From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Apr 20 13:38:44 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:38:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lw0GK-0001b9-Cl for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:38:44 -0700 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lw0GK-0001b2-AJ for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:38:44 -0700 Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:38:44 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Gender neutrality? Message-ID: <20090420203844.GG593@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20090420140025.GA7343@sdf.lonestar.org> <20090420201926.GF593@digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-archive-position: 15483 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Umm. I don't think I even know what it means. If I say "Did you see that woman?", I mean "Did you see that human with female secondary sexual characteristics?"; I'm probably only bothering to say "woman" because I found them attractive. I have no idea what "replacing words meaning biological sex with words for gender identities" would entail in that conversation, let alone why I would want to do that. FWIW, as others have said nanmu/ninmu can mean looks like an X, thinks like an X, acts like an X, considers themselves an X, is considered by others an X, etc, etc; it's up to context to make the distinction. I'm not at all clear on which case you think should be deprecated. -Robin On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 04:34:40PM -0400, Danny Piccirillo wrote: > Yes, but in conversation people often like to say, "Did you see > that girl?" instead of "Did you see that person?". Things like > that. My request is that lujvo for gender identities should > replace words meaning biological sex in casual conversation since > it will come up. Can that happen? Does anybody else see this as > something that should happen? > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 16:19, Robin Lee Powell > wrote: > > > It hasn't come up. Unless I need to talk about whether someone > > actually has a penis or vagina, I use {remna}. Or, you know, their > > name. :) If it comes up in conversation for you, I suggest you > > invent some lujvo. > > > > -Robin > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 04:12:16PM -0400, Danny Piccirillo wrote: > > > No, i mean words that instead of meaning that someone is a boy, it > > > means that they are mentally a boy. 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). > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:00, Minimiscience > >wrote: > > > > > > > de'i li 20 pi'e 04 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Danny Piccirillo .fy. cusku zoi > > > > skamyxatra. > > > > > If there are terms for boy, man, girl, and woman, there are surely > > terms > > > > for > > > > > one who identifies as masculine or feminine, or androgynous, > > genderqueer, > > > > etc > > > > > and those are the terms i think should be preferred in common > > > > conversation > > > > > when talking about someone who has a gender identity (all humans). > > > > .skamyxatra > > > > > > > > If you mean words that are suitable for individuals regardless of their > > > > gender > > > > identities, yes, there are words for those. "Human" is "{remna}," and > > > > "person" > > > > (not necessarily human) is "{prenu}." "Child" is "{verba}," > > "offspring" is > > > > "{panzi}," "parent" is "{rirni}," "sibling" is "{tunba}," "uncle/aunt" > > is > > > > "{famti}," et cetera. > > > > > > > > mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > le munje vi smaji > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > They say: "The first AIs will be built by the military as weapons." > > And I'm thinking: "Does it even occur to you to try for something > > other than the default outcome?" -- http://shorl.com/tydruhedufogre > > http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ > > > > > > 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. > > > > -- They say: "The first AIs will be built by the military as weapons." And I'm thinking: "Does it even occur to you to try for something other than the default outcome?" -- http://shorl.com/tydruhedufogre http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ 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.