Assuming for the moment that the information you have on current BMC policy is accurate, I would add for clarity (and I've appended my opinions of each): - Cis women: currently identify and are identified as women, admitted. (I think this is good.) - Trans women: currently identify and are identified as women, not admitted because they have in the past identified or been identified as men. (I think this is bad.) - Cis men: currently identify and are identified as men, not admitted. (I think this is good.) - Trans men: currently identify and are identified as men, admitted because they have in the past identified or been identified as women. (I think this is good.) - Genderqueer women (inclusive neither): currently identify as both man and woman, admitted because they have in the past identified or been identified as women. (I think this is good.) - Genderqueer men (inclusive neither): currently identify as both man and woman, admitted because they identify in part as women. (Hm, I find this surprising, but good.) - Gendrqueer women (exclusive neither): currently identify as neither man or woman, assume you'd be admitted due to fitting some kind of general idea of "woman has set of genitals x" despite not identifying as a woman (?) (Or possibly because they have at some point been identified as a woman even if they haven't identified themselves that way... and therefore I think this is good.) - Genderqueer man (exclusive neither): currently identify as neither man or woman, assume you'd be not admitted due to not identifying as a woman. (And because they have never identified or been identified as a woman. And therefore I think this is good.) - Intersexed people: Honestly, I have no clue if the college would admit intersexed people or not. It might depend on how they identify; I hope it would at any rate. (I agree completely. If they identify as women in whole or in part, or have been identified as such for educational purposes, I would hope that they would be admitted.)
What to do with those genderqueer men who are an inclusive neither because they explicitly identify as both genders at once?--or do you think that falls under the heading of "we need a college to end the gender binary, but BMC can't do everything for everyone?" In this case, how can you say that these people will never experience or have never previously experienced the specific educational issues of those who identify as women--since in fact they do currently identify as women, at least in part? (As opposed to, for example, trans men, who may once may have identified as women, but now likely identify as men generally).
I personally think they should be admitted, because they identify in part as women. I think that people who identify in that way will be affected by the issues BMC seeks to address. (They will also be affected by a whole host of other issues, but those may be outside of BMC's mission, beyond their mission to help a student with whatever issues they have after admission.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
19/4/11 01:54 (UTC)- Cis women: currently identify and are identified as women, admitted. (I think this is good.)
- Trans women: currently identify and are identified as women, not admitted because they have in the past identified or been identified as men. (I think this is bad.)
- Cis men: currently identify and are identified as men, not admitted. (I think this is good.)
- Trans men: currently identify and are identified as men, admitted because they have in the past identified or been identified as women. (I think this is good.)
- Genderqueer women (inclusive neither): currently identify as both man and woman, admitted because they have in the past identified or been identified as women. (I think this is good.)
- Genderqueer men (inclusive neither): currently identify as both man and woman, admitted because they identify in part as women. (Hm, I find this surprising, but good.)
- Gendrqueer women (exclusive neither): currently identify as neither man or woman, assume you'd be admitted due to fitting some kind of general idea of "woman has set of genitals x" despite not identifying as a woman (?) (Or possibly because they have at some point been identified as a woman even if they haven't identified themselves that way... and therefore I think this is good.)
- Genderqueer man (exclusive neither): currently identify as neither man or woman, assume you'd be not admitted due to not identifying as a woman. (And because they have never identified or been identified as a woman. And therefore I think this is good.)
- Intersexed people: Honestly, I have no clue if the college would admit intersexed people or not. It might depend on how they identify; I hope it would at any rate. (I agree completely. If they identify as women in whole or in part, or have been identified as such for educational purposes, I would hope that they would be admitted.)
What to do with those genderqueer men who are an inclusive neither because they explicitly identify as both genders at once?--or do you think that falls under the heading of "we need a college to end the gender binary, but BMC can't do everything for everyone?" In this case, how can you say that these people will never experience or have never previously experienced the specific educational issues of those who identify as women--since in fact they do currently identify as women, at least in part? (As opposed to, for example, trans men, who may once may have identified as women, but now likely identify as men generally).
I personally think they should be admitted, because they identify in part as women. I think that people who identify in that way will be affected by the issues BMC seeks to address. (They will also be affected by a whole host of other issues, but those may be outside of BMC's mission, beyond their mission to help a student with whatever issues they have after admission.)