Gender studies and tolerance of dissent

In recent years, the academic field of gender studies has, at least in English-speaking countries, filtered into the broader world. One effect of this is that it has become taboo in progressive circles to question the belief that being male or female is an arbitrary social construction that any individual can choose between regardless of biology. The neologism "transphobia" was coined to identify dissent from the theory behind this belief with established taboos such as racism and sexism.

This can all be traced back to the strain of existentialism developed by Sartre and especially Beauvoir. As Beauvoir famously said, if "Existence precedes essence", then "One is not born a woman; one becomes one."

However, it is not self-evident that existentialism is true. Indeed, it seems to be part of the split between empirical science and continental philosophy. No one would be taken seriously if claiming that a chimpanzee is born with no essence, and humans too are a species of ape.

In summary, requiring people to assent to the idea that a person's true sex is whatever they identify as rather than what their biology demonstrably is is to punish people who openly dissent from existentialism. Is this thesis in error? Discuss.

“Love is the eternal law whereby the universe was created and is ruled.” — St. Bernard

I'd argue that it's factually wrong to say to a transwoman/transman "biology says you're male/female," because transmen have a different brain structure than women, and transwomen a different brain structure than men.

"All pain is a punishment, and every punishment is inflicted for love as much as for justice." — Joseph De Maistre.

How do you know, empirically, that every male who says "I'm a woman!" and vice versa has a different brain structure from normal males?

“Love is the eternal law whereby the universe was created and is ruled.” — St. Bernard

Well, maybe they don't. But surely claiming that 'biological sex=gender' is claiming that finding such a thing is impossible.

If you find a few people with male genitals but female brain structures or vice versa, that disproves your point that such a thing is impossible.

Be not afraid...

There are indeed exceptions that attempt to play into transgenderism as a fad, so attempting to blindly make it a universal statement doesn't work. For people who actually have gender identity issues, there's this.

edited 14th Jan '11 9:38:03 PM by Pykrete

I think the "arbitrary social construction" you're thinking of is gender, not sex. The idea of gender and gender roles is a social construct. Yes, people of a certain sex have different behavior patterns biologically speaking, but not everyone is wired that way and to deny them the right to express themselves is cruel.

edited 14th Jan '11 9:44:34 PM by snailbait

"Without a fairy, you're not even a real man!" ~ Mido from Ocarina of Time

Rottweiler,

I am not an expert on gender studies and I know little about existentialism, but I thought the idea was that sex and gender are two very different concepts. My impression was that the former is just purely biological and the latter is where social constructs are relevant. Thus, talking about one's "true sex" makes little sense to me since I believed that the biological one I mentioned earlier is the only use of that term that makes sense.

Yet, I do think that gender is quite different from that concept. If a person who is biologically a woman believes that who she is fits "male" better than "female" then I think that person should be allowed to identify as "male." Saying that person must identify with "female" because that person is a woman seems a bit unfair to me personally. I do not have the confidence to be able to say that people who have such gender identities are somehow misguided and that I know better than them so I believe they should be allowed to identify with genders as they wish.

I do not think it makes a lot of sense to call that person a man though so I do not believe that the original biological state of that person's body (aside from the brain) really plays into this much.

Now, the degree to which gender identity is based on different brains or the state of gender roles in a society is not something I wish to discuss given that I do not have expertise in that field, however, I do not believe that was what you were really talking about in your original post.

snailbait pretty much said what I said here better.

edited 14th Jan '11 9:50:34 PM by LouieW

"irhgT nm0w tehre might b ea lotof th1nmgs i dont udarstannd, ubt oim ujst goinjg to keepfollowing this pazth i belieove iN !!!!!1 d

If anything, the word "transphobia" was coined to identify assent to the theory of gender as a purely social construct. Most transgender people are vehemently against social constructivism, precisely because social constructivism implies that you cannot simply inherently "be" [gender/sex], which they feel invalidates their identities.

"The neologism 'transphobia' was coined to identify dissent from the theory behind this belief with established taboos such as racism and sexism."

Coined as such in the minds of social conservatives, perhaps. In reality, however, it was coined to refer to acts of discrimination or violence against individuals who are transgendered OR inter-sexed.

(Semi-related)

Most transgendered people would argue their inherent gender is NOT the same as their inherent sex. There was a quack psychologist who believed that gender identity is socially learned and performed the horrific task of reassigning a young child's gender forcibly (see the case of David Reimer). The results were tragic, all around. Similarly, forcing a transgendered person to live as the gender with which they do not identify is also unacceptable.

edited 14th Jan '11 10:16:52 PM by UnabashedFornicator

I thought part of the issue is that the vast majority of transpeople are heterosexual (in the context of the original sex; homosexual in the context of their chosen sex) which leads to the suspicion (whether justified or not) that they're really just Yaoi Fangirls and Yuri Fanboys who take it to extremes.

edited 15th Jan '11 1:36:54 PM by silver2195

Currently taking a break from the site. See my user page for more information.

^ I've heard the opposite claimed by people in years past, and even on this board — i.e. that the majority were heterosexual in their chosen gender, with a very small minority that were homosexual. I haven't seen much of an indication that this was the case, but I don't exactly have hard data, just the people I know — who don't match that assessment at all.

My suspicion is that the proportions of people who are heterosexual or homosexual in their chosen gender is identical between trans- and cis-gendered persons, or nearly so, but I know of no studies on this statistic.

Sakamoto demands an explanation for this shit.

We could always conduct a poll.

edited 15th Jan '11 2:00:23 PM by EnglishIvy

How scientifically rigorous is "gender studies" anyway? From what I've heard it just strikes me as a particular variation of philosophy, and I don't regard unscientific fields as having very valuable conclusions anyway.

Not very, because it's very multidisciplinary and takes many ideologically-charged premises as given.

Currently taking a break from the site. See my user page for more information.

On the other hand, one of the most common fundamental assumptions in gender studies is that there's no such thing as objectivity in science  ^*

. The answers you get always depend on the questions you ask, assumptions you make and so on.

So, what happens if I don't feel male or female? What if I just feel like me, and don't want other people to tell me to talk a certain way and act a certain way, or to look at me acting a certain way and somehow still believe I act a different way?

That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful

I've never really understood the whole mindset behind the issue. Wouldn't simply rejecting the traditional "gender roles" in the first place reach the same conclusion with a mere fraction of the controversy? Why pidgeonhole yourself into a pattern of behavior one doesn't agree with in the first place, then flip it around?

Because lots of people do not like it when you do that.

"Who wants to hear about good stuff when the bottom of the abyss of human failure that you know doesn't exist is so much greater?"-Wraith

Transgender identity and seeing gender roles as arbitrary are not the same thing.

Hell, I've seen feminists and transgender individuals get fierce at eachother over this.

the statement above is false

Fascinating. Confusing as all hell, but fascinating.

Yup. Gender/Sex is a Mind Fuck of epic proportions. The more you look at it, the less sense it makes.

"Who wants to hear about good stuff when the bottom of the abyss of human failure that you know doesn't exist is so much greater?"-Wraith

In before a lengthly Sociobiology debate that brings out the Social Darwinism in certain users.

Genkidama for Japan, even if you don't have money, you can help![1]

Nein. While there's a fairly high prevalence of homosexuality (in terms of their gender identity) in transsexual individuals relative to the rest of the population, it's closer to about equal in MT Fs, with a fairly high prevalence of bisexuality and asexuality (One study finding 10% of the subjects were asexual pre- and post- transition, though I somewhat question it's veracity), as well. I'm uncertain about FT Ms, but I recall hearing heterosexuality was much more common.

edited 16th Jan '11 6:15:24 AM by Miijhal

Okay. I guess I must have been misinformed on that point.

Currently taking a break from the site. See my user page for more information.

"Not very, because it's very multidisciplinary and takes many ideologically-charged premises as given." - silver

So why is it taken as seriously as it is?