On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 7:46 PM, vitci'i
<celestialcognition@gmail.com> wrote:
On 07/12/2012 03:47 AM, Jonathan Jones wrote:
> We already have gismu or lujvo for the meanings of "gender" that are
> salient for medicine and science.
What are they?
On 07/12/2012 06:41 AM, .arpis. wrote:
> What if we discarded the idea of a word for "gender" and coined a
> term for something that subsumes the concept. I don't particularly
> like {ceinse} for being too much like {cinse}, but that's a small
> detail.
{cinse} was close to what I wanted, so I created {ceinse} as a
"corrected version". (I'm assuming that redefining a standard gismu is
not going to happen.)
> How about: x1 is the internal subjective identity of x2 according to
> x3
>
> Thus {tu'a lo nanmu mi ceinse} would be "I'm male-gendered" (I'm
> putting a tu'a in there because otherwise I feel like I'm saying
> something more like {da poi nanmu zo'u da mi ceinse}, which doesn't
> make sense.) and {tu'a lo tinbe mi ceinse} could be used for "I'm a
> submissive" or {tu'a lo arxokuna mi mi ceinse} for "I self-identify
> as a raccoon." (e.g. a furry).
That's actually too *narrow* -- it doesn't allow us to talk about how we
gender inanimate objects and each other. (E.g., <http://is.gd/HXdBMy>,
<http://is.gd/aFzoSg>.)
The use of "gender" in that context is different than self-identification; it's targeting based on gender, and that's a tanru/lujvo.
Also, we already have {sevzi} for that.
I was thinking of {sevzi}, but I wasn't sure if that's permissible usage.
{tu'a le ninmu cu sevzi mi} isn't bad for gender identity, though.
On 07/12/2012 08:37 AM, .arpis. wrote:
> Besides, if we use such a general word, we could form a tanru/lujvo
> between {cinse} and it for the more conventional meaning of
> "gender".
This overlooks one of my major gripes with {cinse}, which is that
officially it also includes sexual orientation.
Let's solve one problem at a time, right?