What do you think of the gender binary?

Ingram

Samp's idea thread got me curious about everyone's thoughts. Like it? Hate it? Necessary evil? Unnecessary anachronism?

Samp

Unfortunate reality???

I hate it in every possible way for so many reasons, but I also have to recognize it was invented for imperialism/colonialism. So, even if it oppresses me in comparison to white cis people, my gender as a trans woman is valid because of the binary even as a non-binary woman. That's white privilege.

#burnittotheground

Damariel

It's one of many ways that humans have elected to construct gender roles. By no means is it the only one, or even the most desirable one. I'd like to see more critical analysis and deconstruction of what being male or female means in Western society.

Toz

I still see gender as a binary thing, but that's just sort of how I operate in the first place. 1s or 0s, I'm in Comp Sci because I like the absolute nature of it. You're either a guy or a girl, because I go by the physical bits, I suppose. You can be a 1 looking to become a 0, but until you actually do, at least in my mind? You're still a 1.

So, uh. There's a WASP conservative opinion for your thread?

Damariel

@Toz: I'm studying computer science myself, and here's a metaphor that seems pretty apt - you have hardware, and you have software. The software that's installed on the hardware may or may not match. You could have male hardware, but your software could be female, male, or anything outside of those two distinctions. People don't transition because they want to 'become' a 1. They're already a 1, and some of them choose to change the hardware to match.

Setne

That's deep.

Eleanor

that's the difference between gender and sex.

Toz

Damariel said:

@Toz: I'm studying computer science myself, and here's a metaphor that seems pretty apt - you have hardware, and you have software. The software that's installed on the hardware may or may not match. You could have male hardware, but your software could be female, male, or anything outside of those two distinctions. People don't transition because they want to 'become' a 1. They're already a 1, and some of them choose to change the hardware to match.

I can certainly see it, though I still tend to view by hardware rather than software. I'm big on mechanics > RP, you can't run Dark Souls 2 on Windows 95, etc. Gotta have the hardware to match the software, or it's a little odd. So there, we certainly agree.
EDIT: To clarify, we agree that there's two different levels (software/hardware, whatever you want to call them). I'm trying to take pains to be careful with what I say here, because internet discussions always get weird unless everyone is careful.

Haven't ever met anyone IRL who was trans, or identified as the other gender - that being said, I think it'd bend my brain to have to call someone who clearly looks male 'her'. It's just a side of thinking I can't quite bring myself to comprehend - and I don't mean that in a bad way. I don't understand atheist thinking either, I see too many coincidences, too much in my life has kicked the 'right' way for me to just put it down to me being awesome/getting lucky. My hardware/software match, I guess, but I don't really even think I comprehend what software/hardware not matching would feel like/be like, so I stick to what I know. I'm a guy, hardware and all. So I identify others like that as well.

Ishin

Hrm...I'm with Toz, I've never met someone transgender before. I do, however, have a couple of friends who like people of the same gender as they are, and it doesn't really bother me at all. Six or seven years ago it might have, but these days, not so much. I'm not sure if I've just gotten used to it, grown up a shitload, or a bit of both(I like 'both', myself). But, they're still people, and they are who they are and aren't going to change just because people don't like it(or I'd sure as shit hope they wouldn't), so who am I to tell them they're wrong or something, yanno?

To me(not meaning any offense), you're either a 1, or a 0. I'm just the kinda guy that doesn't really deal well with anything in between, and that's not trying to take away from anyone who wants to be something other than a 1 or a 0. It's just my perception of things, you know? Some 1's and some 0's don't look like a traditional 1 or a 0, but it still is what it is.

Regardless of what I think about such things, I -also- think that people should, more or less, just be who they are and be happy in life, whatever others might think. I've been through some shit myself, and honestly, life's only about 80 or 90 years long if we get lucky, so better just to be happy while you're alive, I think. Not like, superficially happy, but happy inside. If that makes any sense.

Irruel

I've met someone that identified as an 'it'. She put a lot of effort into looking somewhere in the middle. Androgynous is the word, I think.

A cool indie woman/it/whatever (at the time I would have said chick) that was never interested in anyone the whole time I knew her. I regret not asking her more details, why etc.

Samp

Eleanor said:

that's the difference between gender and sex.

If I could suggest a link, this article is fantastic and covers SO many points on the iffy notion of claiming sex as concrete and gender a "social construct."

I don't think that biology is any kind of universal truth, and this article points out reasons as to why our use of science still leads to "social constructs" as much as not using science. That is, sex is as mutable a concept as gender and both are constructs exclusive to society.

Samp

Irruel said:

I've met someone that identified as an 'it'. She put a lot of effort into looking somewhere in the middle. Androgynous is the word, I think.

A cool indie woman/it/whatever (at the time I would have said chick) that was never interested in anyone the whole time I knew her. I regret not asking her more details, why etc.

It's probably better you didn't pry- you did the safe thing even if it's not juicy or interesting

Toz said:

Haven't ever met anyone IRL who was trans, or identified as the other gender - that being said, I think it'd bend my brain to have to call someone who clearly looks male 'her'. It's just a side of thinking I can't quite bring myself to comprehend - and I don't mean that in a bad way.

The thing is though, it is in a bad way when you misgender someone even though you know better.

Brayden

I closely knew a transgender person (man to woman) who, on one hand, said that gender was a completely imaginary social construct. And on the other hand, she said that she was a female by gender. She was placing herself, as if it was an objective fact, into a construct that she herself said was fake. It didn't make sense to me, but I didn't challenge it out of sensitivity, and I try to call people what they want to be called. Scientifically, I would think that there are very few cases (though those few isolated cases do exist) where the hormonal process required for the formation of the "hardware" fails to affect the "software". My perception of the issue is that most of the dissatisfaction with the gender binary stems from our exaggerated social construct of gender.

Riluo

One of the studies conducted recently showed that transgender MTF brains have the same biological make up as cis-females and visa versa with FTM. Indeed I had a long talk with an old colleague about it today Dr Lyons from Adelaide who is a gender specialist, he was very forthright about it all. I found it fascinating to be honest and learnt a lot to use in my own practice in the future.

Mariena

I am not sure if I should even be commenting because I'm not sure if I grasp this enough, but hear me out. I see sex and gender like those manual scales at the doctor's office, with the two sliding weights on the metal bar? You stand on it and push those weights around. When it balances, that's you. Female is on one end and male is on the other in my head and in the same way what you like your parts mashing against (or not mashing against) on the other. You can be any combo and it can fluctuate as you grow.

I don't know if I get this at all.

Zakarel

I just want to point out an important distinction here: To recognize that something is socially constructed is not the same as saying it is fake or not real. Social realities are realities all the same.

Anyway, here's my take. Sex and gender are hella complicated. A lot of folks think that there are two sexes, male and female, and that's the be-all, end-all of it. The fact is, there are so many different genetic and biological criteria to determine those categories. There's the chromosomes typically associated with sex, XX and XY, but some folks are born with XO or XXY. Some folks have XX chromosomes but testosterone levels that lead to the development of masculine sex characteristics (congenital adrenal hyperplasia); some folks have XY chromosomes but retain uteri and fallopian tubes, structures usually associated with femaleness (persistent müllerian duct syndrome). Then there's androgen insensitivity, wherein a person with XY chromosomes has a level of or response to androgens leaves them presenting phenotypically in a way most people would perceive as female.

So you can go beyond sex chromosomes and look at genitalia, but the fact of the matter is there is a huge amount of variety there, too. The Intersex Society of North America has some really great data about the frequency of births that are not easily categorized as male or female the way we conceptualize those categories here: http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency

And it's not as simple as sex hormones, of course, because those vary so widely, as well. For example, is a post-menopausal woman any less of a woman for her lower estrogen levels? Of course not.

If so-called "biological sex" is not a clear-cut 1 or 0, how the heck could gender be?

Zakarel

Alright so it's almost 5am my time, and that means I just did a whole lot of rambling without getting to my actual point. What I'm saying is, the gender binary is socially constructed meaning that it is how we, and by 'we' I don't just mean individuals, but healthcare professionals, academics, scientists, policy makers, and the institutions 'we' all work with/for, take all of those factors and oversimplify them to basically say, "If you present with enough characteristics that allow us to lump you into this category, we will call you 'woman' and have these expectations of you socially, professionally, emotionally, etc., and if you present with enough characteristics that allow us to lump you into this category, we will call you 'man' and have these expectations of you socially, professionally, emotionally, etc. If you present with ambiguous characteristics, you will likely be subject to various medical treatments as an infant with no ability to consent or not to those procedures. Because it's easier for us to change people to fit them into our categories than to re-think our categories to more adequately capture the reality of gender: it's complicated."

Emelle

@Mariena‌, I think you get it just fine!

Mephistoles

Samp said:

Unfortunate reality???

I hate it in every possible way for so many reasons, but I also have to recognize it was invented for imperialism/colonialism. So, even if it oppresses me in comparison to white cis people, my gender as a trans woman is valid because of the binary even as a non-binary woman. That's white privilege.

#burnittotheground

The 'gender binary' doesn't really have anything to do with colonialism or imperialism, and I'm frankly a little mystified as to where that assertion came form. Nothing about 'two genders' supports or promotes 'imperialism'. Really not even sure to make of that.

That said, gender is indeed socially constructed and there are other cultures that see it differently. Some indigenous cultures in Malaysia and Indonesia have three or more 'genders', as does Thai culture with it's concept of kathoeys.

The concept of binary gender is really just a product of our binary reproduction and a shallow understanding of human sexuality, but it's not uniquely western. There are plenty of other cultures that have binary gender (probably most really), and there are some that have conceptions of a 'third gender' as it's usually called. But it doesn't have anything to do with imperialism.

Samp

--nope nevermind--

Ingram

Why nevermind?

Lim

Interesting to know that the indigenous cultures of Indonesia and Malaysia are not widely accepted in part due to the patriarchial systems imported from Dutch Christian colonialism (the other part is from the adoption of Islam, an example of a non-white patriarchy). Patriarchial systems depend heavily on a gender binary.

I'm guessing Samp is referring to that aspect of imperialism/colonialisation, where it imports and entrenches patriarchy, which has historically (and perhaps even now) opposed to anything which contradicts a gender binary.

Adding on:
Something interesting to think about - Centuries back, these indigenous cultures in Indonesia celebrating trans/third genders were prevalent before Islam and colonialism, and were a big part of their way of life. Third/trans gendered people were (as I understand it) seen as something like being gifted by the Gods. They took on the privileged roles of ritualists/shamans and were spiritual guides to the people in the same way you would see class of priests as revered and privileged. They had a unique place in society and were treated with respect and awe, not ostracision. When you showed signs of being trans/third gendered, you were sent off to serve a greater calling, and provide a divine service to your people.

That's a very stark contrast to how trans/third gendered people are seen today. And it makes you wonder how the world would be like today if different people had the power, and shaped it differently.

Samp

Ingram said:

Why nevermind?

This is a hyper personal conversation for me and I have a lot invested in it. I didn't want to get into an exhausting conversation that had no end. @Lim did a great job showing examples of how binarism is related to colonization and western society and I'm with them 100%.

I have to remind myself it's not always useful or healthy to step in the middle of it. I'm also just returning to Aet, and I've always been an errant brat looking for a fight. I'm invested in avoiding that behavior this go around. When I realize I don't have nice words to make my point, I'm wanting to step away from the conversation. (Don't worry, I'll get riled up again in no time!)

@Ingram FWIW, gender theory is my jam and I can do this convo all day long so long as I know me and the other folks involved are excited and into it. If it's something you ever wanted to chat about, PM me!

/my only humble post ever

Mephistoles

@Lim Pretty much all traditional cultures are 'Patriarchial' unless you're using the term in a peculiar way. In traditional cultures sometimes you get things like the Iroquois chief being elected by women, but it should recognized that even in these cases, it's really a 'patriarchial' society, one led by men. The closest human culture has come to getting away from that is modern society, Iceland is presently closest to it actually since so many women got involved in politics after the recent market crash. I think the majority of their politicians at this point might actually be women, but don't hold me to that, I'm definitely not certain.

Really, the connection between imperialism and colonialism in this case seem tenuous even in the best of scenario. You'll have to make a more convincing argument than that one for me.

Samp

Wow you're so I'll informed on Iroquois tradition. The notion that men ran the tribe was invented by white people who only respected male leaders. A man's contribution as chief had a limited scope (often relegated to hunting and war, again thinks white colonizers priorirized) and women (as well as non binary folk) provided extensive leadership in maintaining the tribe.

Samp

And nobody is obligated to make any argument for you to decide to agree or not. The work is on you.

Areka

In just regards of how dialogue and conversations work, if you want someone to change their stance and agree with you, it IS your obligation to put forth the case, data, and information in hopes of doing so. "You should agree with me and you should figure out on your own why you should agree with me." doesn't work.

In regards to the rest, I think it is easy to harp on imperialism, however it is a -human- practice of defining statuses and things, giving them names to identify them by - and while this often does become a larger tool of 'us vs them' (which taps into our base instincts to have an 'other' and protect our smaller clusters, which goes back to tribal warfare and territory and preservation, not just imperialism) - is not something the white man alone has done. I feel that it is a cop out to utilize the very argument that is being contested, and ignores the complexities and facets of one subject to address the complexities and facets of another.

Mephistoles

Samp said:

And nobody is obligated to make any argument for you to decide to agree or not. The work is on you.

Never said that someone was obligated to do anything, that said, if you're making a claim, it's on you to show evidence for it.

It's sometimes referred to as "Hitchens' Razor" after the late Christopher Hitchens, though the concept of the burden of proof being on the claim maker predates him. If you've actually got some convincing evidence it would be interesting to hear it, rather than an assertion that I'm

Samp said:

I'll informed

As for the rest, the Iroquois system of political governance was complex, and though women held much more power than they did in European societies, they still were not the ones ultimately in power. I'd suggest reading about the Iroquois Confederacy, also called the Iroquois League, which was without a doubt controlled by the chiefs of the tribe, who were of course, male. The Iroquois also did plenty of conquering themselves, particularly against the Algonquians and were definitely not a particularly peaceful bunch.

However, if your assertion is actually correct that the Iroquois were non-patriarchal, it undermines arguments about imperialism being inherently patriarchal.

Minarael

There are plenty of examples of traditional cultures that are not at all patriarchal.

Gender as binary is really a hard sell with western views on gender roles to begin with. I had ...we'll call it a gender crisis when I was a younger teenager. I was legitimately worried I might be a lesbian or Trans because of my nature. I am not girly. Now, I very much identify as female, but many of my core personality traits are viewed as masculine by my society. I am aggressive, loud, practical, logical, and generally dominant in any public situation. We regularly joke about me being the dude in my relationships because I'm the ultra logical, solve the problems one. I am also the primary breadwinner and always have been. Making myself ultra cute has never been something I was good at. Oh man, I tried.

With the vocabulary I had at the time, I translated this as dyke. I was super upset because I also liked boys. I was feeling like I was being pulled towards a thing and would be required to give ups parts of myself to achieve an actualized me.
At the time, the gay community was pretty harsh towards the idea of bisexuality. I grew up hearing bad things about bi people. That didn't seem like a possibility.

Gender and sensuality are linked in a way they really shouldn't be, I think. Who you fall in love with, who you are attracted to is only minimally informed by how you feel about your gender.

I've been watching my two oldest daughters sort through these things. They are moving through their early teens years where this really starts to hit home. Where you begin to work out who you are attracted to and begin to learn who you are. Many of their friends are in some form of flux. They are comfortable with non-traditional terms for gender and sexual identity. A few of my kids friends identify as gender fluid. My middle daughter has always been a tomboy who is currently rocking a shaved head. She identifies as a girl but challenges daily social assumptions of what 'girl' is and should be. She is aware of the pressure, aware of possibilities, in a way that I never was at her age. It has been interesting to watch these kids sort through it with expanded awareness and vocabulary.

I think we'll see a very different landscape as these kids become adults.

Mephistoles

Minarael said:

There are plenty of examples of traditional cultures that are not at all patriarchal.

People say this but then have trouble coming up with actual examples. I'm certainly open to the idea, but no one ever really seems to come up with solid, non-contemporary instances of this.

Areka

I just want to voice that 'I was not girly' is a misnomer with gender identity, and raises concerns with me about gender identity becoming the new ADD ("my 5 year old has a lot of energy I clearly need to medicate him he clearly has ADHD even though this is a totally typical thing for a child of that age" - make up skills or interest and preference for skirts do not a female make, and pushing that as the forerunner of gender identity only further entrenches the binary and minimizes the complexities of all aspects of self-identity) or the new sexuality (with every high schooler and their mother now 'being' bisexual because it is the hip, edgy thing to be, even if they aren't, and the weird territory it brings the actual subject into being paraded as a trend rather than the reality. That isn't to say that I disbelieve that large populations are somewhere middling in the spectrum of sexuality, but what it has become in the social sphere, for a good chunk in the last two decades, has been a trend).