[Serious] Please convince me gender is binary

[tackattack]

I don't think either of you are being careful enough with the word trait. I define trait as a genetically determined characteristic. So an atom's apple, hips, muscles, gonads, to be traits. What you guys seem to be identifying is a general intuitive characteristic. Things like how a person acts, their speech patterns, effeminate or masculine, etc. those are all characteristics to me and not traits. Both of which is different from preferences which are more volition based (even if indoctinated to that). Preferences to me could be anything from your preference in footwear to the type of deodorant you use or how you style your hair.

[The Grand Nudger]

adam's apple..adam's apple... lol.  The notion is that it got stuck in his craw, lol. Let that sink in.

But lets run with that. Gender identity is about characteristics as we conceptualize them in the gender construct, not traits as they exist in your pants. Did you choose to be "masculine" or "effeminate" to whatever degree you are either..or is it simply who you are?

[bennyboy]

I don't think either of you are being careful enough with the word trait. I define trait as a genetically determined characteristic. So an atom's apple, hips, muscles, gonads, to be traits. What you guys seem to be identifying is a general intuitive characteristic. Things like how a person acts, their speech patterns, effeminate or masculine, etc. those are all characteristics to me and not traits. Both of which is different from preferences which are more volition based (even if indoctinated to that). Preferences to me could be anything from your preference in footwear to the type of deodorant you use or how you style your hair.

Call it whatever you want.  If you give it a metric, it will either be related to binary gender categories, or it won't be related to gender at all.

Some "general intuitive characteristics" are cultural artifacts, but they are still binary, rather than ternary or other poly.  Sure a man can wear a dress, but wearing a dress is clearly a female behavior in our culture, rather than a female one.  If that weren't true, then people who feel they are a woman trapped in a man's body wouldn't need to do anything-- no special body language, no dresses, no make-up, no name change.

[The Grand Nudger]

They're binary in our culture, and at present..that's a comment on our culture in this moment, not their being intrinsically binary.  Other cultures have conceptualized them differently (and so have we - little boys used to wear dresses).

[bennyboy]

adam's apple..adam's apple... lol.  The notion is that it got stuck in his craw, lol.  Let that sink in.  

But lets run with that.  Gender identity is about characteristics as we conceptualize them in the gender construct, not traits as they exist in your pants.  Did you choose to be "masculine" or "effeminate" to whatever degree you are either..or is it simply who you are?

Gender and gender identity are not the same thing.  You mention "masculine" or "effeminate," but not any third or poly option.  That's because there really are only two gender categories-- it's a binary dialectic, and it's not arbitrary-- it is, ultimately, strongly linked to what the vast majority of people have in their pants, and how they feel and think about things as male or female members of the human species.

[The Grand Nudger]

The inclusion of a third or fourth or fifth category would be redundant to my point..if would be no more or less of a construct than the other two we're more familiar with.

Cultural does not equal arbitrary.

[bennyboy]

They're binary in our culture, and at present..that's a comment on our culture in this moment, not their being intrinsically binary.  Other cultures have conceptualized them differently (and so have we - little boys used to wear dresses).

So long as they are related to gender, they're binary.  If both boys and girls often wear dresses, then dresses are no longer part of gender expression or identity.  But since dresses are worn almost exclusively by women, then in our culture, that's a female mode of dress-- female being one of the two options in a binary gender metric.

I think for trans people like Jehanne, the gender binary symbols are good, and useful-- they allow her an easy means by which to express her sense of self.  If you break down all the symbols-- just call them all meaningless constructs-- then you aren't really doing anyone a favor; you're just making it impossible for people to express themselves.

But think about this-- people can have any mix of female or male traits, express any mix of species or cultural norms, but there's still no option "C."  You can have male chromosomes, female sex organs, and wear a dress or a male business suit on alternate days if you want.  But all those things distill down to a binary dialectic.

[The Grand Nudger]

They're binary in our culture, and at present..that's a comment on our culture in this moment, not their being intrinsically binary.  Other cultures have conceptualized them differently (and so have we - little boys used to wear dresses).

So long as they are related to gender, they're binary. 

Except when they're not.....  What else can be or even needs be said? I'm all for discussing the practicality or social shock of changing or adding categories relative to our current construct...but I'm not interested in debating reality with you or anyone else.

[bennyboy]

The inclusion of a third or fourth or fifth category would be redundant to my point..if would be no more or less of a construct than the other two we're more familiar with.  

 Cultural does not equal arbitrary.

Yeah, it matters, because we're talking about whether gender is binary.  If you are talking about gender, then all traits, of any kinds, are binary-- male or female.  If they aren't, then we're not talking about gender at all.

People can exhibit a complex collection of traits and behaviors, some of them male and some female-- either by species norms or cultural constructs.  If you attempt to distill a person's humanity down to a single word, then a complex person will have a very difficult (read: impossible) task.  But that's not a gender issue-- that's a semantic issue.

But in the end, there's no option "C."  There's still just male and female.

---

Except when they're not.....  What else can be or even needs be said?  I'm all for discussing the practicality or social shock of changing or adding categories relative to our current construct...but I'm not interested in debating reality with you or anyone else.

Okay, give me an example of any gender-based construct which is not based on a male/female dualism. Show me an option C.

[The Grand Nudger]

Male and female are sex, not gender.  Gender refers to the social constructs we lay atop sex.  That's what people are talking about with non binarism.  They aren't talking about people who have a penis and a vagina, or no penis, or no vagina.

Go show yourself, let wonder lead you to knowledge.