Ok, so I think gender identity is a core part of a person's sense of self that forms at a relatively young age. The sense of self is a real thing, it can be documented and measured and it not delusion or imagination. I am sure you have a strong sense of self, we all do.Anyway, this is a sense of self that is genuine, very deeply held, persistent and fairly immutable. This sense of self/gender identity deeply and profoundly informs how a person behaves, appears, interacts with other individuals and institutions and their general relationship to the outside world. It does not mean that they conform to some sort of stereotypical behavior associated with a given sex or gender. In turn this outward expression of the gender self also has a major impact on how individuals and institutions view and interact with the person.
As for what renders a male a woman or a female a man, it is having this sense of self and therefore navigating the world with this identity all day every day.
My own understanding is that gender means the set of sexist stereotypes, sex roles and expectations associated with each of the two sexes in any given society that collectively constitute the norms of femininity and masculinity at present and historically or traditionally.
As far as I can figure it, gender identity in your view is a universally-held core component of the human sense of self or self-concept that’s based on, and built around, the set of sex stereotypes, roles and expectations for each of the two sexes considered normal and customary in the family and cultural milieu of one’s own upbringing and where one lives at present.
If that's not the case, please explain what I have gotten wrong.
BTW, I strongly agree with you that the human “sense of self is a real thing.”
I also very much agree that a person’s sense of self “deeply and profoundly informs how a person behaves, appears, interacts with other individuals and institutions and their general relationship to the outside world.”
I further strongly agree that sex stereotypes, roles and expectations are very real - and they are imposed on all of us in our formative years as well as later on, and we all have to deal with them to some extent as we go through life.
I just don’t think that everyone focuses so heavily on the sexist stereotypes, roles and expecations that collectively constitute gender, takes them so much to heart and sees them as of such enormous, overriding importance that these sexist steretoypes, roles and expectations are at the very core of every human being's fundamental sense of self the way you contend.
I believe most people have a definte awareness of their own sex, some more intensely than others - and for many of us, awareness of our own sex is a central component of our basic sense of self both generally and especially in specific situations and times/phases of life. But I don’t think being aware of one’s sex is the same as having a gender identity.
I have no problem recognizing that some people have a gender identity, and that their gender identity is at the core of their own sense of self, and it matters very much to them. But I have a problem with the notion that because some people have a gender identity, we all do.
I also have a problem with the view that because some people have a gender identity and their own personal gender identity really matters a great deal to them as individuals, then gender identity should be the main organizing principle or pillar that society is built around and laws and policies are based on.
I also disagree with the view that gender identity should supplant sex as the basis on which humans are categorized for sports participation, competition, rankings and records. And for purposes like health care, and the design and allocation of shared facilities outside the home such as toilets & washrooms, locker rooms, fitting & changing rooms, spas & bath houses, rape crisis centers, shelters, barracks, dorms rooms, bunk houses, hostels, hospitals, nursing homes, refugee camps and other places where people sleep, get undressed and are especially vulnerable to pervs and predators.
Well, that's just your opinion. It's not backed up by the neuroscience that shows that the human brain is sexually differentiated, or that the brains of MTFs and FTMs more closely resemble the brains of the gender that they say they are. Cisgender men and women, regardless of the extent to which their gender expression/personal interests conform to their sex assigned at birth, cannot begin to imagine having to live life with the secondary sex characteristics of members of the opposite sex. How do you think a cisgender woman would feel if she started growing a beard, and developing a deep masculine voice? How do you think a cisgender man would feel if he started growing breasts and hips, and a feminine higher pitch voice? Cisgender women who buck gender norms by becoming engineers, physicists, business owners etc. still do not want to live in the world as men, nor do they want the secondary sex characteristics of men. These differences are rooted in the brain, as is all human behavior. Are there social influences? Probably, but much less so in western countries in the 21st century than in any other place in modern history. And yet despite the fact that women have ample opportunities to participate in sports, become scientists, engineers, doctors, lawyers, business owners etc., there are still people assigned female at birth that identify as men, transition and are much happier. And there are still people assigned male at birth that strongly identify as women, transition, and are much happier.
Human beings have been transitioning since the 1940s and there is ample evidence that the overwhelming majority (I believe 98-99 %) do not regret transitioning and that they are much happier post transition. I am not going to share data here because others have shared countless peer-reviewed studies with you that back up exactly what I am saying.
If gender identity is just a bunch of sexist stereotypes being imposed on people, then why did David Reimer know that he was a boy despite being told he was a girl and being raised and socialized as one? It's not sexist to point out that generally speaking men are more masculine and women are more feminine. It is simply a correct observation of human behavior. You can call me whatever name you want, but reducing the differences between men and women to the version of sexual and reproductive organs with which they were born is inaccurate, and if we are truly being honest, we all know this. Like I said before someone's gender identity/expression is real, observable, neurologically based, and usually blatantly obvious.
I have no problem recognizing that some people have a gender identity, and that their gender identity is at the core of their own sense of self, and it matters very much to them. But I have a problem with the notion that because some people have a gender identity, we all do.
I don't have any known physical disability. Does that mean I don't have any "disability" status? That means I am "non-disabled." That's a status on its own.
Miltiadis Tentoglou is not referred to as "able bodied long jumper" 99% of the times. He is just a "long jumper." But when we discuss whether Marcus Rehm should be allowed to compete in the Olympics, we have to mention Rehm has jumped further than "able-bodied" jumpers like Tentoglou. Calling Tentoglou an "able-bodied" jumper is not a slur, nor an attempt to diminish him as some subcategory of long jumpers.
Likewise, cis women are called cis women only when the topic is about trans people. 99% of the time, they are simply referred to as "women." If you choose to think about trans people 99% of the time, that's a different matter.
what does any of this voluminous word salad have to do with trans women competing in women’s athletics?
It doesn't have to do with trans women competing in women's athletics, nor is is it a voluminous word salad. It's a pretty straight forward and easy to read response to one of RunRagged's numerous much lengthier posts.
I am still in the dark about what you really mean by “gender identity.”
…
I have no problem recognizing that some people have a gender identity, and that their gender identity is at the core of their own sense of self, and it matters very much to them. But I have a problem with the notion that because some people have a gender identity, we all do.
I also have a problem with the view that because some people have a gender identity and their own personal gender identity really matters a great deal to them as individuals, then gender identity should be the main organizing principle or pillar that society is built around and laws and policies are based on.
You have no conceivable reason to have a problem with the notion that you have a gender identity that is the same as your sex as opposed to insisting that you have no gender identity at all, a distinction without a difference for you personally, rather the only conceivable purpose is a disingenuous one, namely to serve as a stepping stone to the next argument of rejecting gender identity as an organizing pillar of society by claiming that not everyone has it.
You can be more honest and simply say that you are over-my-dead-body opposed to according gender identity first class status as opposed to caricaturing it and feigning an inability to understand it.
Would you feel the same way if his leg was an actual spring?
I don't know what you mean by this. Rehm should not be allowed to compete with able-bodied jumpers because his artificial leg gives him unfair advantage. IOC and World Athletics agree on this.
But if Rehm agrees to take off on his natural foot, he should be allowed to compete. Then his advantage will be cancelled off.
None of these changes my argument that calling Tentoglou "able-bodied" long jumper is not a slur.
I am still in the dark about what you really mean by “gender identity.” Because throughout your post you never actually define what the word “gender” in the phrase “gender identity” means in your view.
You also conflate a lot of different things in ways that I think end up muddying the waters rather than making your points crystal clear.
You start off saying that gender identity is a core part of the human sense of self, which seems to be a tacit way of acknowledging that you see the human sense of self and gender identity as two distinct albeit sometimes related things.
But very quickly you start speaking of the human sense of self and gender identity as though they were one and the same, using the term “sense of self/gender identity” and then abandoning the “sense of self” part entirely and speaking solely of “gender identity.” Then you switch to speaking of behavior and the “outward expression of the gender self.” And finally, you speak of “a non conforming gender identity.”
But you never say exactly what the “gender” in the phrase “gender identity” means in your view.
My own understanding is that gender means the set of sexist stereotypes, sex roles and expectations associated with each of the two sexes in any given society that collectively constitute the norms of femininity and masculinity at present and historically or traditionally.
As far as I can figure it, gender identity in your view is a universally-held core component of the human sense of self or self-concept that’s based on, and built around, the set of sex stereotypes, roles and expectations for each of the two sexes considered normal and customary in the family and cultural milieu of one’s own upbringing and where one lives at present.
If that's not the case, please explain what I have gotten wrong.
BTW, I strongly agree with you that the human “sense of self is a real thing.”
I also very much agree that a person’s sense of self “deeply and profoundly informs how a person behaves, appears, interacts with other individuals and institutions and their general relationship to the outside world.”
I further strongly agree that sex stereotypes, roles and expectations are very real - and they are imposed on all of us in our formative years as well as later on, and we all have to deal with them to some extent as we go through life.
I just don’t think that everyone focuses so heavily on the sexist stereotypes, roles and expecations that collectively constitute gender, takes them so much to heart and sees them as of such enormous, overriding importance that these sexist steretoypes, roles and expectations are at the very core of every human being's fundamental sense of self the way you contend.
I believe most people have a definte awareness of their own sex, some more intensely than others - and for many of us, awareness of our own sex is a central component of our basic sense of self both generally and especially in specific situations and times/phases of life. But I don’t think being aware of one’s sex is the same as having a gender identity.
I have no problem recognizing that some people have a gender identity, and that their gender identity is at the core of their own sense of self, and it matters very much to them. But I have a problem with the notion that because some people have a gender identity, we all do.
I also have a problem with the view that because some people have a gender identity and their own personal gender identity really matters a great deal to them as individuals, then gender identity should be the main organizing principle or pillar that society is built around and laws and policies are based on.
I also disagree with the view that gender identity should supplant sex as the basis on which humans are categorized for sports participation, competition, rankings and records. And for purposes like health care, and the design and allocation of shared facilities outside the home such as toilets & washrooms, locker rooms, fitting & changing rooms, spas & bath houses, rape crisis centers, shelters, barracks, dorms rooms, bunk houses, hostels, hospitals, nursing homes, refugee camps and other places where people sleep, get undressed and are especially vulnerable to pervs and predators.
I’m not sure I can articulate any better than I’ve done already. I think when your gender and sex align, as it does for me and you, you can easily conflate the two parts of your “self.” You for example have a profound sense of self, and a big part of that is being female, being a woman. For you it’s one and the same. It’s not the only part of your self, of course, but it’s certainly major. We agree on this. I think for a trans person it’s not one and the same.
Now let’s do a thought experiment, I would venture to guess you would have this profound feeling of female sex/gender even if in a health catastrophe befell you as a child and you ended up having your ovaries and uterus removed (say because of a terrible cancer) and so you didn’t go through natural puberty and needed exogenous hormones. I don’t think you would feel any less a female or a woman today? Don’t you agree? I don’t think your self knows your chromosomes (maybe it does on some level) so what exactly is the wellspring of this profound feeling of femaleness/womeness? Where does it come from? My thesis is that what is left is what is experienced by a trans person and that it’s real and profound. They feel they are a woman just as you do even if you never had a uterus or ovaries. In the past you’ve cited examples of people claiming to be trans who are not. I’m sure this happens, though I doubt it’s common, but I’m referring to people who are truly trans. I agree with you about some of the people saying they are non binary and doing this more for sociocultural reasons than because of a true sense of self, but it’s very hard to sort this all out and in the end really we should accept people’s declarations of self unless we have hard evidence to the contrary, like we catch them living as a man.
Now as to whether or not the organizing principle in society should be sex or gender. Great question. Your position is pretty absolute on this issue, but mine is more flexible, but not absolute the other way. There are many examples in todays world that are both ways. I’m of the mind that in general terms of respect and dignity and human autonomy, the sense of self is MORE important than biological sex. The mind/brain is paramount to human existence. That being said, I acknowledge many of your arguments, but if it was left to me, I would like there to be compromise more than acrimony (it’s not left to me of course). In terms of sports, I’ve stated it over and over that I don’t think trans women should be allowed to compete in professional or even NCAA sports. My children are going to be mad at me for even going this far! I think the rules should be left to the governing bodies and not politicians. Where we painfully disagree about sports is around lower level sports. I’m not going to persuade you and I’m done trying, and you won’t persuade me about 7th grade soccer or even the 11th grade 1600. As for other places, spaces, it’s a case by case thing. Nobody wants to read my detailed opinions on bathrooms, etc.
I am still in the dark about what you really mean by “gender identity.”
…
I have no problem recognizing that some people have a gender identity, and that their gender identity is at the core of their own sense of self, and it matters very much to them. But I have a problem with the notion that because some people have a gender identity, we all do.
I also have a problem with the view that because some people have a gender identity and their own personal gender identity really matters a great deal to them as individuals, then gender identity should be the main organizing principle or pillar that society is built around and laws and policies are based on.
You have no conceivable reason to have a problem with the notion that you have a gender identity that is the same as your sex as opposed to insisting that you have no gender identity at all, a distinction without a difference for you personally, rather the only conceivable purpose is a disingenuous one, namely to serve as a stepping stone to the next argument of rejecting gender identity as an organizing pillar of society by claiming that not everyone has it.
You can be more honest and simply say that you are over-my-dead-body opposed to according gender identity first class status as opposed to caricaturing it and feigning an inability to understand it.
RunRagged had a very abusive male relative who claimed to be a trans woman. This person developed dementia and forgot that she/he transitioned before her/his death. That's why she harbors such strong hostility toward trans women. Maybe she believes every trans woman is like her abusive relative. So please understand where she comes from.
I am not sure of the determinants of this sense of gender identity, but I would not be surprised if there are biological ones, genetic, neural, developmental reasons. In the end, I also am not sure we can really ever know why people have a non conforming gender identity or if it is "real or not", but I am comfortable taking people's word for it and treat them accordingly.
You and I do not know the true cause of this, because we are not "experts" like GD. She has already explained to the rest of us that it is all about most modern queer theory. Another popular explanation is that males, especially white males, are trying to acquire the status of "marginalized" people (aka victims) by pretending to be women. That does not explain FtM trans people. But that does not seem to matter.
The bottom line is, some people do not want anything to remain unexplained. So when they face something that has not been fully explained, they just come up with some explanations and try to fit the reality into them. They fear unknown, so they want to feel secure by coming up with explanations that match their existing worldview.
I don’t love all the keyboard shouting and name calling, but the back and forth with GD and RR has caused me to reflect, read, discuss and think through these issues more than I’ve done in the past. So it’s not all bad. We have Lenny on the one hand who is of the mind that if you say you are a woman, you are one. I like the simplicity of this and it’s more in line with my values, but still should that person be allowed to defeat Hassan for the gold in Paris with no hormonal alterations at all? I guess I’m not for that. Then you have RR who says that a male is always a man, full stop, and no amount of lived experience or sense of self or anything will ever be enough to allow that person to participate in a women’s after work softball league.
I don’t love all the keyboard shouting and name calling, but the back and forth with GD and RR has caused me to reflect, read, discuss and think through these issues more than I’ve done in the past. So it’s not all bad. We have Lenny on the one hand who is of the mind that if you say you are a woman, you are one. I like the simplicity of this and it’s more in line with my values, but still should that person be allowed to defeat Hassan for the gold in Paris with no hormonal alterations at all? I guess I’m not for that. Then you have RR who says that a male is always a man, full stop, and no amount of lived experience or sense of self or anything will ever be enough to allow that person to participate in a women’s after work softball league.
Ok, on we go…..
I’m yet to hear a convincing argument for why or to who it is unfair if a participation policy results in the fraction of trans women medaling (relative to all trans women) being comparable to the fraction of cis women medaling in professional sport.
Agreed we don’t know how to design a policy targeting that outcome but if one accepts the fairness premise above, it’s a useful quantitative basis to find that the current WA and FINA policy is unfair to the trans group because even the trans-unsympathetic side agrees that the likelihood of anyone transitioning before puberty and remaining under 2.5 T for a couple years and still being competitive is practically 0. Going by empirical numbers in T&F at least, even the pre-2022 rules without the pre-pubertal requirement were clearly not (yet) skewed in favor of trans.
I don’t love all the keyboard shouting and name calling, but the back and forth with GD and RR has caused me to reflect, read, discuss and think through these issues more than I’ve done in the past. So it’s not all bad. We have Lenny on the one hand who is of the mind that if you say you are a woman, you are one. I like the simplicity of this and it’s more in line with my values, but still should that person be allowed to defeat Hassan for the gold in Paris with no hormonal alterations at all? I guess I’m not for that. Then you have RR who says that a male is always a man, full stop, and no amount of lived experience or sense of self or anything will ever be enough to allow that person to participate in a women’s after work softball league.
Ok, on we go…..
I’m yet to hear a convincing argument for why or to who it is unfair if a participation policy results in the fraction of trans women medaling (relative to all trans women) being comparable to the fraction of cis women medaling in professional sport.
Agreed we don’t know how to design a policy targeting that outcome but if one accepts the fairness premise above, it’s a useful quantitative basis to find that the current WA and FINA policy is unfair to the trans group because even the trans-unsympathetic side agrees that the likelihood of anyone transitioning before puberty and remaining under 2.5 T for a couple years and still being competitive is practically 0. Going by empirical numbers in T&F at least, even the pre-2022 rules without the pre-pubertal requirement were clearly not (yet) skewed in favor of trans.
The policy in place now is effectively a ban and everybody knows it. Yet, it’s still not enough for some.
You have no conceivable reason to have a problem with the notion that you have a gender identity that is the same as your sex as opposed to insisting that you have no gender identity at all, a distinction without a difference for you personally, rather the only conceivable purpose is a disingenuous one, namely to serve as a stepping stone to the next argument of rejecting gender identity as an organizing pillar of society by claiming that not everyone has it.
You can be more honest and simply say that you are over-my-dead-body opposed to according gender identity first class status as opposed to caricaturing it and feigning an inability to understand it.
RunRagged had a very abusive male relative who claimed to be a trans woman. This person developed dementia and forgot that she/he transitioned before her/his death. That's why she harbors such strong hostility toward trans women. Maybe she believes every trans woman is like her abusive relative. So please understand where she comes from.
I dunno if you think it's just me who makes unfair generalizations about entire population groups based on samples of one, or you think all women do this... But trust me, mate, just as I don't think ill of all men because of all the abusive and arsehole men I've encountered in my life, I don't "harbor hostility" towards all males who call themselves "trans women" because of one abusive male person in my extended family who announced he was a woman in his 40s after fathering 5 kids.
That family member is far from the only trans-identified male person I've known. The other ones I've known have run the whole gamut from being abusive, sexist, violent jerks to being lovely, kind, decent, gentle people.
It's just that I don't think any of these male people are actually women or that any one of them has ever had the foggiest idea what it means to "feel like a girl/woman" or "live like a woman."
I also don't think that it's fair for this group of males, or their "allies" like you, to keep demanding that the female half of the population forfeit our own hard-won rights to fairness, safety, privacy, dignity, comfort and wellbeing in order to make this group of male people happy.
I am all for accommodating, including and accepeting everyone in sports and society. But in my view, it's not fair or justifiable to accommodate males who feel discomfort with their own sex by taking away rights and protections from people who are female.
BTW, the abusive father of five in my extended family who announced he was a woman - and a lesbian - in his 40s and then forgot later on when he developed dementia had full "sex change surgery" aka orchiectomy and "penile inversion vaginoplasty" from Stanley Biber in Trinidad, CO. So in that respect he was more legitimately "trans" - aka "true trans"- than 99% of the adult males who call themselves "transwomen" today are.
But even after all that, when dementia hit, his supposedly deep-seated, immutable "woman gender identity" flew out the window and he was very angry, distressed and confused by the surgical changes he'd made to his body.
I also don't think that it's fair for this group of males, or their "allies" like you, to keep demanding that the female half of the population forfeit our own hard-won rights to fairness, safety, privacy, dignity, comfort and wellbeing in order to make this group of male people happy.
You and I do not know the true cause of this, because we are not "experts" like GD. She has already explained to the rest of us that it is all about most modern queer theory. Another popular explanation is that males, especially white males, are trying to acquire the status of "marginalized" people (aka victims) by pretending to be women. That does not explain FtM trans people. But that does not seem to matter.
The bottom line is, some people do not want anything to remain unexplained. So when they face something that has not been fully explained, they just come up with some explanations and try to fit the reality into them. They fear unknown, so they want to feel secure by coming up with explanations that match their existing worldview.
I don’t love all the keyboard shouting and name calling, but the back and forth with GD and RR has caused me to reflect, read, discuss and think through these issues more than I’ve done in the past. So it’s not all bad. We have Lenny on the one hand who is of the mind that if you say you are a woman, you are one. I like the simplicity of this and it’s more in line with my values, but still should that person be allowed to defeat Hassan for the gold in Paris with no hormonal alterations at all? I guess I’m not for that. Then you have RR who says that a male is always a man, full stop, and no amount of lived experience or sense of self or anything will ever be enough to allow that person to participate in a women’s after work softball league.
Ok, on we go…..
And only one of these opinions is actually based in objective truth...
It's just that I don't think any of these male people are actually women or that any one of them has ever had the foggiest idea what it means to "feel like a girl/woman" or "live like a woman."
I also don't think that it's fair for this group of males, or their "allies" like you, to keep demanding that the female half of the population forfeit our own hard-won rights to fairness, safety, privacy, dignity, comfort and wellbeing in order to make this group of male people happy.
RunRagged, do you honestly think that an MTF who self identifies as a girl from a young age, is socially accepted by her female peers as a girl, transitions at a young age, and goes on to live a "stealth" life as a woman in society for the rest of her life, has no idea what it's like to be a woman in society? Does a transgender boy who self identifies as a boy from a young age, transitions at a young age, and lives the rest of his life as a man, know what it's like to be a woman in society more than the aforementioned trans girl? What about a woman with XY androgen insensitivity disorder, who is assigned female at birth, identifies as a girl, and doesn't find out that she has XY chromosomes and lacks female reproductive organs until her teenage years, but continues to live her life as a woman? Does she have no idea what it's like to be a woman because she doesn't menstruate?
You seem to view women in the same way that right wing chauvinistic men do: walking uteruses and vaginas.
BTW, the abusive father of five in my extended family who announced he was a woman - and a lesbian - in his 40s and then forgot later on when he developed dementia had full "sex change surgery" aka orchiectomy and "penile inversion vaginoplasty" from Stanley Biber in Trinidad, CO. So in that respect he was more legitimately "trans" - aka "true trans"- than 99% of the adult males who call themselves "transwomen" today are.
But even after all that, when dementia hit, his supposedly deep-seated, immutable "woman gender identity" flew out the window and he was very angry, distressed and confused by the surgical changes he'd made to his body.
Sad as this person’s story is, I don’t understand its relevance to the broader argument, especially taking your word for your not generalizing based on a single data point. You also seem to be presenting their case to cast doubt on the legitimacy of their trans feelings, but people with dementia are known to no longer be able to remember their own children and lose much of their sense of self in ways that are neither fully understood nor uniform across individuals, so I don’t know why their trans identity ought to be indelible.
Ultimately everything one feels including one’s perception of one’s gender even for a cis person is through their central nervous system that is physically changing throughout’s one’s lifetime, and dramatically so under dementia.
If you need surgery, hormone therapy and other people to VALIDATE your identity, DO NOT like this is some natural part of human biology. Gay people don't need surgery or anything to be themselves. You can do you, but taking part of women sports is INSANITY it's too far. FORCING people to play along with people's delusions. You can identify with whatever you want, idc don't force me or ANYONE to go along with it. I am a liberal. This is fight is not Liberal vs Conservative. This Sane vs Insane.