The Prince has a penis

I'd rather not get entrenched in this debate, so I'll just say this:

How much cooler would it be if the UK had "It has a penis" instead of "It's a boy" proudly displayed all over the country?!

 

this is as simple as it gets.

His sex is male. that is determined by his gentalia

Gender is not determed by your gentalia, because it's a personal idenity.

Please, correct me if i'm wrong. I hope im not

 

No, you're right. And actually, you've just explained everything I've said in much fewer words than I could have ever hoped to use. Props to you on that.

 

Yay! phew, I was scared i was going to wrong. I hate writing something and being wrong and Thank You. I definitely understand and agree with your stand point

 

Yep

 

Sure in an ideal world we wouldn't force kids into define roles before they can even think rationally. I think this topic is a great way to explain the difference between sex and gender to people but clearly its not a topic to project negativity as though the Prince is being mistreated. Its silly at this point to get defensive when the general populace still has engrained views about sex = gender.

 

You love the child regardless.

the real problem is not raising a child with a gender; it is subscribing to ridged gender roles.

The british monarchy, and the parlimentarian system worked, before even knowing what sex the new future monarch would be, worked to place new rules to ensure that the child's sex would not matter in royal succession, and a girl would succede for being first born just as a boy would.

that should count for something.

at the end of the day, it is not immoral to raise a child based around the gender their body expresses. the immorality is when a parent or social structure rejects a child when they express a gender that physically their body may not show.

Whats more important is that as a society, we destigmatise the concept of transgenderisem, and other gender variances.

 

Well there are actually still aristocracies in existence today like Saudi Arabia Brunei and some constitutional aristocracies like Morocco and Jordan. Not to mention several Middle American and eastern countries that technically do have an aristocratic style government or plutocracy. I think it's just that England is the only one who advertises it. It has a lot to do with Patriotism though because it's a part English heritage, and it's worth it to the people.

 

It bothers me more in the importance that people tend to seem to place in regards to the gender/sex of the child.

 

He's most likely going to be a heterosexual and cisgender man who will study at Oxford or Cambridge, join the military, inherit a vast amount of personal land and 16 kingdoms. The media isn't going to behave in a way that contradicts the common viewpoint of cisnormity.

 

I really do not get the purpose of this post.
Is it now considered offensive and traumatizing to announce a persons birth gender? Most of the posts in this thread are very stupid.
The fact is and will remain, most people in the world are cisgender, trans people make up less than ten percent of the entire earths population, and there is noting wrong or offensive about them being happy that its a biological boy and announcing it.
If he turns out trans which would be a little more than highly unlikely, then so be it
But until then he is biologically male and hence will be assigned male.
There is nothing wrong with that.

Its very stupid to attempt to suggest that its wrong for healthy babies to be assigned genders based on their sex. The only thing that is wrong is when INTERSEX babies are assigned either male or female or given unnecessary corrective surgery without consent.

If you re born with a male sex then you will be assigned biologically male, since that is what you are. If you turn out trans then that is unfortunate and you will have to go through the process of changing your sex to match your gender and get yourself a new birth certificate but that doesn't mean it was wrong for you to be assigned male in the first place.
No one thinks its wrong to refer to their male dogs and males when they are born, but when it comes to humanity everything relating to biology and science is just thrown out the window.


The fact is i would love to have my own son and raise him in the future. Telling me or suggesting that it is offensive for me to want to have a healthy cis son and to be proud and happy enough to announce his birth gender is very idiotic. If he is biologically male then when he is born he will be considered biologically male.
If my child turned out to be trans then so be it, it wouldn't change a thing and i would accept and love them just the same.

That said,
There's nothing wrong with wanting my child to be cisgender, just like there is nothing wrong with wanting my child to not have cancer.

And I'd be proud to have a healthy son in the future that didnt have to deal with the medical, emotional and physical strain and difficulties that come with transitioning.
Its not offensive.

What is offensive is this bullshit that seems to be circulating at the moment concerning trans vs cis people and die cis scum and all that other nonsense about how cis is the root of all evil in the world so being a cis heterosexual person automatically makes you ignorant and your sexuality is invalid because you are just conforming to society's standards.
Hypocrites.

 

I agree with the first half of this statement. Yes, most people are cis. However, that doesn't mean that we should be assuming the kid is cisgendered. He's royalty, so there is an entire nation that will assume SO much of him throughout his life, whether he likes it or not simply because "It's a boy" was all over marquees and headlines. So yes, it's wrong about them actually announcing it. What isn't wrong about them announcing is that he was born. That's perfectly fine.

Okay.

Yes. It's wrong to assign a gender on someone's sex. As I've said before, there are many, many assumptions that will be made of someone because of that. We've all been through it, cis or trans. Guys are expected to date and marry the prettiest girl they see. Because of that, girls are expected to date and marry the hottest guy they know.

And this may not happen to the cisgendered people that make up the majority of the population, but it still does to the many people that are transgender:

They grow up in a society and environment that expects them to like certain things and do certain things just because of what's between their legs. If they don't, they get beaten, discriminated, or even killed. If they don't get killed, they go through the traumatic experience of gender dysphoria. And a lot of that DOES have to do with the assumption of things they're SUPPOSED to do based on what's in their pants.

Just because MOST of the population is happy doesn't mean EVERYONE in the population is. That's what we need to strive towards.

Last I remember, people like J Snow were ecstatic over the fact that they COULD transition. The traumatic experience is being said "Don't do girly things" if you're a guy and "Don't do guy things" if you're a a girl, and figuring out your gender because of assumptions people have made, and therefore taught you early in your life.

That's because dogs don't get assumed things and discriminated if they don't do certain things based on their genitalia. Dogs are treated like what they are: Dogs. Not "boy dogs" and "girl dogs"

So what if you DON'T have a son? Will you still love your child, or will you hate them and try and change them because you want a child with a penis and "acts" like it?

Okay, then why did you say what you did before?

First off, the comparison between gender and cancer is a terrible one. They have nothing to do with each other. It also could give the message that you're saying people who are transgender have a disease that need to be cured, much like what conservatives say about people who are gay.

And there might not be nothing wrong with your child being cisgender, but it is wrong to actually want that, and here's why:

To some degree, there is a chance you will be focusing on that. So you'll end up giving him things he might not want. Likewise, you'll end up denying him things that he will want, and that will all be based on what's between his legs instead of who he actually is as a person.

As I've said before, the trauma and emotional difficulties that come with gender dysphoria are dysphoria alone, and the assumptions people make of you over time because of what's between your legs. Add on the knowledge that people have been discriminated, beaten and killed, and you've got even more of a mess. Also, I've said before that those who look to transition are very excited that they are. Their sex will finally match their gender, and likewise (and sadly), the society they live in will now look at them and see them as who they truly are.

Also: It's not like everyone who's transgender are MtF or FtM. There are people that don't identify as either male or female, and so there are genders that people may look like, but really aren't. Someone who's genderqueer might look entirely female.

There's also a long process before transitioning that includes horomone replacement therapy, and several other things that others may be able to clue you in on that I never could. That's because the doctors want to make sure that their gender DOES align with the sex they want.

I and many others here who are transgender agree that "Die cis scum" is offensive. But that doesn't mean that we haven't been offended because of what's between our legs. So labeling us as hypocrites is also making yet another assumption.

 

Radical transgenderisem is just as destructive as radical feminisem.

I am going to say it again; if, in the course of a person's life, they express a gender identity that doesnt match with their biological sex, then it is the appropriate time to deal with the matter, and hopefully, handle it with compassion and dignity.

but until that time comes, STOP WITH THE HYPOTHETICALS TO PUSH AN AGENDA.

Yes. he was born a boy, and there is no denying that. he is a newborn infant, with no concept of gender, and really no concept of much. As George grows, George will come to know theirself, and then, when they are capable of comprehending their own gender, they can express it, and if it is not in line with their physical state, then so be it.

but let it happen on george's term, not ours.

 

You are in serious need of a chill pill.

Your biases towards the trans* community from either Tumblr or another website/forum are seriously limiting your knowledge and view on the world.

Every single thing that you mentioned, whether you want it or not, is the reason why trans* people have such a hard time trying to be themselves.

Being trans* and figuring that you are trans* is not as easy as you make it out to be. You don't just simply find out and then decide to come out to your whole family. It is a dangerous world out there for Trans* people, and everything that you have said contributes to that fact.

And while you may think its stupid, you are being incredibly insensitive and rude.

 

Is he circumcised, or do they not do that to the royal family?

 

What do you mean capable of comprehending their own gender? That is like saying that you must be a certain age before being able to comprehend your own sexuality. There are simply some people that just know from a fairly young age.

What ends up happening is that if a parent believes someone is a boy then they will raise them as a boy. What then happens is that the kid might be depressed from a very young age because he doesn't understand why he is so unhappy, they will internalize all the hate and confusion, and coming out to the parents and friends will be highly traumatizing.

If you are a friendly parent that understands sexuality and gender then you would be cautious in assuming either thing for you kid or at least teaching them from the beginning that there are more than two genders and that gender roles are a social construct.

 

..Yeah. This whole thing is just ridiculous. I saw twitter posts of people complaining about the kid being called a boy, and I thought they were being ridiculous even then. Though, I'm not sure how many were being serious and how many were just quoting a Monty Python sketch. Either way, it honestly makes me face palm a bit on how everything has to be turned into a debate about gender. Raise the kid as male until otherwise proven. I'm not talking about gender roles. Let the kid play with whatever.

But hey. I'm playing black sheep like I always do.

 

If you would pay attention to what I was saying, instead of cherry picking things to attack, you would understand exactly what I am saying here. George is an infant. Infants do not come into the world understanding everything. A newborn can no more express the gender their mind and heart tells them they are than they can express complete sentences, or even simple words. Newborns cant even be shown to comprehend what a gender is, let alone express it. a time will come when every person understands themselves enough to express the gender they truly are, be it one that matches their physical sex, or is not in line with it. But until then, people need to learn to let things happen naturally.

The time for dealing with a child who is transgendered is when the child expresses their transgenderisem, not before.

Until that time, George is known by Georges biological gender. If the time comes that George realizes that their gender does not match their biology, it can be addressed, and like I said, before you so rudely attacked me, hopefully it will be with Compassion and dignity.

Stop trying to make an Orwellean 'Ministry of Gender.'

 

Yeah, let's not go from one argument to another. :lol: