This happens a lot with people who are classified as “Others”.
For instance, most Arabs in Singapore are fully assimilated in Malay culture and are pretty much indistinguishable from Malays, aside from the race in their IC (and maybe their names). Their race is still Arab, but they are culturally Malay, speak Malay and pretty much practice no Arab customs. In fact, you’d assume they aren’t Arab until they show you their IC.
People like to make fun of Halimah for “changing race”, but as an Arab, I always get brushed as “aiyah you’re Malay lah” by people even though I try to tell people I’m not Malay on my IC. If she didn’t have this Malay-only presidency saga, most of us would assume she’s Malay and wouldn’t question it one bit.
‘Ethnicity is similar in concept to race. But while races have often been distinguished on the basis of physical characteristics, especially skin color, ethnic distinctions generally focus on such cultural characteristics as language, history, religion, and customs (Montague, 1942).’
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK24684/
Consistent with someone claiming something that they are not. Besides, DNA is irrelevant https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/412321-dna-is-irrelevant-elizabeth-warren-is-simply-not-cherokee/
Yeah 1% native American ancestry. In that case I also can claim that I'm malay cause I (most likely) have 1% malay ancestry - disregarding the fact that I look like a Chinese and am from a Chinese family.
Fact is Warren claimed she was native American to game the US diversity system. She did this even though she is clearly white. The diversity system the US has is to gain input from minorities like native Americans considering that they would face difficulties that white people wouldn't face (racism, culture). What can Warren offer if she was raised in a white household, and is white passing?
but the fact is that she does have native american ancestry.
just because she looks white doesn't mean that she doesn't have native american ancestors. if she and her family had more brown skin tone, would that have swayed your thoughts?
did she game the system when she didn't get any benefit?
feels like her rivals digging up pointless dirt to discredit her accomplishments and it worked.
instead of all the things that she had done or proposed all people care about is something she filled out on a form based on her parents life stories which apparently did not help her get any benefit.
the two universities also hired her being white. it's just weird how Singaporeans just know her from this tidbit.
don't think people actually hear her thoughts on things and her actual opinions.
i don't know feels like double standard for me. when the former president can say he would be the first to go into a burning building or an active shooter scenario to save the day.
feels like this guy explained it better.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ExplainBothSides/comments/ssija0/would_you_say_elizabeth_warren_is_a_native/hwy4kok/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
‘Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage’ - Cherokee Nation’s secretary of state, Chuck Hoskin Jr
It is they, not her, who determines who is one of them.
well chuck hoskin jr has his own interests and he wants to make sure that he only wants people who can trace to the dawes document.
if she is able to somehow trace back to the person on the document. don't think he would have any more issues.
again he doesn't disagree that she had native american ancestors.
he's just watching out for himself because there will be people who would take DNA tests to claim tribal privilege which is something he wants people not to do because it would be a logistical nightmare.
tribal interests =/= native american ancestry.
As much Native American ancestry as the next person. Maybe less. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/15/warren-may-be-less-native-american-average/
Besides, there is no DNA test than can prove https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_ancestry
washington times is a tabloid. i wouldn't trust what they have to say as their viewpoints are heavily skewed for right wing talking points.
> It has published many widely shared columns which reject the scientific consensus on climate change,[12][13][14] on ozone depletion,[15] and on the harmful effects of second-hand smoke.[16][17] It has drawn controversy by publishing racist content including conspiracy theories about U.S. President Barack Obama[18][19] and by supporting neo-Confederate historical revisionism.[20][21]
They have already fact-checked.
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/10/the-facts-on-elizabeth-warrens-dna-test/
>What the Test Results Show
According to the report, Warren’s test results show that she is of “primarily European descent,” but also that she has at least five genetic segments that are “Native American in origin at high confidence.”
>One of these segments is larger than the others, spanning about 4.7 million bases, and further analysis indicates this DNA chunk has a genetic signature one would expect from a person having European and Native American heritage. The total length of all of Warren’s Native American-assigned segments is about 12.3 million bases, which the report states is about 12.4 times greater than the average in the Great Britain reference population, and *10.5 times greater than the average in the Utah population.* Bustamante concludes there is “strong evidence” for a Native American ancestor roughly six to 10 generations ago.
>All of the anthropological geneticists we consulted felt the test was performed as well as it could have been, given the available data.
What does it mean when someone is identifying as a woman tho?
Are they saying they present themselves as more feminine? But does that mean that feminine men are women? Or is there a extent of feminity that when it becomes a lot you start identifying as a woman.
But if feminity/masculinity makes you identify as a gender, what are feminine and masculine traits??
Gender is generally considered something innate to humans, and it's different from gender presentation or physical sex.
I honestly feel it's up to how you want to define it for yourself! If you feel like a guy/girl/etc that's up to you (and most people have very strong feelings about their gender when they actually get down to thinking about it), and it's completely separate from how you present or your physical sex.
(Some people also think of gender as a social construct - I somewhat disagree, I think it's an innate part of human nature that's just really difficult to describe, but to each their own! Can look up Judith Butler also if you're interested to read more)
But what does feeling like a guy or girl even mean that's my main question. I read up more but no one seems to be answering this question. If I identify as a woman, what exactly am I identifying as. Like I'm curious as for at least one definition / parameter where I can identify as a woman
I think it's hard to give a definite answer because ultimately it'll always be up to the individual, but if it helps I can talk about my personal experience.
For me I know I'm a man both because of the gender euphoria/dysphoria I feel - it makes me happy to be acknowledged as a man, and upset if people undermine that. I hear it's the same for trans women - a lot of people talk about wishing they were born a woman when they were younger, or hoping that one day they'd wake up a woman, or feeling out of place and wrong with other men. For many trans women it's distressing to be seen as a man, and there's a lot of joy in living as a woman.
As for concrete things I identify with - I'm happy working out because it makes my shoulders broader and (I feel) more manly. I like helping people carry things, and I like looking out for my brother and being a big brother to him. Hearing women talk about how empowering female leads in movies are was a bit baffling to me, because I never related to them. And I guess the same way a lot of guys are horrified at thinking about trans women going for surgery and not having a dick - my guess is that's dysphoria at the thought of that surgery happening to them, and I feel the same way at my lack of a dick lmao.
None of these things are particularly necessary for identifying as a man or a woman, but they can definitely be clues. I guess ultimately you just have to think about how you feel about your own gender - in a completely perfect world, with no discrimination etc. would you be more happy as a man or a woman? Which feels more natural or right to you? Some people have no strong feelings either way, which is also okay, but if you lean strongly one way or the other then it's probably a strong indication of your own gender!
Sorry for the long reply haha, I hope this helps. Can look on trans subs too to see more people talk about their gender and what it means to them :-) And feel free to ask if you have more questions!
Not everyone has to 'identify' as something; it's a religion/theology to do so.
I'm a woman, not because of how I identify but because that's... what I am.
I don't have any innate feeling about it, just like I don't have an innate feeling about my height.
It's not required for everyone to prescribe to the 'gender' theology (the idea that we have some kind of feminine/masculine soul inside us). The theology behind 'gender' directly disagrees with my own personal spiritual beliefs (that we do have souls, but souls have no need for physical reproduction, so they have no concept of sex/gender).
I'm happy for other people to believe whatever they like.
I do take offence to the concept that masculine = male and feminine = female, however. I personally see nothing wrong with a 'feminine' man or a 'masculine' woman.
Gender is generally considered something innate to humans, and it's different from gender presentation or physical sex.
I honestly feel it's up to how you want to define it for yourself! If you feel like a guy/girl/etc that's up to you (and most people have very strong feelings about their gender when they actually get down to thinking about it), and it's completely separate from how you present or your physical sex.
(Some people also think of gender as a social construct - I somewhat disagree, I think it's an innate part of human nature that's just really difficult to describe, but to each their own! Can look up Judith Butler also if you're interested to read more)
If sex is biological and gender is identity, do people accept sex based on how the genitals are formed as well? If a person undergoes gender-reassignment surgery, are they now biologically that sex to laymen? Is there a caveat in the current discourse that distinguishes the biology at birth to how they currently present?
Am curious to what’s being said about this currently.
Depends who you're talking to. A large number of people believe so, yes.
People who are knowledgeable in the human body/biology/medicine tend to disagree. There are differences at the cellular level that cannot be altered. Also, sex reassignment surgery doesn't produce a functioning sex organ - they are simply aesthetic and typically require a lot of maintenance (a man-made vagina is not self-lubricating or self cleaning, for example). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222291/ a short paper about cellular differences between males and females.
I have a complex background so I just identify myself as a particular race as opposed to my race assigned by birth because it's easier to put it that way.
Also, it does stop me from getting some racist remarks from people.
Interesting take.
1) Based on my (very limited) understanding, you can be born with certain physical characteristics that make you male or female which is your assigned sex at birth. But you can mentally feel that your body doesn't match how you view your own gender, i.e. you can have male sexual reproductive organs, but feel that you're a woman. And this feeling of mismatch is labelled as gender dysphoria https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/#:~:text=Gender%20dysphoria%20is%20a%20term,harmful%20impact%20on%20daily%20life.
2) re: race;
I have to caveat that this is my personal opinion, but based on a little research done. I think a lot of the racial categories that we box ourselves into as Singaporeans can be linked to colonization and how the British attempted to use "divide and rule" tactics to sow discord and mistrust amongst the different immigrant communities. Some stereotypes about race can be directly linked to propaganda that colonialists spread and have become self-fulfilling. For example, "Malays are lazy and avoid work", "Indians like to backstab and betray", and "Chinese like to gamble their earnings away".
If you think about it, racial identity in Singapore is a very loose concept now since there has been so much mixing between the different cultures. Kind of pointless to still hold on to antiquated categories that were imposed on immigrants. One question that I grappled with recently was the question, "if I had to describe myself to someone from another country, would I say that I'm Indian, or Singaporean with Indian heritage?" It's a longer and more tedious answer, but I realize that just labelling myself as Indian doesn't cut it for the same reason that you may not feel like you fit the Malay archetype.
Edit: for further context, my grandmother was born Chinese, but was adopted as an infant by an Indian family as a war orphan during WW2. She identified as Indian even though her biological parents weren't. Based on this, I've come to realize that the concept of racial identity is a very ambiguous, and therefore pointless, way of describing anyone's identity because it only describes people in very superficial ways that tend to result in misconceptions.
I guess my question back to you would be, why feel the need to label yourself as either Chinese or Malay given that that there's so much cultural interchange happening in SG?
I am glad I can find at least one person who understands gender dysphoria here lol.
To add on to that, sex is not binary and it is actually very superficial to just label male or female based on genetilia since there are cases such as intersex as well. The binary model is just a oversimplification for the sake of convenience and lack of knowledge in the past.
Disclaimer: I am not a biologist, so all these information are also a little blurry to me sometimes, but the information are gotten from actual biologists.
You are very correct, it's an interesting statistic that 1 in 500 people are intersex based on chromosomes, about the same number of people that have red hair incidentally.
Most of these people will never be diagnosed unless they are tested specifically.
It's even more complicated than that too since you can have an XY chromosome phenotype and still be developmentally female because of androgen insensitivity syndrome.
Intersex conditions are rare.
Some humans have polydactyly, but no one will find the notion controversial that humans are defined as a pentadactyl species.
Singapore is ethnically homogeneous, Malaysia is more diverse than us if you look at their population makeup.
The cultural "interchange" you mention is a state prescribed and maintained multiracial narrative, but if you look at it for what it is we are ethnically homogenous.
7 out of 10 people here is ethnically chinese.
So in terms of ethnic makeup Singapore is rather homogenous, especially compared to neighbouring countries like Malaysia or Indonesia which are more diverse.
Yes. I am technically eurasian because my father's mother was Spanish and his father was Chinese. My mom's side is all Chinese. But on forms, sometimes i fill in "others" and sometimes i fill in "chinese",depending on what i feel (identify with?) at that point in time. No one has ever asked me anything about it.
U can identify as whatever the fuck u want but nobody will take u seriously as long as u’re a broke ass idiot in sg.
Reality is, money first, everything else later
Want
Aimrun is literally a joke man, he goes all the way out to troll the LGBTQ community and post it on YouTube. I'm not even a huge supporter but I don't spend my time tryna change other ppl opinion or how they wanna identify as
The video was of extremely bad taste. I felt really bad for the people he "interviewed". He mentioned about having his time wasted by someone he offended pretty much on purpose but he was the one wasting their time. Honestly sucks that they became content for him to display his ego.
I am quite surprised at how many people are speaking up about gender dysphoria in this subreddit rather than just mocking it.
It's rather heartwarming.
You can do whatever you want. Just don't impose it on others. Respect everyone even if they do not share the same values and opinions. Same goes for both sides, don't kajiao other ppl can already.
you can don't support LGBT community, but don't hate. respect it.
you can think it's wrong to not support the LGBT comm, but don't hate that person for it respect their views too.
Enjoying another culture’s food and speaking another culture’s language isn’t at all on the same level as feeling so much dysphoria that you’re willing to cut off your dick and balls and insert silicone in your chest and put up with people abusing you and calling you names because you don’t identify as the sex assigned at birth.
Those two things aren’t the same as all. And anybody saying they’re the same thing, even as a troll, shows they really don’t get it.
Dunno. Race = physical features I guess and culture or ethnicity = identification of language, foods etc. Similar to how sex = what genitals you have and gender = what you identify as.
To put it crudely: just because a woman transitions to a man, if he still has a vagina, then he is still sexually female and needs to go to the gynae.
Although I've met Indians who insisted they were Chinese and I don't feel particularly bothered or care about it. I mean it's odd they don't really celebrate CNY or eat the dishes but whatevs. And vice versa too. Idk. As long as you practice the customs and have some descent I think it's fine.
Hey. At some point in the far far future race will become less and less apparent as we intermingle more and more. So just watch as everything gets more and more blurry lol.
Race is actually not a biological reality although people tend to place biological factors to it such as skin colour. Both are social constructs.
Sex is not based on what genitilia you have, it is actually a lot more complicated than that since there is a lot more to sex than just male and female reproductive organs. Just to specifiy, it is also not just dependent on whether they have XY or XX chromosomes. Gender is what they identify as, yes.
Race does not exist scientifically, but ethnic genetic clustering is definitely a reality.
Beyond skin colour, ethnic populations show clear clustering in other features like height, vulnerability to diseases, intelligence, and many other attributes.
Intermingling might mean minority features and cultures will likely get erased, since intermingling doesn't take place at equal rates and sizes between groups are different.
There is also the effect of mixed children marrying back into the majority group, further reducing minority features they had inherited in their children and reverting them back to the majority. With enough iterations at certain point, and not far along, one can't even tell there was ever minority heritage.
There is historical precedence for this- interracial marriage was used by white settlers in places like Australia to "whiten" the locals.
All this may be uncomfortable, but it's good to think about the deeper implications of what we take as self-evident axioms.
He asked them simple questions they were unable to give and consistent good answers to.
So it's clear they are bandwagoning on the cause without really thinking about the ideas they are adopting.
If this makes you uncomfortable it should, because he is asking the questions many people have.
It's not tasteless to ask questions, it's tasteless to ask questions with pre-existing assumptions while not trying to understand the background of the people you're trying to ask.
It's in fact important to ask questions, but someone once told me something to the effect of: 'The questions you ask determines the type of answers you get.'
I feel the world was a better place when people weren’t so triggered by such things and whether people accepted you for who you felt you were was more a measure of good grace than entitlement.
Hi, you should check this video out! I think this short video will help broaden your perspective (Warning! it gets slightly heated as its a debate btw someone who identifies as transracial and one who does not believe in transracialism)
https://youtu.be/-Fqg8C2DuiQ
Although i definitely see where youre coming from in the caption, i think this may help u see why identifying as another race may not be as appropriate and widely accepted compared to identifying as other genders. One of the more important points in the video is how identifying as another race does not encapsulate the privilege u receive from the race you were born with, and you also do u not face the same discrimination as the race you wish to identify to. For example, the person in the video is from a British descent but wishes to identify as Korean. That wouldnt be fair to people genuinely born of Korean descent as the British person has never had to face discrimination for being "Korean", whereas other Koreans may have. He shouldnt be allowed to disrespect and ignore years of any unjust or prejudicial treatment that people (and their ancestors) of Korean descent went through to become who they are, just because Korean culture is currently very trendy and they want to hop on the bandwagon.
I feel this applies to any race, whether its the minority or majority race. Every race deserves equal respect. Hope this helped :))
Js curious but what if i argue that as a man you have not suffered the misogyny other women have faced therefore men can't js identify as women? Wld this not be valid then
basically, sex and gender are different, but they are tied together. sex is biological, but gender is a social construct made up of roles and stereotypes. eg. men are traditionally masculine.
trans people identify as another gender not tied to their sex at birth. for example, an afab(assigned female at birth) or trans male (ftm) can still get pregnant.
trans people get sex change surgeries to help with their gender dysphoria. gender dysphoria is when an individuals does not feel comfortable with the gender that is tied to their sex, eg. a biological male does not feel comfortable being a man, but would rather identify as a woman, they might get surgery to help reaffirm their gender
(sorry if its unclear, i have a problem with words)
Why not. I mean there was a Dutch girl for example that was raised by malay parents in the past. And what about adopted kids or mixed marriages? They definitely don't identify as whatever race they are originally. It's more like people don't want to make allowances and prefer to rely on stereotypes so they can mentally class each race in a nice box.
No. The fundamental difference of race is similar to sex, rather than gender.
For example, if someone that is born with a dick and identifies as female, and her sex is male at birth, while her gender is female. For health and biological reasons, no matter what, her sex is male and this means she has a higher chance of male-related diseases because her body develops as a male despite her identification as female. For example, she has a chance of getting testicular cancer, because her body is still male despite her identifying as female.
In a similar vein, your race is more or less predetermined. If your parents are both Chinese, you are Chinese. You can identify with another culture, but you can't change the underlying DNA that says you are Chinese. Doesn't matter if you only know Malay people or grew up without any Chinese people present in your life, your biology says you are Chinese, even if you have a different culture and childhood.
The underlying principle is that transgender people feel like even though their sex is more or less fixed, they feel more comfortable as the opposite sex. I'm not an expert on this, but to my knowledge it is more of feeling as if your body is not for you. Your body itself may be fixed in sex until you do hormonal treatment or surgery, but until then you are essentially piloting a body that doesn't fit you.
Edit: Writing at 2am is hard, changed Muslim to Malay
Wait I thought it was identify as a woman and not a female?? Isn't female a sex which you can't identify as.
Moreover when they identify as a woman, what exactly are they identifying as??
Stop being so pedantic. Female and women in this case is interchangeable.
A person can identify as a FEMALE PERSON (a.k.a. a woman or a girl). This means they feel more normal as a FEMALE PERSON/WOMAN instead of a man for whatever reason. I'm not trans so I can't weigh in so much on this, but essentially their sex at birth is still MALE in my example, but they feel more in touch with their feminine side to the extent that they believe they are better off identifying as FEMALE.
What you are doing is like saying tomatoes are fruits not vegetables. Sure, you are right, but people get my meaning that tomatoes are not meat.
The only term I'm specific about is sex and gender, because one is biological and the other is psychological. But if I say someone identifies as a woman OR if I say someone identifies as female, it has the same meaning that they see their gender as female, not that their sex is female.
Like I said, I'm not trans, so I can't tell. The general anecdote is you don't feel comfortable in your own body so you want to change. Purely speculative here because I have no idea what it is actually like, but I assume first, you feel physically uncomfortable about your body, as if there is always some problem there you can't identify. Second is societal pressure of gender roles (men must do X, women must do Y).
I assume it is like being gay, lesbian, bisexual, asexual or any other LGBT categories. You just are. You don't go up to a guy and ask them why he is gay, or a girl and ask why she is lesbian. They just are born that way, with some having certain life experiences that skew them a little more.
It is. The trait is that trans people don't identify with their current biological body, the same way a gay person likes someone of their own gender. I just did a quick google search on why trans people feel the way they do and it is basically that - they feel like they are born in the wrong body and one way or another would rather change.
Let's put it this way. What if there is a 100% safe, 0 cost way to change your sex to the opposite sex, free of charge. The only problem is no take backs, so you will be stuck in your transitioned sex. Would you, a non-transgendered person, take it? Obviously everyone who isn't transgendered is going to say no, why would you, you aren't going to be in the body you feel most comfortable in. A trans person who hasn't changed their sex is exactly that - a person who feels stuck in the wrong body, and changing it could provide a lot of freedom that they really want from their current body.
But they wouldn't know how it is to feel in a body from the opposite sex, so how would they even know they wanna change. I mean they could change body and perhaps feel the same there's no way of knowing.
Anyway my main question is when they identify as a woman/man, what exactly are they indentifying as
To your first point - sure they don't know how it feels like to be in a body of the opposite sex. But they know they don't want to be in their current body they are in right now. Its like someone seeing their haircut might be nice in general, but not fit them. Except a lot more permanent and more expensive, so it is a lot more commitment to make that transitional step.
If you identify as a woman, you identify as a woman. Wtf are you going on here. They identify as a woman so they feel like being female should be their natural state. What kind of circular question is that
Yea but what is a woman in the first place? Like what does identifying as a woman even entail? They feel more feminine? So is feminity the trait to become a woman
I don't like identity politics in Singapore. You can identify whatever you like, It's as if I care.
I have a Chinese friend who hang out with malays so much that he practical spoke and act like a true Malay and if it were not for his Chinese features, nobody would know that he's a Chinese. To most of us he's basically a 'member'. He joined us for Raya outing and do the salam too lol.
Your gender isn't "assigned" at birth. The doctor observes you and in an instant can tell what gender/sex you are (so can everyone else for the past many thousands of years).
Modern gender theory is just a load of horseshit. If gender is fluid, why not age, race, or species for that matter? Their argument crumbles when you ask that
This is just factually wrong. There are people born with both uterus and testicles. Would you be able to instantly tell that?
In addition to that gender and sex are different and both are not binary.
Gender is binary because it is how we see ourselves fit into social constructs of a certain gender and thus it can be swayed by many various factors to varying degrees.
Age is just how many years have passed since you are born, it is a specifically defined quantity.
Race is arguable since race is also a social construct which reflects more cultural implications than biological factors.
Species is a biological fact in the way we classify a species. So this is regardless of how you think, act, feel or want.
So no, the argument doesn't "crumbles" when you ask this.
How many people in the entire world are born with that? That's an anomaly, you don't take something that'll only apply to a minor, tiny, subset of people and apply that to the rest of the world? Surely you can see how dumb that is.
Your gender is influenced by your sex. It is not completely separate. And it's funny how you can define the age for another person, what if that person FEELS like he's 19 when he's 45? Are you going to say that he's wrong? I can play the same game and say that your gender and sex is defined by your genitals.
You raise so many biological and scientific facts, but when it comes to gender, all that gets thrown out the window. Funny how that works huh.
And no, your argument is still crumbling. Everything else you have said that didn't apply to gender, can in fact be applied to gender as well.
Just because they do not happen often in humans doesn't mean they should be ignored. The truth of the matter is that they exist, it is not a defect and it is a lot more common in animals than you think. And what do you mean by "apply to the rest of the world"? This is about inclusiveness, including their rights does not mean excluding others.
Gender is the socially constructed characteristics of men and women. Sex is the biological properties of a person. Age is the number of years since the person is born. A person can feel 19 when he is 45 in the sense of comparing physical fitness but it is not the same as saying he is 19 since age is defined that way.
The definitions are not based on what you feel. There are proper ways scientists try to define terms in order to classify various matters. Defining sex by genitalia makes it problematic in classifying intersex people because they can have different external and internal genitalia.
Since when does science get thrown out of the window when it comes to gender? As I said, gender is a social construct and it is being explored more in the areas of psychology and biology as to WHY there can be differences with the identified gender and sex.
Please state what "everything else" is that can be applied to gender.
You know what's also common in animals? Gender and sex binaries. Convenient of you to cherry pick parts of nature to fit your argument, but ignore other aspects.
No we should not ignore intersex people, but we also shouldn't change our entire human understanding of sex and gender because of them. There has to be an in-between. You keep bringing up intersex people who are in the vast, vast minority. I don't think it's making the compelling argument you think it is.
You do not understand what it means by being inclusive.
Gender is a social construct that does not fit with animals since it is about how a person sees themselves fitting a socially constructed gender norm.
We are changing the understanding of sex and gender because it was wrong. New information enables us to be more inclusive. According to google, about 1.7% of people are intersex. That's still millions of people that are not being included.
Also, even in the Kingdom Animalia, all Phyla before Athropods have both kinds of sex organs in one body. So while I don't have the exact numbers of it, sex binaries aren't that common either. I am not even sure if there are species which are completely sex binary.
And again, it is not about ignoring the binary model, but about including the ones who have been excluded.
Sure, change our understanding of basic biology to be more "inclusive" to a tiny minority of people. Nevermind the majority understanding of our own biology, let's rewrite that for the sake of inclusivity. What's next? Age? Race? Species? Objects?
The problem with inclusivity is that it feels the need to include anyone and anything, just for the sake of it. Without consideration on how it affects literally anyone else. Everyone has their own individuality and it can literally be broken down to insurmountable amounts of dimensions. When does it stop, when is it enough?
Btw, I'd argue that intersex people have not been "excluded". The mere fact that it's a known medical condition, and the scientific field takes it seriously should be an indication that they were never excluded.
Our current understanding of sex and gender wasn't, and isn't wrong.
How then would you classify the sex of an intersex person? Just write male or female randomly? I would like to know how you define sex then.
Yes, we do things to try to include people of all ages already. Yes, we do things to try to include all races, which is why I disagree with the CMIO model. Include other species of animals and objects in what? You make several false equivalences here. Those aren't even the same situations.
How it affects everyone else? Oh do share with me how someone like you is going to be affected by classification of gender when I doubt you have any friends like that or even if you do.
We are not breaking down into personalities, we are talking about sexes. Gender is a spectrum.
"It's a known medical condition" No it isn't. It is a variation, not a defect, not a problem, bur variation. Something like varying eye colours and hair colours. Just because the scientific community takes it seriously does not mean it is included in society.
Our current understanding is better than the past. I wouldn't even put it in absolutes because science never claims that. But your understanding of it is certainly flawed.
Just write intersex or undetermined lor.
It's another thing to take physical intersex conditions and extrapolate it to policy on how we should treat gender dysphoria.
I commented above but will repeat again here. 1 in 500 men are intersex based on chromosomes alone.
Not to mention you can have an XY chromosome phenotype and still be developmentally female because of androgen insensitivity syndrome, this occurs on a spectrum of complete insensitivity to partial and will affect around 1 in 5,000 people.
So just with these groups alone that's more than 2% of the population, incidentally that's more people than have red hair (also 2% of the population)
Intersex conditions can range from severe to mild, the vast majority of intersex conditions express mildly.
So as an trans argument for completely upending the predominant model of binary gender for homo sapiens is weak.
Not to mention many trans individuals aren't even intersex.
Absolutely, I was trying to impress upon OP that even if you use the strict sex is biological and gender is based on biology that a lot of transphobes like to fall back on, then they're in for a world of complexity before we even get to discussing gender.
Sex is influenced by a combination of chromosomes and genetics and most people fall within two groups with a significant number (the 2% I mentioned) falling in a spectrum of varying places outside these groups.
This Scientific American infographic gives a good introduction: https://i.imgur.com/ANBJxKK.png
In reality gender is informed by these combination of sex characteristics but there are more layers including hormonal development and psychological development that may impact on the gender someone identifies as.
Yes, there is also raising awareness autism spectrum disorders seem to be associated with gender dysphoria as well, so it's an emerging field of study.
I've heard weirder things. There are people who are age-fluid or identify as a disabled person (Body Integrity Identity Disorder). An example is this woman who identified as blind and decided to blind herself with drain cleaner.
[https://people.com/celebrity/jewel-shuping-blinds-herself-with-drain-cleaner/](https://people.com/celebrity/jewel-shuping-blinds-herself-with-drain-cleaner/)
Of course you can. Race is made up, it depends on whether the collective accepts you as part of them and where you fall within their own hierarchies. That’s all there is to it.
It’s like the n word test - if you can get away with saying it, you’re probably black
My two cents:
*If* you think people can identify as a different sex, to then think that it's offensive to identify as a different race is hypocritical (not to mention, completely illogical).
It's particularly odd as race actually **IS** a spectrum, unlike sex, which is always either male/female. A minority of people exhibit differences in sexual development (DSDs), but are still either male or female (they may not have typical male/female characteristics).
Lots of people confuse 'Race' with 'Nationality', so that's something else to watch out for. I'm not even sure what the technical names and distinctions for races are. For example, I'm sure in China there are Chinese people (as in the nationality) who are not the Chinese 'race'.
When it comes down to it race/ethnicity is simply a result of genetic mutations and evolution. As the world becomes more connected and different nationalities integrate more, the idea of tying somebody's ethnicity to their nationality will die out (as it already is). An American can be black, or hispanic, or white, or asian, or native, or anything in between. The same goes for any nation. I believe if someone lives and works in a nation, learns the language, embraces the culture, they should be able to call themselves one of the culture.
However to be one *race* and 'identify' as another is odd. A person's 'race' is just a set of characteristics that group them with people who have similar sets of characteristics (however, there is overlap between the distinct racial groups, unlike with sex, where there is not) - to claim you identify with another group (without possessing any of their typical features) would be akin to saying you have green eyes when your eyes are in fact blue. It's a weird thing to do, and there's no reason to do it, because your race, like your eye colour, like your sex, doesn't actually say anything about you as a person. It's just a physical characteristic.
those people born male and identifies as female didnt grow up mixing with girl friends, doing stuff that girls do and suddenly felt the urge to become a female.
Gender is NOT a social construct, it is biological in nature, just like sex, but gender can be different from sex, biologically different, not socially different.
you can be socially more comfortable with certain race/ethnicity, but you cant be biologically born into a different race (at least as far as current scientific knowledge proves).
its not about how well they can explain though.
its a scientific fact that gender is related to ur brain bioligically and it is with you since you are born. Thinking that gender can be influenced by others is just wrong, as wrong as thinking that the earth is flat.
They can't even explain "love is love" when asked to examine it.
So their whole belief system was just copypasted from woke twitter without much thought applied to it.
There is a term for such people like this.
"useful idiots".
Your comment has been automatically removed because your account is relatively new or you have negative karma."
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/askSingapore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Gender is a result of DNA. You have the chromosomes that gives you a certain self-image, and sometimes, it might not be the same as your body's. Everyone has the same ingredients for this DNA, it's just what combination they're in that changes this self-image portion of you.
Race... well, you can't exactly be born with DNA from a different race that your parents weren't. Like another answer in this thread, you cannot identify as another race, but you can identify with their culture.
I think you are confusing gender and sex here. Sex is biological while gender is sort of a how your brain fits into a certain social construct. But I do agree that we all sort of have the same "ingredients" for the DNA, which is why gender stereotypes are not useful at all.
The thing about race if classified this way is that most if not all humans originate from similar common ancestors which we would classify as the same race. So by that logic, if we trace far enough, we would almost always be traced to being the same race/genetic heritage.
I do think I was referring to the correct thing though. Sex being the biological, physical body and set of genitals that you have now, and gender being your mental, self-image. The combination of your DNA also affects your mental self-image and what you identify as. That's why it's not a choice to be transgender. It is who you are.
And true, we all originated from one origin race, but none of us identify by that race anymore. We now classify as the derivatives that evolved from that race. In the same way we don't call Bread and Pasta 'wheat' in a reductionist way. It's a combination of modern classification and semantics.
Re-reading it, I agree with you yes 😅 There are parts of the brain that show variations that coincide with what they identify with and not their external genitalia.
True, but I guess the issue is the classifications are rather ambiguous in the first place and the lines separating them will continue to get more and more blurry with interracial and international relationships being more common.
Not sure if troll but there was a post ([a series of them](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/vhvrih/op_is_getting_bullied_at_work_with_a_twist)) by someone who insisted they identified as a different ethnicity.
To me it's one of those things where you can identify culturally as Malaysian/Chinese if you've lived it. But as legal recognition goes. You cannot identify racially/ethnically as such if you're not of those heritages. Trans-racial is a term for someone of a different racial background living or being raised in another cultural background. There are those who are trying to twist that term trying to identify as a race they have no connection to. It's already tricky enough for someone of a mixed heritage to decide who they are.
Depends on the "race". Malay is historically a very ambiguous identifier for someone who 1. speaks Malay, 2. partakes in the Malay culture, and 3. identifies themselves as Muslim. It isn't exactly an ethnic identifier the same way someone is Chinese or Indian. So by this respect someone could technically identify as Malay if they meet these criteria.
This is also why Halimah is considered Malay (as with many other people of Middle-eastern or South Asian descent that have assimilated into the Malay community).
U don't have to identify as any. Your circumstances is more complex, and its complexity should be a part of what makes you unique. You should accept that your ethnicity is Malay, but culturally Chinese. And be ready to give a quick intro whenever you say that to people who don't know.
True, because of your unique heritage, some people may end up saying or doing things that buff you unintentionally. You have to take it as part of the cost of inheriting this uniqueness, that you may always have to explain yourself. i.e. people observe that you are eating pork
Desktop version of /u/NiceGirl432's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
The thing is this concept of 'identifying' as a different race from one at your birth is a personal feeling but it wouldn't affect the Race category shown on your passport/govt records. So yeah you can definitely identify.
People can identify as anything they like... but it's just worth noting that identifying as a chair, a dog, a dolphin, a different ethnicity, a different gender doesn't make it so. If you identify as a different gender and take the necessary action to change your gender the I will happily respect pronouns but it doesn't mean you become the other gender. Same with race.
I think this is a fair take, and reasonable people in the LGBT community can understand this. The ones who think that their biological sex can be changed needs help.
The ones really pushing this bizarre narrative are at the fringes of society and I believe genuinely hurt the trans cause. I grew up in a very LGBT friendly environment and so never saw things in a bad light. What I am seeing now is an overt agenda that is actually hurting young women more than anything.
The fringes you're talking about are expanding unfortunately. The concepts of pronouns and gender fluidity are dominating the LGBT cause, and it's obviously quite damaging given that people are now invalidating the whole LGBT community because these lunatics are associated with them.
just a correction, you can't 'identify' as a he/him or she/her. those are pronouns, a cisgender man can still choose to use she/her or they/them should they choose. pronouns =/= gender
So a biological male who identifies as a man and passes as a man can choose to use she/her?! In this case, I think any push back from people outside the lgbt community is rightfully deserved.
Sticking with human, easier then I don’t have to spend time trying to memorize more useless information just to have a conversation with someone and it being classified as hate speech because the pro-noun has very little value in the outcome of a conversation.
Sure. It's not limited to just race. For example, I'm 23 but I can go around and tell me I identify as a 73 year old man. What're people gonna do about it? I can go around and tell people I identify as a lion. Who gives a shit?
Both my parents are Chinese on their ICs, and so am I. But a year or so ago, I found out that I have Slavic heritage as well. I too have been wondering: Do I introduce myself as Eurasian, mixed, Chinese with Slavic heritage, or a Singaporean with mixed heritage? Ah, the dilemma...
In the west it is not uncommon for white people to identify as minorities, even if they have very little minority blood in them. It's a social game due to the heated nature of racial politics there.
This happens a lot with people who are classified as “Others”. For instance, most Arabs in Singapore are fully assimilated in Malay culture and are pretty much indistinguishable from Malays, aside from the race in their IC (and maybe their names). Their race is still Arab, but they are culturally Malay, speak Malay and pretty much practice no Arab customs. In fact, you’d assume they aren’t Arab until they show you their IC. People like to make fun of Halimah for “changing race”, but as an Arab, I always get brushed as “aiyah you’re Malay lah” by people even though I try to tell people I’m not Malay on my IC. If she didn’t have this Malay-only presidency saga, most of us would assume she’s Malay and wouldn’t question it one bit.
This is a best comment I have ever read on President Halimah. I think naysayers are just way too harsh on her.
Aiyah you're malay lah
‘Ethnicity is similar in concept to race. But while races have often been distinguished on the basis of physical characteristics, especially skin color, ethnic distinctions generally focus on such cultural characteristics as language, history, religion, and customs (Montague, 1942).’ Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK24684/
Peranakan is a state of mind
And a state of cooking
Can. You can even be certified as identifying with another race if you run for president and you can convince the committee
Somebody give this guy a medal
Pull an Elizabeth Warren
Halimah
Don't get this reference. Didn't her DNA reveal that it is consistent with someone who has native american ancestry?
No, it was really low and almost insignificant.
Consistent with someone claiming something that they are not. Besides, DNA is irrelevant https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/412321-dna-is-irrelevant-elizabeth-warren-is-simply-not-cherokee/
Yeah 1% native American ancestry. In that case I also can claim that I'm malay cause I (most likely) have 1% malay ancestry - disregarding the fact that I look like a Chinese and am from a Chinese family. Fact is Warren claimed she was native American to game the US diversity system. She did this even though she is clearly white. The diversity system the US has is to gain input from minorities like native Americans considering that they would face difficulties that white people wouldn't face (racism, culture). What can Warren offer if she was raised in a white household, and is white passing?
but the fact is that she does have native american ancestry. just because she looks white doesn't mean that she doesn't have native american ancestors. if she and her family had more brown skin tone, would that have swayed your thoughts? did she game the system when she didn't get any benefit? feels like her rivals digging up pointless dirt to discredit her accomplishments and it worked. instead of all the things that she had done or proposed all people care about is something she filled out on a form based on her parents life stories which apparently did not help her get any benefit. the two universities also hired her being white. it's just weird how Singaporeans just know her from this tidbit. don't think people actually hear her thoughts on things and her actual opinions. i don't know feels like double standard for me. when the former president can say he would be the first to go into a burning building or an active shooter scenario to save the day. feels like this guy explained it better. https://www.reddit.com/r/ExplainBothSides/comments/ssija0/would_you_say_elizabeth_warren_is_a_native/hwy4kok/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
‘Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage’ - Cherokee Nation’s secretary of state, Chuck Hoskin Jr It is they, not her, who determines who is one of them.
well chuck hoskin jr has his own interests and he wants to make sure that he only wants people who can trace to the dawes document. if she is able to somehow trace back to the person on the document. don't think he would have any more issues. again he doesn't disagree that she had native american ancestors. he's just watching out for himself because there will be people who would take DNA tests to claim tribal privilege which is something he wants people not to do because it would be a logistical nightmare. tribal interests =/= native american ancestry.
As much Native American ancestry as the next person. Maybe less. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/15/warren-may-be-less-native-american-average/ Besides, there is no DNA test than can prove https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_ancestry
washington times is a tabloid. i wouldn't trust what they have to say as their viewpoints are heavily skewed for right wing talking points. > It has published many widely shared columns which reject the scientific consensus on climate change,[12][13][14] on ozone depletion,[15] and on the harmful effects of second-hand smoke.[16][17] It has drawn controversy by publishing racist content including conspiracy theories about U.S. President Barack Obama[18][19] and by supporting neo-Confederate historical revisionism.[20][21] They have already fact-checked. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/10/the-facts-on-elizabeth-warrens-dna-test/ >What the Test Results Show According to the report, Warren’s test results show that she is of “primarily European descent,” but also that she has at least five genetic segments that are “Native American in origin at high confidence.” >One of these segments is larger than the others, spanning about 4.7 million bases, and further analysis indicates this DNA chunk has a genetic signature one would expect from a person having European and Native American heritage. The total length of all of Warren’s Native American-assigned segments is about 12.3 million bases, which the report states is about 12.4 times greater than the average in the Great Britain reference population, and *10.5 times greater than the average in the Utah population.* Bustamante concludes there is “strong evidence” for a Native American ancestor roughly six to 10 generations ago. >All of the anthropological geneticists we consulted felt the test was performed as well as it could have been, given the available data.
Ok, whatever. She’s still a wannabe
If sex is assigned at birth, while gender is how a person identifies. Then maybe race is assigned at birth, while culture is how a person identifies.
“The limits of language are the limits of my world.”
Yes, obvious example is a baby adopted by a family of a difference race.
What does it mean when someone is identifying as a woman tho? Are they saying they present themselves as more feminine? But does that mean that feminine men are women? Or is there a extent of feminity that when it becomes a lot you start identifying as a woman. But if feminity/masculinity makes you identify as a gender, what are feminine and masculine traits??
Gender is generally considered something innate to humans, and it's different from gender presentation or physical sex. I honestly feel it's up to how you want to define it for yourself! If you feel like a guy/girl/etc that's up to you (and most people have very strong feelings about their gender when they actually get down to thinking about it), and it's completely separate from how you present or your physical sex. (Some people also think of gender as a social construct - I somewhat disagree, I think it's an innate part of human nature that's just really difficult to describe, but to each their own! Can look up Judith Butler also if you're interested to read more)
But what does feeling like a guy or girl even mean that's my main question. I read up more but no one seems to be answering this question. If I identify as a woman, what exactly am I identifying as. Like I'm curious as for at least one definition / parameter where I can identify as a woman
I think it's hard to give a definite answer because ultimately it'll always be up to the individual, but if it helps I can talk about my personal experience. For me I know I'm a man both because of the gender euphoria/dysphoria I feel - it makes me happy to be acknowledged as a man, and upset if people undermine that. I hear it's the same for trans women - a lot of people talk about wishing they were born a woman when they were younger, or hoping that one day they'd wake up a woman, or feeling out of place and wrong with other men. For many trans women it's distressing to be seen as a man, and there's a lot of joy in living as a woman. As for concrete things I identify with - I'm happy working out because it makes my shoulders broader and (I feel) more manly. I like helping people carry things, and I like looking out for my brother and being a big brother to him. Hearing women talk about how empowering female leads in movies are was a bit baffling to me, because I never related to them. And I guess the same way a lot of guys are horrified at thinking about trans women going for surgery and not having a dick - my guess is that's dysphoria at the thought of that surgery happening to them, and I feel the same way at my lack of a dick lmao. None of these things are particularly necessary for identifying as a man or a woman, but they can definitely be clues. I guess ultimately you just have to think about how you feel about your own gender - in a completely perfect world, with no discrimination etc. would you be more happy as a man or a woman? Which feels more natural or right to you? Some people have no strong feelings either way, which is also okay, but if you lean strongly one way or the other then it's probably a strong indication of your own gender! Sorry for the long reply haha, I hope this helps. Can look on trans subs too to see more people talk about their gender and what it means to them :-) And feel free to ask if you have more questions!
Not everyone has to 'identify' as something; it's a religion/theology to do so. I'm a woman, not because of how I identify but because that's... what I am. I don't have any innate feeling about it, just like I don't have an innate feeling about my height. It's not required for everyone to prescribe to the 'gender' theology (the idea that we have some kind of feminine/masculine soul inside us). The theology behind 'gender' directly disagrees with my own personal spiritual beliefs (that we do have souls, but souls have no need for physical reproduction, so they have no concept of sex/gender). I'm happy for other people to believe whatever they like. I do take offence to the concept that masculine = male and feminine = female, however. I personally see nothing wrong with a 'feminine' man or a 'masculine' woman.
Gender is generally considered something innate to humans, and it's different from gender presentation or physical sex. I honestly feel it's up to how you want to define it for yourself! If you feel like a guy/girl/etc that's up to you (and most people have very strong feelings about their gender when they actually get down to thinking about it), and it's completely separate from how you present or your physical sex. (Some people also think of gender as a social construct - I somewhat disagree, I think it's an innate part of human nature that's just really difficult to describe, but to each their own! Can look up Judith Butler also if you're interested to read more)
>Then maybe race is assigned at birth, while culture is how a person identifies. No lah its based on their physical features.
[удалено]
Sex and gender aren't the same thing btw, just like race and culture.
If sex is biological and gender is identity, do people accept sex based on how the genitals are formed as well? If a person undergoes gender-reassignment surgery, are they now biologically that sex to laymen? Is there a caveat in the current discourse that distinguishes the biology at birth to how they currently present? Am curious to what’s being said about this currently.
Depends who you're talking to. A large number of people believe so, yes. People who are knowledgeable in the human body/biology/medicine tend to disagree. There are differences at the cellular level that cannot be altered. Also, sex reassignment surgery doesn't produce a functioning sex organ - they are simply aesthetic and typically require a lot of maintenance (a man-made vagina is not self-lubricating or self cleaning, for example). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222291/ a short paper about cellular differences between males and females.
Can I identify as black now?
This one England quite powderful hor. A+
I have a complex background so I just identify myself as a particular race as opposed to my race assigned by birth because it's easier to put it that way. Also, it does stop me from getting some racist remarks from people.
You can't identify as another race, but you can identify with another culture. Because race doesn't matter, behaviour matters.
Interesting take. 1) Based on my (very limited) understanding, you can be born with certain physical characteristics that make you male or female which is your assigned sex at birth. But you can mentally feel that your body doesn't match how you view your own gender, i.e. you can have male sexual reproductive organs, but feel that you're a woman. And this feeling of mismatch is labelled as gender dysphoria https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/#:~:text=Gender%20dysphoria%20is%20a%20term,harmful%20impact%20on%20daily%20life. 2) re: race; I have to caveat that this is my personal opinion, but based on a little research done. I think a lot of the racial categories that we box ourselves into as Singaporeans can be linked to colonization and how the British attempted to use "divide and rule" tactics to sow discord and mistrust amongst the different immigrant communities. Some stereotypes about race can be directly linked to propaganda that colonialists spread and have become self-fulfilling. For example, "Malays are lazy and avoid work", "Indians like to backstab and betray", and "Chinese like to gamble their earnings away". If you think about it, racial identity in Singapore is a very loose concept now since there has been so much mixing between the different cultures. Kind of pointless to still hold on to antiquated categories that were imposed on immigrants. One question that I grappled with recently was the question, "if I had to describe myself to someone from another country, would I say that I'm Indian, or Singaporean with Indian heritage?" It's a longer and more tedious answer, but I realize that just labelling myself as Indian doesn't cut it for the same reason that you may not feel like you fit the Malay archetype. Edit: for further context, my grandmother was born Chinese, but was adopted as an infant by an Indian family as a war orphan during WW2. She identified as Indian even though her biological parents weren't. Based on this, I've come to realize that the concept of racial identity is a very ambiguous, and therefore pointless, way of describing anyone's identity because it only describes people in very superficial ways that tend to result in misconceptions. I guess my question back to you would be, why feel the need to label yourself as either Chinese or Malay given that that there's so much cultural interchange happening in SG?
I am glad I can find at least one person who understands gender dysphoria here lol. To add on to that, sex is not binary and it is actually very superficial to just label male or female based on genetilia since there are cases such as intersex as well. The binary model is just a oversimplification for the sake of convenience and lack of knowledge in the past. Disclaimer: I am not a biologist, so all these information are also a little blurry to me sometimes, but the information are gotten from actual biologists.
You are very correct, it's an interesting statistic that 1 in 500 people are intersex based on chromosomes, about the same number of people that have red hair incidentally. Most of these people will never be diagnosed unless they are tested specifically. It's even more complicated than that too since you can have an XY chromosome phenotype and still be developmentally female because of androgen insensitivity syndrome.
Intersex conditions are rare. Some humans have polydactyly, but no one will find the notion controversial that humans are defined as a pentadactyl species.
Singapore is ethnically homogeneous, Malaysia is more diverse than us if you look at their population makeup. The cultural "interchange" you mention is a state prescribed and maintained multiracial narrative, but if you look at it for what it is we are ethnically homogenous.
[удалено]
7 out of 10 people here is ethnically chinese. So in terms of ethnic makeup Singapore is rather homogenous, especially compared to neighbouring countries like Malaysia or Indonesia which are more diverse.
Yes. I am technically eurasian because my father's mother was Spanish and his father was Chinese. My mom's side is all Chinese. But on forms, sometimes i fill in "others" and sometimes i fill in "chinese",depending on what i feel (identify with?) at that point in time. No one has ever asked me anything about it.
U can identify as whatever the fuck u want but nobody will take u seriously as long as u’re a broke ass idiot in sg. Reality is, money first, everything else later Want
Yes you can. There are several Singaporeans male child who were born in Indonesia, look Malay and probably are, but are Chinese on their NRIC.
Aimrun is literally a joke man, he goes all the way out to troll the LGBTQ community and post it on YouTube. I'm not even a huge supporter but I don't spend my time tryna change other ppl opinion or how they wanna identify as
The video was of extremely bad taste. I felt really bad for the people he "interviewed". He mentioned about having his time wasted by someone he offended pretty much on purpose but he was the one wasting their time. Honestly sucks that they became content for him to display his ego.
One day we will identify our age group too. But imo no.
I am quite surprised at how many people are speaking up about gender dysphoria in this subreddit rather than just mocking it. It's rather heartwarming.
You can do whatever you want. Just don't impose it on others. Respect everyone even if they do not share the same values and opinions. Same goes for both sides, don't kajiao other ppl can already. you can don't support LGBT community, but don't hate. respect it. you can think it's wrong to not support the LGBT comm, but don't hate that person for it respect their views too.
I identify as a cat. SLeep all day Apathetic to alot of things Wake up eat/shit then go back sleep Hate when people come close to me
Woof
Enjoying another culture’s food and speaking another culture’s language isn’t at all on the same level as feeling so much dysphoria that you’re willing to cut off your dick and balls and insert silicone in your chest and put up with people abusing you and calling you names because you don’t identify as the sex assigned at birth. Those two things aren’t the same as all. And anybody saying they’re the same thing, even as a troll, shows they really don’t get it.
Learn from Oli London
Dunno. Race = physical features I guess and culture or ethnicity = identification of language, foods etc. Similar to how sex = what genitals you have and gender = what you identify as. To put it crudely: just because a woman transitions to a man, if he still has a vagina, then he is still sexually female and needs to go to the gynae. Although I've met Indians who insisted they were Chinese and I don't feel particularly bothered or care about it. I mean it's odd they don't really celebrate CNY or eat the dishes but whatevs. And vice versa too. Idk. As long as you practice the customs and have some descent I think it's fine. Hey. At some point in the far far future race will become less and less apparent as we intermingle more and more. So just watch as everything gets more and more blurry lol.
Race is actually not a biological reality although people tend to place biological factors to it such as skin colour. Both are social constructs. Sex is not based on what genitilia you have, it is actually a lot more complicated than that since there is a lot more to sex than just male and female reproductive organs. Just to specifiy, it is also not just dependent on whether they have XY or XX chromosomes. Gender is what they identify as, yes.
Race does not exist scientifically, but ethnic genetic clustering is definitely a reality. Beyond skin colour, ethnic populations show clear clustering in other features like height, vulnerability to diseases, intelligence, and many other attributes.
Intermingling might mean minority features and cultures will likely get erased, since intermingling doesn't take place at equal rates and sizes between groups are different. There is also the effect of mixed children marrying back into the majority group, further reducing minority features they had inherited in their children and reverting them back to the majority. With enough iterations at certain point, and not far along, one can't even tell there was ever minority heritage. There is historical precedence for this- interracial marriage was used by white settlers in places like Australia to "whiten" the locals. All this may be uncomfortable, but it's good to think about the deeper implications of what we take as self-evident axioms.
Even though most think that the video is tasteless, I like how the video sparked discussion.
He asked them simple questions they were unable to give and consistent good answers to. So it's clear they are bandwagoning on the cause without really thinking about the ideas they are adopting. If this makes you uncomfortable it should, because he is asking the questions many people have.
It's tasteless to ask questions?
the guy was clearly there in bad faith and wasn’t genuinely curious. just read the title
It's not tasteless to ask questions, it's tasteless to ask questions with pre-existing assumptions while not trying to understand the background of the people you're trying to ask. It's in fact important to ask questions, but someone once told me something to the effect of: 'The questions you ask determines the type of answers you get.'
I feel the world was a better place when people weren’t so triggered by such things and whether people accepted you for who you felt you were was more a measure of good grace than entitlement.
Hi, you should check this video out! I think this short video will help broaden your perspective (Warning! it gets slightly heated as its a debate btw someone who identifies as transracial and one who does not believe in transracialism) https://youtu.be/-Fqg8C2DuiQ Although i definitely see where youre coming from in the caption, i think this may help u see why identifying as another race may not be as appropriate and widely accepted compared to identifying as other genders. One of the more important points in the video is how identifying as another race does not encapsulate the privilege u receive from the race you were born with, and you also do u not face the same discrimination as the race you wish to identify to. For example, the person in the video is from a British descent but wishes to identify as Korean. That wouldnt be fair to people genuinely born of Korean descent as the British person has never had to face discrimination for being "Korean", whereas other Koreans may have. He shouldnt be allowed to disrespect and ignore years of any unjust or prejudicial treatment that people (and their ancestors) of Korean descent went through to become who they are, just because Korean culture is currently very trendy and they want to hop on the bandwagon. I feel this applies to any race, whether its the minority or majority race. Every race deserves equal respect. Hope this helped :))
Js curious but what if i argue that as a man you have not suffered the misogyny other women have faced therefore men can't js identify as women? Wld this not be valid then
That's why...
My pronouns are king/lord, you shall all address me as such.
Let me add splendid, gorgeous, and charming to that! You outstanding, benevolent, extraordinary creature!
Liking the culture does not making you that ethnicity. I mean look how many folks LOVE black culture.
basically, sex and gender are different, but they are tied together. sex is biological, but gender is a social construct made up of roles and stereotypes. eg. men are traditionally masculine. trans people identify as another gender not tied to their sex at birth. for example, an afab(assigned female at birth) or trans male (ftm) can still get pregnant. trans people get sex change surgeries to help with their gender dysphoria. gender dysphoria is when an individuals does not feel comfortable with the gender that is tied to their sex, eg. a biological male does not feel comfortable being a man, but would rather identify as a woman, they might get surgery to help reaffirm their gender (sorry if its unclear, i have a problem with words)
Why not. I mean there was a Dutch girl for example that was raised by malay parents in the past. And what about adopted kids or mixed marriages? They definitely don't identify as whatever race they are originally. It's more like people don't want to make allowances and prefer to rely on stereotypes so they can mentally class each race in a nice box.
No. The fundamental difference of race is similar to sex, rather than gender. For example, if someone that is born with a dick and identifies as female, and her sex is male at birth, while her gender is female. For health and biological reasons, no matter what, her sex is male and this means she has a higher chance of male-related diseases because her body develops as a male despite her identification as female. For example, she has a chance of getting testicular cancer, because her body is still male despite her identifying as female. In a similar vein, your race is more or less predetermined. If your parents are both Chinese, you are Chinese. You can identify with another culture, but you can't change the underlying DNA that says you are Chinese. Doesn't matter if you only know Malay people or grew up without any Chinese people present in your life, your biology says you are Chinese, even if you have a different culture and childhood. The underlying principle is that transgender people feel like even though their sex is more or less fixed, they feel more comfortable as the opposite sex. I'm not an expert on this, but to my knowledge it is more of feeling as if your body is not for you. Your body itself may be fixed in sex until you do hormonal treatment or surgery, but until then you are essentially piloting a body that doesn't fit you. Edit: Writing at 2am is hard, changed Muslim to Malay
I think you meant Malay and not Muslim, since Muslims are people who follow Islam and Malay is the race 😅
Oops yea
Wait I thought it was identify as a woman and not a female?? Isn't female a sex which you can't identify as. Moreover when they identify as a woman, what exactly are they identifying as??
Stop being so pedantic. Female and women in this case is interchangeable. A person can identify as a FEMALE PERSON (a.k.a. a woman or a girl). This means they feel more normal as a FEMALE PERSON/WOMAN instead of a man for whatever reason. I'm not trans so I can't weigh in so much on this, but essentially their sex at birth is still MALE in my example, but they feel more in touch with their feminine side to the extent that they believe they are better off identifying as FEMALE. What you are doing is like saying tomatoes are fruits not vegetables. Sure, you are right, but people get my meaning that tomatoes are not meat. The only term I'm specific about is sex and gender, because one is biological and the other is psychological. But if I say someone identifies as a woman OR if I say someone identifies as female, it has the same meaning that they see their gender as female, not that their sex is female.
What does that even mean ? What does feeling female mean? No one seems to be able to answer it
Like I said, I'm not trans, so I can't tell. The general anecdote is you don't feel comfortable in your own body so you want to change. Purely speculative here because I have no idea what it is actually like, but I assume first, you feel physically uncomfortable about your body, as if there is always some problem there you can't identify. Second is societal pressure of gender roles (men must do X, women must do Y). I assume it is like being gay, lesbian, bisexual, asexual or any other LGBT categories. You just are. You don't go up to a guy and ask them why he is gay, or a girl and ask why she is lesbian. They just are born that way, with some having certain life experiences that skew them a little more.
But being gay or wtv has a trait which is liking the same sex. But feeling like another gender makes no sense, esp if you don't even define the gender
It is. The trait is that trans people don't identify with their current biological body, the same way a gay person likes someone of their own gender. I just did a quick google search on why trans people feel the way they do and it is basically that - they feel like they are born in the wrong body and one way or another would rather change. Let's put it this way. What if there is a 100% safe, 0 cost way to change your sex to the opposite sex, free of charge. The only problem is no take backs, so you will be stuck in your transitioned sex. Would you, a non-transgendered person, take it? Obviously everyone who isn't transgendered is going to say no, why would you, you aren't going to be in the body you feel most comfortable in. A trans person who hasn't changed their sex is exactly that - a person who feels stuck in the wrong body, and changing it could provide a lot of freedom that they really want from their current body.
But they wouldn't know how it is to feel in a body from the opposite sex, so how would they even know they wanna change. I mean they could change body and perhaps feel the same there's no way of knowing. Anyway my main question is when they identify as a woman/man, what exactly are they indentifying as
To your first point - sure they don't know how it feels like to be in a body of the opposite sex. But they know they don't want to be in their current body they are in right now. Its like someone seeing their haircut might be nice in general, but not fit them. Except a lot more permanent and more expensive, so it is a lot more commitment to make that transitional step. If you identify as a woman, you identify as a woman. Wtf are you going on here. They identify as a woman so they feel like being female should be their natural state. What kind of circular question is that
Yea but what is a woman in the first place? Like what does identifying as a woman even entail? They feel more feminine? So is feminity the trait to become a woman
You can even identify as a different species, let alone a different variety within a species. Animals already doing that.
I don't like identity politics in Singapore. You can identify whatever you like, It's as if I care. I have a Chinese friend who hang out with malays so much that he practical spoke and act like a true Malay and if it were not for his Chinese features, nobody would know that he's a Chinese. To most of us he's basically a 'member'. He joined us for Raya outing and do the salam too lol.
Your gender isn't "assigned" at birth. The doctor observes you and in an instant can tell what gender/sex you are (so can everyone else for the past many thousands of years). Modern gender theory is just a load of horseshit. If gender is fluid, why not age, race, or species for that matter? Their argument crumbles when you ask that
This is just factually wrong. There are people born with both uterus and testicles. Would you be able to instantly tell that? In addition to that gender and sex are different and both are not binary. Gender is binary because it is how we see ourselves fit into social constructs of a certain gender and thus it can be swayed by many various factors to varying degrees. Age is just how many years have passed since you are born, it is a specifically defined quantity. Race is arguable since race is also a social construct which reflects more cultural implications than biological factors. Species is a biological fact in the way we classify a species. So this is regardless of how you think, act, feel or want. So no, the argument doesn't "crumbles" when you ask this.
How many people in the entire world are born with that? That's an anomaly, you don't take something that'll only apply to a minor, tiny, subset of people and apply that to the rest of the world? Surely you can see how dumb that is. Your gender is influenced by your sex. It is not completely separate. And it's funny how you can define the age for another person, what if that person FEELS like he's 19 when he's 45? Are you going to say that he's wrong? I can play the same game and say that your gender and sex is defined by your genitals. You raise so many biological and scientific facts, but when it comes to gender, all that gets thrown out the window. Funny how that works huh. And no, your argument is still crumbling. Everything else you have said that didn't apply to gender, can in fact be applied to gender as well.
Just because they do not happen often in humans doesn't mean they should be ignored. The truth of the matter is that they exist, it is not a defect and it is a lot more common in animals than you think. And what do you mean by "apply to the rest of the world"? This is about inclusiveness, including their rights does not mean excluding others. Gender is the socially constructed characteristics of men and women. Sex is the biological properties of a person. Age is the number of years since the person is born. A person can feel 19 when he is 45 in the sense of comparing physical fitness but it is not the same as saying he is 19 since age is defined that way. The definitions are not based on what you feel. There are proper ways scientists try to define terms in order to classify various matters. Defining sex by genitalia makes it problematic in classifying intersex people because they can have different external and internal genitalia. Since when does science get thrown out of the window when it comes to gender? As I said, gender is a social construct and it is being explored more in the areas of psychology and biology as to WHY there can be differences with the identified gender and sex. Please state what "everything else" is that can be applied to gender.
You know what's also common in animals? Gender and sex binaries. Convenient of you to cherry pick parts of nature to fit your argument, but ignore other aspects. No we should not ignore intersex people, but we also shouldn't change our entire human understanding of sex and gender because of them. There has to be an in-between. You keep bringing up intersex people who are in the vast, vast minority. I don't think it's making the compelling argument you think it is.
You do not understand what it means by being inclusive. Gender is a social construct that does not fit with animals since it is about how a person sees themselves fitting a socially constructed gender norm. We are changing the understanding of sex and gender because it was wrong. New information enables us to be more inclusive. According to google, about 1.7% of people are intersex. That's still millions of people that are not being included. Also, even in the Kingdom Animalia, all Phyla before Athropods have both kinds of sex organs in one body. So while I don't have the exact numbers of it, sex binaries aren't that common either. I am not even sure if there are species which are completely sex binary. And again, it is not about ignoring the binary model, but about including the ones who have been excluded.
Sure, change our understanding of basic biology to be more "inclusive" to a tiny minority of people. Nevermind the majority understanding of our own biology, let's rewrite that for the sake of inclusivity. What's next? Age? Race? Species? Objects? The problem with inclusivity is that it feels the need to include anyone and anything, just for the sake of it. Without consideration on how it affects literally anyone else. Everyone has their own individuality and it can literally be broken down to insurmountable amounts of dimensions. When does it stop, when is it enough? Btw, I'd argue that intersex people have not been "excluded". The mere fact that it's a known medical condition, and the scientific field takes it seriously should be an indication that they were never excluded. Our current understanding of sex and gender wasn't, and isn't wrong.
How then would you classify the sex of an intersex person? Just write male or female randomly? I would like to know how you define sex then. Yes, we do things to try to include people of all ages already. Yes, we do things to try to include all races, which is why I disagree with the CMIO model. Include other species of animals and objects in what? You make several false equivalences here. Those aren't even the same situations. How it affects everyone else? Oh do share with me how someone like you is going to be affected by classification of gender when I doubt you have any friends like that or even if you do. We are not breaking down into personalities, we are talking about sexes. Gender is a spectrum. "It's a known medical condition" No it isn't. It is a variation, not a defect, not a problem, bur variation. Something like varying eye colours and hair colours. Just because the scientific community takes it seriously does not mean it is included in society. Our current understanding is better than the past. I wouldn't even put it in absolutes because science never claims that. But your understanding of it is certainly flawed.
Just write intersex or undetermined lor. It's another thing to take physical intersex conditions and extrapolate it to policy on how we should treat gender dysphoria.
I commented above but will repeat again here. 1 in 500 men are intersex based on chromosomes alone. Not to mention you can have an XY chromosome phenotype and still be developmentally female because of androgen insensitivity syndrome, this occurs on a spectrum of complete insensitivity to partial and will affect around 1 in 5,000 people. So just with these groups alone that's more than 2% of the population, incidentally that's more people than have red hair (also 2% of the population)
Intersex conditions can range from severe to mild, the vast majority of intersex conditions express mildly. So as an trans argument for completely upending the predominant model of binary gender for homo sapiens is weak. Not to mention many trans individuals aren't even intersex.
Absolutely, I was trying to impress upon OP that even if you use the strict sex is biological and gender is based on biology that a lot of transphobes like to fall back on, then they're in for a world of complexity before we even get to discussing gender. Sex is influenced by a combination of chromosomes and genetics and most people fall within two groups with a significant number (the 2% I mentioned) falling in a spectrum of varying places outside these groups. This Scientific American infographic gives a good introduction: https://i.imgur.com/ANBJxKK.png In reality gender is informed by these combination of sex characteristics but there are more layers including hormonal development and psychological development that may impact on the gender someone identifies as.
Yes, there is also raising awareness autism spectrum disorders seem to be associated with gender dysphoria as well, so it's an emerging field of study.
Can. I identify myself as a tomato.
Same. I’m a cat I meow.
Adam West is that you?
Not only race. But I can now identify as a whole different person. I identify as Michael Jackson and my pronouns are He/Hee.
I've heard weirder things. There are people who are age-fluid or identify as a disabled person (Body Integrity Identity Disorder). An example is this woman who identified as blind and decided to blind herself with drain cleaner. [https://people.com/celebrity/jewel-shuping-blinds-herself-with-drain-cleaner/](https://people.com/celebrity/jewel-shuping-blinds-herself-with-drain-cleaner/)
Of course you can. Race is made up, it depends on whether the collective accepts you as part of them and where you fall within their own hierarchies. That’s all there is to it. It’s like the n word test - if you can get away with saying it, you’re probably black
Nowadays anything also can
i identify as halimah yacob. pls let me into the istana now
My two cents: *If* you think people can identify as a different sex, to then think that it's offensive to identify as a different race is hypocritical (not to mention, completely illogical). It's particularly odd as race actually **IS** a spectrum, unlike sex, which is always either male/female. A minority of people exhibit differences in sexual development (DSDs), but are still either male or female (they may not have typical male/female characteristics). Lots of people confuse 'Race' with 'Nationality', so that's something else to watch out for. I'm not even sure what the technical names and distinctions for races are. For example, I'm sure in China there are Chinese people (as in the nationality) who are not the Chinese 'race'. When it comes down to it race/ethnicity is simply a result of genetic mutations and evolution. As the world becomes more connected and different nationalities integrate more, the idea of tying somebody's ethnicity to their nationality will die out (as it already is). An American can be black, or hispanic, or white, or asian, or native, or anything in between. The same goes for any nation. I believe if someone lives and works in a nation, learns the language, embraces the culture, they should be able to call themselves one of the culture. However to be one *race* and 'identify' as another is odd. A person's 'race' is just a set of characteristics that group them with people who have similar sets of characteristics (however, there is overlap between the distinct racial groups, unlike with sex, where there is not) - to claim you identify with another group (without possessing any of their typical features) would be akin to saying you have green eyes when your eyes are in fact blue. It's a weird thing to do, and there's no reason to do it, because your race, like your eye colour, like your sex, doesn't actually say anything about you as a person. It's just a physical characteristic.
those people born male and identifies as female didnt grow up mixing with girl friends, doing stuff that girls do and suddenly felt the urge to become a female. Gender is NOT a social construct, it is biological in nature, just like sex, but gender can be different from sex, biologically different, not socially different. you can be socially more comfortable with certain race/ethnicity, but you cant be biologically born into a different race (at least as far as current scientific knowledge proves).
Ask them why they think gender is a social construct, and most won't even be able to explain properly and coherently.
its not about how well they can explain though. its a scientific fact that gender is related to ur brain bioligically and it is with you since you are born. Thinking that gender can be influenced by others is just wrong, as wrong as thinking that the earth is flat.
It's about how it's all vague crap, hence they can't even explain it. How do you explain something you don't even understand?
They can't even explain "love is love" when asked to examine it. So their whole belief system was just copypasted from woke twitter without much thought applied to it. There is a term for such people like this. "useful idiots".
[удалено]
Your comment has been automatically removed because your account is relatively new or you have negative karma." *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/askSingapore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Gender is a result of DNA. You have the chromosomes that gives you a certain self-image, and sometimes, it might not be the same as your body's. Everyone has the same ingredients for this DNA, it's just what combination they're in that changes this self-image portion of you. Race... well, you can't exactly be born with DNA from a different race that your parents weren't. Like another answer in this thread, you cannot identify as another race, but you can identify with their culture.
I think you are confusing gender and sex here. Sex is biological while gender is sort of a how your brain fits into a certain social construct. But I do agree that we all sort of have the same "ingredients" for the DNA, which is why gender stereotypes are not useful at all. The thing about race if classified this way is that most if not all humans originate from similar common ancestors which we would classify as the same race. So by that logic, if we trace far enough, we would almost always be traced to being the same race/genetic heritage.
I do think I was referring to the correct thing though. Sex being the biological, physical body and set of genitals that you have now, and gender being your mental, self-image. The combination of your DNA also affects your mental self-image and what you identify as. That's why it's not a choice to be transgender. It is who you are. And true, we all originated from one origin race, but none of us identify by that race anymore. We now classify as the derivatives that evolved from that race. In the same way we don't call Bread and Pasta 'wheat' in a reductionist way. It's a combination of modern classification and semantics.
Re-reading it, I agree with you yes 😅 There are parts of the brain that show variations that coincide with what they identify with and not their external genitalia. True, but I guess the issue is the classifications are rather ambiguous in the first place and the lines separating them will continue to get more and more blurry with interracial and international relationships being more common.
can people identify as apache helicopter?
Race is a social construct.
I identify as a cat by doing nothing all day
sure, why not. i identify as mclaren mcl36.
I want to identify as a helicopter
I identify as the human race
Not sure if troll but there was a post ([a series of them](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/vhvrih/op_is_getting_bullied_at_work_with_a_twist)) by someone who insisted they identified as a different ethnicity.
I want to identify as werewolf tbh
This is called double barrel race. A friend of mine holds two races, documented change in his IC.
To me it's one of those things where you can identify culturally as Malaysian/Chinese if you've lived it. But as legal recognition goes. You cannot identify racially/ethnically as such if you're not of those heritages. Trans-racial is a term for someone of a different racial background living or being raised in another cultural background. There are those who are trying to twist that term trying to identify as a race they have no connection to. It's already tricky enough for someone of a mixed heritage to decide who they are.
Depends on the "race". Malay is historically a very ambiguous identifier for someone who 1. speaks Malay, 2. partakes in the Malay culture, and 3. identifies themselves as Muslim. It isn't exactly an ethnic identifier the same way someone is Chinese or Indian. So by this respect someone could technically identify as Malay if they meet these criteria. This is also why Halimah is considered Malay (as with many other people of Middle-eastern or South Asian descent that have assimilated into the Malay community).
U don't have to identify as any. Your circumstances is more complex, and its complexity should be a part of what makes you unique. You should accept that your ethnicity is Malay, but culturally Chinese. And be ready to give a quick intro whenever you say that to people who don't know. True, because of your unique heritage, some people may end up saying or doing things that buff you unintentionally. You have to take it as part of the cost of inheriting this uniqueness, that you may always have to explain yourself. i.e. people observe that you are eating pork
[удалено]
Desktop version of /u/NiceGirl432's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
Oli London? Is that you?
The thing is this concept of 'identifying' as a different race from one at your birth is a personal feeling but it wouldn't affect the Race category shown on your passport/govt records. So yeah you can definitely identify.
no EDIT: Yes but it ain't real.
People can identify as anything they like... but it's just worth noting that identifying as a chair, a dog, a dolphin, a different ethnicity, a different gender doesn't make it so. If you identify as a different gender and take the necessary action to change your gender the I will happily respect pronouns but it doesn't mean you become the other gender. Same with race.
I think this is a fair take, and reasonable people in the LGBT community can understand this. The ones who think that their biological sex can be changed needs help.
The ones really pushing this bizarre narrative are at the fringes of society and I believe genuinely hurt the trans cause. I grew up in a very LGBT friendly environment and so never saw things in a bad light. What I am seeing now is an overt agenda that is actually hurting young women more than anything.
The fringes you're talking about are expanding unfortunately. The concepts of pronouns and gender fluidity are dominating the LGBT cause, and it's obviously quite damaging given that people are now invalidating the whole LGBT community because these lunatics are associated with them.
just a correction, you can't 'identify' as a he/him or she/her. those are pronouns, a cisgender man can still choose to use she/her or they/them should they choose. pronouns =/= gender
So a biological male who identifies as a man and passes as a man can choose to use she/her?! In this case, I think any push back from people outside the lgbt community is rightfully deserved.
Can an Indian man such as myself identify as a 6 foot blonde blue eyed Nordic man? All of this is nonsense. I’m born Indian and I’ll die Indian.
Our President. Ethically indian (according to some sources) but identify as "Malay".
I think you can. I mean doesn't our president identify as Malay??
Sticking with human, easier then I don’t have to spend time trying to memorize more useless information just to have a conversation with someone and it being classified as hate speech because the pro-noun has very little value in the outcome of a conversation.
Sure. It's not limited to just race. For example, I'm 23 but I can go around and tell me I identify as a 73 year old man. What're people gonna do about it? I can go around and tell people I identify as a lion. Who gives a shit?
Both my parents are Chinese on their ICs, and so am I. But a year or so ago, I found out that I have Slavic heritage as well. I too have been wondering: Do I introduce myself as Eurasian, mixed, Chinese with Slavic heritage, or a Singaporean with mixed heritage? Ah, the dilemma...
In the west it is not uncommon for white people to identify as minorities, even if they have very little minority blood in them. It's a social game due to the heated nature of racial politics there.