Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Lagayascienza]

I think it is a mistake to try to separate gender identity from gendered behavior when it comes to transexuals. I don't think that you can have one without the other when it comes to transexuals, pre-or post-op. A biological male who feels they are in the wrong body does not role-play at being a women. Such a person knows that they ARE a women, albeit in the wrong body. The female clothes go with being the gender they know themselves to be. Transexuals are not like male transvestites who get a kick out of dressing up as women. Conservative god-botherers might get their rocks off by categorizing transexuals as deviants but it is the god-botherers who are the deviants. They lack the ability to understand anyone who is not exactly like their religion say they should be. They lack imagination and humanity. If there is a hell, then there is probably an especially hot part of it reserved just for them.

[Sy Borg]

The only reason for gender identity that I can think of is to result in gendered behaviours that result in higher rates of reproductive success. Maybe it's something simply going awry, the mental equivalent of a deformity?

[Fried Egg]

Gendered behaviour does not equal gender identity. Although I don't think anybody has come out and stated it explicitly, I'm increasingly convinced that this people here are using the concepts interchangeably.

Whilst I might accept the suggestion that people who identify differently to their biological sex tend to exhibit more typical gendered behaviour of the opposite sex, it seems quite clear that this is not always the case. Hence, they are distinct concepts (even if they do correlate more often than not).

Note, that I think there are some good evolutionary arguments that can be made for various gendered behaviours. But I am unaware of any for gender identity. I suspect that it might be better explained mimetically (in that it is a culturally evolved idea rather than genetically evolved.

I must come straight out and admit that, as described above, I see no significant difference between the two. It is not even clear to me what "gender identity" is supposed to mean. [It's also the case, I suppose, that I'm not wholly clear on what "gendered behaviour" is, either.]

Well, I did a little net searching and found a few definitions that get used:

Gender identity describes how a person feels about their gender.

One's innermost concept of self as male, female, a blend of both or neither – how individuals perceive themselves and what they call themselves.

Lots of things make up your gender identity, including:

• your body and biological sex, for example your sexual organs
• how you feel about your gender and how you identify yourself
• your gender expression, for example how you dress or act.

So, it seems distinct to me from gendered behaviours. By gendered behaviours, I mean any innate behaviours and tendencies that are typically (but not universally) exhibited by men or women. One might include sexuality as a gendered behaviour (since most men are attracted to women, and vice versa). I don't think it's worth getting into a debate ever exactly which innate behaviours are gendered. My point here is to say that it doesn't seem to be what people mean when they say gender identity.

One site above described it as an "innermost conception" and another as how they "feel" about their gender. So I guess my original question relates to this. If we have an innermost concept or feeling about our gender identity, is this feeling innate (or otherwise)?

The Childline article I quoted from above went on to say: "Gender identity isn’t just male or female. Some people can identify as non-binary, and how people identify can change over time." Of particular interest to me in this discussion is this idea that it can change over time. Is that at odds with the idea that gender identity is innate?

I think it is a mistake to try to separate gender identity from gendered behavior when it comes to transexuals. I don't think that you can have one without the other when it comes to transexuals, pre-or post-op.

Well, I think separating them is inevitable as they obviously don't always correspond.

Some people have (I assume) an innermost concept or feeling of their gender that is at odds with their biological sex and seek to identify, express and present themselves as the gender that corresponds with these inner feelings. These feelings do not seem to necessarily arise out of an awareness that their behaviours and tendencies are atypical (for their sex).

[Good_Egg]

I think it is a mistake to try to separate gender identity from gendered behavior when it comes to transexuals. I don't think that you can have one without the other when it comes to transexuals, pre-or post-op. A biological male who feels they are in the wrong body does not role-play at being a women. Such a person knows that they ARE a women, albeit in the wrong body. The female clothes go with being the gender they know themselves to be. Transexuals are not like male transvestites who get a kick out of dressing up as women.

Gendered behaviour is a real thing, involving both social convention (e g social pressure for boys to do what boys are expected to do) and the behavioural outworking of the action of male and female hormones.

If you've ever watched chickens in a farmyard, you may have been struck by how recognisably male and female is the behaviour of the cockerels and hens.

Those hormones also affect bodies and brains, and it is not unreasonable to suppose that brains affect minds, although the mechanism for that is unclear.

So across the population, there is strong correlation between body-sex, brain-sex, feelings of gender identity, and incidence of gendered behaviour.

But when you're talking about trans-sexual people you're considering a small minority of cases where at least one part of that correlation does not apply.

So your simplifying assumption that gendered behaviour correlates perfectly with feelings of identity is unjustified.

[Lagayascienza]

No, I make no simplifying assumptions.

Consider a child who is born with male genitalia but who, from a very young age, despite parents' efforts to discourage it, has consistently behaved in ways that we take to be stereotypically feminine? The child behaves like a girl, believes they are a girl and they identify with the female gender. I am male physically and I identify with the male gender. My gender identity is real and could not be changed. . But it could have been different despite my male physical bits and pieces. There is indeed a correlation between physical characteristics and gender identity but that correlation does not always apply and I nowhere suggested that it did.

Those who make simplifying assumptions are most often conservative religious nutters who cannot bear difference and must shoehorn everyone into categories that are in line with their religious beliefs. It's bonkers.

[Fried Egg]

Consider a child who is born with male genitalia but who, from a very young age, despite parents' efforts to discourage it, has consistently behaved in ways that we take to be stereotypically feminine? The child behaves like a girl, believes they are a girl and they identify with the female gender.

And there are those who's believe they are a girl but don't behave like a girl (or vice versa). Belief and behaviour seem to be distinct because they don't always correlate. That's the distinction that I'm trying to point out and want people to address in this thread.

[Pattern-chaser]

And there are those who's believe they are a girl but don't behave like a girl (or vice versa). Belief and behaviour seem to be distinct because they don't always correlate. That's the distinction that I'm trying to point out and want people to address in this thread.

I understand how difficult discussions like these can be, and how hard contributors are working to have a useful discussion. But, given the nature of the discussion we're having in this topic, is it wise to use a phrase like "behave like a girl"?

It's as if we are saying "If you behave like *THIS*, you are a girl; if you behave like *THAT*, you aren't". And I don't think anyone is really saying this, are they? So what does it mean to say "behave like a boy", and how does it relate to all the other words we're using, like "(biological) sex", "gender", "gender identity", and so on?

[Fried Egg]

And there are those who's believe they are a girl but don't behave like a girl (or vice versa). Belief and behaviour seem to be distinct because they don't always correlate. That's the distinction that I'm trying to point out and want people to address in this thread.

I understand how difficult discussions like these can be, and how hard contributors are working to have a useful discussion. But, given the nature of the discussion we're having in this topic, is it wise to use a phrase like "behave like a girl"?

It's as if we are saying "If you behave like *THIS*, you are a girl; if you behave like *THAT*, you aren't". And I don't think anyone is really saying this, are they? So what does it mean to say "behave like a boy", and how does it relate to all the other words we're using, like "(biological) sex", "gender", "gender identity", and so on?

I wouldn't put it that way personally, but I was responding to something specific Lagayascienza wrote in which he phrased it that way. I think it is meaningful to talk about innate gendered behaviours/tendencies (formed by hormonal effects on the brain during foetal development or afterwards). I know not everyone accepts this premise and believe all gendered behaviours are only a result of social conditioning. But I don't think it's particularly relevant to discuss that here. Even if we decided that there are no innate gendered behaviours, one might still believe that one's gender identity is innate.

So the question I want answered is this: Is there something we might call our gender identity (our inner most conception/feeling of our gender) that is distinct from our gendered behaviours (be they innate or otherwise)? And if so, where does it come from?

[Sy Borg]

Consider a child who is born with male genitalia but who, from a very young age, despite parents' efforts to discourage it, has consistently behaved in ways that we take to be stereotypically feminine? The child behaves like a girl, believes they are a girl and they identify with the female gender.

And there are those who's believe they are a girl but don't behave like a girl (or vice versa). Belief and behaviour seem to be distinct because they don't always correlate. That's the distinction that I'm trying to point out and want people to address in this thread.

I think the difference between believing and behaving is response to stigma. Genderqueer young people who don't fear the stigma will behave naturally while those who fear the stigma will try to conform. That, of course, is the whole point of stigmatisation - to get outliers to practice behaving normally, in the hope that at least some will grow out of it.

[Fried Egg]

Consider a child who is born with male genitalia but who, from a very young age, despite parents' efforts to discourage it, has consistently behaved in ways that we take to be stereotypically feminine? The child behaves like a girl, believes they are a girl and they identify with the female gender.

And there are those who's believe they are a girl but don't behave like a girl (or vice versa). Belief and behaviour seem to be distinct because they don't always correlate. That's the distinction that I'm trying to point out and want people to address in this thread.

I think the difference between believing and behaving is response to stigma. Genderqueer young people who don't fear the stigma will behave naturally while those who fear the stigma will try to conform. That, of course, is the whole point of stigmatisation - to get outliers to practice behaving normally, in the hope that at least some will grow out of it.

But gender identity, or the desire to change sex, goes beyond the mere desire to be free of stigmatisation. In modern western societies, we have never been more free to behave in anyway we want, to adopt any roles we want (still with room for improvement no doubt). And many people take advantage of this and do just that. But wanting to change one's sex goes beyond merely wanting to be free of the stigma of gender expectations.

I think most people these days, and I'm sure everybody here, believes people should be able to live free of stigmatisation and exhibit the behaviours / tendencies of any gender. But it's almost as if those who seek to transition want to reverse that stigma and social expectation. They want to be treated and regarded as if they are a different gender. That's why so many get so hung up on not being mis-gendered, why those that transition often become caricatures of the gender they desire to be. They seek affirmation of their gender identity in the behaviours of others around them. It is not enough that they be merely left to be how they want to be.

[Sy Borg]

Well, if there is no gender identity, then you are effectively saying that all transpeople are either insane or perverts. If that was the case, the medical profession would have put an end to it over half a century ago.

I think that transpeople have long represented the intersection of innate differences in secondary and mental gender characteristics and societal mores. It's always been a minuscule percentage of people. That has changed recently. I'm not sure what the story is with the flood of gender variant people today is. It looks like the breaking of longstanding taboos, possibly one of the last taboos (that doesn't involve exploiting others).

[Pattern-chaser]

I think the difference between believing and behaving is response to stigma. Genderqueer young people who don't fear the stigma will behave naturally while those who fear the stigma will try to conform. That, of course, is the whole point of stigmatisation - to get outliers to practice behaving normally, in the hope that at least some will grow out of it.

Nice one, introducing "stigmatism". No-one has yet mentioned it, I don't think, but it fits the discussion nicely. And in this sense, it is the mildest form of aversion therapy in our human arsenal. It was also used in so-called 'gay conversion', now illegal in the UK, but still practised on autists.

I know no-one is saying this; I choose to post the following words as a warning: aversion therapy is a euphemism for torture. It is not a "therapy", despite the name. There are those amongst us who, presented with something they dislike, will try to rid themselves of it, perhaps by threat or torture.

And perhaps this is part of the discussion that has so far been neglected — the hard-line campaign against anything differing from the binary roles described in the Bible. How are people who deviate from those roles treated, and by whom? what is the view from the non-binary part of our community?

[Fried Egg]

Well, if there is no gender identity, then you are effectively saying that all transpeople are either insane or perverts. If that was the case, the medical profession would have put an end to it over half a century ago.

I did not say that there is no such thing, I only question whether it is innate, and whether everyone has it (as I'm not aware of mine). As I mentioned previously, I think it may be memetic in nature, an idea that spreads and persists through our culture.

In truth, there are probably lots if different causes and reasons behind people seeking to transition. Certainly, not everyone does it for gender identity reasons (we know there are some who do so because they are autogynephiliacs for example - but I don't think it helps to call them "perverts" because that label attaches a negative stigma to something that needn't be - after all, it harms no one).

And also, I'm not going conclude that if gender identity isn't innate that we should not allow people to transition. That is not why I'm bringing the concept up for discussion.

[Pattern-chaser]

Is there something we might call our gender identity (our inner most conception/feeling of our gender) that is distinct from our gendered behaviours (be they innate or otherwise)? And if so, where does it come from?

To me, my gender, and the internal awareness ("feeling") of being or having that gender, are pretty much the same thing. Just like my conscious awareness, and the feeling that having conscious awareness sparks in me. If I have one of them, I also have the feeling of having them. Isn't that how it is for most things, and most people?

Where does it come from? Inside.

[Fried Egg]

I raised this earlier, but I don't think anyone has addressed it, but what do people who think gender identity is innate think about the idea that it can change over time? This is something that all the websites I looked up the definitions for gender identity agreed upon. But that doesn't seem to fit with the idea that it is innate.