Gender Identity

luckya23 · February 2015

ashley8918 said:
I think that this is fantastic! How it could possibly be seen as anything negative is a mystery to me.

And honestly, the argument that it is too difficult logistically is pretty weak. Do you know what was also probably a logistical nightmare for institutions such as schools? Ending racial segregation. Should we have just kept things the way they were?

And allowing women to enroll!

Inkdancer · February 2015

I hope more schools adopt this. While I am happy to identify as female, I have plenty of friends who identify as somewhere in between. Being acknowledged is a big deal to them, and I want that to happen more and more.

Social change has to start somewhere.

ashley8918 · February 2015

WhatawagSBNy said:

All single parents with children in their care potentially need assistance if they have low income. Why do you have to check female for aid to women, infants and children. Why no single parent, infants and children?

This might be the first thing that youve ever said that makes sense AND that I agree with.

I HATE HATE the fucking WIC program. Women are the only one that need baby formula/baby food/infant care/food for young children/etc? NO.

theartistformerlyknownas · February 2015

ashley8918 said:

WhatawagSBNy said:

All single parents with children in their care potentially need assistance if they have low income.
Why do you have to check female for aid to women, infants and children. Why no single parent, infants and children?

This might be the first thing that youve ever said that makes sense AND that I agree with.

I HATE HATE the fucking WIC program. Women are the only one that need baby formula/baby food/infant care/food for young children/etc? NO.

My ex qualified for WIC and he's a dude.

ashley8918 · February 2015

lolo883 said:

WhatawagSBNy said:

All single parents with children in their care potentially need assistance if they have low income. Why do you have to check female for aid to women, infants and children. Why no single parent, infants and children?

This might be the first thing that youve ever said that makes sense AND that I agree with.

I HATE HATE the fucking WIC program. Women are the only one that need baby formula/baby food/infant care/food for young children/etc? NO.
My ex qualified for WIC and he's a dude.

HOW EVEN?! My really good friend couldn't get it when his daughter's mom took off and he met literally every other requirement. Only his genitalia were wrong.

MairePoppy · February 2015

ashley8918 said:

lolo883 said:

WhatawagSBNy said:

All single parents with children in their care potentially need assistance if they have low income. Why do you have to check female for aid to women, infants and children. Why no single parent, infants and children?

This might be the first thing that youve ever said that makes sense AND that I agree with.

I HATE HATE the fucking WIC program. Women are the only one that need baby formula/baby food/infant care/food for young children/etc? NO.
My ex qualified for WIC and he's a dude.

HOW EVEN?! My really good friend couldn't get it when his daughter's mom took off and he met literally every other requirement. Only his genitalia were wrong.

Did your friend receive aid for his daughter? Or was he referred to a program, such as food stamps, that could help? WIC is intended to supplement the nutritional needs of pregnant, nursing and postpartum women, as well as children.

ashley8918 · February 2015

MairePoppy said:

ashley8918 said:

lolo883 said:

WhatawagSBNy said:

All single parents with children in their care potentially need assistance if they have low income. Why do you have to check female for aid to women, infants and children. Why no single parent, infants and children?

This might be the first thing that youve ever said that makes sense AND that I agree with.

I HATE HATE the fucking WIC program. Women are the only one that need baby formula/baby food/infant care/food for young children/etc? NO.
My ex qualified for WIC and he's a dude.

HOW EVEN?! My really good friend couldn't get it when his daughter's mom took off and he met literally every other requirement. Only his genitalia were wrong.

Did your friend receive aid for his daughter? Or was he referred to a program, such as food stamps, that could help? WIC is intended to supplement the nutritional needs of pregnant, nursing and postpartum women, as well as children.

Nope. He did end up getting food stamps, but with no help or referral whatsoever.

I know what WIC is intended for. But it's bullshit that only women are considered needy enough to get help with formula/baby food/etc. He wasn't lloking to get food/milk/etc. for himself (like pregnant or up 6 weeks postpartum women can get), just formula for his daughter when her breastfeeding mother took off.

theartistformerlyknownas · February 2015

@ashley8918‌ that's bullshit. The website even says it's for mothers, fathers, grandparents and foster parents, on behalf of the kids.

ashley8918 · February 2015

lolo883 said:

@ashley8918‌ that's bullshit. The website even says it's for mothers, fathers, grandparents and foster parents, on behalf of the kids.

Tell me about it. I wish he had fought it more, but it was an emergency situation. Bitch literally left him with two bottles worth of breastmilk and booked. She had better fucking hope she never runs into me.

MairePoppy · February 2015

ashley8918 As I understand it, his daughter would be eligible to receive formula if he qualifies for food stamps or other programs. Here's the screening tool if you want to try it out. I filled it out for a baby on Medicaid, a child on Husky and a child whose family receives food stamps, leaving the mother out of the equation.

http://wic.fns.usda.gov/wps/pages/start.jsf

ashley8918 · February 2015

MairePoppy said:

ashley8918 As I understand it, his daughter would be eligible to receive formula if he qualifies for food stamps or other programs. Here's the screening tool if you want to try it out. I filled it out for a baby on Medicaid, a child on Husky and a child whose family receives food stamps, leaving the mother out of the equation.
http://wic.fns.usda.gov/wps/pages/start.jsf

She's all grown up now (Kind of... She's 9), so it's too late, but thanks

I tried it out anyway, and he absolutely qualified back then. I also looked up the income guidelines, and he was well below them at the time. BULLSHIT.

theartistformerlyknownas · February 2015

ashley8918 said:

MairePoppy said:

ashley8918 As I understand it, his daughter would be eligible to receive formula if he qualifies for food stamps or other programs. Here's the screening tool if you want to try it out. I filled it out for a baby on Medicaid, a child on Husky and a child whose family receives food stamps, leaving the mother out of the equation.
http://wic.fns.usda.gov/wps/pages/start.jsf

She's all grown up now (Kind of... She's 9), so it's too late, but thanks

I tried it out anyway, and he absolutely qualified back then. I also looked up the income guidelines, and he was well below them at the time. BULLSHIT.

Was he living with his parents? They consider the whole household income.

MairePoppy · February 2015

Well that's just sad. Maybe they 'adjusted' the criteria since then. Or maybe he fell through the cracks. His daughter should have received formula.

ashley8918 · February 2015

lolo883 said:

MairePoppy said:

ashley8918 As I understand it, his daughter would be eligible to receive formula if he qualifies for food stamps or other programs. Here's the screening tool if you want to try it out. I filled it out for a baby on Medicaid, a child on Husky and a child whose family receives food stamps, leaving the mother out of the equation.
http://wic.fns.usda.gov/wps/pages/start.jsf

She's all grown up now (Kind of... She's 9), so it's too late, but thanks

I tried it out anyway, and he absolutely qualified back then. I also looked up the income guidelines, and he was well below them at the time. BULLSHIT.
Was he living with his parents? They consider the whole household income.

No ma'am.

I had that problem when I had my first. I moved back in with my mom for a few months, and even though she provided exactly ZERO towards food for us, and I paid rent and bills, I didn't qualify because of her income.

WhatawagSBNy · February 2015

lolo883 said:

ashley8918 said:

WhatawagSBNy said:

All single parents with children in their care potentially need assistance if they have low income.
Why do you have to check female for aid to women, infants and children. Why no single parent, infants and children?

This might be the first thing that youve ever said that makes sense AND that I agree with.

I HATE HATE the fucking WIC program. Women are the only one that need baby formula/baby food/infant care/food for young children/etc? NO.

My ex qualified for WIC and he's a dude.

That is a relatively new thing in a nearly 40 year old program (name changed but same program.)

And as recently as last year father of a child in infant at risk program I do therapy for, also qualified for food stamps, three kids three and under, was not given forms or anything when he needed help for supplemental formulas, and was told, can't you read, that is a WOMEN'S and kids program, and caseworker would do nothing until area nurse and I (PT and OT) Bitched and got a lawyer.

People do not see that labels affect perception. For caseworkers and potential beneficiaries, seeing the name means, I do not qualify if I am not a woman.

sophhabobopha · February 2015

FiancB · February 2015

Really, even having any apprehension because oh noes new forms is kind of ridiculous to me.

I am kind of surprised that there is no agreed upon, widely used gender neutral pronoun in this day and age. Like really, adult human nonbinaries aside, I'd like to have another word to use when I'm not sure about the sex of a baby or animal without using an incorrect plural or an inappropriate "it". It just makes sense.

It really shines a light how gendered we make everything. Filling out financial aid? Gotta know what genitals you have. Signing up on a website? Gotta know what your genitals look like. Etc etc. It's ridiculous, and it's all because people don't feel like changing up some forms.

KytchynWitche · February 2015

I'm gonna tell you guys a secret. I've only ever told DH and a handful of close friends, but TK seems to me to be a safe place. I identify as genderqueer. So as far as I'm concerned, any step towards recognizing people on a non-binary gender spectrum is a step in the right direction.

Personally, I'm not bothered by pronouns. If you use feminine pronouns for me, that's fine. If you use masculine pronouns for me, that's also fine. If you use neutral pronouns for me, that's groovy too, thought I do think the ze/xe thing is a little out there from a purely linguistic point of view (it doesn't feel comfortable on the tongue). It just isn't a big deal to me. But I have plenty of genderqueer friends for whom this is a huge issue, and I love that this university is making a go of including them at an institutional level. That is awesome, and it's something that makes me proud to be alive and gives me hope for humanity.

Objecting on the basis of "it's too much work/hassle/admin" is bullcrap of the highest order. Can you imagine what the world would be like if people had just decided that ending slavery was too much hassle, or that recognizing women as entities separate from their fathers or husbands was too much admin? What if the world had just said "Fight Hitler? Meh I don't have the energy." or "End apartheid? Waste of time!"... For change to happen, energy must be expended, effort must be made.

Kahlyla · February 2015

I think this is a wonderful step in the right direction.

@sarahufl, when you mentioned real estate, were you speaking literally or thinking of restroom facilities and the like? I ask because I'm seeing a lot more of those "family" restrooms that still have multiple stalls but are basically unisex, and those could easily meet the needs of all individuals. Existing restrooms can even simply be "rebranded" as family/unisex.

I was even in a family-style change room at a skating rink just the other day; although I don't think the intention was for people to be stripping down completely in there, at least it doesn't force people to pick a gender simply to take off their skates or change sweaters. I think a lot of these needs can be accommodated without the need to change that much infrastructure.

eta *without, not with

sarahufl · February 2015

Kahlyla said:

I think this is a wonderful step in the right direction.

@sarahufl, when you mentioned real estate, were you speaking literally or thinking of restroom facilities and the like? I ask because I'm seeing a lot more of those "family" restrooms that still have multiple stalls but are basically unisex, and those could easily meet the needs of all individuals. Existing restrooms can even simply be "rebranded" as family/unisex.

I was even in a family-style change room at a skating rink just the other day; although I don't think the intention was for people to be stripping down completely in there, at least it doesn't force people to pick a gender simply to take off their skates or change sweaters. I think a lot of these needs can be accommodated without the need to change that much infrastructure.

eta *without, not with

When I talk about a facilities POV, I do mean restrooms as well as housing facilities. I want to emphasize, that I am for this kind of stuff- just interested to see how it gets implemented, I think a lot of PPs have not understood that. As an administrator, it is in my nature to look at this stuff from not only a social point of view, but a logistical one as well.

Housing on a lot of campuses is at an absolute premium. It seems like it will be a long and potentially difficult/expensive process to make the changes necessary for this type of policy. The campus I work on is always out of space and has no room to build. You make a good point about just "re-branding" the bathrooms. That would be relatively simple.

KatieinBkln · February 2015

sarahufl said:

Kahlyla said:

I think this is a wonderful step in the right direction.

@sarahufl, when you mentioned real estate, were you speaking literally or thinking of restroom facilities and the like? I ask because I'm seeing a lot more of those "family" restrooms that still have multiple stalls but are basically unisex, and those could easily meet the needs of all individuals. Existing restrooms can even simply be "rebranded" as family/unisex.

I was even in a family-style change room at a skating rink just the other day; although I don't think the intention was for people to be stripping down completely in there, at least it doesn't force people to pick a gender simply to take off their skates or change sweaters. I think a lot of these needs can be accommodated without the need to change that much infrastructure.

eta *without, not with

When I talk about a facilities POV, I do mean restrooms as well as housing facilities. I want to emphasize, that I am for this kind of stuff- just interested to see how it gets implemented, I think a lot of PPs have not understood that. As an administrator, it is in my nature to look at this stuff from not only a social point of view, but a logistical one as well.

Housing on a lot of campuses is at an absolute premium. It seems like it will be a long and potentially difficult/expensive process to make the changes necessary for this type of policy. The campus I work on is always out of space and has no room to build. You make a good point about just "re-branding" the bathrooms. That would be relatively simple.

Does your university offer housing to 100% of new students? (Mine didn't, if you got in late you had the option of "private dorms" or off-campus housing). Of course from a discrimination POV the university would have to make reasonable accommodations to genderqueer students who wanted to/qualified for student housing, but I have a feeling that accommodation would probably take the form of re-allocating existing space (a floor of one dorm or something) specifically for genderqueer students who want to live there. If your university is like mine, that will mean that slightly more gender-typical students would be stuck finding off-campus housing, but if the school never guaranteed space for everyone in the first place it seems like it would be ok.

They'd also no doubt need to re-arrange their original forms so that people can A. identify how they like, and B. specify which gender, if any, they prefer to room with.

[Deleted User] · February 2015

sarahufl · February 2015

KatieinBkln said:

sarahufl said:

Kahlyla said:

I think this is a wonderful step in the right direction.

@sarahufl, when you mentioned real estate, were you speaking literally or thinking of restroom facilities and the like? I ask because I'm seeing a lot more of those "family" restrooms that still have multiple stalls but are basically unisex, and those could easily meet the needs of all individuals. Existing restrooms can even simply be "rebranded" as family/unisex.

I was even in a family-style change room at a skating rink just the other day; although I don't think the intention was for people to be stripping down completely in there, at least it doesn't force people to pick a gender simply to take off their skates or change sweaters. I think a lot of these needs can be accommodated without the need to change that much infrastructure.

eta *without, not with

When I talk about a facilities POV, I do mean restrooms as well as housing facilities. I want to emphasize, that I am for this kind of stuff- just interested to see how it gets implemented, I think a lot of PPs have not understood that. As an administrator, it is in my nature to look at this stuff from not only a social point of view, but a logistical one as well.

Housing on a lot of campuses is at an absolute premium. It seems like it will be a long and potentially difficult/expensive process to make the changes necessary for this type of policy. The campus I work on is always out of space and has no room to build. You make a good point about just "re-branding" the bathrooms. That would be relatively simple.

Does your university offer housing to 100% of new students? (Mine didn't, if you got in late you had the option of "private dorms" or off-campus housing). Of course from a discrimination POV the university would have to make reasonable accommodations to genderqueer students who wanted to/qualified for student housing, but I have a feeling that accommodation would probably take the form of re-allocating existing space (a floor of one dorm or something) specifically for genderqueer students who want to live there. If your university is like mine, that will mean that slightly more gender-typical students would be stuck finding off-campus housing, but if the school never guaranteed space for everyone in the first place it seems like it would be ok.

They'd also no doubt need to re-arrange their original forms so that people can A. identify how they like, and B. specify which gender, if any, they prefer to room with.

All freshman are required to live on campus. After that, I think about 95% choose to.

theartistformerlyknownas · February 2015

I don't really get the housing headache either. It's not a matter of having a separate third pair of dorms so you have male, female, and "other." You just ask people who they prefer to room with, and designate a portion of existing dorms as co-ed.

WhatawagSBNy · February 2015

My mom lived on a co-ed floor with co-ed bathroom, for the large facility, and an additional single family style bath which also was accessible for the handicapped, for each wing, in the 1970's. The only difference with the co-ed bathroom from usual women's rooms was that the partitions for toilets and changing/shower set-ups had been changed out to go much higher and much lower than usual, added privacy for all.
Many a picture was taken, like of men and women in the outer area, shaving and putting on make-up. The adopted convention was dressed in at least sweats and top, or robes, no partial nudity coming or going.
20 years later, I went to another Boston area school, same thing. Grad school, two private home style bathrooms off the common area outside bedrooms single or double, for each eight students.
Change a sign, change partition heights, make sure to have tampon and pad dispenser next to the condom dispenser. Done.

KatieinBkln · February 2015

sarahufl said:

KatieinBkln said:

sarahufl said:

Kahlyla said:

I think this is a wonderful step in the right direction.

@sarahufl, when you mentioned real estate, were you speaking literally or thinking of restroom facilities and the like? I ask because I'm seeing a lot more of those "family" restrooms that still have multiple stalls but are basically unisex, and those could easily meet the needs of all individuals. Existing restrooms can even simply be "rebranded" as family/unisex.

I was even in a family-style change room at a skating rink just the other day; although I don't think the intention was for people to be stripping down completely in there, at least it doesn't force people to pick a gender simply to take off their skates or change sweaters. I think a lot of these needs can be accommodated without the need to change that much infrastructure.

eta *without, not with

When I talk about a facilities POV, I do mean restrooms as well as housing facilities. I want to emphasize, that I am for this kind of stuff- just interested to see how it gets implemented, I think a lot of PPs have not understood that. As an administrator, it is in my nature to look at this stuff from not only a social point of view, but a logistical one as well.

Housing on a lot of campuses is at an absolute premium. It seems like it will be a long and potentially difficult/expensive process to make the changes necessary for this type of policy. The campus I work on is always out of space and has no room to build. You make a good point about just "re-branding" the bathrooms. That would be relatively simple.

Does your university offer housing to 100% of new students? (Mine didn't, if you got in late you had the option of "private dorms" or off-campus housing). Of course from a discrimination POV the university would have to make reasonable accommodations to genderqueer students who wanted to/qualified for student housing, but I have a feeling that accommodation would probably take the form of re-allocating existing space (a floor of one dorm or something) specifically for genderqueer students who want to live there. If your university is like mine, that will mean that slightly more gender-typical students would be stuck finding off-campus housing, but if the school never guaranteed space for everyone in the first place it seems like it would be ok.

They'd also no doubt need to re-arrange their original forms so that people can A. identify how they like, and B. specify which gender, if any, they prefer to room with.

All freshman are required to live on campus. After that, I think about 95% choose to.

That might make things complicated, I agree. Ultimately, though, I think it's a matter of re-jiggering available space and asking the right questions rather than building more units. Presumably genderqueer students have existed in the same proportions throughout time; it's just now that they are coming out and demanding to be recognized (so the actual number of students should stay the same).

golden1215 · February 2015

ashley8918 said:

I think that this is fantastic! How it could possibly be seen as anything negative is a mystery to me.

And honestly, the argument that it is too difficult logistically is pretty weak. Do you know what was also probably a logistical nightmare for institutions such as schools? Ending racial segregation. Should we have just kept things the way they were?

this.

Gender Identity

Re: Gender Identity

Choose Another Board

Search Boards