4 ms·

What regarding the "generalization" of sexual dimorphism causes legal issues, in your estimation?

by nostrebored 10y ago

hx87 10y ago
It fails to account for edge cases, and much like software engineering, in law edge cases are 90% of the work.
- nostrebored 10y ago
  Which edge cases? Providing a specific example would be enlightening, because as I see it the denial of sexual dimorphism typically co-opts the lives and lived experiences of intersex people or people with AIS to further the goal of a completely distinct group. There have been legal issues regarding intersex people being mutilated at birth, but that "edge case" has been sorted out.
  - hx87 10y ago
    Pre-operational transsexual people and transgendered people who decide against surgery but live as a gender different from their birth one anyway are two edge cases where genitalia are a poor indicator of what their legal status should be. As for intersex people, how does the blurring (aka "denial") of sexual dimorphism diminish progress towards recognition and improving quality of life for them? If co-option does not detract from their lives and their struggles, what is the problem with co-option? Equality is not a zero-sum game, except maybe for those who discriminate.
    - nostrebored 10y ago
      I fail to see how when for all intents and purposes when they are men who adopt the social construct of femininity how their legal status is in any way poorly indicated. Intersex people are still sexually dimorphic. Genitalia is one of a number of ways that someone's sex is determined. Viewing them as the sole way is a mistake, sure there are things like AIS, but even in the case of intersex people, their genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics typically develop in a normal fashion. Co-option does typically detract from their struggles. By using intersex people as a tool to push a political agenda you detract from the serious issues that surround their legal and medical troubles. You can't pretend that the actions you take while pursuing a political agenda don't have positive or negative consequences. When equality in the case that you're advocating for comes at the cost of the groups you're purporting to help, or the groups that you use as part of your political narrative, then something is probably wrong.
      - Avshalom 10y ago
        "Viewing them as the sole way is a mistake" ! ! So you completely agree with us.
      - ubernostrum 10y ago
        I'm still waiting to hear what part of the legal system requires specific genitalia to operate, since that's the only reason I can think of for needing legal documentation to care about what genitals someone has.
Avshalom 10y ago
The Olympics actually gave up on sex testing once (not sure if they started again or not) because it turns out trying to lump people into two categories is an exercise nonsensical exclusion. Also both historically and currently there have been various category beyond "two" that have had legal distinctions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender And of course we've got shit going on right now in the USA like http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-north-carolina-bathrooms-20160601-snap-story.html http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-north-carolina-bathrooms... where that sexual dimorphism (thanks in some cases to modern science and in some cases to the the non-binary nature of human genetics) where that "di"-morphism (morphism meaning shape or appearance) directly contradicts the theoretical intent of some law or another.
- nostrebored 10y ago
  An exercise in nonsensical exclusion? Men taking testosterone blockers still have more testosterone than women at the third standard deviation. There are skeletal differences in men that create an advantage in a number of high-impact sports. "Third gender" is bullshit precisely because it tries to create a preexisting dichotomy that doesn't exist. I'm not a masculine caricature. My wife is not a feminine caricature. The people you meet day to day aren't walking gendered cliches.
  - Avshalom 10y ago
    You wanted examples where genitals where an insufficient distinction for the legal system? You're free to argue about why they were insufficient or whether they should be/have-been sufficient but there they are.
    - nostrebored 10y ago
      Mmm. I moved the goalposts in my second reply to 'where sexual dimorphism is insufficient'. Sorry if that created confusion. I still maintain that genitalia are a very good heuristic for determining someone's sex.

What regarding the "generalization" of sexual dimorphism causes legal issues, in your estimation?

hx87 10y ago

It fails to account for edge cases, and much like software engineering, in law edge cases are 90% of the work.

nostrebored 10y ago
Which edge cases? Providing a specific example would be enlightening, because as I see it the denial of sexual dimorphism typically co-opts the lives and lived experiences of intersex people or people with AIS to further the goal of a completely distinct group. There have been legal issues regarding intersex people being mutilated at birth, but that "edge case" has been sorted out.
- hx87 10y ago
  Pre-operational transsexual people and transgendered people who decide against surgery but live as a gender different from their birth one anyway are two edge cases where genitalia are a poor indicator of what their legal status should be. As for intersex people, how does the blurring (aka "denial") of sexual dimorphism diminish progress towards recognition and improving quality of life for them? If co-option does not detract from their lives and their struggles, what is the problem with co-option? Equality is not a zero-sum game, except maybe for those who discriminate.
  - nostrebored 10y ago
    I fail to see how when for all intents and purposes when they are men who adopt the social construct of femininity how their legal status is in any way poorly indicated. Intersex people are still sexually dimorphic. Genitalia is one of a number of ways that someone's sex is determined. Viewing them as the sole way is a mistake, sure there are things like AIS, but even in the case of intersex people, their genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics typically develop in a normal fashion. Co-option does typically detract from their struggles. By using intersex people as a tool to push a political agenda you detract from the serious issues that surround their legal and medical troubles. You can't pretend that the actions you take while pursuing a political agenda don't have positive or negative consequences. When equality in the case that you're advocating for comes at the cost of the groups you're purporting to help, or the groups that you use as part of your political narrative, then something is probably wrong.
    - Avshalom 10y ago
      "Viewing them as the sole way is a mistake" ! ! So you completely agree with us.
    - ubernostrum 10y ago
      I'm still waiting to hear what part of the legal system requires specific genitalia to operate, since that's the only reason I can think of for needing legal documentation to care about what genitals someone has.

Avshalom 10y ago

The Olympics actually gave up on sex testing once (not sure if they started again or not) because it turns out trying to lump people into two categories is an exercise nonsensical exclusion. Also both historically and currently there have been various category beyond "two" that have had legal distinctions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender And of course we've got shit going on right now in the USA like http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-north-carolina-bathrooms-20160601-snap-story.html http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-north-carolina-bathrooms... where that sexual dimorphism (thanks in some cases to modern science and in some cases to the the non-binary nature of human genetics) where that "di"-morphism (morphism meaning shape or appearance) directly contradicts the theoretical intent of some law or another.

nostrebored 10y ago
An exercise in nonsensical exclusion? Men taking testosterone blockers still have more testosterone than women at the third standard deviation. There are skeletal differences in men that create an advantage in a number of high-impact sports. "Third gender" is bullshit precisely because it tries to create a preexisting dichotomy that doesn't exist. I'm not a masculine caricature. My wife is not a feminine caricature. The people you meet day to day aren't walking gendered cliches.
- Avshalom 10y ago
  You wanted examples where genitals where an insufficient distinction for the legal system? You're free to argue about why they were insufficient or whether they should be/have-been sufficient but there they are.
  - nostrebored 10y ago
    Mmm. I moved the goalposts in my second reply to 'where sexual dimorphism is insufficient'. Sorry if that created confusion. I still maintain that genitalia are a very good heuristic for determining someone's sex.