Understanding transgenderism.

[The Grand Nudger]

Gender exists as an interaction between mind and body.  The interaction between mind and body is ill-defined, so the definition of gender is ill-defined.  We might want to suggest as Nudger does that it's all "data" that is acquired independent of the biological facts.  But this would be going too far.  We know that the brains of people with gender dysphoria differ from those of cis-gendered individuals in ways that strongly suggest a biological basis.  And at bottom, the brain is biological, so the distinction itself is a construct.  If there weren't biological sexes, there would be no gender.  So gender is rooted in biology, even if its expression is moderated by mind and culture.

Gender isn't rooted in biology.  A person with peen can apprehend themselves as either a boy or a girl - and even that apprehension will be based on different things in different times and places.  We make biological assertions about gender as a society, and those assertions are as disparate from each other as they are from reality - that's the root.

My disagreements with you comes from this treatment of culture as an arbitrary ether that exists independently of us. From which we only consume and are affected by. To the contrary, we contribute to culture as much as we consume it. And our contributions to culture come from our psychological traits and tendencies which are often heritable. In other words, I am somebody else's culture.

We form societies because we are biologically social animals. In other words, culture is biological. It is part of our extended phenotype, grounded directly or indirectly on our particular genetic infrastructure. In the absence of our particular genome, culture as we know it, and even society as a whole, ceases to exist. As exemplified by animals that lack culture, or disorders such as autism that affect sociability.

Gender roles emerge in society because gender is something we are hardwired to detect, form, and express. Children look for it; they imitate it. Culture is inseparable from biology.

Then allow, for a moment, that we do not disagree at all.  I don't think that culture is arbitrary or that culture exists independently of us.  Our contributions to culture arise from a great many things, I think you might appreciate more than most how at least some of them aren't biological in any meaningful sense.

We can, ofc, say "it's all biology" as a deepity.  Neither you nor I would do so, I presume. We are not born with a gender, any specific gender proclivity, or even an understanding what gender is, even if we're born knowing that we possess peen. We can know this, for sure, on account of how being a manly man has literally nothing to do with having a dick. How being a girly man has literally nothing to do with not having a dick. How being girly girl has nothing to do with a vagina, and boyish girl nothing to do with lacking one. Everly girly man and manly girl, ever, had the requisite sex organs...and yet. We can know this, for sure, because the list of gender contents is in conflict from culture to culture, and in internal conflict both in the present and over time. Because we can know what we are, biologically, and still understand how we fail or succeed with respect to gender.

Said it before, I'll say it again. There is absolutely no doubt that gender is a manufactured construct which references a specific culture in a specific time at a specific place. In a machine analogy, it really is just a user profile. A monumentally consequential one, sure, but nevertheless.

[Jehanne]

I'm not sure I follow.

Gender roles are cultural and subjective.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Said it before, I'll say it again. There is absolutely no doubt that gender is a manufactured construct which references a specific culture in a specific time at a specific place.

Gender as a concept was created as a way to carve nature at her joints. A way of dividing things up, precisely because there is more to one's sex than mere genitals. This "sex beyond genitals" is gender. As such you cannot understand gender without sex, because gender is nested in it. Gender is what sex does, what sex wears, how sex acts, how sex thinks, how sex appears. You cannot stop doing and displaying gender because you are a sexual being, and everything you do can be seen through the lens of sex. No society is required for gender to exist. A feminine male is still performing his gender, in the absence of any cultural feminine classification.

That said, yes, we agree that societies construct trends, roles, and expectations for either sex. And in so doing create prototype for femininity and masculinity. (Mostly as a consequence of how males and females are already behaving in that society.) Culture is important, but culture isn't where gender begins.

[Silver]

Reposting it here, after also posting it in the gay thread.

Elliot Page to discuss trans issues in “wide-reaching” interview with Oprah Winfrey
gaytimes.co.uk

Vanity Fair released a preview of the interview on Wednesday (28 April), which sees the Oscar-nominated star discuss his coming out journey and the various anti-trans bills that are being introduced in legislature.

In the clip, Elliot tells Oprah that it felt “crucial and important” for him to disclose his transgender identity with the world due to the “horrible backlash” towards the community in the United States – and to inspire transgender youth.

......

Elliot came out as transgender/non-binary in December 2020 in a powerful statement on social media, in which he wrote: “My pronouns are he/they and my name is Elliot. I feel lucky to be writing this. To be here.

“To have arrived at this place in my life. I feel overwhelming gratitude for the incredible people who have supported me along this journey. I can’t begin to express how remarkable it feels to finally love who I am enough to pursue my authentic self.”

[Jehanne]

Said it before, I'll say it again. There is absolutely no doubt that gender is a manufactured construct which references a specific culture in a specific time at a specific place.

Gender as a concept was created as a way to carve nature at her joints. A way of dividing things up, precisely because there is more to one's sex than mere genitals. This "sex beyond genitals" is gender. As such you cannot understand gender without sex, because gender is nested in it. Gender is what sex does, what sex wears, how sex acts, how sex thinks, how sex appears. You cannot stop doing and displaying gender because you are a sexual being, and everything you do can be seen through the lens of sex. No society is required for gender to exist. A feminine male is still performing his gender, in the absence of any cultural feminine classification.

That said, yes, we agree that societies construct trends, roles, and expectations for either sex. And in so doing create prototype for femininity and masculinity. (Mostly as a consequence of how males and females are already behaving in that society.) Culture is important, but culture isn't where gender begins.

Then, it appears that you have no issues with full LGBTQ equality under the Law.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Let's not call it an 'ism'. Peoples identities can't and shouldn't be reduced to a condition. I doubt anyone intentionally used it that way, but it's a word that's become so entrenched in our vernacular by anti-trans folks that people don't give it much thought when they use it.

Why do you feel there's an issue with -ism? Language needs a way to refer to things. And given that the word transgender refers to the individuals, we are left with a linguistic void for the mental experience that they all share. Transgenderism seems like an appropriate word until a new word is coined to take it's place.

I think maturity is required when dealing with topics about mental experiences, and we shouldn't strive to make every classification seem synonymous with a stigmatization. That's an ever losing battle, and language will always find a way to fill the gaps.

Transgenderism shouldn't be seen as any more or less of a dehuminizing word than autism, parkinsonism, neuroticism, etc.

[The Grand Nudger]

Said it before, I'll say it again.  There is absolutely no doubt that gender is a manufactured construct which references a specific culture in a specific time at a specific place.

Gender as a concept was created as a way to carve nature at her joints. A way of dividing things up, precisely because there is more to one's sex than mere genitals. This "sex beyond genitals" is gender. As such you cannot understand gender without sex, because gender is nested in it. Gender is what sex does, what sex wears, how sex acts, how sex thinks, how sex appears. You cannot stop doing and displaying gender because you are a sexual being, and everything you do can be seen through the lens of sex. No society is required for gender to exist. A feminine male is still performing his gender, in the absence of any cultural feminine classification.

That said, yes, we agree that societies construct trends, roles, and expectations for either sex. And in so doing create prototype for femininity and masculinity. (Mostly as a consequence of how males and females are already behaving in that society.) Culture is important, but culture isn't where gender begins.

Gender isn't what sex does.  Gender is what a society says a sex should do.    Different societies, different notions of gender.  No society, no notion of gender.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Gender isn't what sex does.  Gender is what a society says a sex should do.    Different societies, different notions of gender.  No society, no notion of gender.

In other words, do you think transgenderism isn't a real thing? That's it's just a social construct, or a niche social tend? I think most transgender individuals feel that their experience of dissonance between their sex and their gender identity is a real one. One that they they were born with or naturally developed. That's not something that makes sense under your strictly cultural and dictatorial view of gender.

[The Grand Nudger]

Social constructs are real things. So are concerns and frustrations rooted in constructs. Heres a rabbit hole for you. West virginia has the highest percentage of transgender teens in the us.

Do we think that's an effect of a local breeding pop in west virginia? That there was some supercollection of trans carriers fucking about two decades ago blipping the charts today? Seems unlikely. At any rate, little about gender makes any sense at all, under any view - in that sense...but that doesn't mean that gender can't be made sense of outside of those nonsensical gender assertions which color our perception as minds embodied in societies.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Social constructs are real things. Heres a rabbit hole for you. West virginia has the highest percentage of transgender teens in the us.

Right, so your claim is that transgenderism is a social construct. Meaning what exactly? And I ask only because I've seen people give many definitions of what they think social constructs are.