Non-binary identities are valid

[Belz...]

There you go. You do know what being a man "feels internally" like. It's that.

It's nothing, then?

See, that's the issue. I'd wager that most people don't feel "like" either a man or a woman. They simply have no dysphoria about their bodies. Those who do, can resolve the problem via transition, which I think the government should at least partially pay for. But either way, you can't say "but I feel like X" because it's meaningless. "Man" and "woman" were never defined as something you felt like.

 

[Belz...]

Sure. But you do know what it feels like to be male. In fact, that's the only thing (meaning gender) that you can know how to be, unless you have some magical insight into the feelings of other people. Me too.

You have it backwards. He doesn't know what it feels like because he has no magical insight into the feelings of other men. You, on the other hand, are the one arguing that some people know exactly how it feels to be one or the other, which is patently untrue.

That is true because we as a society removed the stigma of being left-handed. It wasn't so long ago (my father's generation) that left handed kids were still forced in school to write with their right hands.

Indeed... and you know what? That oppressed minority, to whom I belong, is TEN percent of the population, and yet we still live shorter lives, on average, than right-handed people because almost everything is made with right-handedness in mind. It's impossible to have the same options as a left-handed person. So what? Do you hear left-handed people complain because of this? Nope. We adapted. So long as you don't force us to be right-handed, or treat us like inferiors, we'll live with the natural consequences of being a minority.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Also notice the subtle shift in goalposts.

"Well you know how it feels to be X!"

Well yeah. Because I am one. The discussion is about people who claim to know how it feels to X when they are really Y.

I know how it feels to be 5 foot 10 because I'm 5 foot 10. If I say I know how it feels to be 6 foot 10 or 4 foot 10 when I am objectively by external criteria 5 foot 10 I am saying something very, very different and I can't go "Well you know what it is like be the height you are!" when someone points out I'm not 4 foot 10 or 6 foot 10.

The vast, super vast, majority of people only know what their sex "feels like" in the sense that it's the sex they just are. Trying to twist this into "Therefore you too have some distinct and separate 'sex identity'" is dishonest.

This is not complicated.

 

[d4m10n]

When you think about it, the only time gender identity should matter is when genitals are (directly or indirectly) involved. And then, it matters to the other person.

Trying to think of a counterexample, just for the sake of being contrary. I suppose it depends on how "indirectly" they can be involved, it may be enough that people make the usual assumptions. There are a few jobs (e.g. Hooters server, burlesque dancer, Thunder From Down Under) where it matters what you look like overall but you still get to keep private bits under wraps.

Physical ability, such as for sport or combat? It doesn't matter so much what your self-identity is. What matters is that other people can observe that you're a man and shouldn't be playing women's basketball.

Agreed.

Sexual attraction? It doesn't matter so much what your self-identity is. What matters is whether your partner is actually attracted to your observable primary and secondary sexual characteristics.

Not to mention your sparkling personality.

Getting a job as a receptionist? Your gender identity shouldn't matter at all to anyone. Getting a job as a CEO? Your gender identity shouldn't matter at all to anyone.

Most jobs are like this, I would have to stretch to think of non-athletic/non-erotic exceptions these days.

There are probably very few situations where your genitals aren't relevant but your gender is.

Best Actress?

 

[theprestige]

Trying to think of a counterexample, just for the sake of being contrary. I suppose it depends on how "indirectly" they can be involved, it may be enough that people make the usual assumptions. There are a few jobs (e.g. Hooters server, burlesque dancer, Thunder From Down Under) where it matters what you look like overall but you still get to keep private bits under wraps.

Yep. In my way of thinking, that counts as "indirectly". Sure, a transwoman can work at Hooters, but his success there is going to depend largely on how well he can pass as female, most importantly in terms of how much other people perceive female secondary sexual characteristics.

Most jobs are like this, I would have to stretch to think of non-athletic/non-erotic exceptions these days.

Exactly.

Best Actress?

And there's a growing advocacy to abolish that particular segregation.

And that opens up a whole can of worms, about whether women would get recognized at all, if it was a single unisex Best Actor award. And then what about transwomen? If we keep the segregated awards, do transwomen count as women? Is the segregation based on sex, or on social construct?

 

[Earthborn]

Of course it is. If someone picks "xe", and I use "they", they'll call me a bigot for misgendering them and denying the validity of their experience, whatever the **** that means. And under some proposed laws, I could face fines or prison times if I don't yield.

That seems rather unlikely. "They" is perfectly fine.

That doesn't mean that people in general understood it that way. "Gender" has always been directly linked to sex. Adult human male makes you a man, for instance. The definition you refer to is not commonly used.

The term "gender" was not commonly used and referred mostly to grammatical gender. The term people in general used was "sex".

Instead, did you or did you not understand my point?

I did not understand your point, because your sentence didn't make much sense. That is what I said.

Or were you just lashing out? The point is that there is no reason to ask 99.7% of the population to use "cis-" when it works fine to just use "trans-" for 0.3%.

99.7% of the population are not asked to use the "cis-"prefix in 99.7% of the situations. Only in situations where they might be assumed to be trans and they want to make clear they are not, is it meaningful to use it.

 

[theprestige]

That seems rather unlikely. "They" is perfectly fine.

Ironically, we have a microcosm of this question right here on this forum. If someone here states preferred pronouns, and someone else defaults to "they" instead, is that indeed perfectly fine? Or is it a breach of the MA?

99.7% of the population are not asked to use the "cis-"prefix in 99.7% of the situations. Only in situations where they might be assumed to be trans and they want to make clear they are not, is it meaningful to use it.

So, in maybe 0.03% of gender-relevant scenarios.

Then there's the inverse (converse?): Trans-folks would only need to use the "trans-" prefix in situations where they might be assumed to be cis, and they want to make it clear that they are not. So, in like 99.999% of gender-relevant scenarios.

 

[Belz...]

Well yeah that's what I've been saying. One side is going "I have five fingers" and the other side is going "No I have four fingers and a thumb" but we never address the obvious fact that everyone knows and can tell that the real and only issue is we aren't using the same definition of "finger" and yet all we do in this discussion is have everyone count their fingers again and get the same answer.

Because one side has made even asking the question "Is a thumb a finger or not?" (either overall or in some scenarios) offensive and a direct attack on them. So instead we hairsplit the difference between a finger and a digit over and over as if the answer is going to be in there somewhere.

That's one way of putting it, yes.

 

[Belz...]

That seems rather unlikely. "They" is perfectly fine.

I agree with you. But some are really trying to make it happen. And the politicians are responding to that because as usual they have no way of knowing how popular an idea on the internet is, so they read the room based on how loudly people can shout; and ideologues, no matter their numbers, can shout really loud.

The term "gender" was not commonly used and referred mostly to grammatical gender. The term people in general used was "sex".

Not in my experience. And regardless it doesn't change the rather important fact that most people understand it to mean exactly that. This isn't a scientific question or one of evidence, but a matter of definitions.

I did not understand your point, because your sentence didn't make much sense.

And why not just say that, rather than use pointlessly flamboyant rhetoric?

99.7% of the population are not asked to use the "cis-"prefix in 99.7% of the situations.

Just a few posts back we have someone quoted in a post telling everyone to give their pronouns when they meet someone. Sounds like they're asking 100% of people to do it. Also, if "woman" means cis AND trans, then yes we have to distinguish them and the use of the prefix becomes a requisite.

I guess you didn't follow the conversation or topic very closely.

 

[d4m10n]

Ironically, we have a microcosm of this question right here on this forum. If someone here states preferred pronouns, and someone else defaults to "they" instead, is that indeed perfectly fine?

I'd like to think so, since "they" is what I call anyone whenever I'm unsure of their gender and/or preferences.

ETA: BTW, I'd prefer everyone use "they" for me as well.

 

[arthwollipot]

Which presupposes that you're right about what the "wrong pronouns" are.

When theprestige pointed that out, you said "Begging no question as I was not referencing any specific example."

He was simply pointing out that one of the issues of debate is how to determine which pronouns are right and which are wrong, but you seem to think that's been settled.

It has. Of course it has. If you're not sure about someone's pronouns, you can ask. Simples. If you're not able to ask, then "they" is perfectly acceptable in the vast majority of cases.

Or, since you've examined several senses of being female, and found that none of them sit right with you: How do you know that any of the senses of being female you've examined are anything like the actual experience of being female?

Or put it the other way around: How does any female know what you feel like, being male, and that they have the same feelings you do?

I don't. That's kind of the point. If I did, I might start to think that I was a trans woman.

Bit of a leap there. Suppose someone says "I am not male; I am not female; I am nonbinary. " Does this tell you anything about their genitals?

Of course not. Why should it?

It's nothing, then?

See, that's the issue. I'd wager that most people don't feel "like" either a man or a woman. They simply have no dysphoria about their bodies. Those who do, can resolve the problem via transition, which I think the government should at least partially pay for. But either way, you can't say "but I feel like X" because it's meaningless. "Man" and "woman" were never defined as something you felt like.

Now you're starting to get it.

You have it backwards. He doesn't know what it feels like because he has no magical insight into the feelings of other men. You, on the other hand, are the one arguing that some people know exactly how it feels to be one or the other, which is patently untrue.

I know what it feels like to be male. It feels like being me.

Indeed... and you know what? That oppressed minority, to whom I belong, is TEN percent of the population, and yet we still live shorter lives, on average, than right-handed people because almost everything is made with right-handedness in mind. It's impossible to have the same options as a left-handed person. So what? Do you hear left-handed people complain because of this? Nope. We adapted. So long as you don't force us to be right-handed, or treat us like inferiors, we'll live with the natural consequences of being a minority.

That's right. Society has progressed past overt discrimination on the basis of handedness. That doesn't mean that there still aren't some issues. Hopefully soon we can get to that stage for trans and nonbinary people as well. But we won't as long as a significant portion of the population still refuses to take the simplest of steps, like using pronouns correctly.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Well yeah that's what I've been saying. One side is going "I have five fingers" and the other side is going "No I have four fingers and a thumb" but we never address the obvious fact that everyone knows and can tell that the real and only issue is we aren't using the same definition of "finger" and yet all we do in this discussion is have everyone count their fingers again and get the same answer.

Because one side has made even asking the question "Is a thumb a finger or not?" (either overall or in some scenarios) offensive and a direct attack on them. So instead we hairsplit the difference between a finger and a digit over and over as if the answer is going to be in there somewhere.

Why do you think there is a "right" answer? People seem to be attacking the question like it's math, and there necessarily one correct answer and all other answers are incorrect, and if they can just get the right evidence rightly judged they'll "solve" the problem like it's math.

It's not math. There is no "right" answer. It's a matter of human behavior, so the assignment isn't "solve for X" it's "how should we act?" Scrabbling around looking for clues isn't going to advance anything one single jot. Not "oh, if we just had some more knowledge of biology!" or "what about this study done by a doctor in Sweden" or "the case law says that".

"Non-binary identies are valid" is a category mistake. It's like asking "are strawberries legitimate?" or "is gravity honorable?" There is no authority that gets to determine what "valid" in this context even means, much less rule on whether non-binary identities meet whatever criteria to pass the test. There is no test, there is no validity or invalidity, there is only a bunch of people quibbling about how to treat each other.

Y'all can drive yourselves mad trying to solve it like it's math but it ain't so it's never, ever, ever going to work and you're damning yourselves to an eternity of frustrating in That Thread.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I know what it feels like to be male. It feels like being me.

I'm male. Do you feel like me? How would you know? How do you know the feelings you attribute to your maleness aren't actually coming from having your blood type? How do you know that every other male on earth doesn't feel very, very different from how you feel?

 

[arthwollipot]

I'm male. Do you feel like me? How would you know? How do you know the feelings you attribute to your maleness aren't actually coming from having your blood type? How do you know that every other male on earth doesn't feel very, very different from how you feel?

I refer my honourable colleague to my previous answer.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Why do you think there is a "right" answer?

*Confused* Because the people who think they have four fingers and a thumb keep calling me a bigot committing hate crimes for saying we have five fingers, or even discussing it conceptually, or even just acknowledging it a concept other people hold.

And, as I keep saying, because I ACTUALLY WANT TO UNDERSTAND THIS.

I want to come to some kind of understanding.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I refer my honourable colleague to my previous answer.

Ah, I missed that. It appears you base your knowledge on your inability to imagine being otherwise, then decided that particular piece of ignorance is proof enough. I think in this you are doing your imagination a disservice, as I can't begin to fathom how you could have come up with such a impossibly wrong construct!

 

[theprestige]

I don't. That's kind of the point. If I did, I might start to think that I was a trans woman.

I'm not sure if you're missing my point, avoiding it, or actually agreeing with it.

My point is that I don't think it's possible for someone to know what it feels like to be the opposite sex, and that an appeal to such feelings is not a valid basis for concluding one is in fact the opposite sex. Thinking you're a trans woman just means you have feelings of discomfort or distress about your manhood. It doesn't mean you're a woman, or a different kind of woman, or a woman for purposes of demography, affirmative action, or sex segregation. Gender dysphoria is more akin to body identity integrity disorder than it is to race or sexual preference. In a nutshell, the trans claim, "I know I'm a woman" is bogus. Just as bogus as the BIID claim, "I know I don't really have a right leg."

 

[TragicMonkey]

*Confused* Because the people who think they have four fingers and a thumb keep calling me a bigot committing hate crimes for saying we have five fingers, or even discussing it conceptually, or even just acknowledging it a concept other people hold.

That seems to be a question of human behaviors, not a question of whether either "side" is "right" about their guesses for solving for X.

And, as I keep saying, because I ACTUALLY WANT TO UNDERSTAND THIS.

I want to come to some kind of understanding.

You're trying to find out the exact mass of phlogiston. You can try measurement after measurement, method after method, but it will never work. It's the wrong question.

 

[Roboramma]

It has. Of course it has. If you're not sure about someone's pronouns, you can ask. Simples. If you're not able to ask, then "they" is perfectly acceptable in the vast majority of cases.

What if I'm sure I know the correct pronouns, but you disagree with me. You're sure that I should say "she" but I'm sure I should say "he". Between you and me that hasn't been settled at all.

So how can you claim it's settled? You've decided you're right, and you are going to engage in the discussion as though that were the case, rather than listening to the other side?

ETA We both think we have an objective way of determining the answer: you say "the person just told me their preferred pronouns! How can it be any more settled than that?!" I say "The person just told me their sex!" or perhaps "I know," (through some other means) "the person's sex! How could it be any more clear than that?!" Given that our discussion isn't about whether or not sex/preference has been made clear, but rather which of these determines which is the "correct" pronoun to use, your simple statement that it's been settled is in fact just trying to sweep that disagreement under the rug.

 

[Roboramma]

I'm not sure if you're missing my point, avoiding it, or actually agreeing with it.

My point is that I don't think it's possible for someone to know what it feels like to be the opposite sex, and that an appeal to such feelings is not a valid basis for concluding one is in fact the opposite sex. Thinking you're a trans woman just means you have feelings of discomfort or distress about your manhood. It doesn't mean you're a woman, or a different kind of woman, or a woman for purposes of demography, affirmative action, or sex segregation. Gender dysphoria is more akin to body identity integrity disorder than it is to race or sexual preference. In a nutshell, the trans claim, "I know I'm a woman" is bogus. Just as bogus as the BIID claim, "I know I don't really have a right leg."

I mostly agree with you on this.

However, I don't think that the feelings, minds, and internal states of others are completely opaque, as your argument makes them out to be. How can one know what it feels like to be female? By talking to people known to be female. If they all describe their state of womanhood in the same way, and that sounds very similar to one's own state, that could at least start to lead one to believe that they are experiencing a similar internal state.

I expect that many trans women have a less direct pathway to that, but something along those lines: interacting with our culture, yes talking and interacting with women, but also reading books which portray their internal states, watching movies, etc. Those can inform an intuitive idea of what it means to be a woman, and that can be compared to one's internal state.

Of course those social cues probably align to what we usually call gender stereotypes. How close the model formed actually maps to the internal feelings of women (which I suspect vary widely) is hard to say.

I'm also not sure if arthwollipot, or anyone else sharing his views, would endorse this view of coming to an understanding of the "feeling of femininity", but I do think it has to be addressed by your argument.