I find it really disappointing that the incredibly basic statement "Pronouns don't equal gender and presentation doesn't equal gender and presentation doesn't equal pronouns" Was only an accepted and respected take in the broader queer community for about two years and now we've regressed so far that it's seen not just as silly but as borderline problematic to expect people to gender you correctly if you use he/him as a fem presenting person or she/her as a masc presenting person or neutral pronouns as a person who is not 100% perfectly androgynous. But you're not allowed to be androgynous either because apparently genderfuckery is actually harmful to binary trans people and if you don't conform to cis patriarchal standards you're just as bad as the oppressors enforcing them because you might make somebody a little uncomfortable... right.
It's really funny that transmedicalists got like one singular thing kind of right and then proceeded to fill the rest of their ideology with genuine bullshit because they got personally offended that the teenage neopronouns user with dyed hair might have a similar experience of being transgender than them.
'Why doesn't transracialism exist if both race and gender are socially constructed" is such a funny copout because yeah one can change race depending on location. I'm Coloured in South Africa (non-black) and Black in the West. I change race depending on where I am and arguably depending on who I am with and how I'm being perceived.
It's also why even though there are white Latines, they are very often racialised as being simply "Latine" as a kind of racial identity in the western world.
Obviously, this is different to being trans but it's an example of the fluidity of racial identity. Even ethnicity is something malleable, bendable and can change depending on where, when and who you are. Gender being a kind of 'social skin' just means unlike race and ethnicity, it's reflective of the internal and psychological rubbing up against the external social world.
Gender is definitionally not biological, it's a social concept that has some basis in a superficial understanding of biology but so is race. Both were also created in order to divide up labour based on said superficial understanding.
Sorry to derail your thread but this is just factually wrong. I understand that this isn't the original point you were speaking about so I'm just going to keep this under a read more to avoid distracting from your main point (which by the way I completely agree with).
i get what you are saying but there are countless studies that have been done that show that race has absolutely no biological basis. If you were talking about ethnicity, then sure, but not race. It's a social construct without any biological basis. We are in agreement on this but I'm still keeping an article I really like here as a source.
It's been used to define and separate people for millennia. But the concept of race is not grounded in genetics.
Meanwhile gender identity is biological. Has been proven time and time again. Source for the following screenshot, Abstract of Chapter 8 of "The Plasticity of Sex" published in 2020.
The hormones in the prenatal environment have been shown to have an effect on gender identity. From "Neurobiology of gender identity and sexual orientation" published in 2018
Obviously there is no definitive answer because not enough studies have been conducted. that doesn't mean that there is absolutely no biological basis, just that we need more research into exactly what it is. But it is there!
(note that I am not trying to argue that we have "male or female brains" because the concept of sexually dimorphic brains has been disproven: Dump the “dimorphism”: Comprehensive synthesis of human brain studies reveals few male-female differences beyond size published in 2021)
that does not mean gender roles in society are not a social construct. The social construct of gender for instance believes that people are biologically primed to act in different ways because of their gender identity, or that they deserve different rights or are barred from certain types of labour because a doctor looked at their genitals and assigned them a sex at birth. That also does not mean that our current understanding of sex and gender is not subject to the scientific community's flawed patriarchal perspective. There is no scientific justification for that!
But the very existence of trans people kind of denies the argument that "gender is definitionally biological." If people who experience gender dysphoria exist -- not that it is a requirement to be transgender, but they do exist -- where is that innate sense of gender identity coming from and why do they experience incongruence?
This is from "Genetic Link Between Gender Dysphoria and Sex Hormone Signaling" published in 2018. The study does not assert that the exact genetic components and links have been found to cause gender dysphoria but again there are trends that should be studied further.
The lead author of this study had this to say about it. Source
So again, nothing conclusive (this is a common denominator of basically every study relating to transgender people honestly) but there is evidence.
This also proves why "transracial" (in the transID sense, not about adoptees) is not actually a thing. Race is an entirely human invention that poorly draws on what we know about ethnicity (or better, what Samuel Morton pulled out of his ass) so there is no biological basis for why someone might feel as though they were born the wrong race.
TL;DR: yes, you are right that a lot of our understanding of sex and gender is tainted by bioessentialism and by the patriarchy. That does not mean that gender itself has no biological basis. What do you think contributes to that "internal and psychological skin" ? What is the "internal and psychological skin" constructed from!?
Ethnicity has far less of a biological basis than either race or gender. It's entirely cultural and one's ethnicity is based solely upon where they were born, who raised them and how they present themselves. I don't know why you think it has a biological basis at all.
Race was based on surface level biological ideas such as skin colour, specific "racial markers" and craniometric measurements. These have no bearing on anything and don't reflect discreet categories of humans, but they are biological signifiers that differentiate people from one another. This is why scientific racism was able to proliferate.
A lot of this is "we need more research into this!" writing that STEM researchers love to do. They've been looking for the "gay gene" for decades at this point and have been unable to find it, when they find the exact cocktail of hormonal, genetic and neuroatomic structures that create deviant genders, I'll agree but until then there is little actual evidence to show that this is a biological process and not an entirely social one.
Gender dysphoria is a result of the society we live in rather than some innate thing that would occur if the exact same person was born in a different society with a different social understanding of gender. What is it that makes a man and a woman different? How are non-binary people represented in this schema? How do we define gender if it is biological? If not everyone requires gender dysphoria to be trans, what makes someone trans?
The psychological is not necessarily biological and more often than not is a reflective of the how the internal self (something which is entirely constructed btw) reacts to the social. Gender dysphoria is a reaction of the internal to the external, the internal is not a gene expressing itself but rather entirely based on self-recognition.
My bad on the point regarding ethnicity, I read a bit more on that after seeing your response.
I agree with you on your points race, I thought that was established already? We're saying the same thing here. Categorising based on race is inaccurate and therefore bad science. I am also not sure why you are implying that race has more of a biological basis than gender...
About your third point... I mean, we do need more research into this. Research on sexual and gender minorities is horrifically underfunded especially with respect to transgender people. For instance here are some statistics on the National Institute of Health's funding on research into sexual and gender minorities from 2012-2022 (Source).
If scientists are finding actual evidence that there are genetic and hormonal influences that may affect one's gender identity, repeatedly, across multiple different studies conducted by different bodies, but that they don't have exact answers, and all insist that "more research needs to be done" -- the most likely conclusion to draw from that is that more research needs to be done, not that all the pre-existing research is wrong!
You claim that "there is little actual evidence to show that this is a biological process" in response to me citing four separate research papers published in the last decade. I'd argue that what you perceive as "little actual evidence" is just your unwillingness to accept that the evidence exists.
Your fourth point is basically a series of bad-faith questions and misconceptions about gender dysphoria. Not every trans person experiences dysphoria because incongruence between gender identity and biological sex can manifest as gender euphoria as well (not to mention the slightly flawed diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria). I specified people with gender dysphoria because most if not all studies (and all the ones I have cited) have been conducted on trans people who have experienced it. Again, more research is required because more research is required, not because the research is wrong.
Do you seriously think five year olds who don't know what genitals and chromosomes and biological sex are, would still somehow have the ability to break down gender roles and critically analyse how they fit into them? Do you think people who go on hormone replacement therapy and consistently report better mental health are only doing it to fit better into societal gender roles? Why does anyone transition if gender is just a social construct we can dismantle in our minds? Why did you?
And if it was the case, then by your logic living in society as cisgender and conforming to the binary social construct would cause them even more satisfaction... but it very obviously doesn't.
I get that "gender isn't real" is one of those cool talking points that brands you as progressive but if gender isn't real then our entire existence is meaningless. If gender isn't real then the politicians calling us mentally ill delusional freaks playing make-believe do actually have a ground to be calling us that, don't they?
Also... it's common practice that if you are making a claim, you should have proof for it. If you want to make definitive statements like "Gender dysphoria is a result of the society we live in" and "being transgender is an entirely social process" then you should be able to comfortably support it with evidence... which I don't see you doing. In that case, you are not really giving me or anyone a reason to believe what you're saying. I'm not interested in discussing anything with someone who refuses to provide supporting evidence for their claims, neither do I want to engage in discourse with someone who refuses to engage with the actual evidence.
Thank you for your original post. I hope you have a nice day.
'Why doesn't transracialism exist if both race and gender are socially constructed" is such a funny copout because yeah one can change race depending on location. I'm Coloured in South Africa (non-black) and Black in the West. I change race depending on where I am and arguably depending on who I am with and how I'm being perceived.
It's also why even though there are white Latines, they are very often racialised as being simply "Latine" as a kind of racial identity in the western world.
Obviously, this is different to being trans but it's an example of the fluidity of racial identity. Even ethnicity is something malleable, bendable and can change depending on where, when and who you are. Gender being a kind of 'social skin' just means unlike race and ethnicity, it's reflective of the internal and psychological rubbing up against the external social world.
Gender is definitionally not biological, it's a social concept that has some basis in a superficial understanding of biology but so is race. Both were also created in order to divide up labour based on said superficial understanding.
Sorry to derail your thread but this is just factually wrong. I understand that this isn't the original point you were speaking about so I'm just going to keep this under a read more to avoid distracting from your main point (which by the way I completely agree with).
i get what you are saying but there are countless studies that have been done that show that race has absolutely no biological basis. If you were talking about ethnicity, then sure, but not race. It's a social construct without any biological basis. We are in agreement on this but I'm still keeping an article I really like here as a source.
It's been used to define and separate people for millennia. But the concept of race is not grounded in genetics.
Meanwhile gender identity is biological. Has been proven time and time again. Source for the following screenshot, Abstract of Chapter 8 of "The Plasticity of Sex" published in 2020.
The hormones in the prenatal environment have been shown to have an effect on gender identity. From "Neurobiology of gender identity and sexual orientation" published in 2018
Obviously there is no definitive answer because not enough studies have been conducted. that doesn't mean that there is absolutely no biological basis, just that we need more research into exactly what it is. But it is there!
(note that I am not trying to argue that we have "male or female brains" because the concept of sexually dimorphic brains has been disproven: Dump the “dimorphism”: Comprehensive synthesis of human brain studies reveals few male-female differences beyond size published in 2021)
that does not mean gender roles in society are not a social construct. The social construct of gender for instance believes that people are biologically primed to act in different ways because of their gender identity, or that they deserve different rights or are barred from certain types of labour because a doctor looked at their genitals and assigned them a sex at birth. That also does not mean that our current understanding of sex and gender is not subject to the scientific community's flawed patriarchal perspective. There is no scientific justification for that!
But the very existence of trans people kind of denies the argument that "gender is definitionally biological." If people who experience gender dysphoria exist -- not that it is a requirement to be transgender, but they do exist -- where is that innate sense of gender identity coming from and why do they experience incongruence?
This is from "Genetic Link Between Gender Dysphoria and Sex Hormone Signaling" published in 2018. The study does not assert that the exact genetic components and links have been found to cause gender dysphoria but again there are trends that should be studied further.
The lead author of this study had this to say about it. Source
So again, nothing conclusive (this is a common denominator of basically every study relating to transgender people honestly) but there is evidence.
This also proves why "transracial" (in the transID sense, not about adoptees) is not actually a thing. Race is an entirely human invention that poorly draws on what we know about ethnicity (or better, what Samuel Morton pulled out of his ass) so there is no biological basis for why someone might feel as though they were born the wrong race.
TL;DR: yes, you are right that a lot of our understanding of sex and gender is tainted by bioessentialism and by the patriarchy. That does not mean that gender itself has no biological basis. What do you think contributes to that "internal and psychological skin" ? What is the "internal and psychological skin" constructed from!?
My son is suffering from malnutrition, and his little body has become weaker from the constant lack of nutritious food. All I want is to be able to provide the meals he needs to regain his strength and grow healthy.My daughter was recently discharged after undergoing surgery and is still recovering. At the same time, my other daughter is scheduled to have surgery next week, and I don't know how we will manage to provide everything she will need while we struggle to meet even our family's basic needs.
Every donation, no matter how small, can make a real difference for my children. If you are unable to donate, please consider sharing our campaig
n with others. Your kindness and support give our family hope during this incredibly difficult time.
Thank you from the bottom of my heart. ❤️
Hello, I just donated GBP 5 to you. I know it's not much but I hope it helps somewhat.
If anyone else here has the capacity to help, please donate whatever you can on this link: https://gofund.me/ee8425a3b
'Why doesn't transracialism exist if both race and gender are socially constructed" is such a funny copout because yeah one can change race depending on location. I'm Coloured in South Africa (non-black) and Black in the West. I change race depending on where I am and arguably depending on who I am with and how I'm being perceived.
It's also why even though there are white Latines, they are very often racialised as being simply "Latine" as a kind of racial identity in the western world.
Obviously, this is different to being trans but it's an example of the fluidity of racial identity. Even ethnicity is something malleable, bendable and can change depending on where, when and who you are. Gender being a kind of 'social skin' just means unlike race and ethnicity, it's reflective of the internal and psychological rubbing up against the external social world.
When I get my hands on you I'm gonna kiss you so much there's gonna be little spirals popping up over your head like you're a cartoon character. Big red kiss marks all across your face
Q: For fans who are travelling to Columbus for your OSU show, what is one landmark or something that is uniquely Columbus that we should stop and see?
JOSH: Hmm.. Tyler's house.
When I get my hands on you I'm gonna kiss you so much there's gonna be little spirals popping up over your head like you're a cartoon character. Big red kiss marks all across your face
2087
vaporwave
ellievsbear
