From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Apr 20 13:30:39 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lw08V-0000yG-FT for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:30:39 -0700 Received: from mx.freeshell.org ([192.94.73.19] helo=sdf.lonestar.org ident=root) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lw08O-0000xU-PM for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:30:39 -0700 Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (IDENT:jwodder@iceland.freeshell.org [192.94.73.5]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3KKUT60002356 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:30:29 GMT Received: (from jwodder@localhost) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.3/8.12.8/Submit) id n3KKURMX004285 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:30:27 GMT Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:30:27 +0000 From: Minimiscience To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Gender neutrality? Message-ID: <20090420203026.GA22807@sdf.lonestar.org> References: <20090420140025.GA7343@sdf.lonestar.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: SDF Public Access UNIX System User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) X-archive-position: 15480 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: minimiscience@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list de'i li 20 pi'e 04 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Danny Piccirillo .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra. > No, i mean words that instead of meaning that someone is a boy, it means > that they are mentally a boy. .skamyxatra Technically, "{nanla}" and the like do not assert any specific way in which an individual has a given gender trait, and so they are equally acceptable for referring to individuals who are male/female/whatever in different ways. In fact, the {gismu} for "male" & "female" ("{nakni}" & "{fetsi}") do not mandate that one be biologically/genetically/anatomically male/female (and even if they did, {xorlo} would allow a way around it), and their x2 places can be used to specify exactly how an individual is masculine or feminine. > Everyone is used to using words that describe what people are biologically, > but we should be talking about gender identity unless we really do want to > talk specifically about their biological sex. So, the terms that mean > identify as male, female, genderqueer, etc, should always be preferred when > talking about humans (or even bots/androids that are supposed to have a > gender since they don't have a biological sex). Why can't we just move past that and refer to everyone as "{prenu}" as they truly are? All forms of gender identity are equally irrelevant. mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun. -- do la terjvi ganai pensi gi fliba To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.