RebKell's Junkie Boards

[shadowboxer]

There is still so much we don't comprehend and it will take yrs of scientific/socialogical studies to enhance our knowledge. IMHO, we are in the infancy of comprehension of so much, including hormones, genetics, nature vs nuture issues. Some people need to have black and white answers, and make laws based on them. Most of the world is "gray".

Wish we could just accept people as they are, stop trying to "label" someone or thing so we don't have to think about the myriad of variables, some pre-set, most constantly in flux, producing new and "different" concepts daily. We will never arrive at "the ultimate answer" of most issues, and I wish we remained open to new knowledge, alter our opinions and actions, as needed. Then change again, as new knowledge is always forthcoming.

As we know, stereo-typing is a short cut to critical thinking. The media seizes on old, set perceptions and love to superficially pose the new and unknown approach to initiate controversy and increase their ratings. Those people who think more concretely, glom(sp?) on to one side or the other, and close their minds to contradicting info.

Like The Times(and others) have stated, sports are currently rigidly divided, between sports for the male athlete, and sports that are for females, and when either side attempts to cross over, there is a derisive fan response, which the media measures in ratings. Culturally, this divide goes so deep, the "other" sex athlete trying to cross over, or interpret a sport for themselve or group, tend to get derided and re-labled as an anomoly.

Change is scary, esp. in today's environment, and with so many things out of an individual's control, many seem to long for the predictable. The media attempts to feed that hunger for profit.
Lack of change also oftens lead to inertia and stagnation.

Hope we get to a point of welcoming and accomodating all people, without feeling our whole world view is being challenged, instead of just expanded.

Hope it goes w/o saying this is IMHO, which will always be subject to change.

[gopher5]

http://nicolemlavoi.com/2010/04/05/observations-from-the-2010-womens-final-four/

[Cui7]

[YankeeVol]

[YankeeVol]

[jap]

[rustedsyringe]

[frogdog]

I wondered if anyone else noticed that. Her adams apples is clear to see.
Maybe the day will come when amature sports for women in the USA will need to be subject to the same testing as in international track. Test the X's and the t Y's
i just think she is an outstanding player

[Carol Anne]

This young woman has quite enough to cope with in life as a student-athlete without fan boards and fashion writers speculating about her sex, gender, and sexuality. Leave Brittney Griner alone!

[shadowboxer]

[five_to_the_third]

[Linzin]

[newkid]

You say that an individual is intersexed or blind or gay. Not that he or she is "an intersex" or "a blind" or "a gay." The latter is to equate the person with the characteristic, as if that is all there is to them.

[Linzin]

[pilight]

[Linzin]

[newkid]

Thanks for the clarification that you are in a non-English-speaking country, Linzin. That matters because these are somewhat subtle distinctions in usage and they may vary from one English-speaking country to another.

Anywho, I can say for certain that in America, among the gay community and its allies, "a gay" is most definitely not acceptable usage. Some gay folks would be outright offended and the rest would be, at a minimum, rolling their eyes. But you raise a great point with the word lesbian. It is used as both a noun and an adjective by gay people and their allies. (In that sentence, a non-gay person might say "gays and their allies," and that's less offensive to my ears than "a gay," but I don't know many gay people who would employ that usage.)

Intersexed is not my community, so I cannot speak with certainty as to preferred language conventions for that community, but in my reading the only usage I've consistently seen is "intersexed" as an adjective. I don't recall seeing "intersex" at all as a noun or adjective. I don't think "intersexual" as an adjective is common usage among intersexed people. Though you do see the noun "intersexuality."

Personally, I'm just a big believer that members of a particular community should get to say what they prefer to be called, and those outside the particular community should take their cues from those within, even if the preferred language conventions seem inconsistent or arbitrary. To ignore the preferences of the particular community is to risk sounding, at best, uninformed, or worse, insensitve or downright offensive.

I concede that knowing the preferences of a particular community can be challenging! Some in the "visually impaired" community do not like the word "blind" because it is not as broad an umbrella term and because they think it has a stigma. Others have reclaimed the word "blind," use it proudly, and roll their eyes at the term "visually impaired" which they see as sort of unnecessarily sanitized, as if there were something wrong with being blind.

To some of us, understanding and mastering these usage conventions is interesting and important to clear communication. I know that some others find it tedious and frustrating and a hindrance to communication.

</middle-of-the-night, can't-sleep mini-dissertation>

[ScottS]

[beknighted]

While we're on a semantic roll, the term "gays" - which obviously is a noun - is used quite commonly both inside and outside the community. That said, "a gay" would sound very strange to me.

[YankeeVol]

[pilight]

[beknighted]

[Cui7]

Intersex is a noun and an adjective. It fits in a noun frame: Brittney Griner is not a man, Brittney Griner is not a woman, or Brittney Griner is an intersex.

[newkid]

[newkid]