Etymology is an interesting area of study, but completely irrelevant to modern use of language. If we have two words (and I’m certain that there are many, many more – “entropy”, “proven”, etc. etc.) which mean one thing in a general context and something more precise in a specific context, we cannot cry that they arose in different ways. It simply doesn’t matter.

If we were to carry on and have a discussion about gender in people and in society, we would then have to make up some neologism to describe the concept which we already have assigned to a word. Your refusal to accept that /when talking about this subject/, the word gender /does not refer to birth sex/ is a refusal to communicate. So, I’m not going to bother replying to you on this blog again (although I’ll certainly keep reading, Dan!).

Regarding the rock musician bridges argument, your argument is incorrect since the word bridge as it is used in music does not impact the word bridge as a device for crossing water etc. whereas you specifically told me I was using the word gender wrongly. Besides you picked a poor example as the bridge in music was originally (and often still used) as a bridge between sections of music in the same way as a bridge is between two sides of a river.

Also, according to an unnamed (she is an expert because she is both a doctor and has struggled with depression for some time) person in the know, the word depression was used as a specific medical term before it was used colloquially. Taking a technical word and giving an incorrect, more general meaning is okay because it will be the general public that does this not a small minority. As I stated before, the word of the majority is being stolen by the minority.

Re: Inclusion into LGBTQ:

If we’d reached this point with gay rights when we reached it with Black Rights, you’d be entirely right. When we changed the laws so that a black woman could marry a white man and vice versa, it would have been great if society had been ready to say “Hey, while we’re at it, gay and transfolk deserve equality under marriage laws, too!”. They weren’t ready to say that.

The legislation which marginalises transfolk is largely the same legislation that marginalises gay folk. Marriage, the right to see a GP who doesn’t treat you like dirt, the right to work, the right to walk down the street without being kicked to death. If you’re saying you don’t think society is ready to accept the trans, but is ready to accept gay people, just say so. I think you’re wrong.

(Re ‘Women’: http://pennyred.blogspot.com/2009/11/no-feminism-without-trans-feminism-for.html)

Re: Use of language.

It’s clear that words often have multiple meanings; I could hardly try complaining about rock musicians talking about “bridges”. Bridges are constructions that go over water! Politicians and spin? Ridiculous – they’d get dizzy.

It’s clear also that words that might mean one thing in a general context might mean something very specific in a given context. What about depression? The vernacular use – “feeling sad” has nothing to do with the crippling mental condition of “major depressive disorder” – but I take it if you were talking to someone about mental health you wouldn’t say “People with depression should cheer up and go to the cinema!”.

If you come into a conversation about gender identity and say “gender is sex and sex is gender” you are projecting the same message as you would saying “depression is ordinary sadness and ordinary sadness is depression” to depressives. You’d come across as… “wrong”. It doesn’t matter what “the English” decide – if you’re talking about a specialist subject, you’re going to have to use the language of the people who talk about it.

Unless, of course, you’re happy communicating badly.

I know that the ‘T’ has been there from the start and has always had a link to LGB as it is similar in many respects. I also accept your point about fighting for one is fighting for them all however LGB are essentially the same thing whereas being transexual is definitely different.

Let me give you an example (lets hope this one is better than my last). By your logic, badminton and tennis should share an organisation. They are very similar in that there is a net, a projectile of some sort, two people playing, a court but they are not the same… Also, your fighting for one is fighting for them all argument is invalid because then LGBT should be LBGTBW to include black people and women.

But, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be in the same group, just that it surprises me that its so universally that way.

and now in response to your second comment CJ

Yeah that was a bad example. I chose looks because its easy for people to be deluded about it but skill at sport is another example. If you think you are good at sport it does not make any better than you actually are.

I think my annoyance is that is you were to ask random people on the street who had no involvement with the transgender community what gender is they would respond that it is whether you are a man or a woman. If then asked to define what being a woman or a man is then most would probably mention various body parts. The English language is what the English speak, not what a minority decide.

Apologies for the fairly rambling argument, I didn’t get up very long ago.

Your post again is based around the definition of the word ‘gender’. There’s no real gain to be had discussing definitions; everyone who speaks about this topic with a genuine desire for conversation naturally uses the language (also in use by the medical community) which has evolved to suit the situation. It’s certainly not ‘your word’ any more than it is anyone else’s.

Right, things to do, people to be.

I think what irks me is the use of the word gender to describe a state of mind. The word gender is a synonym of the word sex and the word has been hyjacked and given a different meaning. By all means make up another word for it but give me back my word

@David cole: Ahh, you managed to hit quite a few false statements there.

The trans and the queers have always formed a community – if I may sloppily quote the Wikipedia article on the Stonewall Riots: The Stonewall Inn catered to “drag queens, representatives of a newly self-aware transgender community, effeminate young men, hustlers, and homeless youth.”. The T in LGBT isn’t ‘tacked on’ the end – we’ve been here standing with everyone else from the start.

The LGB and the T aren’t in such a different situation, either; over the last 50 years an awful lot of rights have been won in the West. Black civil rights, the recognition of intramarital rape, gay marriage, the gender recognition act – it’s all symptomatic of a society growing up. You can’t fight for one freedom without simultaneously fighting for all of the others. Sure, there’s a difference of scale; there always is – but the problem is always people being inhumane to others.

(Dan’s already responded to your confusing of “sex” and “gender”. In this context, they aren’t ever used interchangably.)

I don’t interact much with the LGBT community as a whole – my life is rather busy as is. I do (mis?)recall[1] at one trans meet last term the point being made that transfolk experience the most blunt vitriol from feminists (like Bindel and Greer) and the rest of the queer community. I’m sure you meant no ill will, but sometimes when you write “give them their own group. :p” it’s hard not to read “kick them out of mine[2]“.

[1] My memory is dire – I might be conflating two different speakers here.
[2] Of course, I have no idea about who you are or what your sexuality might be, etc.

The mistake you make in the second paragraph is confusing sex and gender. What you’ve said is an absolutely correct appraisal of sex. For the vast majority of people sex is easy to define by physical characteristics or chromosomes. However, gender is something that, according to trans people, is much harder to define and is a psychological thing rather than a physiological thing that doesn’t have to be the same as one’s sex.

The point I was trying to make in this post is that you don’t have to understand or agree with that opinion to avoid discriminating against people who do.

In response to the main article, I have to admit I’m sceptical about transgenderism. I am all for their rights and, as you pointed out, it is easy to accommodate them. however, your gender is not impacted by the way you feel, only by your biochemistry. If you have a y chromosome you are male. If you do not you are female. You can have turner females (singular x chromosome) and kleinefelter males (extra x chromosomes but still have a y) which are obviously special cases but other that that it is very simple.