OT out the window along with the rest.

[Richard Snelson]

Just got back from a week away. Starting reading what was going on and then
started the delete key! Sent it all to digital heaven.
See what happens when OT is put on this list. Hope all are happy. I'm not.
Richard Snelson
rsnelson0984@mchsi.com
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sarah Fox" <sarah@graphic-fusion.com>
To: "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: OT Tuning "It"


> 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.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives
>