Same Sex versus Same Gender, Does one word make a big difference in public opinion? Options

[DreamView]

Sex has a tremendous impact on society.
Sex is used (overused?) in advertising, music, novels, movies, theater to attract an audience.
Sex conjures up images of scantily clad, sweaty bodies engaging in activities leading up to a sexual liaison, as well as THE heavy breathing orgasmatic ACT itself.

There was (continues to be?) a big Brouhaha over SAME SEX Civil Unions and Marriages. Mostly by those with religious ties that teach that sSEX between a couple born of the same gender is WRONG and against GOD and mankind....

Ever notice how much the world calms down when we take SEX out of the picture?

People don't seem to object to two people of the same gender teking a vacation together, going to a movie together, dinner together, even sharing an apartment together or having love for each other.

Use the word "SEX" and suddenly - Societal Conniptions!

As Justices of the Peace, I believe that we can contribute to the relaxation of the stigma experienced by same gendered couple if we strive to remove the word SEX and replace it with who we are truly involved in- SAME GENDER COUPLES.

I have officiated many Civil Unions. always referring to the union as one between a Same Gender Couple. The response of my couples has been great. Their relationship and lives are not about their SEX LIVES- it is about their being a family, built on the love between a couple born of the same gender. SEX is rarely an issue of major importance to a couple facing major societal adversity.

Take the word SEX out of the picture and the world and angry zealots do seem to relax a little. The SEX life of my couples, though I do form relationships with all of my couples because of the type of ceremoines that I design and because of my involvement in their receptions as well, is none of my business. This is true whether the couple is of the same gender or not. Sex is not a hot topic between myself and my hetero couples, so by removing the word SEX from the description of my Same Gender couples, they become, too, simply A COUPLE- not a couple with a Sexual Stigma.

It is a subtle difference, but as with all words that create impact, it does make a difference. Think of all of the impactive words (remember George Carlin and The Seven Dirty Words...?) that don't necessarily change in meaning, but can create or diffuse a situation. It is why our society finds certin words repugnant and frowns upon their use. WORDS DO CREATE IMPACT.

When I was interviewed by a major national newspaper last year regarding Civil Unions, I STRESSED the term Same Gender and its use, over and over to the reporter. He responded by telling me that SAME GENDER wouldn't sell as many papers as SAME SEX...the word SEX SELLS.

SAME SEX creates volatility and argument. It doesn't reflect the gentle, sentimental, romantic Civil Unions which I have officiated.

From my perspective, it is our RESPONSIBILITY, as individuals and as Justices, to contribute to society and to the quality of lives of our couples and the world of which we are all part. Making the slight change to using the term SAME GENDER COUPLE from the destructive words of SAME SEX couple is a simple and effective way to contribute.

[bjay]

Dreamview has shamed me into responding. I continue to use "same sex" in the JP newsletter, in the description of one of the breakout sessions at the upcoming CT JP Conference ("If you haven't yet officiated at a same sex ceremony...") and elsewhere. It's ingrained, and besides, if truth be told, it doesn't bother me. If it did, I would change.

Dreamview may be right that using the word "sex" only inflames the opponents of same-sex unions. But I refuse to be intimidated by people who oppose gay relationships (now that would be a compromise word: gay) into changing the way I speak. Even the NY Times (yup, they are my standard) uses it. Here's a typical headline: "Same-Sex Marriage Blurs Lines on Both Sides of the Political Aisle." When NY's likely new governor, Eliot Spitzer, takes office, we'll be seeing the term a lot more often. And eventually (I predict), "same-sex marriage" will become a reality, not just in Massachusetts but in NY and other states, as it already is throughout Europe.

Dreamview is on a one-woman mission to change the culture and I admire her for it. But it will be an uphill battle. If "same gender" were to succeed, we would also have to say "opposite gender." It just doesn't sound right!
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

[DreamView]

Greeting bjay and others who may become interested in the topic....

Perhaps it is my background, but I am very conscious of SEX and its influence on our culture and every facet of our lives. And, as I am aging (50 looms next birthday) I am more and more tired of having SEX forced at me to sell anything and everything and on nearly every television program on the boob tube. I am tired of the constant sexual jokes and treating sex as if it is A JOKE.
Sex, while not a bad thing, can certainly remain a personal thing and something special. (Yes, I am sounding more like my mother than a kid of the 70s!)

My SEX is between my husband and me.

My GENDER is FEMALE.

I perform Civil Unions for couples who are of the Same Gender.
Their sex (lives) - none of my business.

I perform Marriages for Hetero Couples or Opposite Gendered Couples.
Their sex (lives) - none of my business.

Truly, I would prefer to perform MARRIAGES for ALL COUPLES, regardless of gender!
And I suspect that if progress where made in the Gender battle, then progress would be easier in the Marriage battle.

And, isn't it odd, bjay, that we usually don't define them Opposite Gendered Couples, at all. They are usually just "Couples".

Though I appreciate your statement:

"If "same gender" were to succeed, we would also have to say "opposite gender." It just doesn't sound right!"

...we don't , now, use the term opposite sex, which to me sounds much more weird, then use of the words opposite gender - opposing gender or hetero couples.

I contend, that if terminology was more politically correct (we have done that with just about every other group of people in society haven't we?) it would foster a gentler attitude, and a more accepting attitude.

Sex - Religion - Politics
Three HOT TOPICS that many think should not be brought up in most congenial situations.
Gender is not Sexual. It simply exists and is accepted as such.
But refer to Same Sex Marriage and Sex becomes an issue!

I even once heard a Religious Talk Show Host say that loving someone of the same gender is not against the religion, but to have sex with the same person would be.

Me? I look forward to the day, where the gender of the person one loves is not the focus....just the celebration of The Love!

[mariejp]

I am a Massachusetts JP and I use a number of different ceremonies. When I am marrying same sex couples they usually prefer to be pronounced "partners for life". I helped a couple who originally wanted to marry and then decided to just "commit" to each other. I chose a different reading for each of them that did not resemble a marriage ceremony. It was basically a public sharing of their feelings for each other, no vows and no officiant. My first wedding was two women, a Valentine's wedding. Each bride wanted to be called "bride". One bride was hispanic and her mate said her vows in spanish, she chose and learned the words. I also did a unity candle and rose ceremony. It was very moving and a light snow was falling as we were leaving... I drove them back to their hotel. the night really had a magical feel about it.
I find that when people find out that I am a JP, they always ask me about gay marriage. I find that most couples that I have "auditioned" for prefer to call it a gay marriage rather than same sex or smae gender.

I love being a JP and feel that everyone deserves to be married to the one that they love and that government does not have the right to legislate love.

[SallyMasters]

Hi everyone -
I am a JP in Massachusetts and have performed over 300 same sex weddings in the past two and a half years - they are my speciality, so to speak. I am passionate about same sex marriage and about civil rights for the GLBT community. Although I appreciate Marie's desire to "help" the heterosexual community be more at ease with same sex ceremonies, I wonder if she has asked many same sex couples what they prefer. As a lesbian, I do not feel that I need to (nor do I want to) change my language to placate the heterosexual community. If, by using the terminology "same sex" heterosexuals' minds go to the bedroom, they need to get over that! Rarely are any long term relationships solely about sex! I use the term, "same sex" just as I also refer to heterosexual couples as opposite sex. I think that when we change terminology to appease heterosexuals, homosexuals feel some shame, that there is something wrong about who we are. We, too, are created in God's image!

Sally Masters
www.mastersjp.com

[Senator Fluffy]

My SEX is between my husband and me.

My GENDER is FEMALE.

I perform Civil Unions for couples who are of the Same Gender.
Their sex (lives) - none of my business.

I perform Marriages for Hetero Couples or Opposite Gendered Couples.
Their sex (lives) - none of my business.

Dream View;

Not meaning to be difficult, We had discussed this very topic following the conference Saturday. I gave this topic a good deal of consideration on my drive to Hartford.
I?m sorry to take issue with the semantics at this point.

While ?same gender ? may actually be a more accurate labeling , ?same sex? , I believe you are misconstruing to reference sexual intercourse, yet in the definition of sex also falls to gender.

There is after all the female sex (as referenced to gender of a person), as well as gender ? Female. The terms are generally interchangeable.

Where my concern lies at this time, is as follows:
Given the often negative connotations associated with sex, yet even more so with same sex/gender relationships; be it religious, ethnic, cultural, or personal; the term sex isn?t always taken as a joyous union between consenting adults. Rather, something ?dirty, or shameful. The term sex tends to carry a lot of rather unnecessary baggage. The ?unmentionable term? of the past is yielded freely in reference to the coupling of same gendered persons; I believe it to be bantered about with less than pure motives. People wishing that same gendered folk would just go away? toward that end, if we carefully construct the terms of discussion?

Opposite sex unions? unheard of, and there is little reason for them to change? with the possible exception of Humanity and Compassion.
Be Well.

[DreamView]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
EXCELLENT!!! INTERESTING DISCUSSION AND VARIED PERSPECTIVES!

As I wrote to privately to Senator Fluffy, in response to the phrase " Not meaning to be difficult", your input is received (by me, at least) quite to the contrary. I am so happy that all have taken the time to write!

This forum should foster an air of acceptance for various perspectives, whether or not anyone agrees with another or not. Respect, without name calling or vehement tone is primary. We all need to encourage each other to voice opinion and to share without forcing one to share your belief.

The concept of our discussion forum is to generate conversation, opinion, networking ~ To share and to learn from each other ~ not to prove "right or wrong" but to spark ideas ~

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I have several responses to this continued topic of this thread that I began.
I would preface my thoughts by saying that I respect all opinions, including those shared by you who disagree with me.

Marie, it sounds as if you are discussing YOUR COUPLES' PERSONAL WANTS with them, which I agree, is the responsible and compassionate way to proceed as an officiant. I applaud you for striving to meet your couples individual needs and desires rather than to assume or force your personal preference upon them.


What pleases and works well for one couple in a ceremony may not at all suit another.
This is why I totally customize each and every ceremony that I officiate, regardless of the GENDER of my couples.

And though I have read with interest and respect the comments made by SallyMasters and Senator Fluffy, weighing and considering those perspectives, what fits me best is to continue using the word GENDER when describing ANY GENDER of INDIVIDUALS - be they bi-sexual, heterosexual, homosexual or asexual!

As in the above statement
"regardless of the GENDER of my couples"
I include couples of opposite gender in that statement.
The word GENDER falls more easily off of my tongue.
It has ALWAYS been my preferred word of choice to describe, well, GENDER.
It has ALWAYS been my personal preference over the word "SEX".
My children, who are now 25 and 26, were raised from infancy as identifying their gender as male and female.
We openly have discussed sex as a VERB, but gender remains my preferred NOUN to describe a physical encasement.


Though, of course, you are semantically correct, Senator Fluffy that the true definition of SEX includes "the Gender Of...".
In fact if you visit www.dictionary.com, the first definition of the word SEX refers to the division of gender within specifies
AND
the NEXT 7 DEFINITIONS
are akin to sexuality, sexual action and genitalia.
Sex, defined as Gender is Pretty Outnumbered by Sex as meaning the other connotations one often associates with the word.

I have not officiated ANY Same-gender MARRIAGES, as Connecticut does not allow for "marriage", but differentiates with the term CIVIL UNION. (another soap box that you could get me on easily!)
Though I have officiated Many Civil Unions, I will admit that I have not officiated anywhere near 100 yet, let alone 300.

However, I DO discuss with ALL of my couples their preference for terms of reference and nomenclature ~ inducing their preference during pronouncement.

And, regarding the topic of same-gender vs. same-sex as presented as terminology, thus far 100% of my same-gendered couples, as well as 100% of my same-gendered friends and family members that I have discussed this topic with, all agree that same-gender is THEIR PREFERRED terminology.

I definitely do NOT FEEL that the term same-gender is a term which is disrespectful to the gay community. Nor from my perspective do I agree that it "placates the heterosexual community";
though until SallyMasters brought it up, it had never occurred to me that anyone would construe it as such.
(When posing this question, since reading that ,to many members of the gay and bi-communities, none of them had that reaction either. This is not to say that it is not a possible reaction, just that it was not an anticipated one by me, nor one shared by any of those in my diverse social and business groups).
I feel that Same-Gender is 'better sounding', if you will, and more "gentle" usage of words.

I would, again, also offer that I use GENDER as the term when describing the physical encasement of a male or female of any sexual orientation.
(As an aside, when filling out forms, I have been known to write in the word "gender" , after crossing out "sex" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) and have written 'not today' under the word SEX! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) )

I agree with Senator Fluffy that "The term sex tends to carry a lot of rather unnecessary baggage. ..." etc.

This is my point.

Though gender and sex are terms used interchangeably by the general public and society, my strong preference is to place the emphasis, rather, on gender.
The WORD SEX - just by it's history, is evocative.
It raises emotion.
Gender is a flat, non-emotional term to describe a physical encasement.

After much thought and consideration I do not share the perspective that employing the term "same-gender" would be a move to "appease heterosexuals", creating a subtle need of forcing shame upon homosexuals. (and that anyone has been made to feel ashmed of their sexual orientation, by an unenlightened and intolerate society is a very sad commentary, indeed)

Since we all can agree that, by definition, gender and sex do have one usage in which they can be exchanged, then how might using the term same-gender instead of same-sex create shame?

Technically, they MEAN the same thing. But one of them, just because of the other possible 7 definitions, can create different, more strong images, than the other.

I do still believe that same-gender as a term takes the emphasis off of the word SEX.

SEX (the sex act, specifically) is, after all, the issue that zealots seem to focus on.
"Same-gender" creates less sexual focus and more focus on individuality and total person, from my perspective.
It is not about attempting to APPEASE homophobics
and
seemingly uncompassionate narrow minded heterosexuals (MY perspective!)

It is helping people to understand that the Individual Person is much more than genitalia / much more than who someone has sex with /
but is an ENTIRE BEING - not a sexual object.

In our society, we have come to use terminology that is more encompassing and thoughtful sounding for many different groups and descriptions of people.

When I officiate, I officiate for PEOPLE, not genitals.
I officiate for Same-Gender
and
Opposite Gender
couples.
I officate for PEOPLE.

Unfortunately, right or wrong, good or bad, the word SEX conjures sexual images.

Teaching a course called SEX EDUCATION in schools was not always well received. Parents were often up in arms!
But list a course called HEALTH EDUCATION, which includes information regarding sexual activity, and it becomes more freely accepted.

I continue to believe that by using the word same-gender, yes, which does mean the same thing as same-sex, we will more easily educate the general public, and perhaps, reach more people who often seem intent on passing laws which limit human rights to certain genders.

I belive that Humanity and Compassion would make our world a bit better place to be. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[rabyapril]

Hello all,

As I know a couple of people in this forum, I was told about this particular discussion and asked my opinion. I wanted to share it straight from me also.

Though I am not a JP I have several friends that are and I am an assistant to one of them. I am a female bi-sexual, and have fallen in love with and married someone of the opposite gender than me. My husband and I both work in a male dominated industry. The division of the company that I work for is on the smaller side (especially compared to where my husband works). I am the only woman in a group of about 8 Engineers. We're a fairly laid back group. From my experiences here and in other settings (dancing, hanging out with friends ? of which are a mix of straight, gay, and bi) - the word "SEX" has but 1 meaning and it's not whether you're female or male. From people I've talked with, when asked what the 1st thought they have is when they hear the word sex, the response is something along the lines of "Yes, please", "Now? Okay, let's go!", "Quick, kick the kids out of the house".

I have to agree with DreamView and Senator Fluffy - the word SEX carries baggage. Personally when referring to my gender I prefer the word GENDER over SEX. As my SEX is my and my husband's business. In my previous relationships, when I was with an other woman, I was in a same-Gender relationship. Our SEX was our business.

Regardless of whether you are in a same-gender or opposite-gender relationship, from my experience when you change GENDER to SEX the mind very quickly jumps to the bedroom, swinging from the chandelier! Sorry, Sally, but this Bi-Sexual has to disagree that using the term gender is to make the heterosexuals feel more at ease. I do not believe that using the terms same-gender and opposite-gender degrading and shameful. Not that using the word SEX is degrading and shameful. But the word SEX does brings us back to the bedroom, swinging from the chandelier NOT to whether we are female or male.

Thank you for letting me share.

[mariejp]

Thanks for all of the people who mentioned my post. certainly was not intending to insult anyone, I used the term because the original postings used it. I, too, customize each ceremony and the couples, no matter what their gender may be, have a choice as to every aspect of the ceremony. I was just sharing that same gender couples that I have married preferred the "partners for life". I have also had straight couples ask to be called partners for life because they considered their marriage to be a partnership. Some of the more strident comments remind me why I don't participate in more forums. The whole idea is to be able to share experiences, not to judge each other. If my comments offended some, that was not my intention. I will certainly choose carefully from now on, since the same person critiques any posting I post.

[bjay]

Like everyone, JPs have strong feelings about some topics... and this topic is certainly one of them! A Discussion Forum is an appropriate place to share our thoughts but only with respect for others' opinions and with sensitivity to the feelings of others.

This may be a good time to quote from the Guidelines of this Forum:
"to foster an air of acceptance for different perspectives. Respect for others -- without name calling, vehement tone, or "killer" statements -- is primary. We all need to encourage each other to voice our opinions without fear of recriminations. Our goals are:

* to generate conversation
* to share opinions and information
* to encourage networking with fellow JPs
* to learn from each other -- not to prove anyone "right or wrong" -- but to spark ideas."

I have re-read the entire discussion several times and don't feel that anyone crossed the line. As mariejp says: "The whole idea is to be able to share experiences, not to judge each other." Without restricting discussion of these important topics, can we all try to share our (strong) feelings and still avoid a "vehement tone" (as the guidelines say) that others might take personally.

I hope that mariejp and everyone else will continue to post on the Forum -- on this topic and others that affect our role as officiants. With more states legalizing civil unions -- and likely same sex (or same gender, if you prefer) marriage in the near future -- the topic will only get more timely and relevant.