It’s as believable as a guy who died and came back to lead christians three days later! OR that there’s a heaven…OR that there’s a god. I"m just sayin’…
Please demonstrate where Johanna brought her “issues” into unrelated threads, where it would have been equally inappropriate for a straight person to do so. I do not believe the OP has demonstrated that. My point was that without that established, the OP’s point becomes either invalid or suspect, or both.
Highlighting my words out of context, ignoring my point that I am not accusing kimera of not being “open-minded” and “relaxed” about the topic (the words people use are so interesting to me), and then accusing me of failing to read for comprehension is an amusing bag of tricks.
And this is the Pit. If you don’t want my vomit on your shoes go to MPSIMS, where everybody pukes up rainbows and lollipops.
Well said.
And on preview, Kalhoun, I don’t believe a word of the bible either. But Christianity is a large and long-standing religion, and I believe that alone makes people turn to it. Makes it more “credible”.
I, once, (being young) became interested in witchcraft. I had friends who were into it, and I found and read books. I found it so incredibly unbelievable* that I have never taken the religion seriously again.
*as in bullshit, not stunning
Right. But if she started to, say, PRAY a miner out of a flaming coal mine, we’d think that was really using her noodle, eh?
My point about the projectile-vomiting was more about your methods than the content. I didn’t say that the OP effectively proved her point; I said that I don’t believe persecution of someone who is “different” is behind the thread.
I didn’t highlight your words out of context; I highlighted them WITHIN context. In no way did I present your comments out of their position within the paragraph, or the paragraph out of context with the rest of your post.
I’m not sure why the terms “open-minded” or “relaxed” are interesting. I don’t know HOW fond kimera is of transgendered folks, so I am not in a position to say “she just LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVES her some TGs! Boy howdy, she just can’t get enough of them! Named her dog after 'em, she loves 'em so much!” I modified “open-minded” with “relaxed” because I wanted to imply that she was more than mainstream accepting, and I was sure that if I used the word “accepting” YOU would find a way to make it so I was saying “Oh, just ACCEPTING of them, how OPEN-MINDED of her! </intense sarcasm>”
I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t. My suggestion would be to use a shovel. YMMV
The second example from the OP, with the objection to patrilineal naming, I would argue falls under that category.
Other examples are her post in this thread, this post and this post, and I am NOT including posts about feminism or trans topics when I feel it was on topic, of which there were many.
I’m feeling conflicted about posting this. Johanna, if you do read this, please don’t take it the wrong way. I enjoy many of your posts. And you are not the only person on the board who, I think, needs to do less application of any given issue to themselves.
My point is that the concepts are equally bizarre. I like her, but I certainly wouldn’t single out her religious beliefs as being more bizarre than mainstream beliefs. If I call her a kook…I have to call all believers kooky.
Oh…that’s right. I DO call all religious beliefs kooky! 
As other posters have noted, I have nothing against transsexuals/transgendered people.
Personally, I find it fun too and I hope my post doesn’t stop Johanna from posting more of that stuff. I also would love to discuss more transgendered/genderqueer issues as long as they are in their own threads or don’t highly derail GQ/GD threads that haven’t been satisfactorily answered.
Other people told me that they were afraid of pitting Johanna because they knew they would be accused of being anti-trans. I was disappointed that they are right.
If my OP wasn’t clear enough, I have no problem with her posting transsexual/transgendered/feminist stuff in appropriate threads, in fact I love to discuss that stuff. It just gets tiring to see it in threads where it doesn’t belong particularly because I want to discuss it but don’t want to get the thread spiraling off into a trainwreak.
Polycarp, I don’t know how many times I can say this but gender is different than sex!!! The thread did not ask about gender issues it was only talking about sex! Intersexed are not the physical equivalent of genderqueer! That is a complete misunderstanding of what it means to be genderqueer. For one, male and female sex are a biological restraint that is fixed in the species. Gender is a sociological concept with some basis in biology but gender contrusts are entirely socially based. There are societies where there are more than two genders, but there are only two sexes. The thread was asking about sex being a social construct but not about gender, which is an ENTIRELY different thing.
Since there is obviously so much confusion on this issue, I will start a GQ or GD thread about this later if you have any questions on this issue.
Screw it, I will just give a basic overview here.
Basically, genderqueer is a term that refers to individuals who don’t fit into the two-gender system that we have in this society. In other societies, more genders are recognized. There are many groups of people who identify as genderqueer.
Some are cisgendered (not transgendered) who reject the social roles of their identified gender. For example, a tomboy girl can refer to herself as genderqueer. Although she solidly identifies as a woman, she rejects her society’s view of what it means to be a woman.
Others are individuals who identify as a mixture of woman and man or neither. While some of these people are intersexed or regard themselves as such, many are not.
Others change their gender depending on how they feel. One day they will be decidedly masculine and the next feminine.
Some individuals regard all humans as basically genderqueer because they see gender as a continuum like sexuality. Or, they reject the notion of gender because they consider it a social construct that only serves to cause division and trauma to individuals, especially those who do not fit in the stereotypical gender roles.
While a genderqueer can be transgendered, they can also be cisgendered or nongendered so it is not right to use transgendered and genderqueer interchangeably. A transsexual is an individual who has a set gender identity and is not genderqueer (although to confuse matters, I have met some who identify as such).
Help me kimera. I am way behind in the terminology. New concepts have popped up and old words have new shades of meaning and I am pretty lost at this point. It is amazing how many ways there are to mix up an intertwine two sexes, particularly when you separate out gender and sex (I got that basic one). Could you give me a primer or point me somewhere that lists a vocabularly sheet including genderqueer, intersexed, transgender, transsexual, etc, etc? Thanks.
…I dood it!
{{{{{{{{{cthiax}}}}}}}}}
I dunno, it seemed to work well enough with Evil Captor
Personally, I like when someone adds a new dimension to a discussion. Like if Johanna adds comment about gender issues to something that doesn’t seem to involve it, that makes me look at the question or issue in another light. So often, we get wrapped up in looking at things the same way we always have and need someone with another perspective to broaden our thinking. Quite honestly, who would be better at pointing out where we make assumptions about gender and identity roles than a TG person?
Russell
Learn something new every day.
I just found out that there’s another word for ‘tomboy’ that apparently doesn’t have the derogatory connotations of ‘tomboy.’ I guess I’ve got a label now.
Not meaning to be snarky but it really does get overwhelming with all the different … hmm, ‘types of people’ doesn’t sound right. I guess quantifications of gender and sexuality would be a good way of putting it.
It’s weird to me that we (humans) try so hard to quantify ‘what’ we are.
On another note, it does get annoying when someone interjects the same personal stuff into just about every thread that they participate in. I haven’t seen many of Johanna’s posts lately that haven’t had something to do with her being a lesbian transsexual pagan priestess, or telling other people what feminism means. I realise it’s my own personal issue that I don’t like someone who was raised and lived as a male talking to me as an authority on women’s issues, but even absent that, I think she’s bringing it up too damn often.
I have no dog in this fight whatsoever, but I found this to be laugh-out-loud hilarious.
Her. Daniel you wound me. Painting flattering pictures of myself is my raison d’etre. Which reminds me, I was thinking of changing my username from ugly beech to ratfaced cnt.
I love the dope, in all it’s prematurely crotchety glory. But if a mean and hypercritical friend won’t tell you when you’re turning into a bunch of crabby old farts who will? You’re driving away the interesting people. Johanna’s fine. She’s great. She’s bold and Of COURSE she talks about gender all the time. It’s the big topic in her life. It would be in yours too if you were going through what she was. And it’s a fantastic perspective to add to a thread.
Clear as mud, but why leave out the “intrasexed”? They’ll be up in arms about the inequitable treatment, when, that is, said arms are not outstretched demanding federal funding.
Johanna can’t speak for all TG people. As I understand it, she identifies as transsexual which means she is probably qualified to talk about those issues, but by her own admission, she can not discuss all the issues pertaining to TG people. She “doesn’t get” transvestites. Not all transsexuals understand or accept genderqueers, in fact, there is a considerable proportion who hate that term, don’t understand them, and would be offended if you referred to them as such.
Don’t feel you have to use it if it doesn’t fit you. Genderqueer is a new term and many people use it differently. While some consider me genderqueer, I just use the term tomboy myself, but I don’t have any negative associations with. I know other females who do and prefer genderqueer for that reason.
The problem is there isn’t a set agreement on who fits into what category. This is a new field and there are a lot of people with very strong opinions. For example, non-ops (usually male to females who decline SRS for a variety of reasons) are not regarded as “true” transsexuals by some transsexuals to the point where they are excluded from various support groups. These people are offended by being classified in the same group as non-ops. There are also social issues associated with labeling of individuals. For example, when I was younger I refused to wear girl’s clothing and wore boy’s clothing instead. Because I was a female, I was labeled a tomboy and no attention was given to my refusal to accept women’s clothing. However, if I had been male, I undoubtedly would have been sent to a shrink and given a label.
The official difference between transsexual and transgendered is GID versus GIDNOS.
There are a lot of people who feel these labels are misleading, incomplete or incorrect.
For example, my best friend was born with a penis and labeled a male but she has a hormone disorder which means that she was able to “pass” as a female even without taking female hormones. Her official definition is GIDNOS (Gender Identity Disorder Not Otherwise Specified) because she is intersexed. Unfortunately, most people haven’t heard of GIDNOS, so she usually calls herself transsexual because transgendered includes transvestites which she does not identify with.
Wikipedia is a good source because individuals who identify as transsexual and transgendered are active in its upkeep. Wikipedia’s summary on various conditions/identities:
The problem with this definition is that historically transvestites are included in this category although they do not fit this definition.
Genderqueer has too many definitions to come up with a summary but you can find info on it here.
I can honestly say I only know of Johanna from a post or two and don’t remember anything that would set me off. And I had no clue about the TS aspect, so take that into consideration.
Based on the quoted lines in the OP, I’d offer my opinion on the seeming dearth of posts by him/her regarding the matter in all forms open.
“Matrilineal” and “Patrilineal”.
Now honestly, are these concepts in everyday parlance? I have no idea the actual circumstances of his life, but here’s what it seems to be.
Johanna has come to terms with his life. He went to college and took a few sociology courses that introduced some new concepts and ran with them. Nothing wrong with that, it is the case with a great number of students. What he failed to do is apply these concepts to the real world and how they may or may not be pertinent in real life. He fails to see, at least so far if my guess is correct, is that what you see as theoretical Nirvana in a classroom, doesn’t have anything to do with who you are as a person. Nor what responsibilities you have when you leave the class. The world is not there to conform to what you want it to be. Self-awareness is great, but when you expect everyone else to follow your rules, you’re setting yourself up for guaranteed disappointment.
Again, I may be way off base and I mean no disrespect. But based on the use of those two words alone, it would appear our dear friend has gotten a little enthusiastic about his idealism.
Most of us don’t care if you’re TS, Bi, gay or whatever. Just quit bringing it up at every opportunity. We’re not trying to shout you down. We get it. The only other option would be to accept it and have every straight Doper (that was punny!) mention their orientation in every other post.
If you are truly comfortable with who you are, you won’t need to remind us of who you are so often.
Just a thought. Flame if you must.