Non binary and that sort of thing.

I don’t know if these two are lying, but it isn’t out of the realm of possibility, and is more likely if they are purposefully putting themselves in the public eye (seeking attention). I do see a possible motivation for attention seekers to claim such a thing.

 

I think the bigger question is why should we care. I would only care if a “woman” lied to me, seduced me, we got sexual, and suddenly out comes a penis. That is very very very rarely going to happen.

 

I've probably never missed one, when I'm in their vicinity for more than a few seconds and close enough to see detail. It's largely an ANIMAL response, remember. The visual signals (and they're never really good enough to disguise the reality of brow ridges and big hands etc) can never do a complete job, because at least half of our information comes from those animal senses.

I will grant you, however, that FTM trans can be quite difficult to spot. For a variety of physiological reasons, it's much easier for a female to pass as male, than the other way around.

 

Exactly. If gender is just a social construct, there would be no 'gender dysphoria'.

 

It's funny, the people claiming that there are only two genders is a scientific fact never seem to actually sight any scientific articles or studies.

 

Because if the science doesn't agree with them, then it has been politically motivated or pushed to say otherwise.

 

There are only two physical sexes. Sperm or egg. Male or female. Gender is often said to instead be a social concept. So people will disagree on that, but there are some to seem to equate it to the sexes.

You are not going to determine cultural concepts through scientific articles. They are what we decide they are.

 

Gender was a biological concept up until about 15 years ago. It was the description of how you could tell a man from a woman without seeing them naked. It's still that way today generally speaking but people like to pretend you can't.

 

I have met many Thai ladyboys (what they call themselves) who look far more feminine than most western women, and I don't think even other ladyboys can tell they are not biological women.

 

There are exceptions. That's why I said generally.

 

I also see it that way.

 

My question is, what is gender.

If it isn't defined by a role culturally applied to sex and therefore binary what is it?

 

Well it definitely isn't a role assigned by the culture because we keep redefining the roles. Men and women have held various roles across time and many in direct opposition to the roles of other times.

Starting out with the fact that the word gender started out in the lingual and scientific fields and only later migrated to being a synonym of sex, it has been misattributed since that point. Maybe gender isn't an accurate label, but it is the one in use right now. Gender is the sense of self that is, regardless of what others expect of your sex as far as actions, roles, and presentation. Part of the problem in all this is the claiming of what a given sex should and should not be doing and how they should and should not present themselves. We further complicate it because we can bell curve the population to show that the vast majority have a gender that matches their sex. But we can do that for being right handed as well. But similar to how we tried to correct those who were left handed in the way back when, right now there are people trying to correct the how people act and present, even though history shows that most presentations have gone back and forth between men and women.

We might not really know the more solid answer of what gender actually is for many years. The reality of something is not nulled by our lack of knowledge or discovery. Look at how long radiation and a heliocentric solar system existed, despite claim to the contrary.

 

That's why I asked what it is not what it isn't.

A label for what

What does that mean?

The biggest problem I see is lack of discernible meaning.

Even when you tried to explain you have vague ideas that I'm having trouble deciphering.

Without knowing what the hell gender is this statement is meaningless.

being right-handed is defined. That's the have you have more fine motor skills in.

Gender is not. What does it mean?

No we don't.

I think that's the issue. You're trying to describe something you can't even show actually exists.

so there are leprechauns and unicorns?

Look at how many people believed in demonic possession of people who were left-handed.

Show me anything that suggests this is like the solar system and not like demons.

 

Sometimes life just isn't that easy.

For that which people identify within themselves that is somehow typically associated with sex (biological)

It means the person's self identity regardless of what others think it should be, on a criteria that is not as objective as others might want it to be.

No more vague than emotions and pain. These are also things that can only be described by the person experiencing them, and cannot be made objective

Gender is that sense of self, typically associated with a given sex. Last I knew, you were biologically male and you identify as such. Even if an accident caused you to lose your penis, your sense of self would not change. But what if you were born still XY genetically, but with a vagina (AIS for example)? You might still identify as male even though the evidence, initially at least, indicated that you were female. Or maybe your sense of self was female despite your DNA. We have people out there who are claiming, as separate camps, that the genitals are the deciding factor or that the genetics are the deciding factor. But regardless of what they say, that sense of self can only come from you.

No we don't what? The only present tense action I put out is that of people trying to force others to present and act as they prefer and not as the people themselves prefer. This is absolutely true.

Show me that emotions and pain really exist, and are not made up by people. Prove to me that they are not as much improper actions as those who are claiming a gender opposite or different than their sex.

Maybe. I would say that unicorns are real. They are one horned goats, and the breed was even in production for a while somewhere in the Midwest for circuses. (Ref: Dynamite magazine, back in the 70's). The legends that have built up over centuries and the physical distortions in the description don't have to be true or accurate for the creature itself to be real. Look at all the hype that has built up around Chuck Norris. None of that has to be real for Chuck to be real. Leprechauns could be real, and we have yet to discover what the source of the legends behind them is. That lack of discovery doesn't mean that they are not real.

We could use the demonic possession argument for so much. Sass your parents too much? You're demonically possessed.

You're asking me to effectively show you how the solar system was heliocentric instead of geocentric before the maths were developed to show such. The concepts were there long before the proofs were.

 

No I'm asking you to define gender.

You must Define terms in order to discuss this with any meaning.