(June 4, 2019 at 1:43 pm)Aegon Wrote:(June 4, 2019 at 11:53 am)onlinebiker Wrote: IF something as quantifiable as genitalia isn't an indication of the identification of sex - how can something as ambiguous as skin coloration be an identifier of race?
Shouldn't a person have the right to self identify what race they belong to?
And those of you - who this question angers (there will be several) - explain rationally why there is a difference.
I think this implies a trans person has a higher degree of choice in gender identity than they actually do. There are problems with the comparison with race, but I know we have trans members so maybe they should be the ones to respond before I do.
While it seems that sexuality is not a choice, whether to choose between representing yourself as a female or male is.
I agree that a male maybe turned female or vice versa in the womb, but that doesn't completely purge the initial gender.
Many people are born with aspects of both genders in the brain, especially transgender people.
I believe that gender fluidity is a result of people wondering why they should have to make a choice and why can't they just be themselves, male and female in different circumstances.
Anyway, Onlinebiker, if you read the science behind it you should be able to realise that the skin colour thing is not analogous to gender identification. (I thought it was a good analogy at first, too.)
Also, skin colour does not identify race.
