The Gender Non-binary debate.

Author
Discussion

Clockwork Cupcake

58,618 posts

210 months

Monday 11th February
quotequote all
Randy Winkman said:
In all seriousness, my Blondie comment was just a way of saying that I don't feel anyone influenced or coerced me into heterosexuality.
Well, that was kind of my point. Nobody influenced or coerced me into being transgender.

Lord Marylebone

7,960 posts

118 months

Monday 11th February
quotequote all
Some of the replies in this thread are frankly shocking.

Almost along the lines of 'teaching kids about homosexuality will make them gay'.

I would hope that anyone contributing to a thread like this would be more intelligent than that.

Randy Winkman

6,056 posts

127 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
Clockwork Cupcake said:
Well, that was kind of my point. Nobody influenced or coerced me into being transgender.
thumbup Just watching "The Making of Me" from last night. Have to go to work in 10 mins though. frown

amusingduck

3,826 posts

74 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
j_4m said:
Dromedary66 said:
And if people are adamant that doing the above does classify a man as a women, then those people HAVE to agree that this gentleman was a cat (he's dead now). Since he self-identified as a cat and had undertaken body modification to more resemble a cat.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/25/35580398_529e12c2...
Well, not really. It's one thing to want to be another variety of human, it's another to call yourself another species/attack helicopter.
I don't see the difference in principle, and I don't see how it's logical to effectively remove biology from the conversation when it comes to transgender people, but then use biology as the justification as to why this tiger guy's identity is illegitimate.


j_4m

565 posts

2 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
amusingduck said:
I don't see the difference in principle, and I don't see how it's logical to effectively remove biology from the conversation when it comes to transgender people, but then use biology as the justification as to why this tiger guy's identity is illegitimate.
There have been a few research projects that have shown general structural and chemical differences in the brain between transgender, cisgender, hetero and homosexual people. There’s definitely some element of being born that way based on that evidence. Catman is just a fetishist.
Advertisement

xjay1337

11,375 posts

56 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
Dromedary66 said:
And if people are adamant that doing the above does classify a man as a women, then those people HAVE to agree that this gentleman was a tigress (he's dead now). Since he self-identified as a female tiger and had undertaken body modification to more resemble one.

Funnily enough I think people would rightly be claiming mental illness!

AshVX220

3,450 posts

128 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
CC, were you on radio last Friday (I think) lunchtime? They were talking with a Trans woman, used to be called John and called Jo, just wondering if it was you.

Clockwork Cupcake

58,618 posts

210 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
AshVX220 said:
CC, were you on radio last Friday (I think) lunchtime? They were talking with a Trans woman, used to be called John and called Jo, just wondering if it was you.
Nope, not me. I have never been on the radio.

The Li-ion King

257 posts

2 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
j_4m said:
Dromedary66 said:
And if people are adamant that doing the above does classify a man as a women, then those people HAVE to agree that this gentleman was a cat (he's dead now). Since he self-identified as a cat and had undertaken body modification to more resemble a cat.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/25/35580398_529e12c2...
Well, not really. It's one thing to want to be another variety of human, it's another to call yourself another species/attack helicopter.
A Tigra



would have been worse for that poor soul rolleyes

witko999

237 posts

146 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
gregs656 said:
Except of course my 'final sentence' is demonstrably true, because I and many others have experienced it.

Like I have said previously; not having the language to describe something is not the same as not experiencing it.

I think the similarities to sexuality are striking - particularly around how people describe knowing, often from a very young age, but it is precisely this that you are trying to deny. Another similarity is that it was a commonly held belief that it was a choice, and something you could unlearn.

Indeed it was believed that kids shouldn't learn about homosexuality because it would corrupt them and make them all gay.

I don't think you believe that, but I think you are making exactly the same argument.
My earlier point is nothing to do with language. With no frame of reference (ie. having never seen or heard of the other sex), that person cannot wish to be the other sex or know that they are in the wrong body. Some element of learning (or influence) must have happened beforehand to wish to be something. And that's what I mean when I say that there were influencing factors, not that your mates or parents were saying "go on Barry, be a girl", like CC is suggesting to try and make me look like a w@nker. Therefore knowing you were in the wrong body since birth is something I don't believe.

How can you be born knowing something is different? Different to what?

Anyway, I'm not going to convince you of anything and it's unlikely that you're going to convince me of anything, so I'll leave it there.

Maybe my internal diagnostic system just isn't as finely tuned as yours.


Clockwork Cupcake

58,618 posts

210 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
witko999 said:
... like CC is suggesting to try and make me look like a w@nker.
To be absolutely clear, I have no such agenda. I have no reason or desire to make you look like anything. I was merely putting forward my personal experience as counterpoint to your assertions.

Don't go making this personal, or making insinuations about me.

gregs656

2,248 posts

119 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
It is to do with language. A person raised in isolation can't have a language, so their ability to express anything is somewhat moot.

However, just because they wouldn't know if they were tall or short (relative measures) they would still have a height, they would still have a sexuality, they would still be right or left handed etc etc, I don't see why you couldn't experience body dysmorphia similarly.

Also, I don't think infants 'know something is wrong' but I do think in many cases people come to understand something is different about them. Of course in your example they wouldn't recognise that as a difference, but that doesn't mean they are not experiencing it - in the same way people don't notice they are aware they are the same as everyone else (if they are brought up in a predominantly straight environment) but I don't believe they come to this realisation at 16.

Clockwork Cupcake

58,618 posts

210 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
So, just to be clear here, a child raised in ignorance of homosexuality will never realise they are gay? And a child raised in ignorance of transgenderism will never realise they are transgender?

This seems highly unlikely to me. Especially as I was raised in ignorance of transgenderism and still grew up wishing I had been born a girl, and thinking that I should have been.

witko999 said:
Anyway, I'm not going to convince you of anything and it's unlikely that you're going to convince me of anything, so I'll leave it there.
Fair enough. If your mind is so closed that you don't want to accept new information and new ideas, then so be it.


xjay1337

11,375 posts

56 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
Clockwork Cupcake said:
So, just to be clear here, a child raised in ignorance of homosexuality will never realise they are gay? And a child raised in ignorance of transgenderism will never realise they are transgender?

This seems highly unlikely to me. Especially as I was raised in ignorance of transgenderism and still grew up wishing I had been born a girl, and thinking that I should have been.

witko999 said:
Anyway, I'm not going to convince you of anything and it's unlikely that you're going to convince me of anything, so I'll leave it there.
Fair enough. If your mind is so closed that you don't want to accept new information and new ideas, then so be it.
Don't think that's being said
But I'd say around 70% of how someone "turns out" whether that's sexuality, personality, intelligence, is due to the environment they are raised / grow up in.

Clockwork Cupcake

58,618 posts

210 months

Tuesday 12th February
quotequote all
xjay1337 said:
Don't think that's being said
But I'd say around 70% of how someone "turns out" whether that's sexuality, personality, intelligence, is due to the environment they are raised / grow up in.
"Nurture vs Nature" has been discussed for a very long time, in many papers, and I don't think we'll resolve that one here.

I'm just pointing out that I was raised in total ignorance of transgenderism and yet still came to realise I should have been a girl. According to witko999 that is utterly impossible. I beg to differ and present case study evidence to the contrary (ie. my own experience).

As the refrain from The War of the Worlds goes:
"The chances of anything coming from Mars are a million to one, he said
The chances of anything coming from Mars are a million to one...
But still, they come!"

Edit: I don't necessarily disagree with you, mind. I just can't see anything that may have influenced me, that's all.


Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Tuesday 12th February 19:25

otolith

36,665 posts

142 months

Wednesday 13th February
quotequote all
amusingduck said:
I don't see the difference in principle, and I don't see how it's logical to effectively remove biology from the conversation when it comes to transgender people, but then use biology as the justification as to why this tiger guy's identity is illegitimate.
Is it common, perhaps as much as 50% of the time, for human embryos to develop into tigers? Is it conceivable that, in the way that sometimes human foetuses develop external sexual characteristics which do not match what would be expected from their chromosomal makeup, they may develop brains more like those of tigers? Do you really think that the two things are similar? Can you propose a plausible biological mechanism?

amusingduck

3,826 posts

74 months

Wednesday 13th February
quotequote all
otolith said:
amusingduck said:
I don't see the difference in principle, and I don't see how it's logical to effectively remove biology from the conversation when it comes to transgender people, but then use biology as the justification as to why this tiger guy's identity is illegitimate.
Is it common, perhaps as much as 50% of the time, for human embryos to develop into tigers? Is it conceivable that, in the way that sometimes human foetuses develop external sexual characteristics which do not match what would be expected from their chromosomal makeup, they may develop brains more like those of tigers? Do you really think that the two things are similar? Can you propose a plausible biological mechanism?
Right, but what you're talking about is only the simplest examples of transgender people. Born as one thing, but feel that they're the other. That makes perfect sense to me.

Beyond that, I rapidly start losing what the principle is. I used to think that the principle was that there were two sexes, and sometimes the brain's sex doesn't match the body's sex. Makes sense to me, but that only works for MTF and FTM people, and doesn't (i think) encapsulate the non-binary people whatsoever.

The justifications around non-binary seem to revolve around the principle that gender is entirely a social construct, divorced from biology. Viewed through that lens, I cannot see any reason that a non-binary identity is legitimate, but the tiger guy's identity is not.

Honestly, it feels to me that once you go beyond FTM/MTF, it rapidly becomes nonsensical. Some things make sense in isolation, but the overall picture is so confusing.

jdw100

2,663 posts

102 months

Wednesday 13th February
quotequote all
Back in the mid-90s I was running some Production teams in a factory we had built in North Wales.

We were due a visit from an automaton engineer from our HQ in LA. A couple of days before he was due to arrive we had a call from our Production VP over there to give us a heads-up that this engineer (who had been with the company for 10 years) was transitioning from male to female.

Well, my production teams had people in them that had never been outside North Wales in their life. I had one team doing hand-assembly that were all females in their 50s and 60s...lots of gossip, Welsh housewives basically.

My other teams included some quite conservative people, bit macho, still adjusting to working in a Life Sciences company after working for tougher industries etc. Not a metropolitan bunch basically.

I briefed them that the Engineer was coming in and what he was aiming to achieve, mentioned that he was also changing to be a she. Lots of stunned faces....a few jokes etc..

Our Engineer arrived and was wearing a lovely red summer dress and high heels, long blonde hair, built like a brick sthouse; like could have played some decent rugby!

I have never been more proud of my teams; could he use the ladies toilets? Of course, why not?

Some of my ladies were taking him up to lunch each day. Everyone, to be honest to my amazement, just treated the guy as if he was a) one of the team and b) like a woman.

Me and a couple of the other managers at our level took him out for a beer in town on the Friday. Getting a few funny looks and then we bump in to a couple of the warehouse guys. One of them (who used to work making slate tiles by hand in a slate quarry, before it closed down) comes up and says to our Engineer "Oi you!" I was thinking st they've had a few to drink...but then follows it up with "get a bloody round in then my love, its your shout"

Ended up having a great night out. As above just treated this transgender person with total respect. Could not have been more proud.

That's 25 years ago in North Wales.....then you read a few of the comments from people on here....what really is the issue? Great Engineer, nice person, why is it a problem if he decides to be she? Does it effect anyone they work with, no. Are they trying to make you change sex, no.

Just let people get on with it.

For the record as I recall, this guy (and I'm saying 'he' throughout my anecdote just to make clear who I'm talking about) had known since he was about six that something wasn't right, but it had taken 30 years before he'd had the courage to do something about it.




esxste

1,480 posts

44 months

Wednesday 13th February
quotequote all
amusingduck said:
Right, but what you're talking about is only the simplest examples of transgender people. Born as one thing, but feel that they're the other. That makes perfect sense to me.

Beyond that, I rapidly start losing what the principle is. I used to think that the principle was that there were two sexes, and sometimes the brain's sex doesn't match the body's sex. Makes sense to me, but that only works for MTF and FTM people, and doesn't (i think) encapsulate the non-binary people whatsoever.

The justifications around non-binary seem to revolve around the principle that gender is entirely a social construct, divorced from biology. Viewed through that lens, I cannot see any reason that a non-binary identity is legitimate, but the tiger guy's identity is not.

Honestly, it feels to me that once you go beyond FTM/MTF, it rapidly becomes nonsensical. Some things make sense in isolation, but the overall picture is so confusing.
It sounds to me like you consider male and female to be two unique, exclusive categories. Born as one thing, feel they're the other. Binary choices.

And that is the social construct you are operating in.

Male or female. No middle ground. No grey area. No spectrum. You must be one or the other.

The biology is not binary. It is not the case that everyone is born with either XX or XY chromosomes, or that everyone is born with either a male reproductive system or a female reproductive system.

The idea biology is binary is a social construct.

Gender too is a spectrum, and is not divorced from the biology, it just isn't defined by the biology. The two are obviously highly linked, since the overall correlation strongly shows the biology matches gender.


As for the tiger guy. His identity as a tiger has nothing to do with gender. It's a red herring.

Clockwork Cupcake

58,618 posts

210 months

Wednesday 13th February
quotequote all
amusingduck said:
Right, but what you're talking about is only the simplest examples of transgender people. Born as one thing, but feel that they're the other. That makes perfect sense to me.

Beyond that, I rapidly start losing what the principle is. I used to think that the principle was that there were two sexes, and sometimes the brain's sex doesn't match the body's sex. Makes sense to me, but that only works for MTF and FTM people, and doesn't (i think) encapsulate the non-binary people whatsoever.

The justifications around non-binary seem to revolve around the principle that gender is entirely a social construct, divorced from biology. Viewed through that lens, I cannot see any reason that a non-binary identity is legitimate, but the tiger guy's identity is not.

Honestly, it feels to me that once you go beyond FTM/MTF, it rapidly becomes nonsensical. Some things make sense in isolation, but the overall picture is so confusing.
Well, there's the thing.

I'm not on hormones, and I haven't had any surgery. When I put on my makeup and wig, and dress in "women's clothes" I generally pass without comment or even a second look. People treat me as a woman and I go into the ladies loos without comment (the world doesn't end, dogs and cats do not start living together, nobody gets sexually assaulted).

If I just want to pop down to the shops for a pint of milk, sometimes I can't be bothered to put on my makeup, so I'll pull on a t-shirt and jeans, and go "as is" and will pass unnoticed as a man. I can walk into the gents loos and nobody gives a st (apart from the ones grunting and farting in the stalls, of course).

I can literally choose the gender that people will see me as. That doesn't change who I am inside - I'm still me. It's just I can slip into either of the gender binaries, if I want to.

So does that make me male? Or female? Or both? Or neither? Not really. I'm still me. I'm just dressed differently and pandering to either one or the other of society's expectations about how I present.

It's just society has this whole "either / or" thing. It's kind of like a biker being told off for driving a car when it's rainy or they need to move a wardrobe. How can you be a biker AND a car driver? Choose one!