"Gender" is NOT a social-construct: Difference between Gender-Identity and Gender-Expression/Stereotypes
[The conflation of gender-expression and stereotype-behaviours with gender-"identity"]
Personally I believe the narrative that gender is merely a social construct is potentially harmful and misleading.
It firstly implies that reparative therapy would actually work for trans-people.
And secondly I do not believe that gives an accurate picture of what the condition of transgenderism really is.
I think what those new self-IDer groups are trying to really advocate is instead: freedom of "gender expression" and from the constrains of "stereotypical gender-behaviours" -- both are indeed social-constructs. I do agree whole-heartedly that people should be free to express however they like, and to be able to simply be how they are, in terms of gender-expression, regardless of their biological (or legally assigned) sexes, or psychological gender. I also do believe that it is positive for children to not be confined by social stereotypes, and limitations of artificial/subjective gender-expression/expectations.
However, when it comes to gender-identity, I however believe this to be a solidly innate attribute of a person (base on my own experience as a trans-person, and which is irrespective of my upbringing (e.g. it is more to do with nature, rather than nurture). The further fact that DES exposed babies have extremely high occurrence of being gay, intersex, and/or trans is evidence of this IMO, as one of various examples.
Precision of language is important, especially when it comes to spreading awareness and advocacy. The sense of gender-incongruence, which transgender and non-binary people realize since an early age (which may eventually lead to dysphoria), has to do with gender-identity; and irrespective of subjective social constructs of gender-expression/expectations/stereotypes. Not every trans- and non-binary people may develop dysphoria, however every trans and non-binary people would (at the minimum) experience a persistent sense of gender incongruence to varying degree and intensity.
From my earlier post: https://steemit.com/gender/@aeondrift/precision-in-language-is-important-when-talking-about-gender
"It is about identity (not expression) -- i.e. a biologically male person who identifies completely as a woman but who may be tom-boyish in personality and/or prefers to wear non-feminine clothing regardless is not a non-binary person by this definition. A non-binary person (rather than a trans-gender person) is someone who do NOT identify completely as a woman or man.
Note: The world "trans" means being opposite of "cis"."
To me, the including of gender non-conformists (in terms of expression -- e.g. hobbyists who are presently referred to as "crossdressers"), and even fetishists (i.e. transvestites -- typically men who have transvestic fetishism, as classified and defined by the APA) under the "Transgender Umbrella", and then allowing them to freely self-identify, with the legally recognition and gain access to women-only spaces, is not only erasing very valid issues/concerns/fears raised by many non-transgender women in society, but is also erasing actual transgender-people who do experience persistent gender incongruity (since adolescence) -- and along with it, the understanding of actual (gender-identity incongruent) trans-people.
===
[On The Topic of Self-Identification]
I do personally agree with the safety concerns (to women) that legal acceptance of adult “self-identification” brings is warranted. This is even despite considerations of the statistics which shows occurrences of crimes as the result of such policy is extremely “rare”, or the argument that “rapists are gonna rape” with or without legal-recognition of gender self-IDing. (Not something that I would want to discuss too much about) but having experienced sexual assault myself in the past, I do strongly feel that even 0.1% of cases to me is way too much -- especially when the odds is multiplied, by the number of times over the years, where safe access to such spaces is required!
To clarify, I do see the significant benefits self-IDing might bring to actual trans-people, making our transistioning experiences so much easier (for one). However, the issue to me is complex, since it DOES affect women as a whole (including the safety of legally recognised trans-women as well!). Furthermore, there are multiple real cases of young people experimenting with "gender" (behaviour/expression) having mistakenly transitioned (e.g. a girl taking testostrone, and getting mastectomy done, only to later regret upon realising that it has nothing to do with gender-identity at all). These cases, although few, are certainly not "negligible". A balance IMO will need to be struck, to ensure that everyone's interests are not significantly sacrificed in the name of making our lives as trans-people easier to navigate.
Especially for cases of dysphoria, access to affordable counselling with qualified gender psychiatrists is very much necessary; and allowing of self-IDing may make it a lot less compelling for those who need it to actually seek one. And with regards to the taking of HRT under the extreme anguish/pain of dysphoria, sensible advise from doctors against overdosing + the continued monitoring of insulin levels, liver health, and other potential side-effects, are crucial.
Finally, to sum it all up: Instead of legally-recognizing gender base on self-ID, the better (middle-ground) approach, I believe, is to require individuals who suspect themselves to be trans to seek consultations with a qualified and experienced gender-psychiatrist, and to make such services more accessible and affordable to people. It is also extremely important to bring awareness to the very real dangers of self-medication, especially to young children experimenting with gender-expression (not necessarily having to do with gender-identity issues) or even adults. At the same time, society also needs more advocation for acceptance of not just actual "trans" (gender incongruence experiencing) people, but of freedom of gender-expression/experimentation as well; while still reasonably regulate legal recognition of identified-gender and access to anything more than hormone-"blockers" to gender-psychology specialists.
~ Juni LEE
EOS: cybernetwork
References:
Scientific research shows gender is not just a social construct
https://qz.com/1190996/scientific-research-shows-gender-is-not-just-a-social-construct/
A system of gender self-identification would put women at risk
https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/07/03/a-system-of-gender-self-identification-would-put-women-at-risk
There is one thing trans campaigners on both sides of the argument can agree on: the debate is getting ugly https://inews.co.uk/news/long-reads/trans-rights-gender-self-identification/
===
See also: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/08/self-certified-trans-women-all-women-shortlists-labour
See also (Video): The Science of the Transgender Issue VS. the Pseudoscience Surrounding Gender and Biology; which raised quite a number of interesting perspective on the topic, even if I do not necessary agree with everything in the video myself (i.e. his stance on non-binary people).
=====
See also: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/08/self-certified-trans-women-all-women-shortlists-labour
(Quote): "And where we are stuck is awful. Most importantly, it is awful for transgender people, because their lives and futures have been left hanging. But as the debate surrounding gender identity has become more polarised, and the divergence of views between trans activists and some feminists has hardened into a standoff, others too have come under attack. Clearly some women are prejudiced against trans people. But the label “transphobic” should not be hurled at anyone who has the temerity to suggest that the interests of trans women and other vulnerable women might sometimes come into conflict." ~ Susanna Rustin
(Quote): "The trans rights debate has become deeply toxic, in part because of what people perceive there to be at stake, but also, I suspect, in part because of a lack of understanding of each other’s perspectives. It’s all-or-nothing: some trans advocates deny there may be legitimate questions about how to balance the rights of trans and cis women, and denounce those asking them as transphobic. Some cis feminists seem unwilling to give way on anything, fearing a slippery slope that ends with their hard-won rights being trampled.
I support making it much less intrusive for people to register their gender as different from the one they were assigned at birth; it’s clearly demeaning for trans people to have to be diagnosed with a medical condition in order to change their gender. But I think it’s wrong for supporters of trans rights to say it’s transphobic for women to ask questions about spaces that exist to protect women from male violence.
Of course some trans women have suffered male violence, and are no less deserving of protection. But if changing your gender is a matter of self-declaration, what safeguards are there to stop male criminals disingenuously declaring themselves female to get themselves out of a violent men’s prison and into a women’s prison? What would happen if a trans woman with a history of sexual violence against women – and who still has male sex organs – says it’s their right to be in a women’s prison? These are questions that need exploring, and risks that need mitigating.
I don’t see the same clash of rights in all-women shortlists. Trans women face no less discrimination when it comes to politics than cis women; there are none in parliament. Trans women make up a tiny percentage of the population and I can’t see men faking being trans in order to get on to a women’s shortlist. This could represent an opportunity for two groups to come together and argue for Labour to expand its use of all-women shortlists – that are inclusive of trans women – even further; it’s a shame that this seems unlikely.
At heart, these are fundamentally complex issues that involve competing rights, and are not easy to resolve. We should be wary of anyone claiming absolute moral certainty." ~ Sonia Sodha
=====
Note: In the title, the word "gender" refers specifically to "gender identity" (which I personally believe should be the default meaning to the word).
Note: Trans-people do not necessarily develop/experience dysphoria (which is a common mistaken assumption that that do). But the common denominator between trans-people (and also non-binary people) is the persistent sense of "gender incongruence". That is the accurate term to use.
Other references:
The X Factor Explains Androgyny in Male Asperger’s
Un-erased maternal markers on the X may feminize male Asperger’s cases.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/the-imprinted-brain/201410/the-x-factor-explains-androgyny-in-male-asperger-s
Brains of men with autism have some ‘female’ patterns
https://www.spectrumnews.org/news/brains-men-autism-female-patterns/