Discovering, accepting, and/or changing who you are is a major part of the human experience. Taking that away robs potential for relatable, developing characters. I've heard of campaigns where the entire villain's motivation was becoming something they weren't. I had characters haunted by a desire to become mentally or physically different. I had one monstrous character deny the chance to become "normal" because she put her duty above her personal desires.
Canon-wise, giving a person a new body is surprisingly difficult because a soul has an innate connection to its mortal coil. Even permanent polymorph effects are merely a facade created by magic. Dispel magic or another polymorph effect can undo a gender changing spell. Instantaneous effects, such as fleshwarping, are extremely dangerous and taboo. Reincarnate and wish/miracle spells are the only ways to truly gain a new body, but such magic is expensive and not reliable.
So, no, this isn't a "solved problem."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Discovering, accepting, and/or changing who you are is a major part of the human experience. Taking that away robs potential for relatable, developing characters.
I don't think anyone here has been talking about taking away the potential for relatable, developing characters. Could you be more specific about what you mean?
Canon-wise, giving a person a new body is surprisingly difficult because a soul has an innate connection to its mortal coil. Even permanent polymorph effects are merely a facade created by magic.
I'm pretty sure Shardra's soul has an innate connection to her body, after the tincture has taken effect. I'm sure the same would hold for any transgender character. (It sure as hell holds true for my own soul and my own body.)
Dispel magic or another polymorph effect can undo a gender changing spell. Instantaneous effects, such as fleshwarping, are extremely dangerous and taboo. Reincarnate and wish/miracle spells are the only ways to truly gain a new body, but such magic is expensive and not reliable.
I don't know, I get the feeling that neither the mulibrous tincture that Shardra has used nor its counterpart, the anderos salve would be affected by dispel magic.
So, no, this isn't a "solved problem."
Again, I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Could you be more specific?
Oh hey, thread is still active.
Anyone mind a question of vaguely Rorschach nature?
Having personally been through the unintended drama of rejecting advances from a transperson, and read of numerous others who by contrast are happy in their relationships, I figured that, especially since I will likely to at some point be in the equivalent in-game situation with both more and less accommodating personae, I would indulge in flagrant comma abuse and pose the question; would it be out of line to 'friend-zone' with such as a basis, or would it be taken as cause for offense?
If the question seems odd, it's because of the fact that, in one of my groups, there's one person of the LGBT persuasion who has a particular fixation the always want to play out; specifically seduction of individuals that don't confirm to their orientation. I make it difficult (intentionally) by keeping the matter fluid, but they have consistently wanted to play the 'trap' role, no matter who is GMing. I know full well that such is NOT AN RL Interpretation/Iteration of being Trans-*, which is why I want Input from those who are who may have had an experience (traumatic or otherwise) with crossed signals and attraction mismatch that can be learned from on multiple fronts.
Contributor
|
Discovering, accepting, and/or changing who you are is a major part of the human experience. Taking that away robs potential for relatable, developing characters. I've heard of campaigns where the entire villain's motivation was becoming something they weren't. I had characters haunted by a desire to become mentally or physically different. I had one monstrous character deny the chance to become "normal" because she put her duty above her personal desires.
Canon-wise, giving a person a new body is surprisingly difficult because a soul has an innate connection to its mortal coil. Even permanent polymorph effects are merely a facade created by magic. Dispel magic or another polymorph effect can undo a gender changing spell. Instantaneous effects, such as fleshwarping, are extremely dangerous and taboo. Reincarnate and wish/miracle spells are the only ways to truly gain a new body, but such magic is expensive and not reliable.
So, no, this isn't a "solved problem."
Actually, the elixir of sex shift mentioned by Dr Swordopolis is a permanent effect. Dispel magic, mage's disjunction and the like would have no impact on its effects; the text calls that out specifically.
|
Contributor
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh hey, thread is still active.
Anyone mind a question of vaguely Rorschach nature?
Having personally been through the unintended drama of rejecting advances from a transperson, and read of numerous others who by contrast are happy in their relationships, I figured that, especially since I will likely to at some point be in the equivalent in-game situation with both more and less accommodating personae, I would indulge in flagrant comma abuse and pose the question; would it be out of line to 'friend-zone' with such as a basis, or would it be taken as cause for offense?
If the question seems odd, it's because of the fact that, in one of my groups, there's one person of the LGBT persuasion who has a particular fixation the always want to play out; specifically seduction of individuals that don't confirm to their orientation. I make it difficult (intentionally) by keeping the matter fluid, but they have consistently wanted to play the 'trap' role, no matter who is GMing. I know full well that such is NOT AN RL Interpretation/Iteration of being Trans-*, which is why I want Input from those who are who may have had an experience (traumatic or otherwise) with crossed signals and attraction mismatch that can be learned from on multiple fronts.
Are you asking how to politely turn down the romantic advances of a transgender person? Basically the same way you politely turn down anyone else: Let them know that you don't have any romantic feelings towards them, but that you enjoy being their friend. If you otherwise find them attractive but don't want a relationship with them solely because of their trans status, I'd encourage you to think about why exactly that bothers you and perhaps talk to other trans people about the feeling (or better yet, cis people in happy relationships with trans people).
Are you asking how to politely turn down the romantic advances of a transgender person? Basically the same way you politely turn down anyone else: Let them know that you don't have any romantic feelings towards them, but that you enjoy being their friend. If you otherwise find them attractive but don't want a relationship with them solely because of their trans status, I'd encourage you to think about why exactly that bothers you and perhaps talk to other trans people about the feeling (or better yet, cis people in happy relationships with trans people).
The latter was more my extended question, which the answer lined up nicely with; the first part was something of a lead in that's harder to quantify without being a rude jerk on some level, which is not the intended goal.
The only reason I would see any jerk-factor comes of my oblique kvetch about one of my LGBT players. They are basically being That Person to the other GMs, and get annoyed when I don't play along with their need to play as shock-tastically as possible. Those players come in every shape, size, and gender format possible.
I will freely admit, my personal perspective on the matter is skewed - especially on the physical attraction angle - but that to me falls as much into personal tastes as, say, attractions to a specific ethnicity or culture. Just because I don't want to, say, date someone from Eastern Europe or Southeast Asia, doesn't carry over to my other interactions with said individuals. It would be, to my heterosexual male cisgendered eyes, no different from some statuesque woman who wouldn't give any man shorter than her the time of day. Which is not a great thing honestly, but I wouldn't condemn them for their preferences.
I'm sure that it would not surprise any one that I know that feeling, having been rejected for my race. I honestly wasn't offended, and still have a friendship with said pperson.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I tend to bed most things that walk on two legs, especially if I've been drinking a lot :D
I tend to bed most things that walk on two legs, especially if I've been drinking a lot :D
See, I can respect that, especially as a shameless smutmonger, but unlike in my gaming and writing, my own tastes aren't quite as expansive. I theoretically and conceptually appreciate the varied proclivities; my own preferences are relatively tame...in the way that compared to a bhut jolokia, a Serrano pepper is tame. :D
More seriously? I don't have the attraction. Which is probably insulting to some, and isn't meant to be - the stereotype I have been used to seeing, to my dismay, has been 'if it has a hole, and I fit, then I don't care about the details'. It makes me think of Eddie Murphy and his alleged indiscretions, though he is far from the only person with a reputation for doing things 'on the down low'.
Obviously in Golarian this far less of an issue; in my own campaigns I have been as inclusive as possible barring the aforementioned player who isn't happy unless they are playing the 'trap' game, which is something I find annoying.
|
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really know how to advise you about a person using minority status for shock value. If they're a member of that minority, then maybe they're trying to reclaim or find power in their situation; if it's making your or other players uncomfortable, then you might want to pull them aside out of game and talk about it; find out why they're doing it and how they can work out some self-empowerment without pulling the GM or other characters into situations that make them uncomfortable. If it's a different member of the LGBT spectrum playing a tarns character for shock value, then they're just being as much of a jerk as any straight person doing that.
I don't really know how to advise you about a person using minority status for shock value. If they're a member of that minority, then maybe they're trying to reclaim or find power in their situation; if it's making your or other players uncomfortable, then you might want to pull them aside out of game and talk about it; find out why they're doing it and how they can work out some self-empowerment without pulling the GM or other characters into situations that make them uncomfortable. If it's a different member of the LGBT spectrum playing a tarns character for shock value, then they're just being as much of a jerk as any straight person doing that.
THANK you. That is precisely the concern I wanted to express without crossing the forum files Rubicon. Without name-calling or -dropping, it was/is an LGBT individual who is obsessed with seduction of individuals who hold specific orientation, with the implicit thrill being in the deception. I would personally be less irked were it not for the fact that he has made known his proclivities in this regards in the real world, and to me it's not the deed - it's the duplicity (and my own and other's concerns about him ending up dead because the other person had a stupid freak-out).
I worry that I will take things too far off-topic, but I don't know if the LGBT gamers thread is the place for complaints about players who aren't the usual suspects in regards to GM griping. up
I do know it isn't this one though so on the Golarion front, I figured that while there is room for scorned lovers and vengeance, rejection for trans-* status is likely rare enough to not even be a thing.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
With all due respect, can I ask if you felt that the pain and depression that you went through were something you considered to be a fundamental part of yourself? Was it an intrinsic part of your identity? I don't mean in the sense of, this is what I've had to deal with every day and this is part of my life. I mean in the sense of your conception of yourself. Was it a part of your sense of self prior to the depression hitting?If the answer is no, that's where the metaphor falls apart.
Given that in recovering from my breakdown and depression I had to deal with what was a core part of me for 30+ years, the white hot ball of rage in me, being gone. I'd say from personal experience that yes, treating my depression was changing part of my identity.
Hells, I fought taking the antidepressants because of fears that I'd not be 'me' anymore. My dad finally pointed out something obvious. I didn't have to keep taking them.
I don't see the disconnect between mind and body. If you change the body to match the mind, why is doing the opposite so evil? Hells if I woke up right handed, it would be as fundamental a change in my body as taking my welbutrin and not having that white hot ball of rage to keep me warm.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given that in recovering from my breakdown and depression I had to deal with what was a core part of me for 30+ years, the white hot ball of rage in me, being gone. I'd say from personal experience that yes, treating my depression was changing part of my identity.
Hells, I fought taking the antidepressants because of fears that I'd not be 'me' anymore. My dad finally pointed out something obvious. I didn't have to keep taking them.
Thank you for sharing that. (And as I said to the previous poster, good on you for fighting through and surviving. No small feat.)
Do you still consider yourself to be yourself, on a basic and integral level, now that your long-term depression is gone? The rage that was a part of you is no longer there, but is Matthew Morris still there?
I don't see the disconnect between mind and body. If you change the body to match the mind, why is doing the opposite so evil? Hells if I woke up right handed, it would be as fundamental a change in my body as taking my welbutrin and not having that white hot ball of rage to keep me warm.
I think one major difference between the experience you're discussing and the experience I'm discussing is that the depression and rage you felt were fundamentally negative things. They were, on some level, examples of your mind not functioning as it could, and it made your life more difficult. Like a broken limb prevents the arm from functioning. Or eyes in need of glasses so that they can see better. Healing or treating those negative things, removing them from your life, I agree, is a good thing. There is a net gain there.
But when it comes to gender identity, for me, my internal sense of being female (deriving from the structure of my brain or what have you), is a fundamentally positive thing. My female identity is in no way in need of being healed, or fixed, or medicated away. I like and embrace my female identity. What does need to be fixed, what does require healing and treatment, is my body. That is my source of pain. That is what, for me, has been like a broken limb. (A limb that is now well on the way to mending.)
Fix the gender issues with my body, that's a positive thing, and I'm still me. "Fix" the gender of my brain/internal sense of self by resetting it to "male"? Again, that would be a violation of who I am.
Do you see the difference? If not, look at Crystal's post above, which discusses her experiences with both depression and gender, and lays out the differences between the two.
Now, transplant this to Golarion. Can you see why a magic item or spell that changed young Shardra's gender identity from female to male would be a problem?
(Edit to add: The way society treats trans people is another source of pain, of course, in addition to that attached to the body. Again, however, to force my gender identity to conform to the preferred preferences of society would be another form of violence committed against me.)
First off... I'm kinda ashamed I don't understand the difference between "transsexual" and "Transgender".
Transgender I do understand, and as a GM (and my players are on the same page) we treat being transgendered as something from a character's background. With a world full of magic, we just assume this is a common transition for some folks and there is plenty of permanent magic around to change physical sex so it matches gender identity. We don't bother making it something that has to be continually addressed.
In our campaign these things are incidental- a transgender woman IS a woman, and a transgender man IS a man. It's our fantasy world and in that world it's never been an issue for any of the societies (except maybe a Lawful Evil Kingdom).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... I don't see the disconnect between mind and body. If you change the body to match the mind, why is doing the opposite so evil? ...
Might I weigh in with a few thoughts that crossed my mind as I read the latest turn in the discussion? I would like to say first that although I’ve experienced depressions that have subjectively really slowed me down, I have never sought treatment for depression specifically, and what follows is a reflection of my experiences only; I don’t mean to belittle or dismiss anyone else’s.
I was intrigued by the spectre of the mind/body dichotomy, but this is where it led me: if we really wanted to avoid disconnecting mind and body, why don’t we think of mental illnesses more like we do those affecting other parts of the body? Were my mild depressions something like a chronic cold, and other folks’ more serious cases like cancer, so to speak? I would find it strange to define much of my identity by something my body does when it’s obviously not working at its best, like when I have a cold, and I’m thinking of what some people have meant when they say things like, “I am not my cancer.”
However, I think even without disconnecting mind and body one can think of one’s mind as the most important part of one’s body. There are some things I quite like about my body, but I can’t say I count any of my overtly physical characteristics among the things that interest me very much about myself as a person, and I can’t say I ever felt what the rest of my body was doing while my mind was completely off on its own, doing its own thing, while I frequently tune out most of my body until it reminds me that browsing the messageboards isn’t doing anything for the part of it sitting more or less motionless for far longer than is healthy. :) Alternatively, though I’m not a consciousness riding in a vehicle of flesh, my life feels a lot closer to that than to a network of physical processes that result in weird things going on in what I perceive as my head.
Putting those things together, well, how does gender fit into them? On the one hand, I have a hard time imagining a gender that is ill. I suppose one can think of internalized sexist ideas and so on, but optimistically most of the time a person’s gender is just whatever it happens to be. Alternatively, what sort of gender would be “intrinsically disordered,” to use a rather pointed phrase? On the other hand, gender identity, from my point of view, falls much more under mind than body, to use those terms more cavalierly than I did in the previous paragraph, and so involves more “me-ness” than I think I can convey precisely, and again, what sorts of “me-ness” need correction, as opposed to those parts of ourselves that conflict with them?
This is just a coda to KSF and Ms. Frasier’s posts, in case even a more abstruse approach can help anyone and bring out some of what’s going on here by coming at it another way.
First off... I'm kinda ashamed I don't understand the difference between "transsexual" and "Transgender".
Transgender is sometimes used as an umbrella term for various kinds of gender variance, including being a transsexual, cross dressing, drag, being genderqueer, etc.
More colloquially, these days, it seems to have narrowed down somewhat toward transsexual, which itself seems to be used less often nowadays. At least, that's been my experience. The meaning of transgender seems more context dependent these days.
Thus, I'm a transsexual, but I usually refer to myself as transgender or trans, and people usually get my meaning. But if we talk about the T in LGBT, it refers to transgender people, and includes all of those under the umbrella (should they choose to identify as such.)
Edit to add: And no need to feel ashamed about not knowing. It's okay to ask.
Transgender I do understand, and as a GM (and my players are on the same page) we treat being transgendered as something from a character's background. With a world full of magic, we just assume this is a common transition for some folks and there is plenty of permanent magic around to change physical sex so it matches gender identity. We don't bother making it something that has to be continually addressed.
In our campaign these things are incidental- a transgender woman IS a woman, and a transgender man IS a man. It's our fantasy world and in that world it's never been an issue for any of the societies (except maybe a Lawful Evil Kingdom).
Kudos.
|
Contributor
|
First off... I'm kinda ashamed I don't understand the difference between "transsexual" and "Transgender".Transgender is sometimes used as an umbrella term for various kinds of gender variance, including being a transsexual, cross dressing, drag, being genderqueer, etc.
More colloquially, these days, it seems to have narrowed down somewhat toward transsexual, which itself seems to be used less often nowadays. At least, that's been my experience. The meaning of transgender seems more context dependent these days.
Thus, I'm a transsexual, but I usually refer to myself as transgender or trans, and people usually get my meaning. But if we talk about the T in LGBT, it refers to transgender people, and includes all of those under the umbrella (should they choose to identify as such.)
Edit to add: And no need to feel ashamed about not knowing. It's okay to ask.
What KSF said. A few years ago, "transgender" meant pretty much anyone who flew in the face of the traditional gender binary, including crossdressers, genderqueer folk, genderfluid folk, drag queens, ect, while "transsexual" specifically meant anyone who was receiving medical treatment to transition. The definitions have gotten a lot fuzzier over the last five years or so, partially because some groups have decided they don't want to be included under "transgender" (most notably some drag queens) while the transsexual community as a whole has started to pull the stick out of its collective butt about being associated with the other groups. Nowadays, most "transgender" covers a wide spectrum of people both pursuing and not pursuing medical treatment.
It doesn't matter what their gender or orientation is. Using a tabletop RPG to play out your sexual fantasies is only cool if everyone at the table is explicitly okay with that and has given informed consent to signing up for that kind of game.
If you do have that situation, great, everyone can have fun. But if you don't, and there are some people at the table who did not consent and aren't comfortable with sexual roleplaying, then the person trying to push it on others without their consent is being a real jerk.
Being LGBT is not a free pass to be a jerk. Or creepy, or pushy with their sexual fantasies when other people at the table did not agree to participate in that. Respecting other people's levels of consent and personal boundaries is equally important for everyone.
I won't say that I disagree - I think the fairest way to put it is that I'm somewhat sympathetic to the desire, but annoyed by the focus of it, which mixes with my personal taste being very different and finding myself exasperated. This while also, for that group, being a double minority opinion (I feel there is a vast gulf between not into the same things and condemnation of others for what genitalia they are fond of) and trying to not go off about what irritates me.
I do not mind indulgence of mores and kink in my games, and not just my own; however I do include consequences of all sorts, not just the punishment variety. And said individual reacts to said consequences like a wizard being all kinds of exploity with the rules who just had his spellbook attacked.
.....
would Golarion have cases of Transpecism
like a Dwarf who feels he's an Elf trapped in a short stocky body, who dreams of frolicking in the woods and shooting arrows from the tree tops.
|
.....
would Golarion have cases of Transpecism
like a Dwarf who feels he's an Elf trapped in a short stocky body, who dreams of frolicking in the woods and shooting arrows from the tree tops.
I remember a short story about a human-to-elf instance of this...
There's also some of this going on with the Naga Aspirant druid archetype(which might actually make for a neat take on a third gender shaman role in some cultures).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Alright son time to make your first Battle Axe"
"Dose it have to be an Axe dad?"
"hmm, you want a hammer then, good boy, working man's weapon a hammer is"
"Actually I was thinking something a bit lighter, more elegant"
"What....like a Hand Axe."
"No not an Axe Dad....something like a Rapier"
"A what?"
"Rapier dad, it's a light thin bladed sword, you use it in quick graceful jabs, like you're dancing on wind."
"dancing on..... GET OUT OF MY SMITHY!"
"but dad"
"I HAVE NO SON!"
Depending on inheritance laws and marriage alliances you will have the rich and powerful and those wanting to be choosing sex of offspring for political reasons. Might make for an interesting backstory, the character fleeing from an arranged marriage because they never fit into the reassigned sex roles.
And you know this how, exactly? I mean, its a fantasy, so as far as we know everyone is conceived as a dragon, and the swirling eddies of magic that mysteriously swirl around unseen shape each being according to the will of the gods?
Pretty sure there's enough precedent to say that things play out pretty much just like the real world on that front.
That said, sorcerers (and now bloodragers) do totally provide the room play around with this sort of crisis of identity, changelings and the various half-human half-X types could potentially get away with it (particularly with the ARG having spells to permanently change them to the race of one parent or the other). Changelings also have some potential there. I have a character for a game that looks like it isn't going to happen now where a big part of the premise is that she didn't resist the calling to go meet her mother and become a hag, but didn't complete the ritual because someone killed mama hag before she got there.
And then of course you can play around with weirder concepts anywhere the polymorph subschool interacts with a pregnancy I suppose.
Still, none of this is going to be entirely comparable to being trans.
Probably not. Transgender is a thing in humans because all humans start off as female in-utero, and subsequent developments differentiate male traits away from that piece by piece. Humans never spend any time in-utero as elves or dwarves or orcs.
Reincarnation is an accepted part of the setting. I've seen your posts on Shardra claiming that it's not her mind that's female, but her soul. If we accept that, which I am perfectly willing to do, then we can accept that a human can be born with the soul of an orc, or a troglodyte can be born with the soul of an elf, or whatever.
...because all humans start off as female in-utero, and subsequent developments differentiate male traits away from that piece by piece.
I've been hearing this ever since that one House episode, but that's not how it works. The eggs begin with a single X chromosome and the sperm provides the second chromosome (the other half which is either X or Y) needed to begin development.
|
Contributor
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
And you know this how, exactly? I mean, its a fantasy, so as far as we know everyone is conceived as a dragon, and the swirling eddies of magic that mysteriously swirl around unseen shape each being according to the will of the gods?
Golarion is based off our real world with thematic additions. Like with most fictional worlds rules are assumed to function like our world unless called out as functioning differently. This is how we can assume gravitational attraction pulls everyone towards the planet's surface (unless called out otherwise), humans have to consume a variety of proteins, carbohydrates, water, vitamins, and minerals to stay healthy (unless called out otherwise), and humans give birth to live young after approximately a nine month internal gestation (unless called out otherwise). We could have a world where every creature is born from swirling vortices of magic, but we haven't described that happening, and have even specifically called out people getting pregnant the boring old Earth way.
I also have personal reasons for avoiding the topic. I'm more inclined to steer away from the idea humans with elf identities or souls, personally. The otherkin movement co-opts trans suffering a lot in ways that are often belittling and tonedeaf, and I prefer to draw as few parallels between the two issues as possible.
And you know this how, exactly? I mean, its a fantasy, so as far as we know everyone is conceived as a dragon, and the swirling eddies of magic that mysteriously swirl around unseen shape each being according to the will of the gods?Golarion is based off our real world with thematic additions. Like with most fictional worlds rules are assumed to function like our world unless called out as functioning differently. This is how we can assume gravitational attraction pulls everyone towards the planet's surface (unless called out otherwise), humans have to consume a variety of proteins, carbohydrates, water, vitamins, and minerals to stay healthy (unless called out otherwise), and humans give birth to live young after approximately a nine month internal gestation (unless called out otherwise). We could have a world where every creature is born from swirling vortices of magic, but we haven't described that happening, and have even specifically called out people getting pregnant the boring old Earth way.
I also have personal reasons for avoiding the topic. I'm more inclined to steer away from the idea humans with elf identities or souls, personally. The otherkin movement co-opts trans suffering a lot in ways that are often belittling and tonedeaf, and I prefer to draw as few parallels between the two issues as possible.
I don't disagree with that point as it applies to the real world, but within the context of a fictional universe where these fantastical creatures actually exist and reincarnation is an established and observable phenomenon, I think the possibility can't be ruled out.
...because all humans start off as female in-utero, and subsequent developments differentiate male traits away from that piece by piece.I've been hearing this ever since that one House episode, but that's not how it works. The eggs begin with a single X chromosome and the sperm provides the second chromosome (the other half which is either X or Y) needed to begin development.
That isn't quite how it works. Here's a really science heavy explanation.
The tl;dr version though is:
Sex determination in mammals is almost entirely a matter of hormone exposure.
If an embryo has a Y chromosome in it, it calls an order in for male hormones to be pumped in, resulting in the development of male features.
If the womb floods with male hormones without such a call being called in, or it's called in but not delivered (lots of things can cause this, it's actually a major reason women are encouraged not to smoke while pregnant), then you can absolutely end up with someone who by nearly every possible means of determination appears to be male, despite an XX sex chromosome pairing, or absolutely female with XY. And if you have a mix of properly requested and unrequested hormone washes, some features will develop one way, some the other, or some just kinda splitting the difference.
The "chromosomes only" explanation is the dumbed down version people are usually taught in highschool. Mostly holds true, particularly for non-mammals which don't really have the relevant developmental circumstances... but even then, it's not really accurate, because there's species which have "XX" vs. "X" or "Z" and "W" chromosomes.
I don't disagree with that point as it applies to the real world, but within the context of a fictional universe where these fantastical creatures actually exist and reincarnation is an established and observable phenomenon, I think the possibility can't be ruled out.
The problem there is that the way reincarnation is established to function, you aren't born again. You just suddenly have a young adult body of a new race, fully formed, right there, with your unaltered original mind in it.
... Unless we're talking about the strange Samsaran life cycle, in which case all that changes is the intact mind and the adult age. It still completely bypasses the birth bit, and race lines aren't being crossed.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also have personal reasons for avoiding the topic. I'm more inclined to steer away from the idea humans with elf identities or souls, personally. The otherkin movement co-opts trans suffering a lot in ways that are often belittling and tonedeaf, and I prefer to draw as few parallels between the two issues as possible.
I was trying to figure out the best way to put my worries that exploring such themes could feel like it's co-opting the real world suffering of others, but that pretty much nailed it. I can see exploring such themes still working, but staying mindful and keeping it respectful would definitely need to be stressed.
I guess it could be a bit like using fantasy races as a way to explore real world racism or the X-Men being a metaphor for gay rights and the struggle against homophobia. It can work, but it can also go horribly wrong or make the folks its ostensibly helping uncomfortable via unfortunate implications or just being tonedeaf, like you said.
|
Contributor
|
...because all humans start off as female in-utero, and subsequent developments differentiate male traits away from that piece by piece.I've been hearing this ever since that one House episode, but that's not how it works. The eggs begin with a single X chromosome and the sperm provides the second chromosome (the other half which is either X or Y) needed to begin development.That isn't quite how it works. Here's a really science heavy explanation.
The tl;dr version though is:
Sex determination in mammals is almost entirely a matter of hormone exposure.If an embryo has a Y chromosome in it, it calls an order in for male hormones to be pumped in, resulting in the development of male features.
If the womb floods with male hormones without such a call being called in, or it's called in but not delivered (lots of things can cause this, it's actually a major reason women are encouraged not to smoke while pregnant), then you can absolutely end up with someone who by nearly every possible means of determination appears to be male, despite an XX sex chromosome pairing, or absolutely female with XY. And if you have a mix of properly requested and unrequested hormone washes, some features will develop one way, some the other, or some just kinda splitting the difference.
The "chromosomes only" explanation is the dumbed down version people are usually taught in highschool. Mostly holds true, particularly for non-mammals which don't really have the relevant developmental circumstances... but even then, it's not really accurate, because there's species which have "XX" vs. "X" or "Z" and "W" chromosomes.
Not to mention human women with XY chromosomes, human men with XX chromosomes, and all sorts of other arrangements, as well as many people whose bodies were considered "indeterminate"
|
Contributor
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was trying to figure out the best way to put my worries that exploring such themes could feel like it's co-opting the real world suffering of others, but that pretty much nailed it. I can see exploring such themes still working, but staying mindful and keeping it respectful would definitely need to be stressed.
I guess it could be a bit like using fantasy races as a way to explore real world racism or the X-Men being a metaphor for gay rights and the struggle against homophobia. It can work, but it can also go horribly wrong or make the folks its ostensibly helping uncomfortable via unfortunate implications or just being tonedeaf, like you said.
I have missed you, Mikaze!
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have missed you, Mikaze!I was trying to figure out the best way to put my worries that exploring such themes could feel like it's co-opting the real world suffering of others, but that pretty much nailed it. I can see exploring such themes still working, but staying mindful and keeping it respectful would definitely need to be stressed.
I guess it could be a bit like using fantasy races as a way to explore real world racism or the X-Men being a metaphor for gay rights and the struggle against homophobia. It can work, but it can also go horribly wrong or make the folks its ostensibly helping uncomfortable via unfortunate implications or just being tonedeaf, like you said.
Me too. :)
...wait
Not to mention human women with XY chromosomes, human men with XX chromosomes, and all sorts of other arrangements, as well as people like me whose bodies were considered "indeterminate"
Yeah, I could have been clearer there. There are in fact transwomen and ciswomen with the XY chromosome pair going on, and both cis and trans men with XX. In the vast majority of cases they match up, but it's not a direct determination situation, and the female in the womb until things develop along other lines bit is largely true (although again, there's some simplification there).
I also have personal reasons for avoiding the topic. I'm more inclined to steer away from the idea humans with elf identities or souls, personally. The otherkin movement co-opts trans suffering a lot in ways that are often belittling and tonedeaf, and I prefer to draw as few parallels between the two issues as possible.
That does stand to be stressed a bit yes. If nothing else, it's bad to compare "having the soul of another race" to being trans because at best, it confuses the issue by implying being trans is a psychological thing, rather than an actual, physical, observable phenomenon, and at worst implies it's just some weird silly personal fantasy.
It's not quite as bad to blur the lines there in a fantasy setting, where at least dwarves and elves and dragons and magical transformations are things that exist and lend some plausibility to the premise, but it can still be an uncomfortable reminder of real-world people spreading misinformation that does harm to real people.
Humans that are anatomically male didn't start off as female and become male. Instead they, like people that are anatomically female or indeterminate or what have you, start off as asexual. There comes a critical point when those hormones are introduced or not. If that doesn't happen, then the default is to develop into an anatomical female.
But just because that is the default development doesn't mean a male was female and became male. You could say all people started with the potential to become female, but it is incorrect to say all people start off as female.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That isn't quite how it works. Here's a really science heavy explanation....because all humans start off as female in-utero, and subsequent developments differentiate male traits away from that piece by piece.I've been hearing this ever since that one House episode, but that's not how it works. The eggs begin with a single X chromosome and the sperm provides the second chromosome (the other half which is either X or Y) needed to begin development.
As it stands, my argument has to change, but the goalposts are still right where I left them.
In females, differentiation occurs when the absence of MIS allows development of the Müllerian structures, the lack of androgens permits degeneration of Wolffian ducts, and the absence of Insl3 maintains the gonads in the abdomen.
Since differentiation is required, and both the Müllerian and Wolffian groundwork exist simultaneously, I say that the sex cannot be determined female until the "if MIS, then" statement is resolved. Before this step, whatever it is cannot be called "female" and it is certainly not "male".
What this does demonstrate is that we need a better understanding of sexual development at early, very early, stages in order to determine just how many sexes (or variances of the primary two) are possible.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also have personal reasons for avoiding the topic. I'm more inclined to steer away from the idea humans with elf identities or souls, personally. The otherkin movement co-opts trans suffering a lot in ways that are often belittling and tonedeaf, and I prefer to draw as few parallels between the two issues as possible.I was trying to figure out the best way to put my worries that exploring such themes could feel like it's co-opting the real world suffering of others, but that pretty much nailed it. I can see exploring such themes still working, but staying mindful and keeping it respectful would definitely need to be stressed.
I guess it could be a bit like using fantasy races as a way to explore real world racism or the X-Men being a metaphor for gay rights and the struggle against homophobia. It can work, but it can also go horribly wrong or make the folks its ostensibly helping uncomfortable via unfortunate implications or just being tonedeaf, like you said.
For me, it adds to the overall weariness I feel with people poking at the idea (or validity) of being transgender whenever it comes up, and trying to conflate being transgender with things that have nothing to do with it.
I usually bite my tongue when I see one of those sorts if posts. They always raise my hackles. Particularly because of their similarity to a common attack against trans people. I get tired of arguing with people about the validity of my existence sometimes.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been hearing this ever since that one House episode, but that's not how it works. The eggs begin with a single X chromosome and the sperm provides the second chromosome (the other half which is either X or Y) needed to begin development.
Generally speaking the default pathway for embryological development is female, but it's a large abstraction, albeit a convenient one. It's more subtle and complex than that. Things start out as neither male nor female with some common embryological structures that differentiate early on to female or male structures. I like to posit the situation as males being suppressed females and females being suppressed males.
There are male specific genes present on the X chromosome which are suppressed in most women for instance. The SRY gene on the Y chromosome is responsible for suppressing numerous female specific genes and activating male specific ones, stopping female development pathways and pushing male ones forward. For instance in the absence of SRY you can have a genetically XY fetus develop as a female.
I have missed you, Mikaze!
I'll jump on this welcome wagon as well. Welcome back :)
It's more subtle and complex than that. Things start out as neither male nor female with some common embryological structures that differentiate early on to female or male structures. I like to posit the situation as males being suppressed females and females being suppressed males.
There are male specific genes present on the X chromosome which are suppressed in most women for instance. The SRY gene on the Y chromosome is responsible for suppressing numerous female specific genes and activating male specific ones, stopping female development pathways and pushing male ones forward. For instance in the absence of SRY you can have a genetically XY fetus develop as a female.
[tangent]
The problem with generalization is that it gives ammunition to the lunatics willing to intentionally skew the language to produce a desired effect. About five years ago, I experienced this firsthand in my psychology class. The exercise was to write a proposal supported by facts; the caveat was that we had to introduce ourselves and provide a one-word description of our personal stance possibly related to the proposal before we began.The idea was to uncover ways to present our viewpoint even if negative stereotypes had previously formed. We could not debate, but we had a ballot for each proposal and space provided to explain our vote.
Early on, an outspoken evangelical Christian managed to make the case that religious culture should be taught without actively pressuring students to accept the religion's values. The proposal was sound and presented without appealing to emotion or tradition. So when the outspoken feminist began, I expected an equally reasonable proposal focused on something related to women's health, workplace harassment, or the usual issues we've heard over and over.
What the class got was a lengthy monologue "explaining" that biological males were "formed by parasites corrupting a healthy female embryo" and that any efforts dedicated to researching prostate cancer or any other male-specific medical issues were wastes of time and resources. She went on different tangents using inaccurate statistics regarding female-victim-only spousal abuse, serial killers , hate crimes, and of course rape. After she'd vilified the male portion of the human species, she listed the many ways in which the money "saved" could be used...one of which was research some sort of parthenogenesis for women. Her entire argument rested on the belief that females are somehow purer and lesbian relationships were superior to any other lifestyle.*
Ridiculous, right? Well, several students in the class voted in favor of this hate-committed-to-paper and it felt like I was watching a cult form. This all goes back to broad descriptions being taken literally and used to support irrational hostility.
*I haven't come across anyone else that blatantly spouted the same garbage that student did, but a similar attitude and bias is very common in my experience. This is why I never feel like I can go to any BGLQT community group with a strong feminist presence for support. And if this is purely a product of generalization, then that's all the more reason why it has to stop.
[/tangent]
Someone once pointed me towards Queering the Non/Human in regards to transpecism.