partially correlated. Looking between a person’s legs might tell you what sex someone is, but not their gender,” than this whole thread would be a lot shorter.
'Cause, yeah, we’ve all - except you - been using “gender” as the OP used it - the older definition, meaning sex.
You can’t. Not entirely.
Generally the hormonal differences in men’s and women’s bodies lead to discernible differences in their bodies, faces, and voices. Generally the ideas in various cultures about masculinity and femininity lead to men and women choosing certain ways of adorning and presenting their bodies.
These things are certainly what I use, but they are not always applicable.
Plenty of people don’t choose to present their bodies (wherein present = not just how you dress, but also how you walk, how you think about your anatomy: do you want to emphasize your breasts our hide or ignore them? What other parts of your body do you emphasize? Do you want to look ‘beautiful’ or ‘handsome’ or both or neither or something in between?) in the ways we consider standard for their gender.
Plenty of people’s bodies also differ from the common physical characteristics we use to distinguish men and women. There are women with very flat chests, or facial hair. There are men with soft features or high voices.
And of course there are also people who don’t identify with their chromosomal gender, or have chromosomal anomalies.
All of those people are a minority. Generally the characteristics up in paragraph 2 are sufficient. Many of them are culturally ingrained. Some aren’t. But there isn’t absolute, fail-proof certainty.
-Electric Warrior, who has been mistaken for a boy a few times and whose boyfriend has been mistaken for a girl fewer times, but still a few times