Gender and Gender Identity

[Switch]

nahhhhhhhh im a male who was designated female at birth

dfab more like dfabulous am i right :3c

[AppleMango]

she's referring to the fact that Shienvien has stated before that they believe that male and female should only refer to sex and that i shouldn't call myself male because that's not what my sex is. also that i shouldn't choose to call myself designated female at birth either because apparently im actually just female.

I'm still a bit confused...

Also I'm aware that things that I'm about to say may be offensive or upsetting, I don't mean them that way at all and I'm very sorry if they upset you.

 

If you're talking about your sex, I agree that yes you should only be saying that you're female, but the only time that this would be relevant is somewhere like the Doctor, when they need to know things like that to be able to treat you effectively.

 

If you're talking to people on the street, or like someone you just met at a party, then you can say your gender, and if you decide that that's male, then you tell them you're male.

It's none of their business if you're transgender or not and it's entirely up to you if you wish to let people know or not.

[Shienvien]

I'd personally go even further and rift sex even further - and indeed go as far as to make it so that male/female do not refer to gender at all. (With man/woman always referring to gender, and never sex in return.) It feels very odd to me to refer to a human being as female/male outside of very specific circumstances, anyway, and I've heard other people mention that "males" and "females" in reference to people makes them think of seeing humans as cattle.

 

But yes, I agree and have always said - a random person on the street has *no* business knowing what is or isn't or has been or will be between your legs.

 

@Switch:

Which brings the question "what is a mab?".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Mab

...Huh.

[Obscure_Trash]

I'm still a bit confused...

Also I'm aware that things that I'm about to say may be offensive or upsetting, I don't mean them that way at all and I'm very sorry if they upset you.

 

If you're talking about your sex, I agree that yes you should only be saying that you're female, but the only time that this would be relevant is somewhere like the Doctor, when they need to know things like that to be able to treat you effectively.

 

If you're talking to people on the street, or like someone you just met at a party, then you can say your gender, and if you decide that that's male, then you tell them you're male.

It's none of their business if you're transgender or not and it's entirely up to you if you wish to let people know or not.

That video is wrong. Gender and sex are the same. Unfortunately, in an attempt to simplify the issue of gender, it started going around that sex = biology and gender = social. But this oversimplification is incorrect and misleading.

 

Saying that sex and gender are different implies that trans people and other nonbinary people are "really" male/female rather than their actual gender. It's transphobic at best.

 

Why the simplification happened is understandable, but it's really time for the simplification to go away. I don't think we'll ever be able to appropriately or easily describe how we identify with any gender. And yeah, it really sucks because we hate not understanding things, but not understanding something or not being able to explain it doesn't make it not real or natural.

 

People argue to keep sex =/= gender as a concept for many reasons that have many solutions. For example, medical care. Male/gender is already a gross oversimplification that does not give doctors any accurate information about your medical history. If necessary, listing more specifics could take the place of checking off "male" or "female". Besides, there are already doctors that are trans friendly and allow patients to mark their true gender, not based on outdated "science" that is harmful to trans people. Ex. is the story of a trans woman who has marked their papers as woman. On a routine checkup, the doctor asked about their last menstruation cycle and they simply said "I'm trans" and the questions were changed to apply to them as a patient.

 

But saying that trans men are "really female" aka "biologically female" or that trans women are "really male" aka "biologically male" is an act of violence against trans people. It deligitimizes trans issues. It is psychological and mental harm. It benefits a system that actively harms and hurts trans people.

 

dfab more like dfabulous am i right :3c

 

oh my goooooooosh perfect play on words lol xP

[Shienvien]

Saying that sex and gender are different implies that trans people and other nonbinary people are "really" ...

No. That is an assertion you make, and not at all what I have been saying.

 

More specifically, I made this statement:

"saying sex = things in your abdomen and between your legs and gender = brain wiring is oversimplification, obviously, but it is mostly serviceable"

 

Both sex and gender are physical and equally real. Gender roles are social construct (and I tell you, I've taken plenty of flak for that in the past, which is partly why I always point it out when the topic comes up), gender itself is not.

 

You can literally just examine a person's brain and you'll know with almost absolute certainty whether they are (that is, identify as) trans without asking first. There was a rather in-depth article linked on it back when one of our trans men was trying to explain it, too...

[Switch]

dfab more like dfabulous am i right :3c

 

oh my goooooooosh perfect play on words lol xP

thankie c;

 

look im not really sure whats going on with the gender vs sex argument rn but all im sayin is i just want to be called male and not female alright it's really mentally uncomfortable for me otherwise

Edited March 15, 2015 by Switch

[Shienvien]

look im not really sure whats going on with the gender vs sex argument rn but all im sayin is i just want to be called male and not female alright it's really mentally uncomfortable for me otherwise

I ain't gonna call you anything; you are just you are just Switch. Calling people words is not polite.

 

Edit: Just out of curiosity, I assume you don't have any issues with being referred to as a guy/man?

 

(In the end, I was just clarifying that I personally am using these words this way to make what I was saying easier to understand as intended for people who have not been following the thread...)

Edited March 15, 2015 by Shienvien

[AppleMango]

That video is wrong. Gender and sex are the same. Unfortunately, in an attempt to simplify the issue of gender, it started going around that sex = biology and gender = social. But this oversimplification is incorrect and misleading.

 

Saying that sex and gender are different implies that trans people and other nonbinary people are "really" male/female rather than their actual gender. It's transphobic at best.

 

Why the simplification happened is understandable, but it's really time for the simplification to go away. I don't think we'll ever be able to appropriately or easily describe how we identify with any gender. And yeah, it really sucks because we hate not understanding things, but not understanding something or not being able to explain it doesn't make it not real or natural.

 

People argue to keep sex =/= gender as a concept for many reasons that have many solutions. For example, medical care. Male/gender is already a gross oversimplification that does not give doctors any accurate information about your medical history. If necessary, listing more specifics could take the place of checking off "male" or "female". Besides, there are already doctors that are trans friendly and allow patients to mark their true gender, not based on outdated "science" that is harmful to trans people. Ex. is the story of a trans woman who has marked their papers as woman. On a routine checkup, the doctor asked about their last menstruation cycle and they simply said "I'm trans" and the questions were changed to apply to them as a patient.

 

But saying that trans men are "really female" aka "biologically female" or that trans women are "really male" aka "biologically male" is an act of violence against trans people. It deligitimizes trans issues. It is psychological and mental harm. It benefits a system that actively harms and hurts trans people.

 

dfab more like dfabulous am i right :3c

 

oh my goooooooosh perfect play on words lol xP

I understand your point of view completely, but I'm really sorry I can't change my view from sex and gender being different. If I do, it gets a bit confusing for me, and if I have too much trouble understanding it then it's a lot harder for me to accept it.

 

For example, there was a girl at my school and she always dressed in the boys uniform, she always made me a bit uncomfortable and stuff, but as soon as I found out he was trans, and was actually a boy, I was a lot more comfortable. By a lot more comfortable I mean they were just another boy at my school and he had no effect on me whatsoever.

 

I don't use it that way because I think you're not really a female, if you say you're a female, then you're 100% a female to me, if you tell me you're a male you're 100% a male to me.

 

Like, would you call this person a female?

No, you wouldn't. He is obviously a man.

Wanting different words for sex and gender is ridiculous.

[Obscure_Trash]

I understand your point of view completely, but I'm really sorry I can't change my view from sex and gender being different. If I do, it gets a bit confusing for me, and if I have too much trouble understanding it then it's a lot harder for me to accept it.

But why do you have to understand something to accept it?

 

Like, would you call this person a female?

 

I would not call them anything until they told me their pronouns/name. From the looks of that picture, I'm guessing it's from the Plett bathroom bills protests so the point is supposed to be that they are a man being forced to use a woman's bathroom. The point of those protests hinges on trans people "passing" (ie "looking" like their gender). While I agree Plett's bathroom bill is transphobic and extremely dangerous for trans people, saying that someone has to "look" a gender is also harmful and transphobic because certain genders do not look a certain way and should not have to. You can't judge someone's gender just by looking at them. Gender has no look. If someone is a woman, then their look is that of a woman, no matter their facial structure, body hair, or clothes.

[Shienvien]

Like, would you call this person a female?

No, you wouldn't. He is obviously a man.

By the secondary physical characteristics, it looks more like a male to me. "Obviously a man?" No. From all that I know, it might be a woman. Woman or man, they are allowed to wear and look like whatever they want.

 

As a sidenote, I wore pants when I graduated highschool, and I'm a woman. Yes, pants are perfectly OK for women to wear to prom, and it doesn't make them the slightest bit "strange". If my parents/school allowed, I'd also have worn the guys' uniforms those years when I was in a school that had uniforms, too, since I positively hated the skirts/dresses girls had to wear.

Edited March 15, 2015 by Shienvien

[AppleMango]

But why do you have to understand something to accept it?

 

 

 

I would not call them anything until they told me their pronouns/name. From the looks of that picture, I'm guessing it's from the Plett bathroom bills protests so the point is supposed to be that they are a man being forced to use a woman's bathroom. The point of those protests hinges on trans people "passing" (ie "looking" like their gender). While I agree Plett's bathroom bill is transphobic and extremely dangerous for trans people, saying that someone has to "look" a gender is also harmful and transphobic because certain genders do not look a certain way and should not have to. You can't judge someone's gender just by looking at them. Gender has no look. If someone is a woman, then their look is that of a woman, no matter their facial structure, body hair, or clothes.

You don't, but for me personally, it's a lot easier to accept things I understand.

 

You have a good point there, but for some things you need to make the assumption. (Well, don't need to maybe, but do.)

I know you can use things such as "they" but once I was unsure of someone's gender, so I used they and they got angry at me. I make an assumption and use he/she, and if I'm wrong, then I apologize and use the correct pronoun.

I really don't know enough about the Plett bathroom thing to discuss it. :/

 

I don't mean to upset people with my views, it's just how I feel about things.

[S0ren]

I was AFAB, am in transition to be read as male, but have a pretty neutral gender identity. I use either he/him or they/them.

[KaelaBoo24]

I'm a cisgender female. I always thought of sex being the parts you were born with and gender as what you identify as, but recently I've seen that it can be much more complicated than that.

Edited March 18, 2015 by KaelaBoo24

[rabbithaver]

i don't really know how i feel about this argument because i can see both sides of it. like, it's easier for some people to understand it if sex is defined as biology and gender is defined by your mentality, and i feel we should respect that to some degree because there are neurodivergent people who struggle with this kind of thing. it does, in a way, make the trans movement more accessible to disabled people. i agree, however, that it is inherently harmful. i can see how it would be, anywho. it's almost like we need to redefine sex to also mean gender, and use other words to refer to genitals (as well as have more awareness for intersex people). i dunno. sorry if i offended anyone! that's really not my intent.

[shadoxfoxspirit]

Skimmed a few pages of this thread and all I can say is my brain hurts. Let me start by informing you that I am a male to female transgender. I am already in the process of transitioning and have been on my hormones almost 2 months now. All this Gender vs Sex nonsense is exactly why Lawmakers (In the US) want to ban us Transgendered humans from using bathrooms (which is apparently a choice?). I am every bit as female as any other female on the planet, BUT the idea that Gender and Sex are the same is a huge driving factor in Transphobia. Transphobes think that because I have male parts (that I'd rather not have) I am and will always be a male until I get SRS (Sexual Reassignment Surgery). This idea is what drives the social stigma around Transgendered persons and puts all of our safety at risk while also making us appear as sub-human. Myself and other Transpersons' just want to fit in with the rest of society in the genders we feel appropriate (contrary to the beliefs of many people that we just cross-dress to prey on women). I could go into all the laws that discriminate against us or the difficulties of actually changing ones gender on everything but that would take up many pages. If any of you have specific questions I am more than willing to answer them, but please keep in mind to refer to me in female pronouns ^.^

[rabbithaver]

Skimmed a few pages of this thread and all I can say is my brain hurts. Let me start by informing you that I am a male to female transgender. I am already in the process of transitioning and have been on my hormones almost 2 months now. All this Gender vs Sex nonsense is exactly why Lawmakers (In the US) want to ban us Transgendered humans from using bathrooms (which is apparently a choice?). I am every bit as female as any other female on the planet, BUT the idea that Gender and Sex are the same is a huge driving factor in Transphobia. Transphobes think that because I have male parts (that I'd rather not have) I am and will always be a male until I get SRS (Sexual Reassignment Surgery). This idea is what drives the social stigma around Transgendered persons and puts all of our safety at risk while also making us appear as sub-human. Myself and other Transpersons' just want to fit in with the rest of society in the genders we feel appropriate (contrary to the beliefs of many people that we just cross-dress to prey on women). I could go into all the laws that discriminate against us or the difficulties of actually changing ones gender on everything but that would take up many pages. If any of you have specific questions I am more than willing to answer them, but please keep in mind to refer to me in female pronouns ^.^

This is something I didn't think about in my last post. You make an excellent point. Though I'm still concerned about neurodivergent folks who struggle with the difference between assigned gender and actual gender, not out of transphobia but because of developmental or learning disabilities.

 

Also, hate to be a pest, but transgendered isn't a word. Since transgender is an adjective, not a verb, there's not a past-tense version of it. It's cool if english isn't your first language, though.

[Lady_Lunevis]

i apologise for the sudden intrusion, but i've been skimming through here for a while and been very curious.

 

i'm currently learning french, and as far as i know there's no they / them pronouns in french, only il/ellle/ils/elles. what pronouns would a person that identifies as they / them use in gendered languages, if there is one?

 

there's been a lot of clashing views on tumblr on the subject, so i wanted to ask: what is your view on otherkin?

 

personally, my gender is best described as confused |D i use she/her since i was born female and i'm okay with that, but i'm fine with they/them as well. another pronoun i'm kinda leaning towards a lot of my friends don't believe even exists/don't accept as a thing, so,,, ok,,, i see,,,

Edited March 19, 2015 by Lady_Lunevis

[Obscure_Trash]

there's been a lot of clashing views on tumblr on the subject, so i wanted to ask: what is your view on otherkin?

Otherkin is not a gender. That doesn't mean it isn't a valid identity.

 

and i feel we should respect that to some degree because there are neurodivergent people who struggle with this kind of thing. it does, in a way, make the trans movement more accessible to disabled people.

 

The most I've heard on ableism with gender neutral pronouns is from disabled, neurodivergent, and/or neuroatypical people is that they wish people would stop using them as a shield to be transphobic. (And let's not forget there are disabled, neurodivergent, and/or neuratypical nonbinary people as well and they deserve a platform to speak about this.)

 

For people who truly need more accessibility with trans issues (which I do not agree includes having trouble with the definition of gender = sex - I think issues with that are more based in the fact that we're born and raised and taught in a cissexist culture and it's difficult for everyone to unlearn bigotry), that's certainly a discussion/s that should be had. Like many things having to be personally discussed with gender (for example, you likely don't know someone's pronouns without talking to them), some of these may have to be individual conversations. Other things are certainly things we should keep in mind and make sure are accessible. Since I am not disabled and these are, unfortunately, not discussions I see often, I cannot speak with any authority on what needs to be more accessible.

[rabbithaver]

Woop, actual otherkin here, and no, otherkin is not a gender. It's more of a spiritual experience for most, but is not the same as or really even similar to gender identity.

 

@SockPuppet Strangler: Well, I'm neurodivergent/neuroatypical to the point where it is a disability. I guess what I meant is that unlearning these cissexist and transphobic behaviors can be more difficult for us. Because of my ADHD and depression, I tend to forget things very easily. Unlearning these things can be hard for me, but for people who are on the autistic spectrum (I don't yet know for certain if I am, I'm going to receive a diagnosis/take a test to determine whether or not I'm an aspie--at this point, though, it's almost certain) it could be much harder. I dunno. The problem with saying "this is hard for x kinds of people to unlearn" is that for some it comes naturally, and for others they struggle immensely. I mean, I agree with you, don't get me wrong. These behaviors are really gross and problematic. They're also very hard for some people to change, so I feel there should be some leniency on the matter.

[Lady_Lunevis]

ahh, i'm sorry! do we have a separate thread for otherkin discussion, or is it okay to discuss in this one, then? OO:

 

Woop, actual otherkin here, and no, otherkin is not a gender. It's more of a spiritual experience for most, but is not the same as or really even similar to gender identity.

ahh--so do you use otherkin pronouns, then? i've always wondered about that since i identify with types of kin as well, and i've always heard mixed answers about using pronouns correlating with them.

[Obscure_Trash]

@SockPuppet Strangler: Well, I'm neurodivergent/neuroatypical to the point where it is a disability. I guess what I meant is that unlearning these cissexist and transphobic behaviors can be more difficult for us. Because of my ADHD and depression, I tend to forget things very easily. Unlearning these things can be hard for me, but for people who are on the autistic spectrum (I don't yet know for certain if I am, I'm going to receive a diagnosis/take a test to determine whether or not I'm an aspie--at this point, though, it's almost certain) it could be much harder. I dunno. The problem with saying "this is hard for x kinds of people to unlearn" is that for some it comes naturally, and for others they struggle immensely. I mean, I agree with you, don't get me wrong. These behaviors are really gross and problematic. They're also very hard for some people to change, so I feel there should be some leniency on the matter.

And I think that's a completely reasonable request that I respect. I also think there is a difference between struggling to learn a concept and messing up sometimes and outright denying being corrected. I don't mind at all if people slip up. It happens - and it does hurt sometimes - but if I see people are trying, that's worth a lot. Heck, I'll even understand being defensive in public (hey, human nature) but thinking about it in private and ending up changing public behaviors, as long as there's some kind of attempt. =3

Edited March 19, 2015 by SockPuppet Strangler

[rabbithaver]

ahh--so do you use otherkin pronouns, then? i've always wondered about that since i identify with types of kin as well, and i've always heard mixed answers about using pronouns correlating with them.

 

I don't. Some kin do. A couple pronouns are only usable by certain kintypes, like elfkin or whatnot. Since so many otherkin are also trans (I think about 45% of the population?), the argument that nounself and neopronouns are hurting the trans community strikes me as a bit...I don't know, counterintuitive.

 

@SockPuppet Strangler:

Oh, yeah, definitely. You can usually tell when people are just intentionally being transphobic.

Edited March 19, 2015 by oddinomaly

[Pixxelation]

(While we're on the subject) Since the last discussion a few pages ago, I've learned some more about otherkin and changed my opinion a little bit. I don't really care what someone identifies as, but I'm not willing to use neopronouns, myself, for a few reasons. The main one is that it's incredibly redundant and defeats the purpose of using an actual pronoun; pronouns are meant to refer to something in a short, highly generalized way, using a single characteristic. If we're going to be replacing that by just changing any noun into its own pronoun, it's counterintuitive linguistically, and sounds incredibly redundant. It also just doesn't sound like natural language to me, and isn't something that sounds "right" if used in a sentence. Plus, if pronouns were supposed to be by species, then wouldn't the only pronouns for humans be something along the lines of hum/hums/humself? Idk, it just doesn't flow in conversation for me, and seems too much of an effort to make one's identity visible. Not to mention that it could make it waaaay too hard to learn everyone's neopronouns.

 

On the subject of sex vs gender, I still think it's important to differentiate the two because of distinct biological differences that affect many things. Sexual dimorphism in humans goes way deeper than simply genitals and chests. Internal organs and hip (and other bone) structure are two differences that come to mind, which are extremely important for medical purposes. Using chromosomes doesn't work because a large portion of people aren't just XY or XX, and don't know because they never got tested.

[Obscure_Trash]

On the subject of sex vs gender, I still think it's important to differentiate the two because of distinct biological differences that affect many things. Sexual dimorphism in humans goes way deeper than simply genitals and chests. Internal organs and hip (and other bone) structure are two differences that come to mind, which are extremely important for medical purposes. Using chromosomes doesn't work because a large portion of people aren't just XY or XX, and don't know because they never got tested.

Yes, sexual dimorphism is more than just primary and secondary sexual characteristics. It's also a lot of things that are not represented by saying "male" or "female" just like implication of xx/xy chromosomes which is fairly commonly not even being true and rarely being tested for anyway. Which is why it is misleading and vague and therefore unnecessary to label people by "biological sex". You yourself are saying that biological differences go deeper, so why is it that "male" and "female" would be enough to describe these differences when medically necessary? XX/XY is often inaccurate just like male/female is. Why not list actual relevant medical detail?

Edited March 19, 2015 by SockPuppet Strangler

[Omega Entity]

Because if it's required to go by individual characteristics, you could be there all day describing what could be conveyed with a simple set of terms. Male/female are medical shorthand - an easy, simple way to convey the biological "norms", as it were (risks and illnesses related to the parts and body chemistry a person has, for instance), in regards to basic anatomy pertaining to those labels.

 

Using male/female to convey physical characteristics does not preclude one from expounding on those terms to describe aspects unique to the individual. It's not reducing a person to basic sex terminology, but rather gives a basic point of reference off of which to build.