Timewaster's Guide Archive
General => Rants and Stuff => Topic started by: Miyabi on December 18, 2009, 10:44:24 AM
-
OK. So I wasn't sure if I wanted to put this in the movies section or here. I decided here because it's mostly a rant.
So there is a group of people who are wanting to protest the Avatar in these ways for this reason:
On Friday, December 18, 2009 thousands of people will be protesting the release of the James Cameron movie, Avatar. The purpose of the protest is as follows:
1) To make all people aware that heterosexual arrogance, assumptions or exclusions of alternative sexualities in movies is no longer acceptable. Diversity and tolerance are human rights.
2) To speak out for all gay, bi-sexual, genderless and transgender people who are not represented by any character in Avatar.
3) To educate people about Evolution and humanity's transition to transgenderism.
All protests will be peaceful and non-confrontational. Suggested methods of protest:
* Stand outside of theaters with signs and pamphlets to express your views
* Sit down in theater lobbies and do not move unless the police use force or violence upon you
* Stand up during a viewing of Avatar and remain standing
* Buy tickets to Avatar in bulk but do not attend showings. An empty theater sends a message
* Bring your mate to the theater and show affection to each other.
Reminder: SILENCE = DEATH. We will be silent no more.
OK. So
1) Pay attention to the previews. In the previews they want to annihilate a group of people. They send people in to try and coerce them into leaving or find out how to kill them or something along those lines. THEN after they LISTEN they find out that they were WRONG ABOUT THEM and some want to help them.
So basically it's about taking the time to learn about someone or a group of people because you make a judgment about them. . .So how is this being overly heterosexually arrogant? As far as I can see it's about accepting others and finding out the truth and not making assumptions which seems to be exactly the opposite of what this blog was saying.
2)Who cares! Honestly, who's to say that one of the characters ISN'T les/gay/bi/trans. Just because they don't openly go "OH HEY I'M THE GAY CHARACTER!" doesn't mean there isn't one there. Also, how do you determine that from JUST the preview? Dumb. Also, why does it MATTER if there is a main lgbt character?
3)Uhm, what? So you're saying that eventually ALL people will be born into the wrong gender? Do you HONESTLY even know what the heck you're talking about? Unless you meant androgyny, and you know, even so how do you KNOW that we will all move in that direction? Granted there are more than there have been before, but that's because people have taken the time to LISTEN and LEARN before they make judgment which is what this movie seems to be about.
Truly, these people are faggots. They don't deserve to be called lgbt. They are straight up faggots.
-
"Look everyone, here's a really huge movie! Let's go protest about the movie about things it isn't even about! It'll be awesome! ...Wait, what does Avatar have to do with any of this?"
Yeah, it's ridiculous. I agree, Miyabi.
-
If evolution did anything to sexual orientation wouldn't it weed out homosexuality do to the fact that there are no offspring?
-
If evolution did anything to sexual orientation wouldn't it weed out homosexuality do to the fact that there are no offspring?
Clearly, Kaz, you don't know anything about evolution. Obviously evolution will turn it's back on current design, and restructure it so that Heterosexuals cannot reproduce, where as homosexuals can.
Also: their protest is bad, and they should feel bad.
Protesting a random piece of creative work simply because it doesn't contain what YOU want (and isn't opposed to it. I could understand if the movie was strongly about homosexuals being "bad", but as far as I'm aware, it isn't) does nothing for your cause, except making you look bad.
-
Eerongal are you no longer unbannable?
-
Protesting a random piece of creative work simply because it doesn't contain what YOU want (and isn't opposed to it. I could understand if the movie was strongly about homosexuals being "bad", but as far as I'm aware, it isn't) does nothing for your cause, except making you look bad.
Exactly.
-
Homosexuality, in genetics, would be an "abnormality". No different than red hair or green eyes or left-handedness. And would not be weeded out because although SOME homosexual people do not reproduce, it does not mean they all do not. homosexual behavior is evident in history as far back as ancient Egypt, proving that the gene has stood the test of time. In ancient times, it was thought that left-handed people were devil spawn. so, they should have been weeded out as well, since most of them were murdered immediately. Even the latin word for left is "sinister" (which is also where we get the word sinister from.
But, i am in agreement. There is no need to make a big deal of a person's sexuality in shows and movies where the sexual orientation or behavior is not a focus of the show.
-
Eerongal are you no longer unbannable?
I have traded in my unbannable status for a significant increase in my moxie and pizzazz.
Edit: also, kaz, your santa avatar looks like the kind of santa who brings people presents. Except instead of gifts, the boxes are filled with murder.
-
Well I am the Antagonist of the Ages... and "Black Santa" is the evil shadow of Santa in German Folklore who kidnaps bad children and throws them in a burlap sack into the Rhine river...
-
From reading the posts at http://stopavatarmovie.blogspot.com I am convinced the whole "protest" is an elaborate satire.
-
We should start a protest for copying Brandon Sanderson! How dare they make blue people! ;)
-
From reading the posts at http://stopavatarmovie.blogspot.com I am convinced the whole "protest" is an elaborate satire.
I never considered that.
If it is, I was successfully trolled.
-
I'm not convinced that it's an elaborate satire... but it is pretty lame.
Homosexuals need to understand that homosexuality, inasmuch as 98% (give or take) of the population do not engage in it, will never be mainstream.
It's one thing to expect blacks or hispanics to show up in the media. It's another to expect mainstream television shows to include Tajiks because they simply happen to be a minority. Assuming alternative sexualities are as innate as ethnicity (a much debated issue), whining about lack of representation seems just as silly.
-
2%? Really?
there is actually at least as large of a percentage of the US population that is gay or lesbian than those that are black. Yet "black" activities are now considered "mainstream".
I dont necessarily disagree with the point, but slinging numbers around like they are fact hurts the discussion.
-
2%? Really?
there is actually at least as large of a percentage of the US population that is gay or lesbian than those that are black. Yet "black" activities are now considered "mainstream".
I dont necessarily disagree with the point, but slinging numbers around like they are fact hurts the discussion.
Not sure where you're getting your numbers from, but surveys ranging from the mid 90's to current day put the gay and lesbian (and usually bisexual lumped in) at around 4-7% of americans. The 2000 census clocked african americans in at 12.3%
-
Significantly more have come out of the closet since then. Being "gay" is ok now, in most places. Conservative estimates put it at aound 10%, while scientists who have done homosexuality texts in mice believe the average for most species is around 15%.
-
Significantly more have come out of the closet since then. Being "gay" is ok now, in most places. Conservative estimates put it at aound 10%, while scientists who have done homosexuality texts in mice believe the average for most species is around 15%.
A report by the William Institute of sexual orientation in 2007 put the US gay population at about 8.8 million. Using the 2000 census data for population (thus, inflating this percentage, as the population would be higher, so i would see this as a conservative estimate) puts the gay population at about 4%
This is an increase by an estimated 30% over 7 years
You're suggesting that in the past 3 years, this number has changed by 250%
-
mtlhddoc2 your comment wqs just as bad if you look at eerongal's facts, last i looked 1/3-1/2 is not the same amount and that is just blacks, hispanics are the majority in Dallas... so stop whining about accuracy if you do the same darn thing. Back on topic, why should people who believe it is unethical for religous or other reasons have to put it in their production. I'm not religous or conservative yet i believe it is a psychological disorder, I disagree with the behavior yet still socialize with people who are gay/ lez/ bi. I personally will never include a gay/lez/bi character in anything i write.
(don't try to argue the genetics with me as no sexual orientation gene has been found and the of evidence "supporting" it is disputed. Not to mention bi-polar disorder, note disorder, IS genetic.)
-
No, Eeron, I am suggesting taht the particular sources are either erroneous or misguided. They dont report homosexuality the way they do, say, homelessness. with the homeless, they estimate the number of people who dont report it. Same should be with homosexuality, at minimum, half that are dont report it.
Kaz: I am not going to argue with you on it at all. You simply cannot convince people who cling to ignorance regardless of the facts in front of them. It is like trying to convince a liberal that raising taxes does not help people. They will never believe it, despite the mountains of evidence.
-
You claim others cling to ignorance?! Damn that's funny! I did that as well when i believed in my own moral superiority and people disagreed... you are doing the same thing in a different manner...it's funny if you look at it one way... though disgusting in a different light. Not to mention your grasp on economics is really bad if you believe in Reaganomics as the current crisis was soley caused by republicans who did.
P.S. I am against both parties and it is foolish to imply that I am either conservative or liberal considering just how moderate I am.... my party is the Radical Moderates Pm me if you wish to join :P
Edit: and on what grounds do you think you have such a better grasp of genetics than everyone else, are you a microbiologist? And if that is the case how the hell do you think you have a better understanding of social sciences? Completely different field! Sounds to me like you have a case of unsupported empty arrogance, typical to the household i was raised in. I on the other hand had the world teach me that i was just as stupid as everyone else and my opinion was no better no worst.
-
To call homosexulaity a "pychological disorder" is incredibly ignorant. Ther eis ZERO evidence to support that, while there is tons of evidence, and new evidence being discovered every day that homosexuality is no different than brown eyes or blonde hair.
I am a libertarian. In the past 20 years Democrats, not Republicans have controlled the finances of our government and the budget and taxes 14 of those 20 years. Keeps blaming Reaganomics if you would like, but we never had it better and it only got bad when the government went on a spending spree and had to raise taxes. both oparties are guilty. But it is liberal economics that makes it seem like taxing the people you want to support is the right way to go.
Do you know, that I am on government assistance? Yet this year i got hit with an extra tax because, apparently, i am also rich. So I am barely squeaking above the poverty line, yet my taxes increased. Yep, sounds like the Dems know what they are doing.
anyway, I dont believe I am morally superior, in fact, I am not. My morals are ambiguous at best. I am against abortion, vote Republican, nearly every time because the Dems around here are so out of touch, and support the wars, yet even I know that most gay people cannot change any more than i can change my color blindness or deafness. it is genetic. Nearly everything is, including tendencies for criminal behavior, musical skill, and everything in between.
-
I never once supported liberal economics, you keep jumping to conclusions based on zero data! Therefore why should i believe anything you say.... you are kinda stepping on your own tongue, so to speak. And if there was evidence that being gay was genetic they would find a sexual orientation gene... and b/c there is no such gene it can not be found. (if they by some off chance find one i will be the first to raise my hand and say i was wrong) Not too mention the fact that out of my personal expierence i have met more bi polar/ clynically depressed gays (percentage wise) than straights which translates into the possibility of it being a psychological disorder. I do not have the means to survey the populace else i would.
-
maybe they are depressed because people like you keep telling them they could take a pill and be straight.....
Funny boy, elude to one thing and then switch it and blame me, eh, whatever.
-
I just love being told I'm crazy. =/
-
I just love being told I'm crazy. =/
Ah, how easy it is to get sidetracked...
You know, over 1% of the population is autistic, according to a commercial I saw the other night. I think that means that every mainstream fantasy movie is obligated to include an autistic character.
-
You treat disorders Miyabi (not to mention there is atleast 1 bipolar person every generation in my maternal family including my older brother) and just because i disagree with you on this doesn't mean i think little of you. Hell no one would get along with anyone if we had to all agree!
There is about 1% of Anglo-Saxons who happen to be Schizophrenic does that mean we have to include them in movies?
-
I think fantasy movies make up for the lack of autistic characters by the number of Asperger's people who obsess about their shows and video games and what-not after. I say this as the mother of an Asperger's kid who fights orcs in his spare time.
-
Aspergers?
-
It's a mild form of autism with particular characteristics.
-
I would put money on you finding more autistic charachters in TV and movies than gay charachters. There were entire shows and movies, mainstream ones, which focused on autistic chatachters. Rarely do you find a gay lead. You find more pedophiles in TV and movies than gay people, and i would hazard a guess that less people are pedophiles than are autistic.
-
I would put money on you finding more autistic charachters in TV and movies than gay charachters. There were entire shows and movies, mainstream ones, which focused on autistic chatachters. Rarely do you find a gay lead. You find more pedophiles in TV and movies than gay people, and i would hazard a guess that less people are pedophiles than are autistic.
There have been a lot of mainstreme gay characters on tv for quite a while from shows like Rosanne to Will and Grace. And a lot of other shows such ER. Brothers and Sisters. united states of Tara and a bunch of movies. Sorry abot weird caps I'm on my phone.
-
I wouldnt call that "alot" maybe what, two dozen? And how many of those mainstream shows had a gay lead charachter?
Yes, I remember Martin Mull's charachter on Roseanne, and Will & Grace (Dual lead, and it could be argued that "Will" was still a secondary charachter to Grace)
but autism is featured regularly in various forms. Mary McDonnell's Aspergers charachter on Grey's Anatomy, to Corky from Life Goes On and Dustin Hoffman's Rainman charachter. Even "Tropic Thunder" featured Ben Stiller acting out autistic parts (even if it was somewhat distasteful).
-
If evolution did anything to sexual orientation wouldn't it weed out homosexuality do to the fact that there are no offspring?
Clearly, Kaz, you don't know anything about evolution. Obviously evolution will turn it's back on current design, and restructure it so that Heterosexuals cannot reproduce, where as homosexuals can.
Also: their protest is bad, and they should feel bad.
Protesting a random piece of creative work simply because it doesn't contain what YOU want (and isn't opposed to it. I could understand if the movie was strongly about homosexuals being "bad", but as far as I'm aware, it isn't) does nothing for your cause, except making you look bad.
If it isn't illegal, it's obligatory. *sigh* Liberalism, a form of compensate for the western world as it commits suicide. "I leberal as long as you agree with me - and I mean ACTIVELY agree with me." Gits.
I hadn't noticed any of this - but look who else caved to this pressure... "Dumbaldore is gay" What?! I read the books, girl! If he was gay you should have mentioned it somewhere!?! Oh, right, you caved.
-
I forgot about that comment.... and i don't remember making a rebuttal so here is my delayed rebuttal; Homosexuality has become more or less excepted through out American Society. Due to this fact you would normally expect less people to come out of the closet every year, the opposite is the reality. I never specified when it would be weeded out only that there would be signs of it doing so.
On a related note, genes must encode something (pseudo-genes aren't genes and don't encode but genes by definition must encode one or more traits, that doesn't mean several genes can't be used to make up a singular trait) so new genes are VERY rare (alleles are a different story and are variations of a gene i.e. eye color). Let's assume their is indeed a sexual orientation gene with 2 alleles, 1 gay 1 straight, it would most likely be a relatively new gene due to the fact that if it developed in our early history we would have had too few mating pairs to survive all the plagues, famines, predators, ect. However that can't be the case b/c every ancient civilization has some form of homosexuality, Athens is a prime example but if you look at the Native Americans (& there was barely 100 people who crossed the land-bridge 17k years ago, limiting the time span of said mutation much less likely both forwards and backwards) they had men called Berdaches, or the third gender. So technically there could be said gene, though the likelihood is exceptionally small. Also, why can't they find it?
-
Also, why can't they find it?
My guess would be because we still don't fully understand the human genome :D
I mean, seriously, dude, that's a whole lot of data to parse through and solve its function. We didn't just figure out how DNA works and go "Annnnnnnddd....now we know everything about ours."
Honestly, though, i really don't care which it is. I really could care less if homosexuality is a choice, genetic disorder, mental disorder, or a bathtub. It doesn't concern me either way, i'm not homosexual, and don't plan on it anytime soon, and those who are will likely be so regardless of why science determines why they are.
Also: a lot of posts have gone on since i last posted in this topic, and i don't think we're quite on the same subject i last posted about. I also don't remember what I was posting about, but I vaguely remember contesting some points someone made. I don't feel like going back to read whatever it was (i'm lazy, and currently uninterested in whatever it was), so i'm just gonna go ahead and issue a general "Nu uh!" at everyone who has posted since then as my rebuttal in case their statements were directed towards me.
-
We don't understand the human genome but we have mapped it... meaning there should be strong evidence of it's existence... if not an exact location (we know over 1/5 of the genes functions)
Edit: The reasons matter b/c of ethics, not that I care b/c you can't convince anyone of anything on those grounds b/c as a race we are pig-headed fools who stick (primarily) to what moral code we learned as children... I'm just highly competitive
-
I should have also mentioned, since I did reference Tropic Thunder, that they had the rapper charachter wind up being gay as well.... so it kind of moots the Tropic Thunder argument I guess, or not. Just wanted to make sure that was in there :)
funny thing is though, most of the gay people i know (and i know alot of them) are deeply religious people, I find it highly ironic.
-
funny thing is though, most of the gay people i know (and i know alot of them) are deeply religious people, I find it highly ironic.
Why? Over 90% of the world is religious; why should gays inherently be at a polar opposite?
-
I would put money on you finding more autistic charachters in TV and movies than gay charachters. There were entire shows and movies, mainstream ones, which focused on autistic chatachters. Rarely do you find a gay lead. You find more pedophiles in TV and movies than gay people, and i would hazard a guess that less people are pedophiles than are autistic.
You'd lose that money. Bigtime.
Netflix has listed 509 specific shows/movies with a particularly strong gay/lesbian theme. This does not even include shows where gay characters are featured, but which are not a primary part of the plot.
You really think there are many more than 500 TV series and movies highlighting Autism?
(And realize, this is only the stuff they stock—I'm sure there's lots more of smaller & foreign stuff out there that Netflix doesn't have listed.)
-
Exactly! There are TONS of them. Granted there tend to be a lot more foreign films from countries which are more accepting of these types of things.
I remember watching a documentary once on the 'five genders' and there is one country (I can't remember, but it's a small one) that readily accepts all genders as if there is nothing different about it. (Granted this has more to do with genderism than sexuality).
-
funny thing is though, most of the gay people i know (and i know alot of them) are deeply religious people, I find it highly ironic.
Why? Over 90% of the world is religious; why should gays inherently be at a polar opposite?
Because all of the major religions call it a perversion. and when I say "deeply" I mean "deeply" - most people I know are not deeply religious. the gay people, by and large, are much more relgious than the straight ones.
-
I would put money on you finding more autistic charachters in TV and movies than gay charachters. There were entire shows and movies, mainstream ones, which focused on autistic chatachters. Rarely do you find a gay lead. You find more pedophiles in TV and movies than gay people, and i would hazard a guess that less people are pedophiles than are autistic.
You'd lose that money. Bigtime.
Netflix has listed 509 specific shows/movies with a particularly strong gay/lesbian theme. This does not even include shows where gay characters are featured, but which are not a primary part of the plot.
You really think there are many more than 500 TV series and movies highlighting Autism?
(And realize, this is only the stuff they stock—I'm sure there's lots more of smaller & foreign stuff out there that Netflix doesn't have listed.)
Where are these shows/movies on Television? What theaters are they playing at?
Netflix has a large gay film library. That doesnt mean each of them was on NBC or shown at your local cineplex. Even the gay people that are on TV are not playing gay charachters. Wanda Sykes, Neil Patrick Harris, just to name two very much out of the closet gay people playing straight charachters.
-
Huh, i thought I posted in here just a bit ago, but I guess not. Oh well, I probably accidentally hit to go to the main page instead of post.
Anyways:
Exactly! There are TONS of them. Granted there tend to be a lot more foreign films from countries which are more accepting of these types of things.
I remember watching a documentary once on the 'five genders' and there is one country (I can't remember, but it's a small one) that readily accepts all genders as if there is nothing different about it. (Granted this has more to do with genderism than sexuality).
5 *genders*? I suppose if you count hermaphrodites, and sterile people as gender neutral, that gets 4. What's the 5th? Intersexuals? That's the right word, isn't it? Ya know, people who are the "I'm an X in a Y's body".
-
They define genders as male, female, transgendered-male, transgendered-female, and hermaphrodites.
-
They define genders as male, female, transgendered-male, transgendered-female, and hermaphrodites.
Hrm....those middle two, in my opinion, seem more like social roles than *GENDERS*, since a "woman in a man's body" still has the male dangly-bits, so to speak.
Hemaphrodites i suppose i can see a case for, though humans technically can't be a TRUE hemaphrodite, and most hemaphrodites are actually pseudo-hemaphrodites (males/females with deformed genetailia that gives the physical appearance of both sexes, or those who undergo surgery for it), and those born with both X and Y choromosomes (called Klinefelter's syndrome) are usually sterile or less fertile, and usually have testicles but not ovaries, not filling the condition of being able to sexually reproduce as both male and female.
-
All of those symptoms are caused by differing SRY Gene mutations. The SRY gene is encoded on the Y chromosome and is the cause for male development, without it we all develop ovaries and the rest of that bag of tricks (also has effects on testosterone ect.).
-
Transgenders are not just *roles* they are a state in which someone is mentally and emotionally one gender, but physically another. It has nothing to do with how a person was raised or what was in their environment it is just something that happens. There are a lot of studies that show that the "condition" is no different than having a gender except for the fact that it is not as widely accepted, thus many people who are transgendered hide it from everyone so it's hard to truly determine the amount of people who truly are transgendered.
-
That's your personal belief based on how you feel as a homosexual Miyabi. And while you can rightfully call me baised, foolish, and many other negative things on many matters and be right, I have a hard time excepting any objectivity on that topic from you, you are too tied to it emotionally. I haven't encountered a ghost in any way shape or form so i don't believe in them and someone either has a penis or a vagina you don't get a set of ovaries and a penis. (though a SRY gene mutation can cause female development with incomplete ovaries) Science can explain everything, just because you may have to wait for centuries doesn't mean it can't, and just because a guy happens to be as emotional as a female (i've been taught that women have a more developed section of the brain in which emotions are formed) doesn't make you transgender.
-
It's psychological fact. If you want me to dig up an abundance of case studies and scholarly articles I will, but I'm sure you're capable of UTFSE.
-
I hate acronyms (don't ask why i just do) and case studies aren't going to prove what is certainly unprovable because that would mean a.) a soul has a gender & b.) reincarnation exist now while it could be possible... the burden of proof is on you and I for one have no idea how you are going to prove either statement with out "faith" which to me is synonymous with "copout".
-
LEGAL ARTICLES/CASES AND MEDICAL JOURNALS:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8781470914058572427&q=transgenderism&hl=en&as_sdt=2002
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/uclawo8&div=16&id=&page=
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=info:JWhD-US4pMgJ:scholar.google.com/&output=viewport&pg=1&hl=en&as_sdt=2002
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/ilp18&div=41&id=&page=
OTHER ARTICLES:
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-qtlZDCMAZ4C&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=transgenderism&ots=A2DQLP-Jwb&sig=yZGuiVEQ917p1qINtLvBDfhlIZA#v=onepage&q=&f=false
http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=LNZJ8vTd23Qq0JFdTwbvJvjpxjSG2gpMG9JJ5H6tyycQQS51fL2G!52270030!748858375?docId=96394882
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=wAOS53dMNx8C&oi=fnd&pg=PA397&dq=transgenderism&ots=zsTK9CPbOD&sig=jg4LoGCUgtSw71EJAIbHgbHRrFU#v=onepage&q=transgenderism&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2SOe4igsrbgC&oi=fnd&pg=PA2&dq=transgenderism&ots=IcMjCKqGlZ&sig=vQD6fSyB7UfmCGTgMt2Ms8xwejM#v=onepage&q=&f=false
/Proof.
-
None of it was fact all opinion and assumption based on opinion and assumption based on what ohhh more opinions and assumptions it proves nothing. Proof must be hard unalterable fact!!! Now if you can prove reincarnation and some form that we can sometimes keep a kind of previous awareness of being female/ male then i would agree but you can't so it is guesswork with, from what i read, no substance. (it was boring so i only read the first 2)
-
You are impossible. I am in NO WAY claiming reincarnation or previous awareness. I'm done arguing with you, it's like trying to convince a wall it's made of bricks. No matter how many times you actually tell it something it never believes or understands.
-
Claiming that i'm at fault when all i'm doing is the application of logic? That's a statement my bipolar brother would make because he doesn't know how to reason!
And i understand you didn't claim either of those two ideas but they are the only way to prove a "dislocated" person.
-
K, let's play this backwards. YOU prove to me that they are not truly genders.
Also there is this, most dictionaries put more widely used and accepted definitions before others. The definition of gender being male/female is low on the list. (Looking at Black's Law Dictionary, American Heritage Dictionary, and Merriam Webster.)
The first definition in each dictionary tends to be something along the lines of 'a set or grouping of people used to distinguish differences and in different languages (cultures) run anywhere from 2 to 20.'
-
it's like trying to convince a wall it's made of bricks.
hilarious!!!!
-
I don't have to prove it b/c the burden of proof doe not rest on me to desprove something but rather on you to prove something.
Sex-
1 : either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as male or female
2 : the sum of the structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of living things that are involved in reproduction by two interacting parents and that distinguish males and females
-
You defined sex when the discussion is about gender. The words are different.
-
they are synonymous
edit: all documentation i have ever filled out reads sex, which sounds more masculine or something b/c i prefer to use it, pull gender it will give you more of the same
-
In a sense, you're both right, it would seem.
Usage Note: Traditionally, gender has been used primarily to refer to the grammatical categories of "masculine," "feminine," and "neuter," but in recent years the word has become well established in its use to refer to sex-based categories, as in phrases such as gender gap and the politics of gender. This usage is supported by the practice of many anthropologists, who reserve sex for reference to biological categories, while using gender to refer to social or cultural categories. According to this rule, one would say The effectiveness of the medication appears to depend on the sex (not gender) of the patient, but In peasant societies, gender (not sex) roles are likely to be more clearly defined. This distinction is useful in principle, but it is by no means widely observed, and considerable variation in usage occurs at all levels.
from the American Heritage Dictionary on the word Gender
Some people hold a distinction among the two, but the majority apparently doesn't. It would seem Miyabi is in the minority that does, and Kaz is in the majority that doesn't.
-
But sex primarily focuses on the English separation of male and female where gender focuses on a sociopolitical definition.
-
Traditionally speaking you get the same thing... just because the jargon has changed doesn't mean the word should be taken out of traditional context... else colloquialisms like ain't are words (and I'm a Texan who uses ain't on occasion, but slang/ jargon is slang/ jargon)
-
Are you two done yet?
-
Avatar was a really good movie. I wish it had been a little less preachy with the syncretism, but on the whole it was the move final fantasy wanted to be.