Gender Identity in a Fantasy Setting

My fantasy setting involves everyone randomly shapeshifting into different bodies. It's been like this for a while, so their civilization has adapted to it (the details of this are rather complicated and although I don't wish to explain it all right now, be assured that I've done a fair amount of worldbuilding)

One important aspect in this is society's concept of gender identity. (to clarify, they aren't big on the idea of gender roles) Basically everyone ends up in the body of of the opposite sex at least once during their life, so this society realized the "sex vs. gender' divide much earlier than some other ones. They acknowledge the existence of Transsexual people (a few characters are canonically trans) and they suffer very little discrimination against them (however, people who identify as non binary genders have been treated badly in the past, but much progress has been made in that area)

I'm wondering if it would make more sense for them to refer to a body by a specifically gendered (for example: a "man's body" or a "woman's body") or simply by their primary sex characteristics ("body with a penis" or a "body with a vagina" or something along the lines of that)

The latter is similar to the term "assigned male (or female) at birth" with is most commonly used in the transgender community.

Although that term is widely used within that community it is extremely unlikely the average person has every heard that word or even understands the concept behind it. I've worried that using phrasing like that could confuse and alienate readers.

Any thoughts?

edited 7th Sep '14 12:27:35 PM by TheMuse

In a race capable of changing their bodies at will I can't imagine sex is important or significant in any way, so I don't know why they would feel the need to distinguish a male body from a female one regardless of the character's gender.

Well, a "man's body" or a "woman's body" only really make sense in a society with stable gender identities (as it implies a kind of platonic gendered being that owns a particular body). Gender would be more like age or marital status in your world, something people would take note of, but typically wouldn't interpret as a fundamental basis of their identity. Saying "I'm male" would be like saying "I'm 23" and typically wouldn't warrant any further explanation.

If they've lived in a male body their entire life (they don't start "shifting" until they reach adulthood) and they suddenly end up with body parts they're not used to (such as a penis or breasts) that'd be a bit odd to deal with.

I feel like it'd make sense to distinguish between bodies so they can generalize what sex specific issues one within that body could experience. (for example, menstruation, which occasionally could require special attention)

Contraceptives wouldn't be very affected by this, as their contraceptives are magical based and can be used by both sexes interchangeably.

I get the impression that theend isn't arguing against distinguishing sexes, but rather against the specific terminology "a man's body"/"a woman's body", as opposed to the slightly simpler phrasing "male"/"female" (or "guy"/"girl", etc., I imagine). For myself, I think that the former phrasing is a little awkward, making the latter seem a little more likely to me.

"A body with a penis"/"a body with a vagina" is only more awkward to my eye, especially in that it's somewhat long for a description of a trait that their society apparently doesn't place much (if at all) above other bodily traits. I suppose that they could simply say "I have a penis" or "I have a vagina", which would have the advantage of allowing them to more easily deal with intersex cases (presuming that those turn up in new bodies); whether they would be likely to do so might depend on whether they view those organs as private, how they view intersex bodies (both in terms of acceptance and in terms of whether or not they prefer the simplicity of forcing binary categorisation over the accuracy of lengthier description), and likely other factors besides.

I question whether this society would have a concept of gender identity. Oh, people would still be more comfortable with one set of anatomy than another, but I'm not sure if it would really be considered part of someone's identity.

In the real world, most people are born with the sexual traits they are comfortable with, and those who aren't generally try changing their sexual traits to those they are comfortable with, whether that's through pills and surgery, or simply by wearing the clothes and hairstyles society says their gender should have. Regardless, the expectation is that what genitals someone prefers is going to be reflected in their physical appearance, and, thanks to sexism and gender norms, in their behavior as well.

But if everyone's bodies change randomly and repeatedly, then that expectation wouldn't exist. Having a body you're uncomfortable with would be something everyone goes through, but there wouldn't be anything to do about it except wait for the next transformation. And with everyone changing sex all the time, I'd assume that sexism and gender norms wouldn't exist, so there wouldn't be all this baggage attached to the concepts of maleness and femaleness, either.

Basically, while you'd still have people for whom male anatomy feels right and female anatomy feels wrong (and vice-versa), I can't see anyone really caring what someone else's anatomical preferences are, since it wouldn't actually have an effect on anything.

Fascinating question.

I imagine they would view the sexes much like we view, say, whether someone is tall or short. It's a big, visible trait that one can use to identify and refer to people. It comes bundled with a handful of expectations and prejudices, but doesn't carry the gigantic system of cultural implications that sex does for us.

They'd probably use two short and convenient adjectives, but ones without the symbolic baggage that comes with our terms. I propose 'dongsome' and 'besnatched'.

edited 8th Sep '14 2:27:15 AM by ArtisticPlatypus

If people can change their bodies like clothes, then the sex become just one trait among many. It becomes as innocuous as a shirt that is blue or a shirt that is red. Similarly gender preference becomes nothing more than any other preference, like a person who chooses to wear a certain color or style.

I was reading you post while I was in my history classroom and almost burst out laughing at the last sentence.

The do interact with some people who don't go through the shape-shifty thing (mostly due to being used to their bodies and/or religious reasons) and both cultures do end up influencing each other to an extent. (Non-shape shifters aren't big on gender roles in the first place, but have a much more binary idea of gender, while the shape shifters don't actually give a shit)

But if someone's current sex would get discussed (it would come up with discussions of reproduction, coitus, and that kind of stuff, which there is little taboo in this setting) exactly what terminology would they use? Is there preexisting terms that would fit and not sound too out of place or am I going to have to invent new ones?

Why not just use male, female, and intersex?

I've seen in discussions of Gender Theory that phrasing like that has the consequence of gendering bodies when bodies are technically born without gender. There's also the fact that A LOT of intersex conditions would go unnoticed in this setting due to lack of advanced medical knowledge. But I'm not sure, could this be a problem?

edited 11th Sep '14 5:38:30 AM by TheMuse

But bodies are born with a sex; surely that is what "male", "female", etc. refer to? On the other hand, I might agree with the objection if we were discussing the terms "man", "woman", etc.

Put it this way: consider a tomcat: is that male? If so, do we then claim that cats have a concept of mental gender, and are born without it? Looking at it from the other direction, would you refer to a tomcat as a man?

edited 11th Sep '14 9:03:31 AM by ArsThaumaturgis

If I remember correctly, in The Left Hand of Darkness, where most of the characters are neuter most of the time and can change sex when they aren't, they just use the sex of what they are currently— 'male', 'female', 'he', 'she', 'it'. I don't know if you like to read stuff similar to what you're working on for ideas or if you avoid them so you can focus on your own ideas without worrying about borrowing too much, but if the first you might want to read that book. It's a good one anyway. :)

edited 12th Sep '14 5:28:54 AM by PointMaid

"Male" and "female" can refer either to sex or to gender identity; it depends on context. And, as I mentioned before, I don't think this society of shapeshifters would ever have much of a reason to discuss or care about gender identity. While they'd be very aware of the difference between sex and gender, what gender someone is wouldn't really matter, to the extent that the different genders might not even have names.

The society does have a "third gender" that consists of essentially everyone who doesn't identify as male or female (they aren't explicitly referred to as agender, genderfluid, etc. in universe however)

And I again question why they'd identify as any gender at all. People might say "I really prefer having a (insert sex here) body", but that'd be like saying what your favorite season of the year is: it might make for decent small talk, but it serves no practical purpose since you can't control the changing of sexes/seasons, and no one's going to treat it as a big, important part of who you are.

I mentioned in a previous post that there is also another large group of people who do not change at all that have existed just as long as/perhaps even longer than the other group. I think it would make sense for them (the normals) to have a greater importance put on gender/sex and this group controls a lot of the power in the society.

Oh! When you said they also existed, I thought it was in a "somewhere far away" sense. If the shapeshifters are surrounded by non-shapeshifters, that's a different story.

edited 12th Sep '14 11:35:59 PM by RavenWilder

Well, I'd assume that their beliefs on gender norms would probably be a bit looser than ours are, I'd like to think that growing up next to neighbors that can be male or female depending on what day it is would make them look at things a bit differently.

I feel like for the most part they wouldn't think much of their gender other than as personal preference. The more neutral ones might not even consider it a factor other than waking up, looking down and shrugging it off.

The normals might have a more particular gender identity, but other than some particularly racist ones I couldn't see them having much opinion on the others.

I think one of the most interesting aspects of the situation would actually be if a normal was in a relationship with a shifter.

There's little stigma against same gender relationships and a majority of people identify as some shade of biseuxal. So a most of the time, when comes up between a 'normal' and a 'shifter,' the "compatible parts" issue isn't much of a problem.

I apologize for not explaining better, I guessed something like that would be the case. I was more speculating on the thought of a normal who considered themselves straight, even if it is less important to them, falling in love with a shifter. It's not the social stigma I was curious about, I just think the exploration of his thought process would make an interesting story arc.

Nah, it's fine. People are raised to at least be able to acknowledge beauty in the same gender. People who are completely monosexual aren't particularly common, but they would probably be a bit perturbed about dealing with body parts they're not very used to dealing with. They do have some accommodations for monosexuals who are shaken up by the change in receptive/insertive roles in intercorse.

Dildos have existed for millennia, it wouldn't be too out of place for a pre-industrial society to get the idea of attaching them to a harness, no?