LSAT Adopts 12 Different Gender Identity Options

500px-Gendersign.svgColleges and universities have been struggling to become more inclusive by allowing a variety of gender identities, including many asking that academics and staff post their preferred pronouns on emails or alter how they address students based on different pronouns.  Now the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) has adopted 12 different gender identity options for students to choose in creating their account. The choice include include “agender, “androgyne,” “demingender,” “queer or genderfluid,” “man,” “transgender man,” “non-transgender man,” “questioning or unsure,” “woman,” “transgender woman,” “non-transgender woman,” and “additional gender category/identity [fill in the blank].”

The change has been noticed by many on social media:

“I’m registering to take the LSAT. These are the gender categories”

If anything, the list is modest and relatively limited in comparison to some schools or some sites.

Some of the choices however may still be unfamiliar so I decided to look them up.

Agender refers to people who do not want to declare a gender or consider themselves genderless.

Androgynes are those people who have a gender which is both feminine and masculine, but not necessary in equal amounts.

Demingenders are those who claim a partial connection to a particular gender identity and can include people claiming to be a demigirl, and demiboy, and demiandrogyne.

 

 

 

130 thoughts on “LSAT Adopts 12 Different Gender Identity Options”

  1. A so-called Food & Farm bill just passed in the House of Representatives. If this version becomes law, there will be many hungry children.

    Repugs are evil.

    1. “Repugs are evil.”

      David, is your opposition to the farm bill that able-bodied Americans receiving food stamps have to spend twenty hours a week working or getting training?

      1. Allan, I am opposed to hungry children, irrespective of the employment opportunities for the care giver.

        1. ” I am opposed to hungry children, irrespective of the employment opportunities for the care giver.”

          What is your solution? What I am hearing is that you are supporting child abuse. I haven’t heard of children starving to death. I have heard of food stamps being converted to alcohol and paying for strip clubs. Do you not know the difference between right and wrong?

          1. Allan, you look in the wrong places. First, food stamps can only be exchanged for food. Second, I stated hungry, not starving.

            Try reading the authoritative op-ed about this topic in today’s TNYT, written by 3 who have actually studied the situation.

            1. David, don’t be naive and think food stamps aren’t fungible. The NYTimes op-ed is nowhere authoritative. They represent the opinions of individuals frequently wishing to push certain ideological positions. You should know that at your age. There have been many detailed reports having to do with this subject that are not Op-eds. You read only what confirms your bias.

              If you want those kids to grow up and be responsible start looking at the parent’s negligent activities that you wholeheartedly support. It is your type of attitude that is leading to the deaths of so many young children in our country.

            2. You obviously haven’t heard of the illicit trade of “food stamps” for either cash or other commodities such as another commenter suggested tobacco and alcohol. The problem is rampant with mostly beneficiaries trading with others yet occasionally a merchant gets arrested for engaging in substantial exchanges. In fact, the USDA has an enforcement section that deals with this problem.

            3. “First, food stamps can only be exchanged for food.”

              You’re kidding, right. Food stamp fraud is a billion dollar per year industry.

              1. JAY – I agree with Jay. Since they have gone to the EBT cards, the fraud is a little lower but is still done. Usually by small markets. There have been cases of Circle K’s selling more product than the nearby Safeway. Hmmmmmm.

    2. The House proposal is that adults, 18-49 ( or 59, I’ve seen both numbers at the high end) WITHOUT CHILDREN are required to work 20 hours a week to be eligible for food stamp.
      The Senate proposal is somewhat different.

        1. I find it amazing David that with all your talk through the present you don’t know what you object to in the bill. Rather silly, right?

              1. David lacks the knowledge to even provide the points the op-ed made. He doesn’t know what he is talking about. He only knows that people he is supposed to agree with said a bunch of stupid things that he accepts without question and apparently very little cognition.

                1. Allan, the op-ed is written by 3 professors who study such matters. You, on the other hand, appear to be an ignoramus.

                  1. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – it needs to be peer-reviewed, you twit. Publishing in the NYT is not a legitimate journal. David, put down the NYT, walk away, never come back. You will be a better person.

                    1. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – it is the go-to paper for leaks for the FBI and DOJ. It buries its retractions in the back pages and even then it is half a retraction.

                    2. Paul C Schulte just Makes Stuff Up. TNYT corrections are right up front, page 2 of the print edition.

                    3. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – how often do you go to the corrections? Daily? What is the font size compared to the original? And you didn’t deal with it as the paper of record for Hillary Clinton and the FBI/DOJ.

                    4. Paul C Schulte, I read the online edition in which corrections appear at the end of articles but also at the end of the paper. Almost always the latter is blank.

                    5. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – by the time you see it they can have made 30 corrections and you wouldn’t know.

                  2. We need more “professors” like Jonathan Gruber involved in formulating and evaluating political issues.
                    There might have been a time when the claim that “three professors” said this or that, that people would be impressed, and influenced.
                    That time has past, and ex cathedra proclimations by “three professors” no longer carries much currency

                    1. Tom Nash — Yes, several have commented on the end of the age of enlightenment. Now every ignoramus has their mind made up and doesn’t want to be confused by the facts.

                    2. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – You have yet to show us any facts to sway our views. Is there some time in the distant future that you intend to do? Or do you wish to continue Making Stuff Up?

                    3. ” Now every ignoramus has their mind made up and doesn’t want to be confused by the facts.”

                      Is that your argument David after citing an op-ed that said almost nothing and offered even less? Ignoramuses are created by that type of garbage.

                    4. D.B. Benson .

                      –Actually, people are more enlightened with respect to professors who pompously make declarations that “must be correct” because they are from acedemia.
                      While some do indeed have some real knowledge and insight, the others can no longer automatically command respect or have credibilty.
                      While youe own bias and ***-kissing of anyone with “professor” in his or her title is perhaps understandable, don’t expect others to be bowled over by those among them who are arrogant nitwits.

                    5. Tom Nash, the professoriate is employed to question. But in the case in question you obviously have not read the op-ed and yet your mind appears to be made up. Hardly a position of enlightenment.

                    6. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – you made the ‘call to authority’ which is a logical fallacy. We are just calling you and your buddies on it.

                    7. “Tom Nash, the professoriate is employed to question. But in the case in question you obviously have not read the op-ed and yet your mind appears to be made up. Hardly a position of enlightenment.”

                      I read the op-ed and it is junk by those hoping to become professors and trying to add to their resumes garbage that suits the ideological needs of the NYTimes even though nothing of note was written in that op-ed.

                      Professors are employed to question, but first, they have to learn critical thinking and how to read critically. You failed. It is your mind that is made up accepting such cr-p and doubles down by not even being able to repeat whatever points were made by these nonprofessors.

                    8. Tom, not one of the three “professors” were full professors. They were boosting their resumes trying to write an article objecting to 20 hours of work. Their point was what if they can’t find a full 20 hours of work? They could take 20 hours of training.

                      This is what David Benson accepts without any thought. Such foolishness should be thrown out of our universities.

                  3. David, I suppose your lifetime on earth hasn’t provided you with critical reading skills. There is no dearth of accomplished folk studying these matters so your chosen news source can hire those that meet their ideological conclusions whether or not what they say is true. People are paid for their words and the one paying the bill wants those words to reflect his own.

                    You weren’t even able to promote their ideas in a simple sentence or two. I guess that requires a minute or two of work something that you find too exerting. After all the opinion you render revolves around 20 hours of work or training for able-bodied persons. What a wimp you are.

                    Keep ingesting the pablum and spitting it out without understanding. Some people refer to that as brainless and near useless thinking. That is what leads to the creation of an ignoramus.

        1. D.B. Benson…
          I had some friends at WSU in the 1970s.
          You may have heard about the instructor who planned to walk into another professors class and ask “Are you a turtle” in front of his class.
          The intended target professor got wind of the instuctor’s plan.
          He explained the “ritual” to class, told them the guy would be coming in to ask “the turtle question”.
          He said to the class “What I want you to do after he asks the question, is to all very loudly give him “the answer”.
          The young instructor…he might have been a T.A. …was completely shocked at the loud roar/ response coming at him from the large class.

        2. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – So, David, did you decide which of the twelve you were? Or are you in the undecided category? BTW, being a turtle does not count.

    1. You obviously have not read beyond an op ed in the NY TIMES.
      And since they are “professors”, you “know” that their views must be the “right views.”

  2. It’s still Lady of Justice, right? If she is blind, then wouldn’t it logically follow there is no need to identify Gender on the LSAT?

    1. lsat is a private test and they want to know how many men and women are doing what kind of performances on their assessment device

      the useless new categories will diminish the usefulness of the information so it’s probably just a sop to some ideologue or potential market (leftist law school admissions flunkies?)

  3. LSAT Adopts 12 Different Gender Identity Options

    Why not do away with the pretence that a persons Gender Identity has anything whatsoever to do with their LSAT results.

    A person either knows the answer to the question or they do not irregardless of their gender.

    1. Some are confused, some are gender dysphoric, and some don’t realize that “irregardless” is not a word.

      These are troubled times indeed.

    1. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – you are wrong on all three counts.

    2. “Well. Supporters of The Donald are classified as po’ white trash.”

      Yes, David, they are called that by stupid know nothing Liberals. I don’t think you consider yourself stupid so you would never use such a classification.

      1. Maybe next time around they can replace “a basket of deplorables” with “po white trash” in campaigns.
        That’s a really effective campaign tactic….just ask Hillary how well that worked for her.

  4. Even an ocean-dwelling, fish-eating mammal like me realizes this is asanine. But since there are so many categories, why not add one more – Delphinidae – so I and my ilk can begin to take over your rapidly declining world.

  5. its amazing that a system that tolerates a person who pretends that human biology is divided into more than two basic sexual cateogories, is at the same time so illiberal and intolerant that it says that sex work is really bad and throws women into prison for taking money for normal heterosexual acts. which by the way increases crime and victimization of women. where’s the women advocates to speak up for a reasonable change in laws?

    https://reason.com/archives/2017/11/15/legalize-sex-work

  6. im a white male native born american heterosexual. they can count that.
    and I was 98% percentile on the lsat. that’s my white privilege at work: a high inherited IQ
    gotta love it!

    1. Mr Kurtz – that was 98% before they adjusted for you being white. 😉 You were probably 68% after the adjustment, just lucky you weren’t Asian.

  7. If claiming to be a “girl” would put me in the same shower with Taylor Swift or Jennifer Lawrence, where do I sign up?

    Sure, I’ll be a “girl” as long as you want.

    1. Somehow I think merely lying about your gender will not suffice to achieve these lofty ambitions.

  8. Those of us who closely follow Turley know he is very pro homosexual nuptials and he also favors allowing polygamy too. I wish very much he’d share his opinion on the current campus and Progressive trend to deny the long and well established XX and XY chromosome science of homo sapiens.

    1. “…long and well established XX and XY chromosome science of homo sapiens…”

      If you only look at a small population (<500 humans) you could come to the conclusion of there only being 2 possibilities sexual gender. You would be wrong because you have under-sampled homo sapiens by a factor of 10 million.

      Keep looking at larger and large populations, and you begin to see rare genotypes….XXY, XYY, XXXY, XXX, XXXX, XXXXY, etc. This is only looking at the 23 pairs of chromosomes.

      If you look at gender-function genes within these chromosomes, you find still more variation. For instance a male baby with urethra exiting further back than normal (hypospadia) runs about 1:300, and has standard XY chromosomes. It is believed that testosterone is blocked in some fashion during embyonic development.

      I haven't seen any correlations between the gender "choices" listed above, and genetic features. It's still early in this research.

    2. what about legalizing sex work? it’s a ridiculous anachronism in a day where every other perversion has been legalized, that normal heterosexual sex acts for money can land one in prison.

      why don’t the pro homo activists ever do a thing to help normies? freedom is always in the red eye of the beholder i guess

  9. This is absurd. The purveyors of higher education get more asinine every year.

  10. When we go beyond just tolerating queers and homos, and not throwing stones at them, and start acting like it is normal sexual behavior, then we get to this kind of nonsense.

    The thing is, nobody considers that idiocy like this, is why we “have to import immigrants to counter a shrinking population growth.” If a theory which is supposed to lead to a fairer and better nation ends up resulting in the death of your nation, then the theory is wrong.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. Squeeky:

      It’s not immigrants per se that cause the corrosion; it’s immigrants who haven’t been inculcated with American values. Properly vetted and educated legal immigrants are a national asset. Low wage illegals economic migrants aren’t.

      1. Mark,

        You mean to tell me that you’re not convinced by the Left’s calls to eradicate this nation’s borders by citing a plaque placed at the base of the Statue of Liberty “in loving memory of Emma Lazarus”, circa 1903, as “defining us as Americans”?

        For shame Mark!

        According to our Leftist overlords, that “electric cord in that Declaration that links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving men together” is just sentimental claptrap by a president that took away their slaves.

        1. Bob,Esq:
          We that SOL plaque was attached to the back of the Ten Commandments that Moses brought down from Mt. Sinai, or to the Gold Tablets Joseph Smith got form Angel Moroni. Either way, yeah, I’m being pretty silly.

  11. There are two sexes.

    “Gender is the politicized linguistic vehicle that facilitates a legal ban on sex distinctions.” – Stella Morabito

    N.B. Billy Jean King won the “Battle of the Sexes”; not the “Battle of the Genders”.

    1. It’s a reasonable guess he threw the match to pay off bookmakers to whom he owed money. He’d defeated Margaret Smith Court earlier. One match isn’t another match and one players strengths are not another’s, but if I’m not mistaken, their records at the time suggest that Margaret Smith Court ranks higher in the history of tennis than Billy Jean King.

    2. Bob, Here here. I use “sex” and gender the way it was intended. I’ve given up ranting like I used to, I just refuse to conform.

      1. Gender is a part of speech intentionally conflated with sex by leftists desirous of redefining humanity as inherently sexless so as to abolish legal recognition of biological family ties.

  12. I wonder how many gender categories have found their way on to the MCATs? Perhaps we shall have a “gender proliferation competition” as part of our youthful ritual of sorting through the various professions. Oh, the excitement of it all!

  13. If people wish to be so proper about providing their true sexual identities perhaps they should use the established form as a noun with whatever adjective they want to adopt in parenthesis. They can then vent their entire histories and who to blame in a footnote.

    XX , X0, XXX, XXXX, XXXXX

    XY, Y, XXY, XXXY, XY/XXY, XYY

    This can be shortened to lack of Y=Female and presence of Y=Male.

  14. (music- to the tune of Short People, by Randy Newman)
    Bent people got no reason…
    Bent people got no reason.
    Bent people got no reason to live.

    They got little bitty eyes…
    Little bitty feet.
    Little bitty voices going peep peep peep.

    Don’t want no bent people!
    Don’t want no bent people!
    Don;t want no bent people round here!

Leave a Reply