Will you make transsexual Elves canon in your games ?

[Lanefan]

Sure, if you're going for a 'consequences' game, though I suspect anyone who's actually running sexytimes with a pregnancy risk probably is.

EDIT: that would be an interesting extra level of rules to apply to the various polymorph spells and wildshape as well.

I already had to worry about this when DMing a pregnant Druid-equivalent with wildshape.

What I ended up doing was deciding that it'd work fine up to a certain point in the pregnancy (halfway? I forget now) after which she pretty much couldn't do it without losing the fetus.

Ironically enough, given the theme of this thread, this same character also had gender-swap issues. She started out as female, got turned to male by a wild magic effect applying a curse but was able to get herself turned back to female - temporarily - via Remove Curse. Problem was, every time she shapeshifted she'd flip back to male...until she got pregnant, which forced her to stay female until giving birth...after which she almost immediately flipped to male again. She has since been able to get the curse permamently removed.

Lan-"for anybody who might thinks I've never had to give this stuff any serious thought..."-efan

 

[Enkhidu]

So has anyone made the "I'm considering using transsexual elf cannons," joke yet?

 

[TheCosmicKid]

The "standard analysis" as you call is it fine for producing a narrow range of alternatives based on definitions set forth from the binaries. The problem therein lies of course with the definition of the binaries which, as most binaries go, are highly polarized. Being male means Y and being female means X. Identifying as cis means A and identifying as trans means B. Typically framing it in a "Identifying as cis means you are..." while the opposite is identified with a negative, being trans means "you are not..." That's generally what happens when you have two binary elements. Being one means you are not the other.

Yeah, a while back now [MENTION=15729]Charlequin[/MENTION] and I touched on the binary logic inherent in the system.

I don't know how you identify yourself; if you mentioned it, I missed it, so we may not be talking about the same sort of bucking of the system at all. When I see a phrase like "a cis-gendered individual who was born with wrong biological sex" (to quote [MENTION=57112]Gradine[/MENTION]), my concern is that the speaker is using terms which have known meanings within the standard analysis, and so appears to be endorsing or buying into the analysis and simply doing so in a confused way. I've known other people who have objections to binary dichotomies (or other aspects of the standard analysis) to adopt distinctive terms for their own identity, or just to state outright that they don't want to put a label on it. That seems to me a much more effective way of communicating this fact about themselves. So if you do identify yourself in a "cis-gendered individual who was born with wrong biological sex" type of way, I guess my question is why you think that's a better method than other methods of rejecting the binaries.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

In one of the two current threads on this general topic, somebody (name redacted to protect the innocent) told me I should not expect them to use words according to the dictionary definitions.

"Don't trust the dictionary" is good general advice when diving deep into any technical field, actually. Lexicographers can't be experts in every field, nor is it really their job to be. The purpose of a dictionary is more to identify and document words than to attempt to pin down precise definitions.

That said, we do expect a dictionary definition to be broadly correct. It might not be able to bring out all the nuances in a word, but if someone says, "I am a woman because I have green eyes", we can look at a dictionary and go, "I think you've made a mistake somewhere."

 

[Yaarel]

The fourth--which I find the most interesting, for character purposes--is simply that changing to male during pregnancy kills the fetus.

Which means the elf now has genuine consequences and decisions to deal with. What if the character feels more comfortable as a man, or with the ability to constantly change? Given the rarity of elven childbirth, that's pitting the personal against the societal. What's the elven cultural view on abortion? And why would their god grant a blessing with such a significant (if rare) cost?

I find the need for the character to address such questions far more interesting than finding them a loophole in the process.

Some years back, there was a reallife hoax about a male who was pregnant, convincing because the medical data that the hoax presented was sound. Essentially, the placenta attaches to the intestinal tract, and because the placenta develops its own autonomous environment, the baby develops normally within the pregnant male.



I was googling to see if the hoax website was still around. But came across this. In the UK, the first legally identified trans man becoming pregnant.

In other words, this seems to be a female to male, after operation, but still retains a womb within.

The point is, a person can ‘pass’ as a man, while still being pregnant.

 

[Yaarel]

On that note, in case anyone is interested: http://www.masseffectd20.com/

It's impressively comprehensive, and its free!

Wow. Thanks for this. This is awesome.

 

[Gradine]

Yeah, a while back now [MENTION=15729]Charlequin[/MENTION] and I touched on the binary logic inherent in the system.

I don't know how you identify yourself; if you mentioned it, I missed it, so we may not be talking about the same sort of bucking of the system at all. When I see a phrase like "a cis-gendered individual who was born with wrong biological sex" (to quote [MENTION=57112]Gradine[/MENTION]), my concern is that the speaker is using terms which have known meanings within the standard analysis, and so appears to be endorsing or buying into the analysis and simply doing so in a confused way. I've known other people who have objections to binary dichotomies (or other aspects of the standard analysis) to adopt distinctive terms for their own identity, or just to state outright that they don't want to put a label on it. That seems to me a much more effective way of communicating this fact about themselves. So if you do identify yourself in a "cis-gendered individual who was born with wrong biological sex" type of way, I guess my question is why you think that's a better method than other methods of rejecting the binaries.

I might have worded it poorly; there are people I know who were biologically born “male”, but identify themselves strictly as “female”; not as “trans” or any other qualifier. They have no interest in bucking any sort of gender binary; they prefer to identify themselves as, and therefore be treated as, essentially as cis-women.

I don’t think of this as any more or less of a valid way to identify as “trans woman” or “gender queer”.

 

[Sunseeker]

Yeah, a while back now @Charlequin and I touched on the binary logic inherent in the system.

I don't know how you identify yourself; if you mentioned it, I missed it, so we may not be talking about the same sort of bucking of the system at all. When I see a phrase like "a cis-gendered individual who was born with wrong biological sex" (to quote @Gradine), my concern is that the speaker is using terms which have known meanings within the standard analysis, and so appears to be endorsing or buying into the analysis and simply doing so in a confused way. I've known other people who have objections to binary dichotomies (or other aspects of the standard analysis) to adopt distinctive terms for their own identity, or just to state outright that they don't want to put a label on it. That seems to me a much more effective way of communicating this fact about themselves. So if you do identify yourself in a "cis-gendered individual who was born with wrong biological sex" type of way, I guess my question is why you think that's a better method than other methods of rejecting the binaries.

I'm bucking the system from a philosophical debate standpoint, not a personal one. I identify as a generally cis-male.

The answer is always because it is healthier to define anything by what it is as opposed to what is isn't. The long story short is that when you define something by what it isn't you haven't actually defined it at all. You've only defined what those other things are not, and whatever they are not is therefore you. The problem there is that without actually defining yourself (excluding for a moment, people who purposefully refuse to define themselves) is that you can't really make up an identity for yourself on what other people aren't. It's not a healthy mindset to declare "I am not things things!" As opposed to declaring "I am these things!"

Wow. Thanks for this. This is awesome.

Yep, I'm actually putting together an IRL group for it right now. It seems like a pretty good mesh of d20 and Mass Effect.


Will certainly post a play report once we get into it.

I already had to worry about this when DMing a pregnant Druid-equivalent with wildshape.


What I ended up doing was deciding that it'd work fine up to a certain point in the pregnancy (halfway? I forget now) after which she pretty much couldn't do it without losing the fetus.


Ironically enough, given the theme of this thread, this same character also had gender-swap issues. She started out as female, got turned to male by a wild magic effect applying a curse but was able to get herself turned back to female - temporarily - via Remove Curse. Problem was, every time she shapeshifted she'd flip back to male...until she got pregnant, which forced her to stay female until giving birth...after which she almost immediately flipped to male again. She has since been able to get the curse permamently removed.


Lan-"for anybody who might thinks I've never had to give this stuff any serious thought..."-efan

Lol, I think that seems reasonable.

 

[Maxperson]

I might have worded it poorly; there are people I know who were biologically born “male”, but identify themselves strictly as “female”; not as “trans” or any other qualifier. They have no interest in bucking any sort of gender binary; they prefer to identify themselves as, and therefore be treated as, essentially as cis-women.

Cisgender and heterosexual, which both mean the same thing, mean a person whose identity and gender match their birth sex, so someone can't identify as a gender other than their birth sex and be cisgender/heterosexual. At least they can't and be correct.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Cisgender and heterosexual, which both mean the same thing

They do not even remotely mean the same thing. Cisgender has to do with one's own gender. Heterosexual has to do with who you're attracted to.