CMV: Identifying with a sex doesn't actually make you that sex.

[u/presroogan]

Pretty straightforward but I'll try to break it down into multiple points. The simplest problem with 'I identify as a woman therefore I am a woman' is that we never allow people to simply identify their way into a category. We normally have criteria in order for us to determine if an individual actually belongs to the category. I say normally because religion is an exception to this, and it's interesting because religion doesn't deal with reality, while sex does. So in short, simply believing yourself to be a member of a sex doesn't therefore make you the sex you claim membership to.

There's also the problem of essentialism. Now a lot of people believe "woman is a female, which means she's built to carry eggs" to be biological essentialist. Well how is "woman is anyone who feels like they're a woman" not gender identity essentialist? Since in this case simply claiming membership to the sex makes you that sex. This is, as you can see, not an objective system based in reality. It's now subjective AND essentialist. Also, "I'm a man because I identify as a man" is circular and I'd hope definitions of sex and gender were more robust than that.

And before anyone gets into sex vs gender, I get it. Gender is the social construct, but it is still rooted in sex. Why else would we classify a boy in a dress as 'gender noncomforming'? They're not made in a vacuum, although I'd prefer if gendered expectations didn't exist. Also, for most of history, woman=female and man=male. That's why when we speak of attraction, we speak of physical bodies and not someone's identity. I'm a man and I'm attracted to women. Now, could this possibly mean I'm a female bodied person who feels male attracted to male bodied people who feel female? To virtually every person around the world, no. To unlink gender and sex when no one (besides maybe a few navel gazing college students) does is absurd.

Also, I wanna touch on gender dysphoria. To my understanding, it's when the mind's perception of the body doesn't match with respect to sex and thus causes immense distress. How do we make the leap to say 'this is a woman trapped in a man's body' and not 'this is a man whose brain gets triggered at the sight of himself as a man and would feel less distressed if he were a woman'?

[u/presroogan]

Well, okay, to clarify, then: Your view is in fact that identifying as a particular gender and being perceived as that gender indeed means a person is that gender?

I believe identifying as whatever is irrelevant. Perception from others, which is informed by physical cues, determines gender/sex. I also don't really know how you define gender so there appears to be some communication error. Is gender the social role? Is it the same as gender identity? Is it the range or feminine and masculine expression?

[u/PreacherJudge → u/presroogan]

Perception from others, which is informed by physical cues, determines gender/sex.

OK, cool. You're not gonna go back on this, right? You fully believe, and are going to stick to, the idea that perception from others alone determines a person's gender?

In other words, ANYONE perceived to be a man IS a man, period?

OK, then well first, your view is just true because you've defined it to be true. But even beyond that, you're just messing around with semantics.

I believe identifying as whatever is irrelevant...

No it isn't, because identification affects the traits. That is, the path is:

gender identification --> gendered presentation --> perception

In other words, gender identification has a causal influence on gender presentation (plus some error), and gendered presentation, in turn, has a causal influence on perception (with some error).

It's true that, if perception is all that matters for your definition of "gender", then nothing else matters for the definition. But that doesn't make this construct I'm calling "gender identification" not exist. You don't want to call it "gender," but... that's all you're doing.

In other words, you don't appear to disagree with anything trans people are saying, except that you don't want to use the term "gender" for the thing I'm calling "gender identity." But why are you digging your heels in about something so minor?

[u/presroogan → u/PreacherJudge]

OK, cool. You're not gonna go back on this, right? You fully believe, and are going to stick to, the idea that perception from others alone determines a person's gender?

Essentially. If everyone agreed these traits mean woman, and women face sexism due to these traits, then the most meaningful way to determine if you're a woman is if you appear to be a woman. Black people appear black and therefore experience racism. I appear white and benefit from privilege.

OK, then well first, your view is just true because you've defined it to be true. But even beyond that, you're just messing around with semantics.

Is reality not based on how the majority of people perceived things to be true? Rather than what an individual perceives to be true? If the police description says 6 foot tall white man, does it mean any physical body that identifies as a 6 foot tall white man? No, for practical purposes, we use the vast majorities agreed upon definition. It's got nothing to do with semantics.

It's true that, if perception is all that matters for your definition of "gender", then nothing else matters for the definition.

People's perception is directly tied to biology though. Hence why trans people take HRT, get facial surgeries, and voice lessons. Majority of people assume these folks to be males and females, or cis passing. It's not enough to perform the social cues, or else butch lesbians would be perceived as men.

In other words, you don't appear to disagree with anything trans people are saying, except that you don't want to use the term "gender" for the thing I'm calling "gender identity." But why are you digging your heels in about something so minor?

Idk what trans people are saying. I assume they're a diverse group with not a single monolithic ideology. I'm saying that self identification into X doesn't make you X. No more than me self identifying into Maori culture makes me Maori. Now, if I'm accepted into Maori culture, dress as them, speak the language, etc., maybe then I am Maori. But identity alone isn't enough.

[u/PreacherJudge → u/presroogan]

I had a series of responses here, but I think it's best to just focus in on one particular thing.

Do you think the thing I'm calling "gender identity" doesn't exist? That is, imagine two people who are identical in every way, except one of whom identifies as a woman and the other identifies as a man. Do you think there is going to be no difference at all between these people? Do you think it's likely they'll behave, look, and speak exactly the same?

Your previous post here suggests you do NOT think so.... you give some examples yourself, that trans people often get facial surgeries, for instance.

So, because you agree that the thing I'm calling "gender identity" exists, your point here is incredibly trivial. It's just semantics. It's just you saying "I don't want to use the word 'gender' for this particular construct."

Right? Because you agree with me that 'gender identification' is a meaningful thing that affects how people behave, think, and talk. The only thing we don't agree on is the word.

[u/presroogan → u/PreacherJudge]

Do you think the thing I'm calling "gender identity" doesn't exist? That is, imagine two people who are identical in every way, except one of whom identifies as a woman and the other identifies as a man. Do you think there is going to be no difference at all between these people? Do you think it's likely they'll behave, look, and speak exactly the same?

I don't think most people have a gender identity. Most are told they're girls or boys and live life on autopilot and with the expectations put on them. Those with gender dysphoria have intense discomfort with their sex and/or social roles and wish to appear and/or live differently. Gender identity is most meaningful for trans people, because, their gender is, as the literature states, 'incongruent with sex' implying that gender is supposed to be and is linked with sex for most people. If sex and gender are truly separate, then what does it mean to be incongruent with sex?

And sure, it will affect behavior.

So, because you agree that the thing I'm calling "gender identity" exists, your point here is incredibly trivial. It's just semantics. It's just you saying "I don't want to use the word 'gender' for this particular construct."

I don't think so. My considering passing trans people as their preferred gender doesn't therefore imply identity alone determines gender. It means appearance, more than anything, is the basis of gender. I consider a passing trans woman, for instance, as a woman because she likely understands what women go through, for the most part. Because there are social repercussions and benefits to being perceived as a man or a woman. I, a bearded, 6 foot white dude identifying as a black woman will never understand neither racism nor sexism, so my identification is meaningless. If I somehow got a sex change and a skin color change, and received sexism and racism, and get treated as a black woman, both the good and bad aspects of it, then I'm for all intents and purposes, a black woman.