choose gender option

[DirtyChai]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

22 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

disingenuous much?

Nope. Not much at all

Ok, so why just remove the gender section?

Why not just remove everything but the "About Me" section?

[iNow]

You seem to be suggesting,a false equivalence between gender and occupation or place of residence. Why are you doing that?

[DirtyChai]

If you can state your occupation, then why not your gender?

If it's such a big deal, why not just have an "About Me" section only?

Edited December 13, 2018 by DirtyChai

[hypervalent_iodine]

20 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

If you can state your occupation, then why not your gender?

If it's such a big deal, why not just have an "About Me" section only?

You’re the only one who seems to be making a big deal out of it. Personally I don’t see the point, but if letting people know your gender is important to you, you can always write it into your About Me section. 

Also, given the context of this site, occupation seems like a much more relevant / pertinent piece of information than your gender, wouldn’t you agree? The two categories hardly compare.

[DirtyChai]

14 minutes ago, hypervalent_iodine said:

33 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

If you can state your occupation, then why not your gender?

If it's such a big deal, why not just have an "About Me" section only?

You’re the only one who seems to be making a big deal out of it.

Really, I'm the only one making a big deal out of it?  That's why there is a thread that has actually been created on the subject, and then the option for gender is almost immediately removed?

Why was it removed?

14 minutes ago, hypervalent_iodine said:

Personally I don’t see the point, but if letting people know your gender is important to you, you can always write it into your About Me section. 

The same with your occupation and all the other details of your life.

Edited December 13, 2018 by DirtyChai

[iNow]

When I type a post, does it matter what plumbing I use to piss? If so, how? If not, then maybe drop it. 

[DirtyChai]

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

When I type a post, does it matter what plumbing I use to piss?

When I type a post, does it matter if I'm disabled and can't work?

[MigL]

Gender information was always optional INow.
I don't see the rush to remove it either, as it wasn't doing any harm.

Sometimes the information adds depth to an opinion.
Example...
If I'm getting informed on women's reproductive rights, it would be nice to know that it is an opinion brought about by experience.
Not what a man 'thinks' they should be.

Simply my opinion.
Information in itself is never bad; only its wrong use is.
( and that's why we have mods )

[Ghideon]

Why not use the bio field for gender (or other details) that individual members want to tell? 

"72 years old retired male carpenter ..."  

[iNow]

6 hours ago, MigL said:

I don't see the rush to remove it either, as it wasn't doing any harm.

I disagree that it wasn’t doing any harm, or at least that we can state such a thing with any certainty whatsoever. Neither you nor I can know that, but we have actual evidence that maybe it was, in fact, doing some harm.

I’ve seen members get treated differently when other members found out they lacked a penis. Sad, but true. Examples of this are both recent and historically consistent.

I also have to imagine that any LGBTQ individuals may have found the binary choice insulting and frustrating, as yet another example of a place in this world where there’s too much friction when trying to simply fit in and be ones authentic self.

I believe this is what triggered the OP, which basically asked for 68 more gender choices (I’m paraphrasing). The intent was good and the hope was laudable; to be more inclusive, but following the original recommendation would’ve IMO actually added friction to the process, not reduced it.

At SFN, when we submit posts, what matters is the structure of our argument and our ability to defend and support it; our ability to convince others of the veracity of our position and do so in a cordial manner. It doesn’t matter if I’m black or white, old or young, gay or straight, male or female, sick or healthy, rich or poor, fat or skinny, or anything in between.

This is a merit based site, not a tribal one or one where phenotype or crotchal plumbing are in any way relevant . 

So, I’ll ask... if the gender option was as unimportant and harmless as you and others keep claiming, then why are so many of my fellow members getting their panties into such a twist now that the path of least resistance was chosen and gender was removed from profiles entirely? Help me understand... cuz I sure don’t get it. 

Edited December 13, 2018 by iNow

[dimreepr]

30 minutes ago, iNow said:

So, I’ll ask... if the gender option was as unimportant and harmless as you and others keep claiming, then why are so many of my fellow members getting their panties into such a twist now that the path of least resistance was chosen and gender was removed from profiles entirely? Help me understand... cuz I sure don’t get it. 

 

It's a mystery...

 if it's an option

[Raider5678]

7 hours ago, MigL said:

If I'm getting informed on women's reproductive rights, it would be nice to know that it is an opinion brought about by experience.

Ad hominem isn't efficient nor effective, regardless of who it's used against.

40 minutes ago, iNow said:

Help me understand... cuz I sure don’t get it. 

I don't see them really getting upset at it, rather than like me, simply being confused by it.

If you want to do it, sure, go ahead. I just don't understand the motivation behind it. I could see it being changed if it was required, but it being an option didn't force anyone to reveal their gender. And now, if they want to reveal their gender, they simply go to the about me section and type it in, which is again an option.

To me it seemed like:

"We should probably remove the option to include your gender."

"Why? What if I want to?"

"Then you can put it in the about me section if you want."

 

 

I can't help but see a certain inconsistency here.

 

If that still doesn't clear it up, I can break it down into variables:

Prior to this change: 

People have the option to include their gender.

After this change:

People have the option to include their gender.

 

If that makes sense.

Edited December 13, 2018 by Raider5678

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Ad hominem isn't efficient nor effective, regardless of who it's used against. .

how does that work when you have no idea who it's used against.  

[MigL]

68 ( or 63 ) gender options aside, the vast majority of LGBQT people still identify as M or F.
Gender fluidity and differentiation is a recent phenomenon.
And again, it was optional to give that information.

Don't know if you've visited my profile, but I give as much information about myself as possible.
( I'd post my phone number, but all you guys would be calling, wanting to hang out  )

If it was up to me ( it isn't ) I would even include an OPTIONAL field for religion/spirituality.
While I myself have no need for religion, I certainly don't want to offend anyone who does, with an ill-chosen or insensitive argument.
( the Jim Jeffries video about God and dead babies, when speaking to someone who is religious after having lost a child, comes to mind )

[Phi for All]

21 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

If that still doesn't clear it up, I can break it down into variables:

Prior to this change: 

People have the option to include their gender.

I think you purposely oversimplified this. People had the option to include their gender from a limited pulldown menu that seemed insensitive to modern gender classifications.

Hyper's change removed the limitations. What's the problem with this?

[Moontanman]

8 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

When I type a post, does it matter if I'm disabled and can't work?

No, why should it? 

 

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

 

Don't know if you've visited my profile, but I give as much information about myself as possible.
( I'd post my phone number, but all you guys would be calling, wanting to hang out  )

If the current situation in the US get worse you may have lots of us hanging out... Ooo Ooo Ooo legal weed too! 

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

If it was up to me ( it isn't ) I would even include an OPTIONAL field for religion/spirituality.
While I myself have no need for religion, I certainly don't want to offend anyone who does, with an ill-chosen or insensitive argument.
( the Jim Jeffries video about God and dead babies, when speaking to someone who is religious after having lost a child, comes to mind )

I can honestly say I never visit a profile before submitting a reply, I occasionally visit is the person starts to show signs of trollish behavior or just figure out what is making them tick  if their replies get weird... 

[Phi for All]

8 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

When I type a post, does it matter if I'm disabled and can't work?

Only when you bring it up out of context, perhaps as a deflection technique or a way to gain sympathy. It certainly shouldn't matter if your posts are focused on the topic and you aren't breaking any rules. 

Like iNow, I've seen members clearly change their whole tone when they realize they're discussing science with a woman. I've seen them be respectful to hypervalent_iodine as a chemistry expert, then I've seen where they'd visited her profile and found out she's a woman (when she had it listed) and their whole demeanor towards her changed negatively. She's not the first female staff member to experience hateful treatment that the male staff never see. Members may call me lots of names, but they all have to do with my opinions and knowledge (or lack thereof). I don't get people using sexual epithetes demeaning my gender in response to a science post.

[MigL]

Maybe it's a generational thing, Phi.
But I tend to be more respectful when dealing with a woman.

I have previously gone off on a ( misguided ) rant about you, Phi.
I would never do that with Hyper,  but would encourage communication and clarification when in disagreement.

I don't know if you've ever worked in an all male environment. I have. Guys tend to act like jerks, and invariably you find yourself drawn into it, and acting/talking totally boorish, unlike your usual self.
But as soon as you have one woman in the workplace, all that is gone, and people are generally more respectful of each other.
Isn't that one of the problems with forums ? People aren't talking face-to-face, and this 'distance'  leads to more disrespectful behavior.

The more 'human' you make yourself, and less a disembodied screen of text, the better chance you have of being respectful, and, being treated with respect.

[Silvestru]

7 minutes ago, MigL said:

Maybe it's a generational thing, Phi.
But I tend to be more respectful when dealing with a woman.

I have previously gone off on a ( misguided ) rant about you, Phi.
I would never do that with Hyper,  but would encourage communication and clarification when in disagreement.

I don't know if you've ever worked in an all male environment. I have. Guys tend to act like jerks, and invariably you find yourself drawn into it, and acting/talking totally boorish, unlike your usual self.
But as soon as you have one woman in the workplace, all that is gone, and people are generally more respectful of each other.
Isn't that one of the problems with forums ? People aren't talking face-to-face, and this 'distance'  leads to more disrespectful behavior.

The more 'human' you make yourself, and less a disembodied screen of text, the better chance you have of being respectful, and, being treated with respect.

I wouldn't want to be treated differently. Why wouldn't you go on a rant if I were a woman? I understand you see them as manners but I would feel like you kinda agree with me just because I am a woman and you don't want to start an argument. 
I know you mean well but really, I don't agree with this approach. 

It reminds me when I am first introduced to the group of friends of my girlfriend and playing board games. They were being nice to me and not attacking me (in the game) because they had this level of "politeness" because they just met me. It made the whole game boring and uncomfortable especially when I won. (because of this behaviour)

[MigL]

I don't think I should go on a rant with anyone.
Frankly, I like myself better when I'm dealing with a woman than when dealing with other men.
It isn't 'agreement' so much as a different approach.

Men dealing with men invariably leads to a pi*sing contest, and no good ever comes of it.
Other than Helen of Troy ( not really, just a plug for the History section ), how many wars have women started ?

[Silvestru]

6 minutes ago, MigL said:

I don't think I should go on a rant with anyone.
Frankly, I like myself better when I'm dealing with a woman than when dealing with other men.
It isn't 'agreement' so much as a different approach.

Men dealing with men invariably leads to a pi*sing contest, and no good ever comes of it.
Other than Helen of Troy ( not really, just a plug for the History section ), how many wars have women started ?

Haha good plug. Well following your logic, If everyone thought this way, people would falsely put a woman tag just to get more participants or avoid pi**ing contests. 
It sounds like a rant but really, considering the type of forum, when discussing ideas/opinions you should have as little unrelated/unnecessary information about the person who you are conversing with as possible.
If we are talking about the cosmos I could be a can of baked beans typing and it wouldn't add or take to my argument.
In the case that you mentioned where the subject is gender related, I wouldn't find it immoral for a member to give you an opinion and then mentioning their gender so you have the context of their opinion.

[Phi for All]

33 minutes ago, MigL said:

Maybe it's a generational thing, Phi.
But I tend to be more respectful when dealing with a woman.

There are men from every generation that are taught respect for people in general. Too many are not.

35 minutes ago, MigL said:

I have previously gone off on a ( misguided ) rant about you, Phi.
I would never do that with Hyper,  but would encourage communication and clarification when in disagreement.

You never impugned my gender in your rants, and it's unlikely you'd do the same if you heavily disagreed with Hyper. There's nothing wrong with being aggressive in your stances if it's done respectfully.

37 minutes ago, MigL said:

I don't know if you've ever worked in an all male environment. I have. Guys tend to act like jerks, and invariably you find yourself drawn into it, and acting/talking totally boorish, unlike your usual self.
But as soon as you have one woman in the workplace, all that is gone, and people are generally more respectful of each other.
Isn't that one of the problems with forums ? People aren't talking face-to-face, and this 'distance'  leads to more disrespectful behavior.

When I worked construction, it was piecework. The hourly workers could afford to leer at women or talk smack about them, but I only made money when I completed projects. My experience probably wasn't representative of what you're talking about. And my parents, while fairly old-school about gender roles, would have come down on me like a ton of bricks if they ever heard me speaking disrespectfully about women in particular. 

Most of my negative experience in mixed offices was that the women's duties often gravitated towards fixing what men had broken, or on duties the men didn't want to do. I admit to a certain amount of youthful obliviousness regarding women's roles in the workplace, but once I realized all the guys were leaving all the general cleanup to the women in the office, I pointedly started washing everyone's coffee cups myself. It was funny to see guys come into the break room, start to comment on what I was doing, then realize they were about to suggest that one of the female salespeople could do that for me. Most stopped themselves from mentioning it, but some couldn't.

50 minutes ago, MigL said:

The more 'human' you make yourself, and less a disembodied screen of text, the better chance you have of being respectful, and, being treated with respect.

This sounds right, but in practice I think an argument should be able to stand completely on its own. Right or wrong, I would expect any argument presented respectfully to be addressed similarly, without any preconceived notions about my gender, education, sexual persuasion, experience, political leanings, age, or anything else that isn't part of my argument.

[Moontanman]

I am going to have to come down on the side of keeping gender as one of those things that should only be revealed if the person wants it to be. I admit to being prejudiced in the matter, I generally like women better than men, I have more close female friends than male and seem to have more in common with them. At the very least it's nice not have to deal with someone to who everything is some sort of macho challenge. I know, I bit of a rant, this was a major issue for me growing up where I did. Anyone who wasn't a jock was treated rather badly and I never forgot it..    

[MigL]

But that IS the way things already were, Moony.

I'm OK with the change, as it does seem more inclusive to those wo don't identify as strictly M or F.
But otherwise, nothing much has changed.

My only point was that gender information is, sometimes, pertinent to a discussion.
( and you guys are also right, sometimes that information is misused )

[sci-man]

hey guys... wow i didn't think that the choose gender option would be removed... I have no idea what to even say. i honestly didn't think this would go that far and so quick. idek what to say anyways just wanted to stop in byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.