Non-binary gender identities.

CLAX1911 said:

I'm sorry you're confused. I seem to be incapable of alleviating your confusion. I don't think I can make it any simpler than I have.

Click to expand...

Yea sure :roll:

To summarize, you claim that gender is binary but also that a "gender spectrum" which means , by definition, that there are more than two genders, You claimed that if you have the opposite gender characteristics then you are the opposite gender (trans) and then claimed that gender characteristics are not related/do not determine your gender. You maintain that your view is based on science and biology but when your criteria is clearly shown to give rise to a third option, you ignore and actively avoid explaining this contradiction. Not only does your own criteria prove the existence of people who are not male or female, you also fail to explain the logic behind the claim that two sexes can only giver rise to two genders, you fail to explain why if one sex can give rise to a person with the 'biological gender characteristics' of the opposite correlated gender, that it cannot give rise to somebody who is not completely the opposite gender rather somewhere in the middle.

In short your entire view is not scientific, it is not logical, it is entirely political, stereotypically regressive and right wing. I know that because I know scientific proof simply does not exist; it is too early to tell. Whereas we now have many studies that prove a neurological basis for binary transgenderism, there is limited literature on non binary transgenderism. Your view cannot be based on science.

I also think that you are intentionally vague, and that your contradictory changing positions throughout the thread are evidence to you not having a clear understanding of your own positions. It seems you are making it up as you go.

L0neW0lf said:

Yea sure :roll:

To summarize, you claim that gender is binary but also that a "gender spectrum" which means , by definition, that there are more than two genders, You claimed that if you have the opposite gender characteristics then you are the opposite gender (trans) and then claimed that gender characteristics are not related/do not determine your gender. You maintain that your view is based on science and biology but when your criteria is clearly shown to give rise to a third option, you ignore and actively avoid explaining this contradiction. Not only does your own criteria prove the existence of people who are not male or female, you also fail to explain the logic behind the claim that two sexes can only giver rise to two genders, you fail to explain why if one sex can give rise to a person with the 'biological gender characteristics' of the opposite correlated gender, that it cannot give rise to somebody who is not completely the opposite gender rather somewhere in the middle.

In short your entire view is not scientific, it is not logical, it is entirely political, stereotypically regressive and right wing. I know that because I know scientific proof simply does not exist; it is too early to tell. Whereas we now have many studies that prove a neurological basis for binary transgenderism, there is limited literature on non binary transgenderism. Your view cannot be based on science.

I also think that you are intentionally vague, and that your contradictory changing positions throughout the thread are evidence to you not having a clear understanding of your own positions. It seems you are making it up as you go.

Click to expand...

You still don't understand. I'm sorry if you can't understand it, I lack the ability to explain it in a way you can understand it apparently. I have nothing really to discuss with you.

You can post a long drawn out wall of text in response to this if you wish. But I am finished discussing this with you. So there is not going to be any more discussion on non binary gender between you and I. I see no point in arguing why my position makes sense to someone who doesn't understand.

molten_dragon said:

I think there are two genders, and by a great coincidence they correspond to the two physical sexes. Weird how that works out.

I think sometimes some wires can get crossed and your gender identity can not match your physical sex. But I don't think there are a bunch of other gender identities out there beyond male and female. I think some of it is just people wanting to be different and seeking attention. I think the rest can probably be explained by people who are just confused by their gender identity and are flailing around seeking some sort of descriptive term that matches their confused feelings about their gender identity.

So maybe we could add a third gender for those people. Male, female, and undecided.

Click to expand...

There are social expectations placed on both men and women and I think a lot of people don't want to meet or can't to meet these expectations. And that has really been so deeply tied to gender that people think that that's what gender is. I still believe it is the expression of sex. Mostly secondary sexual characteristics and biological roles that are part of sex.

Of course there are outliers and exceptions but these people are exceptions to the social expectations not the gender norms.

CLAX1911 said:

I forget about pipe dreams. Marriage will never move out of the public domain. Texas would rather marry two dudes than repeal state marriage. It isn't gong anywhere.

Click to expand...

If we look at history, it might surprise the unbiased reader to see anyone that would say 'never' in this societal context.

CLAX1911 said:

Gender identity is more of a cultural thing. I wasn't talking about identity.

Click to expand...

Ermmmm... Gender is about identity and culture. That's pretty much the point.

Or are you saying that men don't have an identity? Women don't have an identity?

Incorrect race has everything to do with genetics.

Click to expand...

Assertion is not an argument.

As I've pointed out, if "race" was actually based on genetics, then sub-Saharan Africa would have dozens of "races." Instead, they are all seen as "black."

Well the technical term for oriental race is mongol. But that tends to have negative connotations. Kind of like the taxonomic term for black people.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure "mongol" or "mongoloid" is at least as outdated as "Oriental." It's now considered a highly offensive term.

Again, all this does is show how the concept of "race" has very little to do with genetics. This should not be surprising, given that most genetic changes are not all that obvious, and that a handful of phenotypical characteristics (eye shape, skin color, hair type) were used as proxies for developing theories of "race" that predated access to genetic data by centuries.

To put it another way: Humans developed their ideas about "race" centuries before they had any clue about DNA. No one should be surprised that those primitive ideas about race turn out to have very little to do with genetics.

Well as biological man and a transman are the only two types of men there are. And no it does not make a person transgender if they don't have all the characteristics of their gender.

The presence of an adam's apple does not dictate gender, it is a characteristic of gender. And if you are talking about trans people having disphoria about your gender means you are uncomfortable with your gender. Meaning you want different characteristics.

Click to expand...

egads

The presence of an adam's apple is a biological feature, but it is not a determinant of gender. An individual who has sex characteristics of a male, who identifies as female or androgynous, will have an adam's apple.

I said nothing whatsoever about dysphoria.

Intersex and androgynous are not sexes. There is only male and female.

Click to expand...

"Intersex" is a biological condition, and one that is neither exclusively male or female. Our ideas about gender -- such as the ones you're espousing here -- shove this minority into boxes that they do not fit. Keeping in mind that parents often engage in surgical and/or cultural choices to raise intersex children, it should be up to the individual to determine how that impacts their gender.

"Androgyny" can have biological features, but is (afaik) essentially a gender classification. As such, I see no issue with treating it as a different gender, one that deliberately eschews a definition based on one specific sex.

Mind you, no one is saying there is a new gender called "Blaargh" which has the features of neither male nor female. Rather, some activists and individuals simply do not want to identify exclusively as male or female. They want to combine or eschew characteristics of those two.

It can't possibly exist in a species that has binary sexes. I don't get the point of it.

Click to expand...

I don't get the point of contemporary country music; to me, it sounds like pop music with a violin thrown in. That is not proof that "contemporary country" cannot possibly exist, because someone can't imagine that music must be either pop or country.

joG said:

If we look at history, it might surprise the unbiased reader to see anyone that would say 'never' in this societal context.

Click to expand...

Well should things change I'll happily eat crow. I agree that government shouldn't be involved. And should that ever happen I'll be happy. I just don't forsee it.

Visbek said:

Ermmmm... Gender is about identity and culture. That's pretty much the point.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Gender is the expression of sex. I did preface that in the beginning of this discussion. If you reject my premise why not discuss my premise explain to me how gender is strictly cultural. I'm open minded, but just saying "it's cultural" over and over without explaining why is argumentum ad nauseum.

If you wish to discuss, I'll happily do so with you. If you just want to repeatedly assert that I'm wrong than I don't wish to participate in that.

I will state this in factual form, because it is completely factual. Gender: The state of being MALE or FEMALE
Sex: a category of which organisms are based upon their reproductive functions. (Male or Female)

There you have it. There are only TWO genders, nothing else. The fact that anyone would believe that they aren't the gender that they really are is called GENDER DYSPHORIA! It is literally a mental illness. A good friend once told me the most rational analogy of gender dysphoria: "It's like standing on the edge of a cliff, and you think you can fly even though science clearly tells you different, but you still jump." My friend was completely right, and in no way is gender a choice. It would be if we had the power to change it, but the truth is, we don't. So for all those who have gender dysphoria, my heart cries out to you, because you will never know what the truth about yourself is.

They are just masqueraded consumerism.

The role of gender identity is perversely blown out of proportion. It's nowhere near as fateful for one's life as the gender activists would like you to believe.

It's hard to imagine that there are more than 2 genders. I think given that humans have 2 sexes, it's easiest to envision just two genders. Even if one doesn't identify their gender along their biological sex, it still seems to me that there are but two.

But whatever, in the end if someone wants to claim X, Y, or Z then so be it. Claim you're a hermaphroditic zebra for all I care. Mostly, also, just leave me out of it and don't expect me to play pronoun games. I'll do my best, but if someone has just sort of invented a thing, they can't really get upset if someone uses the wrong word.

Ikari said:

It's hard to imagine that there are more than 2 genders. I think given that humans have 2 sexes, it's easiest to envision just two genders. Even if one doesn't identify their gender along their biological sex, it still seems to me that there are but two.

But whatever, in the end if someone wants to claim X, Y, or Z then so be it. Claim you're a hermaphroditic zebra for all I care.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

Mostly, also, just leave me out of it and don't expect me to play pronoun games. I'll do my best, but if someone has just sort of invented a thing, they can't really get upset if someone uses the wrong word.

Click to expand...

There are people stating that it isn't just rude to "misgender" someone, but that it's an act of violence.

Well, I don't think that one can be anything than the two genders exactly. However, one could be a male who has primarily feminine psychological (or even non genital physical) attributes or a female that has primarily male attributes (either psychological or possibly even physical, other than genital). In my opinion, both of these things are completely normal as part of the human race. I believe that if we were an accepting society that was not judgmental and hateful, there wouldn't be such judgement around these things and one wouldn't feel a need to identify as "something else". That's just my opinion.