Re: [lojban] gender

[John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>]

Well, at least we have gotten grammar out.  The remaining notions of gender and 
sex (and whatever other terms have come along to sort these out a  bit) are 
separate enough (though the terminology is not standardized yet) to start 
getting away from the confusions that working with one or two terms raise.  To 
be sure, for most people most of these notions run more or less together, but 
for a significant number they do not and it would seem ti desirab;e thing to 
sort them out eventually and not continue lumping them together into that couple 
of terms and their compounds (which often are based on rather disparaging 
notions, alas).


----- Original Message ----
From: vitci'i <celestialcognition@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 7, 2011 2:55:10 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] gender

On 11/07/2011 02:29 PM, John E. Clifford wrote:
> But fosters the notion that these various concepts are somehow related beyond 
>the accidents of English vocabulary.

But sociologically assigned gender, biological sex at birth, biological
sex constructed by surgery, personal identification, etc. *are*
entangled -- not identical, but not easily separable either, and if
nothing else then at least moderately-strongly correlated.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.