I'm sorry if I'm confusing you. I'm not sure how I can clearly explain this.
Yes I refereed Krem as a female because she is a female. She has a woman's voice. The only difference is that she shaved the side of her head hair making it more masculine. She looks more butch rather than a guy (Bioware did try hard by giving her a male body with male armor). The fact to the matter is that she can call her self a guy all she wants... but she still has the reproductive organs of a female. She still has her monthly periods, and she can get pregnant at any given time if she decides to have consensual sex with a gender of the opposition. As Krem gets older she will be menopausal.
It is psychotic thinking to even believe that genitals doesn't truly define a human being. I was not proven wrong. I just had an emotional disagreement. People have the right to voice their opinions... even if their not logically correct.
People can call themselves trans all they want but that does not make their "preferred" gender legal.
http://transgenderla...n-in-california
According to California protocols for legally changing your gender status you need a letter signed by a physician saying that you have undergone “clinically appropriate treatment” for gender transition.
So yes. In a legal point of view in order to be recognized you need to be receiving an appropriate treatment. Those who do not want to go through the surgeries or any other treatments must still recognize themselves as the gender that their born with with any legal documents or any other medical documentation.
I don't think you can clearly explain your reasoning because it is all over the place.
Let's break this down:
You called Krem a woman, even though you said that you called your friends by their preferred gender. Reproductive organs do not define a persons gender, as I said before, there are women who don't have vagina's or wombs. They are still women.
Krem lives in a society where gender reassignment surgery or magic doesn't exist, so it is not possible for Krem to do what you want him to do for you to define him as a man.
Even if he was able to do that, he would still have an XX chromosome - which you said would make him still a woman.
You claim that it is psychotic to believe that genitals don't define a persons gender, yet there are many people with multiple genitalia or who are born without the genitals that you claim define their gender. Your definition of gender excludes those people - whats logical about that?
You quote a law from California which is not relevant for a number a reasons
- California is not the world, in Ireland you can get your gender changed on documents without going through surgery.
- Laws do not necessarily keep up with modern scientific thinking, it's still illegal to be gay in some counties.
- Many transsexuals protest laws that require them to have surgery before they can officially change their gender.
You seem to be confused on many scientific principles and on the most current research on gender.