Gender Essentialism, Genderqueer theory and Transgender stuff

[greenfairy]

Ok, bear with me because my thoughts on these matters are confused right now and I'm posting hoping to clear them up a little.

So gender essentialism is the idea that there is some sort of essence of what it is to be feminine and masculine, that there are innate and unchanging qualities and characteristics of these.
Essentialism - Geek Feminism Wiki

Genderqueer theory refers to the idea of gender being nonbinary:
Genderqueer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Transgender people feel they are a different gender than what they were assigned at birth.

While I wholeheartedly believe that gender is nonbinary and support the genderqueer and trans folks in all they do, trying to wrap my mind around all three of these concepts together kind of makes my head hurt.

What would the point of feminism be if gender were an illusion? Do genderqueer people believe this objectively or are they only speaking for themselves? If there were no such thing as gender at all, how could a person coherently say that their gender is wrong? Whatever they are is just what they are and not a gender at all. If gender and biological sex are different, then having reassignment surgery would be unnecessary because the genitals have nothing to do with the gender. If women can have penises, then maybe you don't need a vagina to be a woman.

In short, it seems like the whole concept of being transgender depends on some sort of gender essentialism to have any meaning at all, yet gender essentialism is the main tool of transphobia.

Wtf.

/Philosopher problems.

And I have to figure this out eventually if I am going to adequately write about ecofeminism.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Think of race. Race doesn't really exist in a biologically legitimate way, but the effects of people believing in race are very real. This is how we can confront peoples' ideas about race as wrong while saying race does not actually exist. You can apply the same thing completely (or partially since most folks aren't comfortable with being any more progressive than that) to gender.

If gender is really a cultural construct, there is no reason for it to be binary and not completely open-ended and fluid.

Sex and gender are not the same. A transgender person may fundamentally just be someone who has some kind of software-hardware compatibility issue, if you will. The problem may primarily lie with sex characteristics first of all, and only extend into broader ideas of gender culturally, in the same way that it does for cisgendered people. So there doesn't have to be incompatibility there.

If feminism looks to establish equality between men and women (sex), then feminism would be the most accurate it could possibly be if gender were just an illusion.

 

[Zangetshumody]

I am just going to list a few points that seem relevant to me:

What is gender? OR:
Gender of what exactly (what exactly are people trying to refer themselves too)?

To me it doesn't make any sense to have an undefined gender. From what I gathered using my word-web dictionary, gender means some kind of role (with some kind of reproductive choices [attached to that role]). Reproduction* could be extended to mean reproduction of culture itself... So biology neatly aside... Gender inherently means some kind of classification put onto identity, in terms of the particular work that serves reproduction*?

If "open ended" gender simply means all roles are negotiated on direct personal interactions; then people might need to start wearing T-shirts with manifesto's drawn/written onto them... Without convention, (which could even be argued is the stuff all language is made out of anyway);- all exchanges must either become slower or more nebulous, as more care must be taken to understand something we don't yet have a cultural short-hand for. The concept "open ended"-gender seems to essentially defeat fixed role classification;- which destroys the chance to examine culture objectively as then culture itself is only indirectly produced by the subjective actions of people that think of themselves beyond rooting their identities in any objective [cultural] framework.

Potential ancillary point: It seems to me, there is an economic truth that has some kind of application even in the politics of sexuality: people can't be expected to spend equal amounts of time in considering any message, especially if its apparently hard to read (even if the difficulty in considering the message is the result of unfamiliarity- in which case people's general experience of culture as a whole, might cause them to feel prejudiced by their chosen classifications' limited prevalence).

Based on the definition of gender that I have speculated: it seems clear that gender would gravitate toward superficial and physiological "permission slips" that aided a person in pursuing a ROLE. Because, depending on your chosen role, merely seeming unconvincing can produce resistance to accomplishing the chosen role, and so 'looking the part', is also part of being successful in achieving your service to re-productivity (see elaboration on reproduction above*).

PS: [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] What is eco-feminism?

 

[greenfairy]

I am just going to list a few points that seem relevant to me:

What is gender? OR:
Gender of what exactly (what exactly are people trying to refer themselves too)?

To me it doesn't make any sense to have an undefined gender. From what I gathered using my word-web dictionary, gender means some kind of role (with some kind of reproductive choices [attached to that role]). Reproduction* could be extended to mean reproduction of culture itself... So biology neatly aside... Gender inherently means some kind of classification put onto identity, in terms of the particular work that serves reproduction*?

If "open ended" gender simply means all roles are negotiated on direct personal interactions; then people might need to start wearing T-shirts with manifesto's drawn/written onto them... Without convention, (which could even be argued is the stuff all language is made out of anyway);- all exchanges must either become slower or more nebulous, as more care must be taken to understand something we don't yet have a cultural short-hand for. The concept "open ended"-gender seems to be essentially defeat fixed role classification;- which destroys the chance to examine culture objectively as then culture itself is only indirectly produced by the subjective actions of people that think of themselves beyond rooting their identities in any objective [cultural] framework.

Potential ancillary point: It seems to me, there is an economic truth that has some kind of application even in the politics of sexuality: people can't be expected to spend equal amounts of time in considering any message, especially if its apparently hard to read (even if the difficulty in considering the message is the result of unfamiliarity- in which case people's general experience of culture as a whole, might cause them to feel prejudiced by their chosen classifications' limited prevalence).

Based on the definition of gender that I have speculated: it seems clear that gender would gravitate toward superficial and physiological "permission slips" that aided a person in pursuing a ROLE. Because, depending on your chosen role, merely seeming unconvincing can produce resistance to accomplishing the chosen role, and so 'looking the part', is also part of being successful in achieving your service to re-productivity (see elaboration on reproduction above*).

PS: [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] What is eco-feminism?

I think this has a lot of truth.

Ecofeminism is a philosophy which proposes that there are connections between oppression of the feminine and oppression of the natural via parallel axes of value dualisms.

feminine masculine
dark light
chaos order
emotional rational
nature civilization
body mind

The vertical axis on the left has been historically oppressed and the axis on the right has been valued as being better. The so-called logic of oppression is as follows; x thing or collection of related things are better than y, if x is better than y then x is justified in dominating y, therefore x should dominate y.

Ecofeminism seeks to both remove the value from the dualisms and dismantle the logic of oppression, and more radically to propose that many of our dualisms are in fact complimentary parts of one whole and should exist in harmony- replacing dualism with holism. The challenge is to keep the polarities while promoting harmony between them.

 

[Yama]

What would the point of feminism be if gender were an illusion?

Still the same. Feminism isn't just about women. It's about treating all people of all genders equally.

Do genderqueer people believe this objectively or are they only speaking for themselves?

In my experience, nonbinary folk and trans folk (and LGBT+ folk in general) all pretty much stick out for each other and defend/affirm each other. I don't think I've ever met a nonbinary or trans person who only "spoke for themselves", but perhaps I also misinterpreted the question.

If there were no such thing as gender at all, how could a person coherently say that their gender is wrong?

I don't think nonbinary or trans people want to eliminate gender--just make it "socially acceptable" for people to realize for themselves what gender they are, and not have a gender and its values/ideals/etc. shoved down their throats from birth and have their parents threaten to disown them because of how they feel and that "god doesn't make mistakes" etc. etc. The point isn't to eliminate gender, just to raise awareness and most importantly, acceptance.

Whatever they are is just what they are and not a gender at all. If gender and biological sex are different, then having reassignment surgery would be unnecessary because the genitals have nothing to do with the gender. If women can have penises, then maybe you don't need a vagina to be a woman.

Correct. And not all trans or nonbinary folk feel body dysphoria or even necessarily want transition surgery. It all depends on the individual and one does not have to feel uncomforatble with their biological parts in order to identify with a different gender or as part of the nonbinary.

 

[sprinkles]

I think this has a lot of truth.

Ecofeminism is a philosophy which proposes that there are connections between oppression of the feminine and oppression of the natural via parallel axes of value dualisms.

feminine masculine
dark light
chaos order
emotional rational
nature civilization
body mind

The vertical axis on the left has been historically oppressed and the axis on the right has been valued as being better. The so-called logic of oppression is as follows; x thing or collection of related things are better than y, if x is better than y then x is justified in dominating y, therefore x should dominate y.

Ecofeminism seeks to both remove the value from the dualisms and dismantle the logic of oppression, and more radically to propose that many of our dualisms are in fact complimentary parts of one whole and should exist in harmony- replacing dualism with holism. The challenge is to keep the polarities while promoting harmony between them.

I can agree with this, and not only do these dichotomies exist in one whole, but they're also constantly moving. For example, when a stalk of wheat grows up, this is a yang movement, and when it matures and goes to seed, this is a yin movement. Same wheat, two different aspects. When the seed falls to the ground and germinates, this is a yin movement, and when the seed sprouts and grows up, this is a yang movement and the cycle repeats itself.

Edit: also, long time no see.

 

[Mane]

/Philosopher problems.

Your main problem is that the question wasn't complicated enough as it was, so I figured I'll make it better


My two cents:
I was wondering about the exact same thing a few months ago, and it came up in a thread - because I myself was raised with a mindset that there isn't much difference. The answer from what I remember was that there have been a lot of studies that do show subtle brain differences between genders and that they actually do show up for trans people in FMRIs - female-to-male trans will generally show the same markings as most males and male-to-female trans will generally show the same markings as most females.
This creates interesting situations. I actually know a guy who considered himself trans and identified as female for a very short while and then changed his mind after he had his brain scans checked for those very markings. He seemed to have accepted it without a 2nd thought. I was left wondering how does that change the fact he desired what he envisioned as a female social role, and what is it exactly that should count there exactly, though I never got around to bringing it up, and wasn't sure if I should.

As far as what this means for gender equality in politics & social roles, I think it reinforces the direction of removing artificial negative forces (Limitations and restrictions based on gender) over the direction of applied positive forces (Gender affirmative action). It indicates that we do not need to strong-arm and bend the system until the total of each gender fit into a 50/50 pigeonhole and identical results in every area of life. Gender equality does not require that we'd be the same or forced or incentivized to be the same, simply that we'd all have the same opportunities to reach our full potential.

Edit: Bolded because 21lux said so.

 

[Yama]

Gender equality does not require that we'd be the same or forced or incentivized to be the same, simply that we'd all have the same opportunities to reach our full potential.

Bolded for emphasis because I think this is really important. This is pretty much my point in response to the question of feminism and gender.

 

[greenfairy]

I can agree with this, and not only do these dichotomies exist in one whole, but they're also constantly moving. For example, when a stalk of wheat grows up, this is a yang movement, and when it matures and goes to seed, this is a yin movement. Same wheat, two different aspects. When the seed falls to the ground and germinates, this is a yin movement, and when the seed sprouts and grows up, this is a yang movement and the cycle repeats itself.

Edit: also, long time no see.

Also reflected by the cycle of the moon.

Bolded for emphasis because I think this is really important. This is pretty much my point in response to the question of feminism and gender.

And this is really my point too in most discussions of feminism and gender and polarities and all that. Differences are a good thing; they just shouldn't be assumed or enforced.

 

[Coriolis]

So gender essentialism is the idea that there is some sort of essence of what it is to be feminine and masculine, that there are innate and unchanging qualities and characteristics of these.
Essentialism - Geek Feminism Wiki

Genderqueer theory refers to the idea of gender being nonbinary:
Genderqueer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Transgender people feel they are a different gender than what they were assigned at birth.

While I wholeheartedly believe that gender is nonbinary and support the genderqueer and trans folks in all they do, trying to wrap my mind around all three of these concepts together kind of makes my head hurt.

What would the point of feminism be if gender were an illusion? Do genderqueer people believe this objectively or are they only speaking for themselves? If there were no such thing as gender at all, how could a person coherently say that their gender is wrong? Whatever they are is just what they are and not a gender at all. If gender and biological sex are different, then having reassignment surgery would be unnecessary because the genitals have nothing to do with the gender. If women can have penises, then maybe you don't need a vagina to be a woman.

In short, it seems like the whole concept of being transgender depends on some sort of gender essentialism to have any meaning at all, yet gender essentialism is the main tool of transphobia.

There is alot to this question, and I have considered this topic for quite some time myself. Based on what I have learned so far, my impression is that male and female (or masculine/feminine) do exist as diametric opposites, in an ideal sense, just as the other dualities you listed, like darkness and light, order and chaos. As ideals, however, they will not correspond with human reality except in the most superficial way of our physiology, and even there we see discrepancies.

Any inherent sense of what distinguishes M from F can derive only from physiology and reproductive functioning. Association of other attributes with M or F (e.g. emotionality, independence) is a human construct. There is nothing wrong with defining "woman" as "person with vagina" or "person with 2 x chromosomes" or corresponding definitions for male as long as we understand (1) there will be exceptions, and (2) this characterization really doesn't say much of import about a person, unless they are having their annual physical, or trying to reproduce.

Whether based in physiology or human wishful thinking, the grouping of human traits into M and F simply creates two "buckets" of attributes, from which every human should be able to draw freely without judgment, regardless of physiology or comfort with that physiology. People who exhibit and prefer more traits from the F bucket than the M might then be considered "feminine" regardless of physiology. Yes, having a penis falls into the M bucket, but might be strongly outweighed by a preponderance of other F attributes. And likewise for people drawing more from the M bucket. Many people may draw relatively evenly from both, manifesting that duality in combination you mentioned. These people may not identify strongly with a gender at all. In this way, each of us might be viewed as some superposition of the two genders, though I would include a strong "neutral" component as well, to reflect generic traits like honesty and good humor.

If gender is real only as a theoretical ideal, the goal of feminism would then be to liberate women from arbitrary limitations and restrictions that assume gender to be much more than it is. As we have discussed on other threads, the flip side of feminism is opening to men opportunities traditionally offered to women, e.g. to spend more time with young children, or to be relieved of the need to be the sole/primary breadwinner. Feminism itself focuses on the women's end of this, though many of its goals benefit everyone, e.g. expanded family leave, much as Jewish groups sometimes come to the defense of Muslims subject to prejudice or hate crimes.

I, too, have wondered about trans people in this context. I can understand being uncomfortable in your body, and feeling you should have been born otherwise, but that seems akin to a short, stocky blonde wishing she had been born a tall, willowy redhead. OK, so she may never be a model or basketball star, but in the body she has, she can still do pretty much what she likes.

If "open ended" gender simply means all roles are negotiated on direct personal interactions; then people might need to start wearing T-shirts with manifesto's drawn/written onto them... Without convention, (which could even be argued is the stuff all language is made out of anyway);- all exchanges must either become slower or more nebulous, as more care must be taken to understand something we don't yet have a cultural short-hand for. The concept "open ended"-gender seems to essentially defeat fixed role classification;- which destroys the chance to examine culture objectively as then culture itself is only indirectly produced by the subjective actions of people that think of themselves beyond rooting their identities in any objective [cultural] framework.

Have you ever read Ursula LeGuin's The Left Hand of Darkness? "Open-ended gender" isn't a problem if you are willing to see everyone first and foremost as an individual. Gender really doesn't matter in most situations, so the kind of "slow and nebulous" interaction you mention will be infrequent. It is likely to occur mainly in situations where one is seeking an intimate relationship, and I would maintain that that kind of slow lead in where you have to get to know one another is the best way to decide if the other person is "right" and to embark on a relationship. I for one prefer not to have people make assumptions about me, and I do my best not to assume about others.

 

[Yama]

I, too, have wondered about trans people in this context. I can understand being uncomfortable in your body, and feeling you should have been born otherwise, but that seems akin to a short, stocky blonde wishing she had been born a tall, willowy redhead. OK, so she may never be a model or basketball star, but in the body she has, she can still do pretty much what she likes.

The problem with this is actually quite simple: misgendering.

We live in a society where if you look like a certain gender, sound like one, dress like one, etc. you will be misgendered. This can be upsetting to trans people because it reminds them of something they are not. Hell, you can even look the part, but as soon as you open your mouth if you don't sound the part there's a high chance that whoever you're talking to might refer to you as the gender you "sound like". I've seen it happen many times and the wince of pain in those people's faces is kind of heartbreaking.

Most of society is like this. Because of gender stereotypes. And one might think, "Hell, as long as YOU know what your gender is why does it matter if others do or not??" But... it's not as simple as that. Facing reality, that's just not how society functions. It's heavily based on gender stereotypes and roles. I have a (cis) male friend who has a high-pitched voice, and he often gets mistaken for a girl in places like drive-thrus and even sometimes in person. It's upsetting to him. It is no different for a trans person. If I am a boy, I want people to call me a boy. And if I don't have the right body, it just won't happen. Sad, but unfortunately true. A trans person who isn't "passing" or already transitioned hardly has the time to stop every single person they come across and educate them about transgender and ask them to use the right pronouns--especially in a job like mine, where I speak with HUNDREDS of customers a day. I have to keep the line moving, and frankly, most will either forget, not care, or tell me that I'm going to hell (it's very conservative here).

On the subject of "looking" but not "sounding" the part and "passing"--
Passing, for anyone who doesn't understand/know, is being able to appear to others as the gender you identify as. You can be a "passing" trans person without being transitioned. For example: trans guys can bind their chests, and trans people can cut their hair, dress in the stereotypical clothes of their gender, etc. It's basically being able to have others view you as the gender you identify as without actually transitioning.
Not all trans people are or even can be passing before transition. And like I said above, you can LOOK completely passing, but if you don't SOUND like the gender you identify with, people can and will still misgender you. There was a trans lady customer at my work a couple months ago. I knew she was trans because of her voice, but I still treated her like a human being who is a female like she wants and deserves to be treated. But later I found out that after her interaction with me, she went to the deli department and the worker was incredibly rude to her, and when later confronted by the manager, she sneered, "What, is it about THAT THING?" People in our society can be very judgmental, and sometimes, passing just is not enough.

Although, some trans people don't feel the need to transition. They are fine with their bodies and are comfortable with their gender. I don't know a lot of trans people like this, but many non-binary folk are this way. But in my experience, most trans folk find it uncomfortable and even triggering to be constantly be reminded of the gender they have clearly decided that they are not, and this is why transitioning is so, so important to so many people. As for myself, I don't give a shit about my vagina really, it can stay or go, I don't care. I mainly just want top surgery so I don't have to bind anymore, those things are expensive and I don't want boobs anyway.

Sorry for the really long response, it's just something I feel like I can help explain and give more perspective on. As a transgender male myself, I find that I want, feel obligated even, to explain it. Especially since I am pre-transition, and will not be able to transition for YEARS even, as I am very young, going back to school, broke, and do not have my life really "started" yet (I'm still living at home, even). I live in a conservative area and can't be "out" publically at work and would be constantly misgendered even if I was because of my body. It is exhausting and upsetting to be called "she, her, ma'am, miss" day after day after day, so many hundreds of times, when I'm not a girl!! That is why I don't just want, but need to transition. That's why trans people feel the way they do, about uniting body and soul to truly outwardly express their gender besides just "feeling that way despite their bodies".

Whew, that was a long post. I hope it was educational to anyone reading it!! Do ask questions if you have any more or if you want clarification!!

 

[Yama]

tl;dr for my last post--"society" (the majority of individuals in our culture) is not going to stop visually gendering people on sight based on stereotypes any time soon, so trans people transition not only to make themselves more comfortable, but so that they are also correctly gendered/identified by others without having to be misgendered and made uncomfortable every time they leave the house.

 

[greenfairy]

[MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION]: Those are basically all my coherent thoughts on the matter plus some more which make it fit together. That actually makes the most sense of anything. Great way of looking at it.
[MENTION=23583]21lux[/MENTION]: That was an educational post and I appreciate it. The bit about being misgendered makes a lot of sense (though I did read your entire post). Unfortunately our society's tendency to gender people at all forces us to sometimes misgender people, because if you assume the wrong one for a cis person who looks kind of like the other gender it is another huge social faux paux, like the man you mentioned with the high pitched voice. A man with long hair who looks sort of ambiguous could be trans but it seems offensive to call him Ma'am just based on him looking effeminate. Once again I think we just need to be more gender neutral in our interactions until we know how a person identifies.

 

[Coriolis]

[Unfortunately our society's tendency to gender people at all forces us to sometimes misgender people, because if you assume the wrong one for a cis person who looks kind of like the other gender it is another huge social faux paux, like the man you mentioned with the high pitched voice. A man with long hair who looks sort of ambiguous could be trans but it seems offensive to call him Ma'am just based on him looking effeminate. Once again I think we just need to be more gender neutral in our interactions until we know how a person identifies.

Exactly. People get misgendered so often only because our language has gender, mainly in pronouns and polite address (Sir/Ma'am, Mr/Ms). We could replace all of this with neutral language, as in the second Star Trek movie where all superior officers were called "Sir" regardless of gender. Or, we can simply get used to correcting people and being corrected, the way women always had to clarify Miss vs. Mrs, before Ms. became commonplace.

I have often been mistaken for male online, and to be honest, I don't really care. Unless I'm trying to emphasize personal experience with something distinctly female, like having one's period, it doesn't matter. To refer back to my previous post, I draw many attributes from the masculine bucket, so what's the real me? Yes, I'm female, and I look and sound female, so I don't get called by male pronouns or titles IRL. I do have people look at me, see "female", and make all sorts of assumptions about what I like, how I am, and what I do. This is far more annoying and offensive than calling me "sir" by mistake. I care less what you call me than how you treat me. If you are respectful, hear me out, and treat me fairly, that's all I ask.

We live in a society where if you look like a certain gender, sound like one, dress like one, etc. you will be misgendered. This can be upsetting to trans people because it reminds them of something they are not. Hell, you can even look the part, but as soon as you open your mouth if you don't sound the part there's a high chance that whoever you're talking to might refer to you as the gender you "sound like". I've seen it happen many times and the wince of pain in those people's faces is kind of heartbreaking.

Do you think it is worse to be misgendered than to have someone mistake you for something else you are not? For instance to mistake your ethnic origin, religion, job (e.g. woman boss assumed to be the secretary), or even getting your name wrong?

People in our society can be very judgmental, and sometimes, passing just is not enough.

This is the real problem. If people stop being judgmental on many counts, how much of this problem (misgendering) would go away?

It is exhausting and upsetting to be called "she, her, ma'am, miss" day after day after day, so many hundreds of times, when I'm not a girl!! That is why I don't just want, but need to transition. That's why trans people feel the way they do, about uniting body and soul to truly outwardly express their gender besides just "feeling that way despite their bodies".!

What tells you that you are a guy and not a girl? Put another way, what does it mean to you to be a guy and not a girl? Where do you draw the line between a masculine woman and a transman? Are souls masculine and feminine?

(I hope these questions don't sound judgmental or nosy. Feel free not to answer. I've really had a hard time understanding how/why people of either gender/sex, cis/trans or other, identify that strongly with gender. I appreciate how forthright you have been in sharing your experience, so thought you might be able to shed some light on this.)

 

[greenfairy]

What tells you that you are a guy and not a girl? Put another way, what does it mean to you to be a guy and not a girl? Where do you draw the line between a masculine woman and a transman? Are souls masculine and feminine?

(I hope these questions don't sound judgmental or nosy. Feel free not to answer. I've really had a hard time understanding how/why people of either gender/sex, cis/trans or other, identify that strongly with gender. I appreciate how forthright you have been in sharing your experience, so thought you might be able to shed some light on this.)

This has been part of my question.

 

[Yama]

Do you think it is worse to be misgendered than to have someone mistake you for something else you are not? For instance to mistake your ethnic origin, religion, job (e.g. woman boss assumed to be the secretary), or even getting your name wrong?

I think that depends on the person. The thing about women bosses being assumed to be secretaries is very offensive to some, and would be to me too if I was a woman boss assumed to be a secretary. I don't really know if it's "worse" or not since I think that's a subjective, case-to-case, depending-on-the-individual sort of matter. For me, the gender thing would be the worst, of course, but for others, maybe not.

If people stop being judgmental on many counts, how much of this problem (misgendering) would go away?

I'd say a lot of it. However, language does have its limits. There are some English professors who insist "they" cannot be used as a neutral singular pronoun and only plural. But how many times have you heard someone say something like, "Oh, you made a new friend? How are they? What's their name?" So I think that's bs lol, we use it all the time that way! I think the real thing we need to do is just stop assuming someone is a certain gender on sight just because they look like it, and get into the habit of asking for pronouns and using neutral pronouns until we know the right ones, even if you're cis. Normalize it! That way no one gets left out, including nonbinary folk who may want to be referred to with only neutral pronouns but could appear as either gender to others.

What tells you that you are a guy and not a girl? Put another way, what does it mean to you to be a guy and not a girl? Where do you draw the line between a masculine woman and a transman? Are souls masculine and feminine?

Hmm... it's kind of tough to explain. It's kind of akin to how one "knows" that they are gay or asexual etc. You just kind of... feel that way, you feel that it's right, and you feel relieved and comfortable when you and others accept that about yourself. For some the realization comes later than others (I mean, Bruce Jenner's not the only one who's come out this late), but it doesn't mean that they "just" became trans... it just means it took a lot longer for them to realize it and accept it in themselves, before becoming comfortable enough to tell other people. Kind of like how some people who are gay are scared of the social stigma and internalized prejudice and try to tell themselves they're not, but like... they are, and eventually they won't be able to keep suppressing it. Does this make any sense at all? I'm not sure how well a job I'm doing of explaining it. Basically, you just kind of "know" in the same sense that someone would "know" if they're gay. If one must ask, "Well, how do you know if you're gay?" I'd say... the same way you know if you're straight! You just are, it's just how you were born. It's also kind of a funny question for me because, despite definitely identifying as male, I have a lot of "stereotypically feminine" interests. But I still strongly identify as a male. Some people would call this "femboy"? I don't think it makes me any less "masculine"

The line between a masculine woman and a transman is this: A masculine woman is a woman, she sees herself as a "she", and she just has interests that society labels as masculine. In other cultures, those interests (including how to dress, like if they're butch and like the short hair etc) could easily be labelled "feminine". It's a cultural thing. On the other hand, the transman would, well, be a man, identify as a "he", but was not born with the biological parts that are equated with that. This is why it's important for us to teach the youths the difference between sex and gender, I think. I think it's also important that we teach the young'uns acceptance from a young age... so many people realizing they're trans or gay or whatnot in their teens and even later because they've had to suppress it, because they've been taught that it's "wrong" and that "god doesn't make mistakes" and all that. For some, these realizations are slow; for others, not so much. There are plenty of children who are like 4 or 5 who already know they're trans, and I'm like woah, your parents did a good job of not forcing gender roles onto you if you were able to discover yourself at such a young age.

(I hope these questions don't sound judgmental or nosy. Feel free not to answer. I've really had a hard time understanding how/why people of either gender/sex, cis/trans or other, identify that strongly with gender. I appreciate how forthright you have been in sharing your experience, so thought you might be able to shed some light on this.)

They don't, you're fine!! I did invite more questions after all. I love having polite open-minded discussions with people. Feel free to ask even more questions! I'm not sure how clear some of my answers have been, but I'll do my best to expand further if needed!

 

[Coriolis]

I think that depends on the person. The thing about women bosses being assumed to be secretaries is very offensive to some, and would be to me too if I was a woman boss assumed to be a secretary. I don't really know if it's "worse" or not since I think that's a subjective, case-to-case, depending-on-the-individual sort of matter. For me, the gender thing would be the worst, of course, but for others, maybe not.

This makes sense. I know many people are more sensitive to being misgendered than I am, but I would be very peeved to be taken for the secretary - except for when I actually worked as one.

I think the real thing we need to do is just stop assuming someone is a certain gender on sight just because they look like it, and get into the habit of asking for pronouns and using neutral pronouns until we know the right ones, even if you're cis. Normalize it! That way no one gets left out, including nonbinary folk who may want to be referred to with only neutral pronouns but could appear as either gender to others.

Until we have a neutral pronoun in common usage (other than "it"), this seems the best we can do. I don't mind people assuming one at the outset and having to correct them, just as for years I have had to correct people on the proper spelling and pronunciation of my last name.

Hmm... it's kind of tough to explain. It's kind of akin to how one "knows" that they are gay or asexual etc. You just kind of... feel that way, you feel that it's right, and you feel relieved and comfortable when you and others accept that about yourself. For some the realization comes later than others (I mean, Bruce Jenner's not the only one who's come out this late), but it doesn't mean that they "just" became trans... it just means it took a lot longer for them to realize it and accept it in themselves, before becoming comfortable enough to tell other people. Kind of like how some people who are gay are scared of the social stigma and internalized prejudice and try to tell themselves they're not, but like... they are, and eventually they won't be able to keep suppressing it. Does this make any sense at all? I'm not sure how well a job I'm doing of explaining it. Basically, you just kind of "know" in the same sense that someone would "know" if they're gay. If one must ask, "Well, how do you know if you're gay?" I'd say... the same way you know if you're straight! You just are, it's just how you were born. It's also kind of a funny question for me because, despite definitely identifying as male, I have a lot of "stereotypically feminine" interests. But I still strongly identify as a male. Some people would call this "femboy"? I don't think it makes me any less "masculine"

I would think it is much easier to tell whether you are gay, straight, bi or not: just look at who you are attracted to. Since sexual attraction is distinct from gender, the same process doesn't necessarily apply. Are you saying that "feeling like you are a man" means you identify with things typically associated with men? These associations are largely social and cultural, though, not physiological as sexual attraction seems to be. Would you feel like a man in a culture that largely reverses the male/female stereotypes we have in the west? How can someone "just be born" to fit a set of human-made expectations and assumptions? Or do you think gender is deeper than that, and really is inborn? What would that suggest about its connection with physiology?

The line between a masculine woman and a transman is this: A masculine woman is a woman, she sees herself as a "she", and she just has interests that society labels as masculine. In other cultures, those interests (including how to dress, like if they're butch and like the short hair etc) could easily be labelled "feminine". It's a cultural thing. On the other hand, the transman would, well, be a man, identify as a "he", but was not born with the biological parts that are equated with that.

There is a difference between seeing oneself as a "she" and not minding being called "she". I would put myself in the second category. I see myself as a "me". When I was younger, I sometimes wished I was male, but only because men and boys seemed to have more fun, and more options open to them. By the time I was in high school, I realized sex/gender wasn't the barrier I had thought, and I really could do whatever I wanted in female form. After that I didn't care, which makes me certainly not trans, but not someone overly tied to a gender identity either. So, what is the difference between having masculine qualities and wanting to do masculine things, and actually feeling like a man? It sounds like we both accept the idea that someone considered male from birth can be content being male, while also preferring to do feminine things and present himself as rather feminine. What then would be the basis for such a person's identification as male?

 

[Yama]

Until we have a neutral pronoun in common usage (other than "it"), this seems the best we can do. I don't mind people assuming one at the outset and having to correct them, just as for years I have had to correct people on the proper spelling and pronunciation of my last name.

Oh, me too. My last name is always mispronounced, but I don't mind it. It is a very weird last name.

I would think it is much easier to tell whether you are gay, straight, bi or not: just look at who you are attracted to. Since sexual attraction is distinct from gender, the same process doesn't necessarily apply. Are you saying that "feeling like you are a man" means you identify with things typically associated with men? These associations are largely social and cultural, though, not physiological as sexual attraction seems to be. Would you feel like a man in a culture that largely reverses the male/female stereotypes we have in the west? How can someone "just be born" to fit a set of human-made expectations and assumptions? Or do you think gender is deeper than that, and really is inborn? What would that suggest about its connection with physiology?

Sorry, I didn't mean the process was necessarily the same; yes, they [gender and sexual attraction] are completely distinct. I just meant to say that I think the gender you identify with is similar to it in the sense that you're "born that way" and it's not really a choice. It's also an interesting question, to know if our society's gender stereotypes were different, would trans people still identify the way they do? This is basically the nature vs nurture thing, I think. I'd love to see someone do some sort of research on this!! I think part of gender is identifying with stereotypes and social roles, yes, and another part of it is physiology. For now (until we learn more about it) I would say that I think a large part of gender is "inborn", but it is definitely affected by culture. That's really got me interested now, if a trans person would still be trans if they were born into a culture with swapped gender ideals/stereotypes/etc. I do think physiology is a strong part of it, so possibly, but then again, who knows? Omg I really want someone to do a study about this so bad now. You've got me seriously super interested. Lucky me, I just applied to go back to school and get a degree in sociology, so maybe I'll do the study myself one day

There is a difference between seeing oneself as a "she" and not minding being called "she". I would put myself in the second category. I see myself as a "me". When I was younger, I sometimes wished I was male, but only because men and boys seemed to have more fun, and more options open to them. By the time I was in high school, I realized sex/gender wasn't the barrier I had thought, and I really could do whatever I wanted in female form. After that I didn't care, which makes me certainly not trans, but not someone overly tied to a gender identity either. So, what is the difference between having masculine qualities and wanting to do masculine things, and actually feeling like a man? It sounds like we both accept the idea that someone considered male from birth can be content being male, while also preferring to do feminine things and present himself as rather feminine. What then would be the basis for such a person's identification as male?

I know there are some trans people who don't want to transition, but for the ones that do, body dysphoria is a pretty serious thing. Feeling like they were born in the wrong body. I've had this a few times--it's a lot stronger than "Oh, if only, that would be nice..." and more of a panicky feeling like you're suffocating because you feel "trapped" and there's literally nothing you can do about it (in a matter of minutes, anyway. And transitioning will take a lot of time and a lot of money). For the ones who are okay with not transitioning--not 100% certain; like I said earlier I'm fine with or without the bottom half of me, and will transition that if I can ever get the money to do so without going broke, but if that's later rather than sooner, fine, whatever. It's the top that really bothers me and causes me dysphoria problems the most.

So, I would say, at least some levels of body dysphoria along with not only "minding" but preferring said gender's pronouns, assigned societal values, assigned gender stereotypes, etc. Although this does not mean completely abandoning the ones of your birth gender either. A trans person would not only 'not mind' being seen as the gender they identify with, but need it, and reject or even be repulsed by being mistaken for their assigned birth gender. Someone can not mind being misgendered and still identify as their birth gender, although I think for trans folk, because of all of the social stigma and inner battling and such that they often go through before accepting themselves (and asking others to do the same), being misgendered feels physically painful to them, even. Basically, your mind says "I am this gender", but your body parts would say otherwise, and for the most part society would say otherwise, and there's a lot of sadness, and in bad cases where the person is being told that what they feel isn't feel, shame and disgust.

 

[greenfairy]

I know there are some trans people who don't want to transition, but for the ones that do, body dysphoria is a pretty serious thing. Feeling like they were born in the wrong body. I've had this a few times--it's a lot stronger than "Oh, if only, that would be nice..." and more of a panicky feeling like you're suffocating because you feel "trapped" and there's literally nothing you can do about it (in a matter of minutes, anyway. And transitioning will take a lot of time and a lot of money). For the ones who are okay with not transitioning--not 100% certain; like I said earlier I'm fine with or without the bottom half of me, and will transition that if I can ever get the money to do so without going broke, but if that's later rather than sooner, fine, whatever. It's the top that really bothers me and causes me dysphoria problems the most.

So, I would say, at least some levels of body dysphoria along with not only "minding" but preferring said gender's pronouns, assigned societal values, assigned gender stereotypes, etc. Although this does not mean completely abandoning the ones of your birth gender either. A trans person would not only 'not mind' being seen as the gender they identify with, but need it, and reject or even be repulsed by being mistaken for their assigned birth gender. Someone can not mind being misgendered and still identify as their birth gender, although I think for trans folk, because of all of the social stigma and inner battling and such that they often go through before accepting themselves (and asking others to do the same), being misgendered feels physically painful to them, even. Basically, your mind says "I am this gender", but your body parts would say otherwise, and for the most part society would say otherwise, and there's a lot of sadness, and in bad cases where the person is being told that what they feel isn't feel, shame and disgust.

I can certainly understand this, but I was wondering: if you ask a cis straight man what he would do if he suddenly became female 9 times out of 10 say he would say he would look at himself in the mirror and touch himself and masturbate and stuff. I would turn myself on if I became a man I think because I'm attracted to men. Heck, I'm attracted to women too and I turn myself on as a woman. So I know being attracted to something and having it are different because being attracted to and sexual with something involves a sort of complimentarity, of polarities interacting in harmony apart from gender things, but can you identify with this at all? I don't know your sexual orientation, but if you are attracted to women can you find your body erotic?

 

[Totenkindly]

Uggh. Not in that situation. It's actually almost something that has to be worked through after the fact.