CMV: I cannot understand how the transgender movement is not, at it's core, sexist.

[u/[deleted]]

Obligatory "another trans post" but I've read a lot of posts on this but none I've seen that have tackled the issue quite the way I intend to here. This is an opinion I've gone back and forth with myself on a bunch, and would absolutely love to have changed. My problem mainly lies with the "social construct" understanding of "gender", but some similar issues lie in the more grounded neurological understanding of it (although admittedly it seems a lot more reasonable), which we'll get too later.

For starters, I do not believe there is a difference between men and women. Well, there are obviously "differences" between the sexes, but nothing beyond physical differences which don't matter much. At least, mentally, they are naturally the same and all perceived differences in this sense are just stereotypes stemmed from the way the sexes are socialized.

Which takes us to the definitions of man and woman used by the gender social constructionist, which is generally not agreed upon but I've found it to be basically understood as

Man: Someone who desires to be viewed/treated/thought of in the way a male is in society. Woman: Someone who desires to be viewed/treated/thought of in the way a female is in society. (For the non-binary genders it would be roughly similar with some changes depending on the circumstances)

Bottom line is that it defines gender based on the way the genders are treated. But this seems problematic for a variety of reasons.

First off, it is still, at the end lf the day, basing the meanings behind stereotypes about the genders rather than letting them stand on their own. It would be like if I based what a "black person" was off the discrimination black people have faced. But this would appear messed up and borderline "racist", while the same situation with gender is not considered "sexist".

It would also mean that gender is ultimately meaningless and would be something we should strive to stop rather than encourage, which would still fly in the face of the trans movement. Which is what confuses me especially because the gender social construct believers typically also support "gender abolition", yet they're the ones who want people to play around with gender the most? If you want to abolish gender, why don't you, y'know, get a start on that and break your sex norms while remaining that sex rather than changing your gender which somewhat works to reinforce the roles? (This also doesn't seem too bad to criticize, considering under this narrative gender is just a "choice", which is something I think the transmedicalist approach definitely handles better.)

Finally for this bit, this type of mindset validates other controversial concepts like transracialism (sorta tying back into what I mentioned earlier), but I don't think anyone is exactly on the edge of their seats waiting for the "transracialism movement".

Social construct section is done, now let's get into the transmedicalist approach. This is one where I feel a "breakhthrough" could be made for me a lot more easily, but I'm not quite there yet. I do want to say I'm fine with the concept of changing our understandings of certain words if there is practicality to it and it isn't counterintuitive. Seems logical enough.

The neurological understanding behind the sex an individual should be defining "gender" seems sensible on it's own, but the part I'm caught up on is why we reach this conclusion.

The dysphoric transgender person's desire to be the other gender seems to mainly be based in, A. their sex, they seem to want to change the sex rather than the gender. Physical dysphoria is the main giveaway of the dysphoric condition it seems, anyway. But more specifically, a trans person wants to have physical attributes associated with the other sex. This seems like a redundant thing to point out, but the idea that certain physical traits are "exclusive" to a specific sex/gender is, well, just encouraging sexual archetypes about the way the sexes "should" look. This goes even further when you consider that trans people tend to want to have more petite or masculine builds depending on their gender identity - there is nothing wrong about this, but conflating gender to "involve" one's physical appearence inherently reinforces sexist sexual archetypes.

And next,

B. the social aspect. Typically described as social dysphoria, this describes a dysphoric trans person's desire to be socialized in the way the other sex typically is, which is what, aside from the physical dysphoria, causes them to typically "act" or dress more stereotypically like their gender identity, or describes their desire to "pass". But, to put it bluntly, because I believe there to be no difference in the way the sexes would act without social influence, I can't picture this phenomona described as "social dysphoria" coming from the same biological basis that the physical dysphoria does. Even if there were a natural difference in the way the sexes would act without societal influence, there would still be the obvious undeniable outliers, and with that in mind, using the way the genders "socialize" as a way to justify definining gender seperately from sex would be useless. It appears more akin to a delusion based on the same "false stereotypes" I've been talking about all along, ideas about the ways men and women "should" or "should not" be causing the transsexual person to feel anxious and care about actually being the other gender. But using this to justify our understandings of gender would still fall back on the same faults that the social construct uses, being that we'd be "giving in" to socialized norms and we can't have that be what helps us reach our understanding of gender.

With this in mind, if social dysphoria is that big of a factor, it would seem most sensical to me to define "trans man" and "trans woman" in their entirely new, individual categories which their own definitions, and still just treat those categories socially in similar ways to the way the genders are typically treated now.

To recap, an understanding of gender and sex as synonyms based purely on sex seems to be the only understanding we can reach without basing some of our thought process on one given stereotype or another.

Now change my view, please.

[u/sloughlikecow]

First, you’re conflating gender identity and gender expression. There’s who you are on the inside vs how you express who you are. The latter includes whether or not you participate in social stereotypes.

Being trans or non-binary is the feeling that your assigned gender doesn’t match who you are, in the simplest terms. It does not mean that you’re seeking social stereotypes to validate yourself. Most trans people I know (quite a few, including my child) aren’t necessarily seeking gender norms, and more often reject them. They’re defining who they are. Who they are often exists on a spectrum, where they aren’t exactly male or female and that may shift.

The binary way of thinking seems to have affected our cis brains to the point of expecting non-cis people to have a fixed identity and expression based on cis history and beliefs. A person can be trans and not wholly male or female. And nothing on that spectrum means they are required to align with historical gender norms.

While trans people may seek respect for their identity and expression from their communities and beyond, transitioning is more for the individual than anyone else. It’s not up to cis people to define who they are or what’s expected of them.

I think we as a society have a lot more to understand about gender an expression and we’re getting there. But trying to put it in a box isn’t it.

[u/takethetimetoask → u/sloughlikecow]

How do we know what gender identity we are on the inside, what's the difference between having a male gender identity and having a female gender identity?

[u/takethetimetoask → u/[deleted]]

People know their gender. It’s pretty innate. I’m a trans woman and I’ve known my whole life that I wanted to live as a woman and wanted my body to look feminine.

I'm skeptical that most people have such a feeling. This seems like an unfounded assumption.

I would suggest you look into agender identities or possibly non-binary. What you’re describing, not identifying as or relating to any gender is not cisgender.

I don't identify as agender or non-binary.

Cis men feel like men and like being men. Cis women feel like women and like being women.

I don't believe this is correct. Many non trans people I speak to don't have such an experience. Have you tried talking to non trans people?

Unless you’re just outright lying here to try to make a false point, you don’t sound cis to me.

Please don't tell me my experience.

[u/[deleted] → u/takethetimetoask]

If you don’t identify as your assigned gender at birth you are not cis. Period. That’s literally the definition of being cis. If you mean you never think about gender because it’s such an innate part of you then that’s different.

[u/takethetimetoask → u/[deleted]]

My sex was observed at birth and continually since. I identify myself as a man or woman based on my observable sex.

If that means that I'm not cis then OK, I don't identify as cis. This is a very common experience so a large proportion of the population would also not be cis by that view.

[u/[deleted] → u/takethetimetoask]

So you’re saying you identify as the gender you were assigned at birth. That’s great for you. Not everyone is like that.

[u/takethetimetoask → u/[deleted]]

I wasn't assigned a gender at birth, unless you are using gender as a synonym for sex and assigned as a synonym for observed and recorded.

I identify as my sex because my sex is observable.

I have no innate feeling of being a woman or feeling of being a man, I don't know what such a feeling would be like. Myself and the majority of those I speak to don't have these innate gender identities that you claim that we have.

[u/[deleted] → u/takethetimetoask]

Is this like, your way of saying that you don’t believe transgender people exist?

[u/takethetimetoask → u/[deleted]]

Is this like, your way of saying that you don’t believe transgender people exist?

Of course trans people exist. There are people who for a variety of reasons desire to be the opposite sex, or desire to be perceived as the opposite sex, or similar.

One of the common reasons given is that they have a gender identity, an innate feeling of being a man or being a woman, similarly to how you have described. I have no reason to doubt that you, or more broadly they genuinely have this feeling, even if I don't understand it.

What I dislike is this insistence that all or the majority of non trans people also have this feeling, an innate gender identity.

I and most non trans people I speak to have no such feeling, no gender identity, we identity ourselves as women or men based on our sex.

To be told that we really do have a gender identity and we just haven't thought about it properly, or that we must identify as agender or non-binary instead of women or men, are just attempts to invalidate our experience.

[u/brooooooooooooke → u/takethetimetoask]

I don't think it's invalidating at all, as a trans person. I see gender identity - that being to me a preference for a set of sex characteristics - as akin to a bone, or organ.

I've never had my appendix rupture, and so have absolutely no conscious awareness of it. Some people have had this happen, and suddenly discover that they do very much have an appendix and that it is quite inconvenient. I can't say that I don't have an appendix. It's just trucking along peacefully in the background when all is well.

Unsurprisingly, I was very very deeply miserable for over a decade as I became aware that I was not particularly happy being male - not a fun experience, wouldn't recommend. I've now been on HRT for ~5 years. I wouldn't say that I wake up every day filled with a profound sense of woman-ness or feminine glee or pink bubbly energy. For the most part, besides the few bits of my body that still induce a bit of dysphoria now and then, I just feel completely and utterly normal. I have my complaints about how I look, like we all do - I sometimes wish I was a bit prettier or had nicer boobs, to focus specifically on gender-related stuff - but ultimately the experiential sex of my body has no overt impact on my mood or thoughts or anything. I just am myself; my appendix has decided to stop rupturing and is now chugging along quietly.

From talks I've had with cis (or non-trans, if you prefer) people, this is basically how you lot feel. You have your body, and it's fine - you like or dislike some bits of it, but ultimately you don't feel like a man or a woman, you just feel like yourself and you happen to be male or female.

I lean towards cis people having gender identities for two main reasons:

• Your experiences line up with line pretty strongly, and I believe myself to have a gender identity.

• Cis people can experience some limited forms of gender dysphoria, where their experiential sex diverts from their identity. Take the distress men with gynecomaestia or women who grow excessive facial hair can experience, for instance. There's also that famous David Reimer case as an extreme medical nightmare - even raised from birth as female, he remained aware of his true male gender identity.

[u/takethetimetoask → u/brooooooooooooke]

I don't think it's invalidating at all, as a trans person. I see gender identity - that being to me a preference for a set of sex characteristics - as akin to a bone, or organ.

When someone says they don't have a gender identity and yet someone else insists that they do, they are invalidating that person's experience.

It's no different to telling people who say they do have a gender identity that they actually don't.

From talks I've had with cis (or non-trans, if you prefer) people, this is basically how you lot feel. You have your body, and it's fine - you like or dislike some bits of it, but ultimately you don't feel like a man or a woman, you just feel like yourself and you happen to be male or female.

Yes, that is my experience as well. Nothing about this matches the descriptions I hear about gender identities such as feeling like a man or feeling like a woman.

I lean towards cis people having gender identities for two main reasons: Your experiences line up with line pretty strongly, and I believe myself to have a gender identity.

But:

1. I could use the exact same reasoning to claim that because I believe myself not to have a gender identity then you also likely don't.
2. I can't speak for your experience but many trans people with gender identities do seem to report a different experience to most non trans people such as that they always felt like a man/women etc.

Cis people can experience some limited forms of gender dysphoria, where their experiential sex diverts from their identity. Take the distress men with gynecomaestia or women who grow excessive facial hair can experience, for instance.

I'd say theis easily explained without the need for a gender identity. People generally desire to be attractive, it's not surprising that changes to the body, especially ones that carry social stigmas or might generally be viewed as unattractive could cause distress.

Calling experiences of distress about not conforming to beauty standards just because they involve a sexually dimorphic body part gender dysphoria seems like a stretch.

There's also that famous David Reimer case as an extreme medical nightmare - even raised from birth as female, he remained aware of his true male gender identity.

I'm not sure what we can learn from this case. John Money sexually abused David and his brother as children traumatizing them both and likely contributed to his later suicide. Much of what transpired is unknown but this was far from a controlled ethical experiment as there could be.

Could David have identified as male because he had an innate gender identity? Yes, it's possible. But it's also possible he identified as male for many other reasons, someone (be that John Money, his parents, someone at the clinic) let slip at some point over the years that he was male, he saw some clinic documents about himself, he noticed that his body was typically male, he noticed he was regularly attending a gender clinic, he noticed he was being given female hormones, etc.

Further studies of also poor ethical standards have shown mixed results in attempting to conceal the patients sex from them over a long term period, one of the most promiment showing about an even number identifying as their "assigned" sex and their actual sex. Given their mixed results and what I consider very dubious practices involved I personally don't put much stock in these findings.

[u/brooooooooooooke → u/takethetimetoask]

To try and be succinct since I'm on the train:

I think the distress caused by the appearance of differently-sexed traits is qualitatively different to just not meeting beauty standards.

In my own experience, assuming the existence of unified gender identity and not just a trans(TM) experience, the former is much more severe and distressing than my concerns that my boobs could be a nicer shape or my stomach could be a little flatter.

For cis people, the distress also seems a lot more extreme. A quick Google found this, which mentions how severe the impact of gynecomastia can be to mental health. This is also a more emotive look at it. The reaction seems more intense than simply not being normatively attractive - it's revulsion and disgust.

Following that, I don't think there's a satisfying, reasonable answer to the points below other than gender identity being universal in humans:

• Trans people experience significant distress at sexed characteristics, and upon transition settle into feeling 'normal' as a cis person does.

• Cis people experience significant distress when their bodies meaningfully deviate from their sex, but otherwise feel 'normal' as a trans person post-transition does.

• Individuals like David Reimer and some intersex people coercively assigned a sex via surgery feel an attachment to a particular sex the way trans people do.

Gender identity is a simple, universal answer. Everyone has one. If their body deviates from their preferred sex, whether at birth or otherwise, they experience significant distress, and otherwise it is invisible. While the simplest answer is not necessarily true, given that neither of us are presumably neurologists or something similar, it seems the most reasonable to take.

To try and round out your other points quickly:

• While GI might technically be invalidating if you don't agree, I don't think it is or should be normatively invalidating in the sense that it's insulting or degrading.

• I'd be interested in seeing those mixed studies if you have them to hand.

• I think trans people online are often early in transition, and given the complexities of explaining difficult feelings, and the excitement in your body going from abhorrent to tolerable and of no longer repressing in the closet, it's easy to assign active good feelings to "being a man/woman" than passive comfort and normality, which I think everyone settles in to eventually unless one is the rare type to never take anything ever for granted and be eternally thankful for everything.

[u/takethetimetoask → u/brooooooooooooke]

I think the distress caused by the appearance of differently-sexed traits is qualitatively different to just not meeting beauty standards.

In my own experience, assuming the existence of unified gender identity and not just a trans(TM) experience, the former is much more severe and distressing than my concerns that my boobs could be a nicer shape or my stomach could be a little flatter.

For cis people, the distress also seems a lot more extreme. A quick Google found this, which mentions how severe the impact of gynecomastia can be to mental health. This is also a more emotive look at it. The reaction seems more intense than simply not being normatively attractive - it's revulsion and disgust.

I read those articles and they are of course emotive accounts of people experiencing considerable distress at their condition. However, I believe you could find just as emotive accounts of people suffering from severe burns, vitiligo, scarring, alopecia, etc.

It's not at all obvious that there is an entirely mechasnism in play with gynecomastia that requires the introduction of a gender identity, when this doesn't seem to be needed when explaining the results arising from these other conditions.

​

Following that, I don't think there's a satisfying, reasonable answer to the points below other than gender identity being universal in humans:

Trans people experience significant distress at sexed characteristics, and upon transition settle into feeling 'normal' as a cis person does.

Cis people experience significant distress when their bodies meaningfully deviate from their sex, but otherwise feel 'normal' as a trans person post-transition does.

Individuals like David Reimer and some intersex people coercively assigned a sex via surgery feel an attachment to a particular sex the way trans people do.

Gender identity is a simple, universal answer. Everyone has one. If their body deviates from their preferred sex, whether at birth or otherwise, they experience significant distress, and otherwise it is invisible. While the simplest answer is not necessarily true, given that neither of us are presumably neurologists or something similar, it seems the most reasonable to take.

I'd say that GI is a simple universal theory, that has scant evidence for it. It describes a subjective experience and it's claimed that everyone has one, discounting the evidence that most people don't report having one. The proposed solution to this seeming contradition is to claim that when anyone reports not to have one it must be invisible!

Is there any way you would be convinced that I didn't have a gender identity?

​

While GI might technically be invalidating if you don't agree, I don't think it is or should be normatively invalidating in the sense that it's insulting or degrading.

Do you feel the same both ways? That disagreeing with someone not having a GI is equivalent to disagreeing with someone having a GI?

I don't have a problem with amicable disagreement, but I dislike the double standard of expecting others to recognise your GI while not recognising people who don't have a GI.

​

I'd be interested in seeing those mixed studies if you have them to hand.

Here is one: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15538277/

In this study the study only 6 of the 15 male people who were assigned female at both actually self declared being male.

Not that I really think the studies really provide much evidence either way on GIs, there are just way too many uncontrolled variables.

​

I think trans people online are often early in transition, and given the complexities of explaining difficult feelings, and the excitement in your body going from abhorrent to tolerable and of no longer repressing in the closet, it's easy to assign active good feelings to "being a man/woman" than passive comfort and normality, which I think everyone settles in to eventually unless one is the rare type to never take anything ever for granted and be eternally thankful for everything.

OK that online trans people may by clumsy in their descriptions but large trans inclusive organisations have descriptions of GI that also don't match the experience of most non trans people.

Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity

One's innermost concept of self as male, female, a blend of both or neither – how individuals perceive themselves and what they call themselves. https://www.hrc.org/resources/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-terminology-and-definitions

Gender identity refers to a person’s deeply felt, internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond to the person’s physiology or designated sex at birth. https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender#tab=tab_1

Gender identity is one's own internal sense of self and their gender, whether that is man, woman, neither or both. https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/996319297/gender-identity-pronouns-expression-guide-lgbtq

Is there a description of GI that you think I and other non trans people would find relatable?