OT Tuning "It"

[Sarah Fox]

Hi Dean,

<<Of course, the confusing part is when you can't tell by the dress, voice,
makeup, or hair. What would you call this person then? Personally, I prefer
to use the gender pronoun most closely associated with the DNA imparted to
them by their Creator. But sometimes that is not easily discernible from
outward appearances. >>

<<Indeed all should be afforded the utmost courtesy and respect whenever
possible. But it is a two way street. It is disrespectful to me to ask me to
call them something contrary to their natural state. >>

........so Jamie Lee Curtis is a "he."  Right?  "He" (or perhaps Rob would
prefer "it") was born with androgen insensitivity syndrome and therefore did
not develop normally as the boy "he" was genetically encoded to be.  I
suppose that's a lucky thing for all of us, because "he" is a very pretty
and talented actress, and I've greatly enjoyed many of her movies.

Like it or not, there are many characteristics that aren't encoded in DNA.
If you think a cleft lip is genetic, you are sorely mistaken.  Sometimes
gender and sexual orientation don't develop quite according to plan either.
If you think it's a choice, then ask yourself if you would be happy living
as a woman and/or having sex with men.  I suppose you could force yourself
to do it, but that wouldn't make you a woman, and that wouldn't make you
"like" men.

Our gender and sexual orientation are stamped into us in utero and are
immutable.  From that point on, we have to make certain decisions about how
to live our lives.  For some, the only bearable way to live is to jump the
gender fence, to make the outside match the inside.  I think they could
rightly claim that God made them that way and that they're just living
outwardly in a manner consistent with the most important aspect of their
being -- the way they are made inwardly.  Many of them would claim that God
really intended them to live that way.  When you think about it, who are we
to say any different?

The trouble with your categorization scheme is that you don't *know* a
person's chromosomal makeup when you look at them.  (Hint:  Genitals don't
always reflect chromosomal makeup, even at birth.)  You may have sons of
your own (to whom you would have given your "Y" chromosome), but if you
don't, and if you haven't had yourself karyotyped, then you wouldn't know
for certain whether you should be referred to as a "he" or a "she."  (If we
were to discover that you're actually XX, which is a remote possibility,
should we start calling you "she?")  On the other hand, if you feel you
already "know" what gender you are (I'm guessing "male"), then I would say
that should be the basis of how we all refer to you.  Similarly, if Rob's
client "knows" she is female, despite her external trappings, then shouldn't
we respect that?

Advocates of a gender-neutral society endorse the use of Mx, instead of Mr
and Ms.  Mind you, I have no idea how that would be pronounced.  Anyway, I
won't call you Mx. May, if you don't refer to Rob's client as "he."  Deal?
;-)

Peace,
Sarah

PS Really, why is this issue so important to everyone?  I'm not saying it
shouldn't be, but I think it's interesting that it is.  It's a curious issue
to ponder.