Other How many genders?

[Idea]

I suppose you could argue that there could be a third gender if someone is born without their parts fully developed, half developed

I know I'm gonna sound like a know-it-all guy here, but technically speaking every animal on the planet is born with subdeveloped parts. it's why we have puberty.

 

[Pine]

Homosexuality for example has always existed, in men and animals, while non binary genders are a rarity to be found in history.

iirc, the only thing in old records are people that engaged in homosexual acts. as far as everyone was concerned, sexual orientation wasn't a thing until more recent history. i have no doubt that gay/bi/etc. people existed, but they just weren't called that, and they were probably forced into a myriad of het marriages out of obligation. like some sort of greece/rome thing was that adult men would have younger men specifically for sexual purposes, but as far as everyone was concerned, those men were still only attracted to women by their own definition.

similar to that, trans identities have evolved with the language. if you look into martha p. johnson, you'll find a lot of inconsistent information about if she was just a drag queen and still a man or if she really was a transwoman. this is because drag and trans used to be somewhat synonymous. we've since begun to make a distinction, and we're further fleshing out what "gender identity" truly encompasses. (the definition of trans itself is still being debated, since some nb people identify as trans and others do not.) also i reiterate that other cultures have had more than two genders for a longass time. the only one i regularly hear about it some native american culture has "two-spirit," which i'm 99% sure is having both the spirit of a man and a woman. but again, i feel that this is a matter of language evolving, and just like how i believe that other sexual orientations existed in the past, so too do i believe trans/nb genders existed. it's just difficult to explain a phenomenon when there literally isn't a name to put to it.

And finally yeah, I may never fully know what it feels to be non-binary, or female, or an elephant.

i'd also like to make the distinction of kin identities and gender identities, since it doesn't seem like most people on this thread are aware. kin identities and gender identities are separate things. im not an expert, but i think anyone who seriously says that they're an animal, are x fictional person, etc. are referring to their perceived existence as that person/animal/plant in a different universe via the multi-verse theory. i'd rather not get into my personal opinion on kin identities, but i thought it would be useful to know that it's pretty separate from trans identities and is varying levels of accepted and not accepted in the trans community. if anything, i'd venture to say it's mostly an unwelcome thing (esp. out of a reasonable fear that we won't be taken seriously because of them).

 

[Pine]

Genders are essential for human reproduction, and a deficiency in how you're born regarding your gender is not just something that makes you different, it's a desease and should be treated as such. It's a genetic error that could harm your life, not a funny gimmic.

i would argue that evolution comes from mutations. i doubt the basic male/female sex will ever be replaced in our species, but genetic errors ARE a naturally occurring thing. some mutations are maladaptive, but others can give a species better fitness for survival. so yes, sometimes being born intersex can be fatal, but other times intersex people live, are fertile, and can bear children. you can't lump all of them together as some anomaly doomed to perish.

So to be, whether or not transgender can be also considered a gender is a question to be posed on whether I have the right to stop someone from self-mutilating.

okay, so here's the thing. when you're talking about this as a disease, i'm assuming that's another way of thinking of it as a mental disorder. the thing is, as i view it, trans people have perfectly functioning male/female(/nb) brains, but the body they're in doesn't match that. if it WERE in a body that matched that, i think trans people would be able to function just as well as cis people. when people talk about trans as a mental illness, i think it's a misguided view of mental illnesses to start, but also the term puts too much emphasis on changing the brain (arguably the organ that is our most defining characteristic) and neglects that literally any other part of the body could be the issue. personally, i trust the feelings/thoughts from my brain more than i do my gonads for deriving my identity.

things such as ocd, depression, bppd, and bpd are considered disorders because they're maladaptive in modern society and effect people's abilities to function within it. society, in that regards, is unyielding, and these people will not be able to perform as well unless they learn to flex their brain muscles and develop adaptive strategies and/or take medication responsible for hormonal imbalances, etc.

as for the classification of body/social dysphoria related to gender, that's a common symptom of being trans, but the solution isn't to go against the brain's structure. again, as an isolated issue, these people would be perfectly functional if they were born in the right body. we can't transplant a brain into another body (nor do i think we would really want to), but we have the technology to adjust the preexisting body to lessen this enormous and oftentimes stressful disconnect between mind, body, and how people perceive our body. trying to talk people out of being trans has little to no evidence of being an effective treatment. transitioning, however, is statistically backed up to alleviate symptoms of dysphoria, and studies will show that the majority of people who do transition do not regret it. (there are unfortunate cases where hormone replacement therapy doesn't get someone to be read 100% of the time as their identified gender, as well as people who tire of being trans in a dating scene because of people's obsession with genitals, and just generally wishing they had made the choice to stay in the closet. it isn't always a matter of "shit im actually not trans after all," mind.)

so long story short, i wouldn't call it self-mutilation lol. if it were that other disorder where people have some innate desire to become physically disabled and chop off a leg or an arm (idr the name at the time), then yeah i'd think that would be a more appropriate, albeit insensitive, thing to call it, but i don't think that is an appropriate thing to call ongoing hrt and/or masculinizing/feminizing surgeries.

 

[Project Naiad]

iirc, the only thing in old records are people that engaged in homosexual acts. as far as everyone was concerned, sexual orientation wasn't a thing until more recent history. i have no doubt that gay/bi/etc. people existed, but they just weren't called that, and they were probably forced into a myriad of het marriages out of obligation. like some sort of greece/rome thing was that adult men would have younger men specifically for sexual purposes, but as far as everyone was concerned, those men were still only attracted to women by their own definition.

similar to that, trans identities have evolved with the language. if you look into martha p. johnson, you'll find a lot of inconsistent information about if she was just a drag queen and still a man or if she really was a transwoman. this is because drag and trans used to be somewhat synonymous. we've since begun to make a distinction, and we're further fleshing out what "gender identity" truly encompasses. (the definition of trans itself is still being debated, since some nb people identify as trans and others do not.) also i reiterate that other cultures have had more than two genders for a longass time. the only one i regularly hear about it some native american culture has "two-spirit," which i'm 99% sure is having both the spirit of a man and a woman. but again, i feel that this is a matter of language evolving, and just like how i believe that other sexual orientations existed in the past, so too do i believe trans/nb genders existed. it's just difficult to explain a phenomenon when there literally isn't a name to put to it.



i'd also like to make the distinction of kin identities and gender identities, since it doesn't seem like most people on this thread are aware. kin identities and gender identities are separate things. im not an expert, but i think anyone who seriously says that they're an animal, are x fictional person, etc. are referring to their perceived existence as that person/animal/plant in a different universe via the multi-verse theory. i'd rather not get into my personal opinion on kin identities, but i thought it would be useful to know that it's pretty separate from trans identities and is varying levels of accepted and not accepted in the trans community. if anything, i'd venture to say it's mostly an unwelcome thing (esp. out of a reasonable fear that we won't be taken seriously because of them).

I was kidding when I said elephant, but nevertheless, I can say that I am a cupboard, and be 100% sure that it's true, but it still doesn't make it true.
And once again, to me the very word non-binary seems odd, every new gender proposed that I heard still sounds like a variation of male and female or a combination of them. none of them actually is outside the binary, even the third genders of different cultures than ours (granted, I'm not very knowledgeable on the subject) are just owed to cultural differences.

 

[Idea]

i would argue that evolution comes from mutations. i doubt the basic male/female sex will ever be replaced in our species, but genetic errors ARE a naturally occurring thing. some mutations are maladaptive, but others can give a species better fitness for survival. so yes, sometimes being born intersex can be fatal, but other times intersex people live, are fertile, and can bear children. you can't lump all of them together as some anomaly doomed to perish.

I can see your point. Indeed, evolution is a produced by mutations. Yet, the point falls short on the "is/ought" fallacy. This is because whether a mutation happens and whether it should happen or nothing be done about is are two separate matters. Which in of itself, does not really defeat your point. What does is when you consider the different possibilites.
There is a chance you will live normally with the aforementioned mutations, and there is a chance you won't, but there is no chance your life will be better because of them, or that chance is so contrived and small that it makes no sense to consider. That is what takes this apart from, say, being born with heterochromia. Sure your life won't be any easier, but chances your life will be ruined by it are extremely small too, since it can't affect your day to day life unless you are in the frequent company of assholes. A person born with two genders, on the other hand, can be affected by hormonal disfuctions, body deformities and I imagine (though in this last point I don't have confirmation) and much higher chance of cancer since the mutation means the parts are not supposed to coexist and may reject each other.
This is the boundary between mutation and desease.


And by desease I mean a desease in your body, from cancer to flu. My view of it as such has one simple implication: not treating people who are born with this at the first opportunity is not something I find respectful, it's something I find negletful.

Do note, I did not mention mental diseases at all. I did mention a mania, but that's something I atribute to people who say they are "genderfluid" or "genderless". They are talking about their bodies in a way that simply is not true and you just have to look at the fact that their physical bodies did not change physically at any time when they said they were one gender or the other, in the first case, and that it's effectively impossible to be genderless as a human being. Again, I am talking strictly in a physical sense.

okay, so here's the thing. when you're talking about this as a disease, i'm assuming that's another way of thinking of it as a mental disorder. the thing is, as i view it, trans people have perfectly functioning male/female(/nb) brains, but the body they're in doesn't match that. if it WERE in a body that matched that, i think trans people would be able to function just as well as cis people. when people talk about trans as a mental illness, i think it's a misguided view of mental illnesses to start, but also the term puts too much emphasis on changing the brain (arguably the organ that is our most defining characteristic) and neglects that literally any other part of the body could be the issue. personally, i trust the feelings/thoughts from my brain more than i do my gonads for deriving my identity.

things such as ocd, depression, bppd, and bpd are considered disorders because they're maladaptive in modern society and effect people's abilities to function within it. society, in that regards, is unyielding, and these people will not be able to perform as well unless they learn to flex their brain muscles and develop adaptive strategies and/or take medication responsible for hormonal imbalances, etc.

as for the classification of body/social dysphoria related to gender, that's a common symptom of being trans, but the solution isn't to go against the brain's structure. again, as an isolated issue, these people would be perfectly functional if they were born in the right body. we can't transplant a brain into another body (nor do i think we would really want to), but we have the technology to adjust the preexisting body to lessen this enormous and oftentimes stressful disconnect between mind, body, and how people perceive our body. trying to talk people out of being trans has little to no evidence of being an effective treatment. transitioning, however, is statistically backed up to alleviate symptoms of dysphoria, and studies will show that the majority of people who do transition do not regret it. (there are unfortunate cases where hormone replacement therapy doesn't get someone to be read 100% of the time as their identified gender, as well as people who tire of being trans in a dating scene because of people's obsession with genitals, and just generally wishing they had made the choice to stay in the closet. it isn't always a matter of "shit im actually not trans after all," mind.)

so long story short, i wouldn't call it self-mutilation lol. if it were that other disorder where people have some innate desire to become physically disabled and chop off a leg or an arm (idr the name at the time), then yeah i'd think that would be a more appropriate, albeit insensitive, thing to call it, but i don't think that is an appropriate thing to call ongoing hrt and/or masculinizing/feminizing surgeries.

I need to take this with a grain of salt, before I say anything else. This "male brain/female brain" thing is pretty much a load of pseudo-science, that is, it's scientifically verifiable if you respect the scientific method. Even if it was somehow, the extent of that change would be minimal, AND it's existence would actually justify the usage of stereotypes when dealing with man and woman alike.

But, assuming that your words as true to an extent, I can safely say that one of two scenarios is involved:
*either this brain change is a problem from birth, and given it's potential to affect someone's life, it's something that should be treated if at all possible (which I guess aligns a bit with what you were saying)

*this brain thing is something people consciously choose to aribute their disfunctions to rather than a proven medical fact, meaning that a person is effectively changing their body from what it should be to what the person FEELS it should be.

 

[ApfelSeine]

I'm not non-binary myself, but I know 4 people who are (two who are biologically female, one who is biologically male, and one who was out as NB when I met them, so I don't know or care what their sex is). One changed their name, two kept theirs the same, and the fourth I don't know since I've never asked. So all the people I know who are NB are different and have a unique experience. I think it's very good that you ask, OP, even though you don't really believe/understand what it's all about. Learning from different perspectives is a very valuable thing.

My understanding of my NB friends is that they live normal lives, and really just want to be themselves. They don't really care about being special, or different, and none of them make a big deal about it unless they're explicitly harassed about it. Three have short "boys" haircuts, one has shoulder length hair. Two have a fun punk style and two dress pretty unassuming and blend into the crowd easily. They all have different interests too. One loves theater, one loves music, one loves birds and the eel at the aquarium, and one is obsessed with anime. I know them all as regular people.

For that reason, I don't really see the gender neutral trait to be people trying to be special or follow a trend. They all just want to live life, have fun, and be themselves. They don't have a hard time except for when people are rude to them about it, or when they're frustrated that people don't really understand something that's a significant part of their identity. There's probably a lot that troubles them about it honestly, but my friends are strong and they don't let on if that's the case (though I try to be supportive and a good friend nevertheless, since all my friends are important to me).

They don't feel like they for the gender assigned to then, or to the opposite one either. There's also no way to really measure the spectrum since expected gender traits are different in different cultures. Plus, there's more too it than not fitting a stereotype. For instance, I don't 100% fit the female stereotype, or even come close to that really. I still identify as female though. Yet my friend who has the same interests and a similar personality to me, is NB. I don't know enough about gender to really say what the difference is, but it's pretty clear from the number of people on the opposite side of the spectrum, in the middle, or completely off of it, that there's something psychological. I don't believe it to be learned, so I think there's a neurological or genetic reason behind it. I'm far from an expert though. I mainly just wanted to share my experience and support the idea that non-binary people are people just like anyone else, so it's important as a measure of general politeness to call them what they like to be called and treat them as people instead of giving them a hard time. Seeing as how you're asking about it OP, I'm sure you already know to do that though

 

[Project Naiad]

I'm not non-binary myself, but I know 4 people who are (two who are biologically female, one who is biologically male, and one who was out as NB when I met them, so I don't know or care what their sex is). One changed their name, two kept theirs the same, and the fourth I don't know since I've never asked. So all the people I know who are NB are different and have a unique experience. I think it's very good that you ask, OP, even though you don't really believe/understand what it's all about. Learning from different perspectives is a very valuable thing.

My understanding of my NB friends is that they live normal lives, and really just want to be themselves. They don't really care about being special, or different, and none of them make a big deal about it unless they're explicitly harassed about it. Three have short "boys" haircuts, one has shoulder length hair. Two have a fun punk style and two dress pretty unassuming and blend into the crowd easily. They all have different interests too. One loves theater, one loves music, one loves birds and the eel at the aquarium, and one is obsessed with anime. I know them all as regular people.

For that reason, I don't really see the gender neutral trait to be people trying to be special or follow a trend. They all just want to live life, have fun, and be themselves. They don't have a hard time except for when people are rude to them about it, or when they're frustrated that people don't really understand something that's a significant part of their identity. There's probably a lot that troubles them about it honestly, but my friends are strong and they don't let on if that's the case (though I try to be supportive and a good friend nevertheless, since all my friends are important to me).

They don't feel like they for the gender assigned to then, or to the opposite one either. There's also no way to really measure the spectrum since expected gender traits are different in different cultures. Plus, there's more too it than not fitting a stereotype. For instance, I don't 100% fit the female stereotype, or even come close to that really. I still identify as female though. Yet my friend who has the same interests and a similar personality to me, is NB. I don't know enough about gender to really say what the difference is, but it's pretty clear from the number of people on the opposite side of the spectrum, in the middle, or completely off of it, that there's something psychological. I don't believe it to be learned, so I think there's a neurological or genetic reason behind it. I'm far from an expert though. I mainly just wanted to share my experience and support the idea that non-binary people are people just like anyone else, so it's important as a measure of general politeness to call them what they like to be called and treat them as people instead of giving them a hard time. Seeing as how you're asking about it OP, I'm sure you already know to do that though

Thank you! Yes, the purpose of this thread was just to make things a hit clearer for everyone, and although I'm still pretty darn confused, I definitely do not want to offend anyone. I will try to respect everyone, however they want to see themselves; but respect without understanding is just complacency.

 

[ApfelSeine]

Thank you! Yes, the purpose of this thread was just to make things a hit clearer for everyone, and although I'm still pretty darn confused, I definitely do not want to offend anyone. I will try to respect everyone, however they want to see themselves; but respect without understanding is just complacency.

That's a very noble goal. I hope people manage to stay on topic and help you gain a broader understanding. I'll keep my eye out for any helpful posts from NB people and share any useful information I find with you! (My friends don't talk about it a lot, but there's bound to be some people who want to help by explaining their experiences. I have yet to read the whole thread, so I'm not sure if you've found useful perspectives already lol)

 

[Pine]

I was kidding when I said elephant, but nevertheless, I can say that I am a cupboard, and be 100% sure that it's true, but it still doesn't make it true.

i know it was a joke, but i've heard the attack plane helicopter thing so many times at this point i really don't know if people are aware of the distinction between kin and gender identities. i know i used to think kin was related to gender. either way, im really not about to try to defend kin identities lol esp since i haven't looked into them much

And once again, to me the very word non-binary seems odd, every new gender proposed that I heard still sounds like a variation of male and female or a combination of them. none of them actually is outside the binary, even the third genders of different cultures than ours (granted, I'm not very knowledgeable on the subject) are just owed to cultural differences.

then maybe non-binary isn't a sufficient term and the term itself should change. right now, by binary, they just me not 100% m/f. agender (no gender) and neutrois (feeling of a third gender separate from male and female) are both nb genders that are completely separate from m/f though. as for me personally, i try not to dismiss the ideas of other cultures.

A person born with two genders, on the other hand, can be affected by hormonal disfuctions, body deformities and I imagine (though in this last point I don't have confirmation) and much higher chance of cancer since the mutation means the parts are not supposed to coexist and may reject each other.

i won't deny any of this. no, i don't think that intersex is a sustainable thing, and maybe that does make it a disease in a sense, but as long as its effects have the possibility of being neutral, i just don't view it as something that needs to be dismissed/eradicated?? because they can be high functioning people too and what i theorize as a symptom of the fluidity in sex. i don't think it's too far-fetched to think of the varying levels of masculine/feminine characteristics (women with flatter chests, men with patchy facial hair) and that something in-between should crop up every now and again.

My view of it as such has one simple implication: not treating people who are born with this at the first opportunity is not something I find respectful, it's something I find negletful.

i have mixed feelings on this. on the one hand, if there isn't actually a threat to the person's health, then why change it? it should be left up to the individual what they want for their body. on the other hand, the majority of society has a very black and white view on sex and gender, and that person could have a hard time socializing with others without judgment if it's apparent they fall outside of that binary.

Again, I am talking strictly in a physical sense.

but when you're discussing trans identities, you can't just disregard the brain's role in this...? there isn't a single trans person out there that's disillusioned with the body parts that we have. you aren't going to meet a transguy that genuinely thinks that they don't have any breasts (assuming pre-op). this is about the brain and what it is saying SHOULD be reflected in their body, not what IS. i don't see how it's unfathomable for a gender fluid person to have a wishy-washy idea of body image that they want to strive for. the best they can do is strive for what they want for their body MOST of the time and hope that their wardrobe can accomdate the rest.

This "male brain/female brain" thing is pretty much a load of pseudo-science, that is, it's scientifically verifiable if you respect the scientific method. Even if it was somehow, the extent of that change would be minimal, AND it's existence would actually justify the usage of stereotypes when dealing with man and woman alike.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0038272
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105381190300034X
https://www.researchgate.net/public...al_and_local_volumes_of_grey_and_white_matter

i'm not pulling this stuff out of my ass b0ss. i'm pretty sure the abstracts in each of these research articles mention a statistical significance. this is what im talking about when im talking about sexual dimorphism in the brain. i do respect the scientific method. i don't think any of this proves what im saying 100%, but i do think this support an innate biological difference in male/female brains. to absolutely attribute that as evidence for the validity of stereotypes is what i would call stepping into the realm of pseudo-science. no one is saying there's a "young boys like toy tractors" part of the brain (there was a study about chimps or some other primates with a bunch of toys and with male chimps going for the boy toys and vice versa, but at least in the first one there were some questionable conditions around the study, but it has nevertheless been replicated). any other things i've stated as a fact have probably come from my psychology major lmao.

it's something that should be treated if at all possible (which I guess aligns a bit with what you were saying)

yes. the current at-large consensus in the field of psychology is that allowing them to transition is their treatment

this brain thing is something people consciously choose to aribute their disfunctions to rather than a proven medical fact, meaning that a person is effectively changing their body from what it should be to what the person FEELS it should be.

this may be true. there's always the possibility that these attributions are misplaced. i refer again to what i said earlier about schizophrenia generating dysphoria-like feelings. however, this is the current theory at large, i person can't find any harm in letting people transition, and again, it's repeatedly been found to be a method that helps people suffering from gender dysphoria. i will deny the possibility of this being caused by something else, but again, i find it a useful structure for us to operate under in the mean time.

 

[Idea]

i won't deny any of this. no, i don't think that intersex is a sustainable thing, and maybe that does make it a disease in a sense, but as long as its effects have the possibility of being neutral, i just don't view it as something that needs to be dismissed/eradicated?? because they can be high functioning people too and what i theorize as a symptom of the fluidity in sex. i don't think it's too far-fetched to think of the varying levels of masculine/feminine characteristics (women with flatter chests, men with patchy facial hair) and that something in-between should crop up every now and again.

i have mixed feelings on this. on the one hand, if there isn't actually a threat to the person's health, then why change it? it should be left up to the individual what they want for their body. on the other hand, the majority of society has a very black and white view on sex and gender, and that person could have a hard time socializing with others without judgment if it's apparent they fall outside of that binary.

You may have heard of this already, but some viruses and bacteria are capable of entering hibernating states in certain conditions that would otherwise threaten their ability to reproduce or even their survival. When in this state, these bacteria are not a direct problem, since they don't show any symptoms. That is, until the conditions for them to be problematic show up again.

Then we have the apendix, an organ that is basically useless, yet several people end up having it removed because it causes a disease named after itself (I am missing the word in english). This doesn't happen to everyone, and once removed the person can go on living happily, with a scar to remember it at the most, that is, IF the problem is dealt with on time.

In both of these examples, you have a hidden threat. This threat, if identified, can be eliminated, thus destroying all chances it will cause a problem later on. Something similar is what I see with what, for the sake of keeping the flow of this discussion, I will call intersexuality. Yes, it doesn't happen to everyone, but it can't BENEFICT anyone. It's not something you choose to have either, it's something you're born with. Both medically and socially there is a chance you will get harmed. I cannot see how it can be anything less than irresponsible for a financially capable couple or individual to not end this problem as soon as possible.

I would like to point out a very important thing here: It's not about gender OR identity in cases like this. It's the person's health and social life that is at stake. Attacking something that is the definition of desease is not an attack on the person itself. Getting those two confused is a big issue in discussions such as these, and even often in the actual publishing of scientific studies who are suddenly unable to publish their finding for fear of finding themselves under fire for saying unpleasant facts. More on this later though.

but when you're discussing trans identities, you can't just disregard the brain's role in this...? there isn't a single trans person out there that's disillusioned with the body parts that we have. you aren't going to meet a transguy that genuinely thinks that they don't have any breasts (assuming pre-op). this is about the brain and what it is saying SHOULD be reflected in their body, not what IS. i don't see how it's unfathomable for a gender fluid person to have a wishy-washy idea of body image that they want to strive for. the best they can do is strive for what they want for their body MOST of the time and hope that their wardrobe can accomdate the rest.

I think something may not have been made clear here, so do allow me to reword my position:

I believe that physical unwilling manifestations of gender overlap or deficiency are diseases, since they fit the defintion of a desease, and being so, should be treated.
In other words if, in fact, your brain that of a woman and your body is that of man, that is something that should get treated and the person should get to choose in what direction. That is perfectly fine and is a reason why I am open to the idea that transgenders are in fact different genders.

BUT your feelings have absolutely nothing to do with the matter here. If you FEEL like a woman, that doesn't mean any part of your body has anything in that vein. There is nothing to be corrected. This is where the morality problem comes in, because how you identify doesn't necessarily have to do with any real part of you, and if that is the case, changing anything falls into self-mutilation, because you are warping perfectly fine parts of your body artificially. Whether I have the right and duty to interviene in this or not is the question.

i'm not pulling this stuff out of my ass b0ss. i'm pretty sure the abstracts in each of these research articles mention a statistical significance. this is what im talking about when im talking about sexual dimorphism in the brain. i do respect the scientific method. i don't think any of this proves what im saying 100%, but i do think this support an innate biological difference in male/female brains. to absolutely attribute that as evidence for the validity of stereotypes is what i would call stepping into the realm of pseudo-science. no one is saying there's a "young boys like toy tractors" part of the brain (there was a study about chimps or some other primates with a bunch of toys and with male chimps going for the boy toys and vice versa, but at least in the first one there were some questionable conditions around the study, but it has nevertheless been replicated). any other things i've stated as a fact have probably come from my psychology major lmao.

It's not that I don't trust you, it's that I don't trust these studies. Even if we ignore the obvious prevalent problem of bias, data manipulation, and the fact that ultimately being a scientist is still a profession and the way to earn money is by publishing meaning you need to be a sensasionalist rather than a competent researcher to make a living, there is still the problem that the laughable majority of these studies show signs of having skipped three steps of having a proper sample:
1. Proper size and distribution in the sample
2. Having a control group
3. Repeating the experiment a sufficient amount of times


These are basics of the scientific method, and most studies (ESPECIALLY statistics) are missing them, even some accepted by the scientific community at large. Guesswork-based theories can often also be accepted without actual real testing, making the problem expodentially worse. Lastly, we rely on oversensitive equipment mixed with the traditional human eye and WORSE our interpretation of data without sufficient link to causality.

In other words, millenia-long common sense may not be the best way to get the truth but it is far more reliable than the vast majority of these studies.

this may be true. there's always the possibility that these attributions are misplaced. i refer again to what i said earlier about schizophrenia generating dysphoria-like feelings. however, this is the current theory at large, i person can't find any harm in letting people transition, and again, it's repeatedly been found to be a method that helps people suffering from gender dysphoria. i will deny the possibility of this being caused by something else, but again, i find it a useful structure for us to operate under in the mean time.

And at this point, I think that's pretty much where I think it's best for us to agree to disagree and just move on. I don't have a problem with transgender people or any of those other people, but given the recent explosion of this topic and different "genders" there is a load of it that's not actually medically caused, it couldn't be (mutations happen, but not en-masse like this), and it's actually being made up by this trend. It's more akin to hypochondriasis that it is to an actual thing that's happening.
For the people who have the real problem I worry and want them to get treated- by becoming transgender if necessary.
For the people who don't have a problem and are just starting to call themselves other genders because they misatribute feelings of confusion, admiration or just plain puberty, if they want to change genders as well, I have no idea what I should or not do about it. But I do have a slight issue with one thing, and that is drowning out REAL PROBLEMS.



This happens everytime there is a major social change, people take it too far and make the minority look bad. The enormous mass of people who are not actually physically another gender in any way shape of form, but still think of themselves as that gender alianates people who don't suffer from any of it, trades our sympathy for plain annoyance, especially when things start getting censored over it.
I know that's a little off-topic for our discussion, but I felt the need to bring it up, my apologies.

 

[Project Naiad]

then maybe non-binary isn't a sufficient term and the term itself should change. right now, by binary, they just me not 100% m/f. agender (no gender) and neutrois (feeling of a third gender separate from male and female) are both nb genders that are completely separate from m/f though. as for me personally, i try not to dismiss the ideas of other cultures.

OK but how can one not belong to either gender? Or switch gender depending on the day? I don't understand it.

 

[Autumn McJavabean]

Depends, apparently, which definition you use? Despite both sides, the word has two definitions which makes both actually correct. The multiple genders you hear stereotyped from Tumblr are simply personalities and how one "presents" themselves. The other is sex synonymous. Both definitions are accepted and used, thus both are real and exist.

As for the multi-gender debate, the idea that one argues gender and sex are not the same yet consider "male" and "female" genders, which hare biological, is nonsensical. That inherently makes them the same. What they should say is masculine and feminine, which is what they actually mean. Otherwise they shoot themselves in the foot, logically speaking.

Gender identity and expression as used for things like genderqueer or agender has no basis in science and is often defended by the notion that other cultures, throughout history of humans, have had more than two genders, which, by that logic, should mean we accept many asinine concepts, like a flat earth or holy beings and voodoo magic because "culture".

I'd also like to say that the very concept of agender is paradoxical. It makes no sense nor could it be possible. You can not be without a gender, even bythe tumberite definition of gender. Even saying you're agender is a gender in of itself, making it contradictory.

 

[thoughtless]

Since gender specifically refers to social and cultural identity rather than what you biologically are, the general idea of it (like almost everything else these days) can get very murky depending on where you are and the type of life you've experienced.

My whole ideology is identify whichever way you want (unless, of course, you're joking like the thousands of uncreative attack helicopter comments on the internet) and I'll do my best to respect you and use the correct pronouns, even if I don't fully understand your identity. Who am I to tell someone what they do and do not feel when it's related to their identity? I don't live their life, and although I can try my best to put my selves in their shoes, that will always be the case.

 

[Autumn McJavabean]

OK but how can one not belong to either gender? Or switch gender depending on the day? I don't understand it.

You don't understand because it doesn't make sense. They say you can switch gender, genders like male or female or some other than those two, which is really just personality. One day they feel female or feminine, the next masculine. So they consider themselves genderfluid or whatever. They just have a broader personality, nothing more.

And as I point out above, being without a gender (Agender) is a purely nonsensical, not-so-thought-out concept. The very idea of it makes it a paradox of something that just simply can not exist.

 

[Autumn McJavabean]

Since gender specifically refers to social and cultural identity rather than what you biologically are, the general idea of it (like almost everything else these days) can get very murky depending on where you are and the type of life you've experienced.

Gender does NOT "specifically refers to social and cultural identity rather than what you biologically", you and others do. It has another definition that you're greatly and blatant ignoring. The definition of it being = to sex is real, despite what you may wish to believe. They both exist. To say otherwise is a lie.

 

[thoughtless]

Gender does NOT "specifically refers to social and cultural identity rather than what you biologically", you and others do. It has another definition that you're greatly and blatant ignoring. The definition of it being = to sex is real, despite what you may wish to believe. They both exist. To say otherwise is a lie.

Since the discussion if focusing on the societal definition (which is most commonly used anyways) then that's what I'm going to define it is as lmao. Synonymous doesn't mean equal, as two words can mean the same thing but give an entirely different context and connotation to the situation.

 

[Autumn McJavabean]

Since the discussion if focusing on the societal definition (which is most commonly used anyways) then that's what I'm going to define it is as lmao. Synonymous doesn't mean equal, as two words can mean the same thing but give an entirely different context and connotation to the situation.

It's actually been referring to both, if you look above, but believe what you will.

Doesn't matter, you still literally said it refers to one specific thing, which it doesn't. Even if this thread was about gender socially (it isn't) your comment is still unsound and invalid.

Gender has been used for biological sex. Nuff said. The definition exists, still is used, and is still socially accepted by many people. You know them as the ones who don't agree with the more than two gender people and those who don't agree with transgenderism.

If you only spoke about the social concept of gender, you would have worded it differently. Your post clearly says it is defined as a specific thing that being social and cultural, not what social and cultural gender refers too.

 

[thoughtless]

It's actually been referring to both, if you look above, but believe what you will.

Doesn't matter, you still literally said it refers to one specific thing, which it doesn't. Even if this thread was about gender socially (it isn't) your comment is still unsound and invalid.

Gender has been used for biological sex. Nuff said. The definition exists, still is used, and is still socially accepted by many people. You know them as the ones who don't agree with the more than two gender people and those who don't agree with transgenderism.

If you only spoke about the social concept of gender, you would have worded it differently. Your post clearly says it is defined as a specific thing that being social and cultural, not what social and cultural gender refers too.

Bruh you're really going to sit there and nitpick one word that i used in a pass-by comment, you're not even addressing the argument I made at this point. How is the thread not about gender socially when that's literally what's been discussed for the last four pages, the existence of the nonbinary, genderfluid, agender and more, which all define gender as a social concept. But whatever, you said yourself that the word gender has multiple definitions, so arguing anymore about this is going to be a waste of time. But go ahead and argue over semantics.

 

[Autumn McJavabean]

Bruh you're really going to sit there and nitpick one word that i used in a pass-by comment. How is the thread not about gender socially when that's literally what's been discussed for the last four pages, the existence of the nonbinary, genderfluid, agender and more, which all define gender as a social concept. But whatever, you said yourself that the word gender has multiple definitions, so arguing anymore about this is going to be a waste of time.

Yes, I'll correct you when you give false information, that there is one definition. And they have also brought up biology, in case you didn't read it. To say it's been only about gender socially is also a lie. You didn't read all the pages, did you? I highly doubt it, because both biological and social gender has been discussed in the past 4 pages.

If you don't like it, just stop posting. Don't post in a thread if you're going to get your panties in a notch for being corrected.

 

[Project Naiad]

To clarify: yes the thread is about gender socially and biologically.
And yes I am aware that gender has been used as a synonym for sex in the past, but seeing it had acquired a broader definition I'd say it is superfluous to remark over it's past meaning.
(Particularly as it it doesn't fit the thread's subject that much)

 

[Huxalot]

Aren't people tired of this topic yet?
I don't give a dang about people identifying as other genders than what I "think is real", as long as they don't hurt me with it. Which they don't. It's pretty simple

 

[Project Naiad]

Aren't people tired of this topic yet?
I don't give a dang about people identifying as other genders than what I "think is real", as long as they don't hurt me with it. Which they don't. It's pretty simple

Huh.


What?

 

[Huxalot]

Huh.


What?

What was it you didn't understand

 

[Project Naiad]

What was it you didn't understand

Most of it sorry.
You don't care what people identify as, as long as they don't hurt you?

 

[Huxalot]

Most of it sorry.
You don't care what people identify as, as long as they don't hurt you?

No as long as their gender identity doesn't hurt me. And as long as they aren't attempting to troll, by being like "my gender is fridge xD"

I'll respect the gender of people who hurt me as well, if a trans guy were to hurt me, I'd never sink to the level of misgendering him.