MugaSofer comments on LW Women- Minimizing the Inferential Distance - Less Wrong

58 [deleted] 25 November 2012 11:33PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (1254)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: MugaSofer 27 November 2012 12:15:48AM 1 point [-]

Until the child tells you their gender identity, don't assume it matches their body, and even after then don't police it.

What added benefit comes from not assuming it matches their body, if you're not enforcing stereotypes?

Comment author: ialdabaoth 27 November 2012 12:19:27AM 4 points [-]

You have an implicit assumption: that there are actions that you can take which assume that gender identity matches body, that do not enforce stereotypes and which cannot be co-opted to enforce stereotypes.

There is strong evidence to suggest that that is not true, within the current social landscape.

Comment author: MugaSofer 27 November 2012 12:44:35AM 3 points [-]

Referring to them by gendered pronouns, basically.

Comment author: JulianMorrison 27 November 2012 12:25:54AM 2 points [-]
  1. They might be full blown trans, whether the kind that's so intense it forces people to transition despite all the grief they get, or the kinds that are less intense or more messy (and probably loads more common, like bisexual is more common than gay).

  2. They might want to pick and mix their gender presentation or have a non-traditional way of expressing their identity. Like being a "tomboy" or a boy who likes dresses.

  3. They will learn to behave in a non-assuming, non-policing way themselves.

Comment author: MugaSofer 27 November 2012 12:41:04AM *  1 point [-]
  1. How does treating a child as genderless help if they prove to be transexual?

  2. Surely this is covered by "not enforcing stereotypes"?

  3. I don't follow.