Opinion Change My View: There are Two Genders

[TheRockInception]

So, lately, I've been reading MSM and in general lurking in GD, and lo and behold, I see foreign and secret words to me! Things like "Polysexual" and "Demisexual" and "Genderfluid" befuddle me, and as such, I look to the interwebz to inquire why somebody would make such words. And then I find things that I believe are ultimately soros deep state funded lies make believe and have no place in current society. But... since I'm an enlightened centrist and consider all opinions, I want you, reader, to change my view. In a world where you will beat someone with a bike lock just because you hold a different opinion, and where you can dehumanize an entire ideology that you don't agree with, let's do it the right way and the American way: Through good old democracy and calm discussion of opinions.
So... change my view that there are two genders and gender and sex are synonyms and interchangeable.
Rules
1. Please be respectful and polite with me and I shall do the same.
2. Do not reply to other users! Please, this is all about changing my view, not someone else's.
3. Remain on topic.
4. Use facts to back up your argument, but please, be aware that studies and experiments can actually be slanted if they produce results not wanted. Do research your sources and make sure A. they are not slanted and B. were not purposefully altered to support an agenda and C. make sure they are reliable and nonbiased.

 

[Suum]

Funnily enough I came across a video earlier with this exact same topic, what a coincidence. I'm unsure how I feel about the phrase "let's do it the right way and the American way" on what is effectively an internationally-available platform and with free speech and discussion being prominent in many western countries (indeed, before America), but that's another debate entirely and I wouldn't want to take this too off topic.

I don't really come to the debate with facts because my perspective isn't really one that I feel requires a study or fact to ground the logic of it. Sex and gender were once interchangeable terms which I would not debate, though it is also natural for language to develop and this has led to the idea of a division between sex (biological) and gender (social construct, role, and identity) - whether you agree with the division isn't altogether that important, but just to respect that it does appear to be the modern interpretation and that language does naturally evolve in this way. I can't see any intelligent person open to discussion trying to argue it doesn't when history is literally littered with the fact that it does.

Of course, even with this division, it is still the norm for Sex "A" to still identify as Gender "A", though (and whether this is due to increased awareness of people's self identity or simply more people identifying as such) we do see more individuals of Sex "A" identifying as Gender "B" or what I'll refer to as Gender "X" (conforming to neither of the two traditional gender characteristics to enough of a degree to be Gender "A" or "B"). Within these gender definitions you'll typically find an assortment of predefined roles or shared traits such as masculinity, femininity, or neither, as well as other potentially assumed characteristics of someone of that gender.

The heated debate (which I'm sure you'll have already experienced) comes from the notion that you are able to select a gender to identify with and that society is to conform to how you wish to be identified (pronouns, for example) or treated by others, which is an enormous problem when the number of genders being recognised by people seems to alter with each and every day... but that's not the point I'm going to argue, and therefore why I don't feel my opinion needs a factual backing to remain valid.

I don't personally get to select how the English language evolves, so I simply accept the fact that the terms sex and gender have evolved in their meaning to refer to the aforementioned different aspects. Therefore I accept sex as relating more to the biological (defined at birth), and sociological (societal structures). But that's really where my point is. If you're going to define gender as a social construct, identity, set of roles or the like (which is the predominant opinion) then I see no reason why it would form any limits to do with the number of potential genders. Effectively the predominant definition of a gender is, in practically every conceivable way, the very same as subcultures you might identify with, and subcultures also have no limits in number or variety.

In the same way subcultures have predefined ways of presenting yourself, expressing yourself, the various totems which you should regard as important, and even potential daily habits, the gender structure does the very same. The characteristics may be different to what we're used to, since subcultures usually maintain female and male alternatives within the subculture itself, but it's ultimately an extra layer of customisation to your social identity - customisation is a word I use loosely, since some do feel innately drawn to things rather than it being a conscious choice and I have nothing against that.

How it may vary from a subculture is in the area you're really customising. Ultimately it's usually about masculinity and femininity, and the balance one has, and if people really want to identify notches on the road in either direction then, just like with the identification of subcultures, I'm not sure why this is even up for debate as to why they can or can't. You have subcultures such as scene, emo, and goth, where you'll find quite a bit of similarity with variations here or there, or lessened degrees of characteristics between them. You could argue that gender issues have sometimes led to treatments to change body image beyond wearing different clothes and talking a different way, but the same can be seen in subcultures with body modification.

Really, the core distinction I see is that subcultures don't have a movement in the legal or social system to have them officially recognised or to change the pronouns you might use to refer to someone - one half of the argument is those wanting to identify as they choose, and the other is offended at others trying to dictate their use of language. And really, this boils down to respect - if you respected someone who identified as a biker then you most likely would not refer to them as something else unless teasing, and so in the same breath if someone identifies as male (and is biologically a woman) and is requesting you to use male pronouns, then it just boils down, in my opinion, to if you respect them or not.

Long story short, what I'm getting at is that if you can accept the evolution of the language to see distinction between sex and gender as biological and social structure, then there is really no reason (beyond impracticality) why that social structure can't pan out into as many little different flavours as it sees fit, because that is legitimately what social structures have and always will continue to do. All you really have to accept is that after years upon years of human existence, biological males and females eventually started conforming to a set of traits, habits, and roles which are now seemingly defined under the term "gender", and that those of biological male or female birth may not want to identify with the assumed role imposed on them by society. That's A-OK in my books.

 

[TheRockInception]

Funnily enough I came across a video earlier with this exact same topic, what a coincidence. I'm unsure how I feel about the phrase "let's do it the right way and the American way" on what is effectively an internationally-available platform and with free speech and discussion being prominent in many western countries (indeed, before America), but that's another debate entirely and I wouldn't want to take this too off topic.

I don't really come to the debate with facts because my perspective isn't really one that I feel requires a study or fact to ground the logic of it. Sex and gender were once interchangeable terms which I would not debate, though it is also natural for language to develop and this has led to the idea of a division between sex (biological) and gender (social construct, role, and identity) - whether you agree with the division isn't altogether that important, but just to respect that it does appear to be the modern interpretation and that language does naturally evolve in this way. I can't see any intelligent person open to discussion trying to argue it doesn't when history is literally littered with the fact that it does.

Of course, even with this division, it is still the norm for Sex "A" to still identify as Gender "A", though (and whether this is due to increased awareness of people's self identity or simply more people identifying as such) we do see more individuals of Sex "A" identifying as Gender "B" or what I'll refer to as Gender "X" (conforming to neither of the two traditional gender characteristics to enough of a degree to be Gender "A" or "B"). Within these gender definitions you'll typically find an assortment of predefined roles or shared traits such as masculinity, femininity, or neither, as well as other potentially assumed characteristics of someone of that gender.

The heated debate (which I'm sure you'll have already experienced) comes from the notion that you are able to select a gender to identify with and that society is to conform to how you wish to be identified (pronouns, for example) or treated by others, which is an enormous problem when the number of genders being recognised by people seems to alter with each and every day... but that's not the point I'm going to argue, and therefore why I don't feel my opinion needs a factual backing to remain valid.

I don't personally get to select how the English language evolves, so I simply accept the fact that the terms sex and gender have evolved in their meaning to refer to the aforementioned different aspects. Therefore I accept sex as relating more to the biological (defined at birth), and sociological (societal structures). But that's really where my point is. If you're going to define gender as a social construct, identity, set of roles or the like (which is the predominant opinion) then I see no reason why it would form any limits to do with the number of potential genders. Effectively the predominant definition of a gender is, in practically every conceivable way, the very same as subcultures you might identify with, and subcultures also have no limits in number or variety.

In the same way subcultures have predefined ways of presenting yourself, expressing yourself, the various totems which you should regard as important, and even potential daily habits, the gender structure does the very same. The characteristics may be different to what we're used to, since subcultures usually maintain female and male alternatives within the subculture itself, but it's ultimately an extra layer of customisation to your social identity - customisation is a word I use loosely, since some do feel innately drawn to things rather than it being a conscious choice and I have nothing against that.

How it may vary from a subculture is in the area you're really customising. Ultimately it's usually about masculinity and femininity, and the balance one has, and if people really want to identify notches on the road in either direction then, just like with the identification of subcultures, I'm not sure why this is even up for debate as to why they can or can't. You have subcultures such as scene, emo, and goth, where you'll find quite a bit of similarity with variations here or there, or lessened degrees of characteristics between them. You could argue that gender issues have sometimes led to treatments to change body image beyond wearing different clothes and talking a different way, but the same can be seen in subcultures with body modification.

Really, the core distinction I see is that subcultures don't have a movement in the legal or social system to have them officially recognised or to change the pronouns you might use to refer to someone - one half of the argument is those wanting to identify as they choose, and the other is offended at others trying to dictate their use of language. And really, this boils down to respect - if you respected someone who identified as a biker then you most likely would not refer to them as something else unless teasing, and so in the same breath if someone identifies as male (and is biologically a woman) and is requesting you to use male pronouns, then it just boils down, in my opinion, to if you respect them or not.

Long story short, what I'm getting at is that if you can accept the evolution of the language to see distinction between sex and gender as biological and social structure, then there is really no reason (beyond impracticality) why that social structure can't pan out into as many little different flavours as it sees fit, because that is legitimately what social structures have and always will continue to do. All you really have to accept is that after years upon years of human existence, biological males and females eventually started conforming to a set of traits, habits, and roles which are now seemingly defined under the term "gender", and that those of biological male or female birth may not want to identify with the assumed role imposed on them by society. That's A-OK in my books.

Well, the way I see the problem with this is that if gender is now apparently a social construct determined by society... society doesn't view things as a whole. Society is a mix of different races, religions, ages, etc. that everyone has their own personal opinion on what boils down to what is right and what is wrong. What is feminine or what is masculine. I mean, speaking of masculinity and feminine, aren't words that fall under these two terms... personality or rather adjectives? Although I probably know no such woman I can describe, would it mean a woman that is 'buff', macho, a hunter and a weightlifter be considered transgender? I think such an idea is quite silly and hunting and weightlifting are hobbies.

 

[Suum]

Well, the way I see the problem with this is that if gender is now apparently a social construct determined by society... society doesn't view things as a whole. Society is a mix of different races, religions, ages, etc. that everyone has their own personal opinion on what boils down to what is right and what is wrong. What is feminine or what is masculine. I mean, speaking of masculinity and feminine, aren't words that fall under these two terms... personality or rather adjectives? Although I probably know no such woman I can describe, would it mean a woman that is 'buff', macho, a hunter and a weightlifter be considered transgender? I think such an idea is quite silly and hunting and weightlifting are hobbies.

Ultimately, given it's based on self identity and not scientific fact (as all subcultures are), the buff woman would not essentially be anything by merit of her being buff, just like you are not inherently part of the biker subculture for owning a motorbike. However, the argument is simply that those wishing to define their gender are traditionally using masculinity, femininity and associated male or female roles in society as what sets them apart from others. As for what is feminine and masculine, there is a loose idea (as there is with all subcultures) of what falls into the male or female gender role, which incorporates machoness but also things such as dominance, fashion, and even how one holds oneself.

As with all subcultures, there are varying perspectives of what fits into what, but both traditional subcultures and genders do have a rough idea of what constitutes what, and that's simply the nature of a social structure really. Social structures are very much prone to personal opinion rather than factual logic, which is why it can be harder to wrap your head around it. Ultimately, the only reason genders are such a hot topic and subcultures aren't, is simply that subcultures do not traditionally demand you use specific language for interaction with them, which is where all the anger, confusion, and heated debate comes from.

 

[rxthissms]

I also find it interesting that you said the American way, because that is one of the issues with the "only two genders argument."

The concept of other genders than male and female is found in many different cultures. Ancient Greeks had Dionysus, a male god who was raised as a female and once accepting his godhood keeps many of his female attributes. Hindu recognizes a third gender as kind of an umbrella term for people who are non conforming in their sexuality or gender and these individuals are often required to perform at certain religious events. Native American cultures also generally recognize "Two Spirit" individuals in a similar way.

I think a lot of the issues people have with people identifying as a different gender than the norm is that Euro-centric culture did not have these kind of concepts and these people ended up colonizing a lot of the world, bringing their stigmas to these cultures who did not have that concept. This is why many third gender Hindu performers basically subsist on the money made from performing. Two genders has been the norm in American society since it's conception. We as English speakers don't have the terms that some other languages have for describing a third gender. That's why some terms like demigender and non-binary are so bizarre and even clumsy. I say this as someone who identifies as non-binary.

Also for me, on a personal level, it's an identity thing. I have never been able to look at traditional womanhood even in the 21st century and be able to see myself in most of it. I see myself in body parts and in some preferences but never as a whole. I connect even less with traditional manhood despute always wanting to be a dad and grow a beard. Part of that may be my sexual orientation. I will probably never be able to know for sure.

There is also the issue of body dysphoria. Depersonalization is a big mental health issue where you feel disconnected from your body. It's common in those with depression, PTSD and other neurological disorders. Dysphoria is similar, where your actual physical appearance doesn't match what you feel it should. That doesn't necessarily mean "I wish I was buff" because that that is something that can be actually changed by going to the gym. It's more like "I wish I didn't have breasts so I could look at myself comfortably in the mirror without having an emotional crisis."

 

[AnimeGenork]

the American way: Through good old democracy and calm discussion of opinions.

I'd like to talk about this instead

Here's how I see it:
I don't understand economics. It's a lot of words and concepts all jumbled together to me. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I choose to let other people handle understanding the concepts I myself understand.

I still don't fully understand all the different genders and sexualities. But that doesn't mean that others don't identify with them. Just because I'm a straight female and I'm comfortable in my body and skin doesn't mean that others do. I accept anyone regardless. I have gay friends, bi friends, pan friends, a friends, even a transgender friend who I support every step of the way. Not understanding does not mean that it doesn't exist. Not accepting it does not mean it doesn't exist. Not knowing why it's a thing does not mean it doesn't exist. Not everyone is as fortunate as I am to know for sure what I am, gender and sexuality wise. People get sex changes because they didn't feel right as the other one. It's similar with gender, but instead of completely changing their body, they change their mentality. Gender has to do with mentality, sex has to do with biology.

Really, it's a matter of if you're willing to ask questions. If someone can't change your view, fine.

Just don't impose your opinion on others as the one and only truth.

 

[Corrosion]

As I am not American, I shall take the liberty of shoving the facts straight in your face. It's not that hard to understand, you know. I can change your views by telling you the truth. There are, in fact, three genders: male, female, and attack helicopter.

But seriously, there are only two genders, except in those special and exceedingly rare cases where babies are born with both sexual organs, or genderless creatures such as tapeworms or various insects. Most animals, such as you an I, only have two genders: male and female.

Get over it.

 

[Dair]

People can lust for which ever genital they want but in the end there are only two types of genitals.

 

[Valemon]

There are two genders. That's it.

 

[Jules8008]

I don't even wanna post too much because this topic gives me weird chills. But aye, seeing this topic just one month after gojg through my self-identification phase is...well. Weird. Also don't wanna stay too long, it's still a ...weird topic for me.

Well, for me, there are two sexes (Male and female. Well, ok, won't exclude y'all intersexuals. But intersexuals are pretty rare with about 1-2%, you still exist though ), but multiple genders; Male, Female, Inter, Transman and Transwoman (Thinking about just using the term Trans) and Agender (With which I identify myself). For me, stuff like Demigirl/Demiboy and whatnot is kind of...dunno. Not fitting? I mean you do you, I am the last person to stop you from identifying as that. I have other shit to worry about than whatever gender you are.

 

[younghaunting]

I think the discussion is pretty straight forward when you get down to it. Both sex and gender are social constructs, like species is a construct in biology that isn't based on any scientific reality (if that makes sense). I'd recommend checking out @zoologicallyobssessed on tumblr, bc they are a trans science student who writes pretty eloquently on the subject. If you go through certain tags you'll find your question answered in much more detail and scientific integrity than I could provide. So I definitely recommend that.​

​

Personally I think there's not really s discussion when this topic is involved, bc if you talk to any accredited biologist you will find they too believe sex and gender are social constructs, and that consequently the idea of a binary system as simple as male and female is too basic. I find it amusing when people try to apply their high school knowledge of biology when they're discussing with people with PhDs. But it's good you're going into this open minded and I hope I could be of assistance.​