These are the default sexual choices supported in site profiles around the web.
And now introducing GenderHack:
The Problem
Social software including social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace often encode certain cultural values into their profile builder. There are minority groups for whom such constructions are not appropriate.The Aim
GenderHack is meant to be a document intended for people involved in designing or building social software, social networks, data interchange formats or Semantic Web projects, so that they can adequately consider issues of sex, gender identity, social constructed gender status and more flexible approaches to matters of sex and relationships. Eventually, it could become a gender and relationship equivalent of accessibility guidelines.If this is successful, we can also put together technical formats representing a more enlightened view of gender - specifically, RDF and XML representations.
Overall, the ability to express one’s identity online sucks. Everyone is being mapped into constrained (western) visions of what humans are all about.
Even more expressive visual digital representations, such as my WeeMe, your own SouthPark character and Second Life avatars, are limited in the reality that they convey to others.
What if I had an accident and lost my legs? I saw no disability features while building my WeeMe! 
Imagine I wanted to use my WeeMe in a dating site. Since there are only two legged versions of WeeMes, at some point in the online conversation I would want to disclose that my WeeMe was “a little bit” inaccurate.
No, it’s not the sweater. Try again.
While in the real world my handsomeness (cof cof) would immediately get through and conquer my date (handsome guy - in a wheel chair), the online interaction lowers up my date’s expectations (cool guy -> cool guy in a wheel chair). Screwed over by a WeeMe…
Expressing one’s identity online is a big deal and backlashes regarding our identity are hard to handle (online or offline).
Unfortunately, there aren’t enough people worrying about these things (at least under the spotlights) and those that worry are thinking “small-time” normally constrained by a need to fit people into a database schema.
There are sites, dating sites namely, that need to “know you” well enough to match you up with others. Those are probably the only ones which understand that “You” are more than just a set of values on a profile. Interesting enough, current research into “digital identity” don’t seem to include concerns for just how expressive that identity is. They are more concerned with your “consumer persona” -> and that one fits perfectly in a database. 
And to finish off, some related questions:
- When sites ask for our information, what are they using it for?
- What value (for you) comes out of it?
- How much of our individual humanness is captured and how much of it do we want to be captured?
- Can we force those sites to delete our information from their databases?
