I’m not sure that transgender people usually report their sense of identity this way, but even under this description, what difference does it make? Where does the inclination toward traits that are not usually correlated with a cis identity come from in a strongly cis-normative culture? Obviously not from the culture.
Again, I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
We have gender identities. What is in dispute is whether the origin of gender identity (which category you feel you fit into) is innate or socially determined.
The usual correlates of gender identity (gender expression) that define the categories within a society may be largely social constructs.
You seem to be confusing:
(1) the properties that define the existence of a category
(2) how an individual decides which category they feel they fit into
(1) is at least partly (perhaps mostly) socially constructed. But I am saying that (2) cannot possibly be a result of social factors in the case of trans people, otherwise trans people would simply not exist in strongly cis-normative cultures. All social pressure pushes people to place themselves in the cis category. Asserting a trans identity has historically always been in opposition to social influence, so it cannot be a result of social influence.
That doesn’t imply that trans gender identity is necessarily innate, it may also be a result of early environmental factors other than social factors.
That’s a complicated question because the answer is both.
A) An individual has the inalienable ability to unilaterally determine his or her personal identity, regardless of what the rest of society thinks.
B) An individual has the inalienable ability to unilaterally decide what identity he or she thinks someone else has, regardless of how that other person self-identifies.
C) An individual often has great social pressure to reconcile his or her personal identity with his or her identity in society at large.
The way I see it, the origin of personal gender identity is a chicken and egg problem because there is a feedback loop with society. There is also the problem of personal gender identity not necessarily being the only gender identity associated with an individual.
Nonsense. Let’s not get caught in an excluded middle. Social factors are not the only factors that produce personal gender identity, for example genetics contribute to muscle tone and hair density which are often contributory or reinforcing factors in personal gender identity. And sex organs, those are usually important factors! Nevertheless AHunter3 personally testified that social factors can be prominent in shaping the resulting gender identity.
If social factors are necessary for gender identity, then I say gender identity is necessarily a social construct. This is why I use a hypothetical involving a feral child as a test.
You seem to misunderstand the potential of social pressure to backfire and reinforce deviant behavior. History is ripe with examples… for example, all persecution for any reason whatsoever.
Oh, the absurdity! Religious extremism has historically always been in opposition to social influence, so it cannot be a result of social influence. Sexual promiscuity has historically always usually been in opposition to social influence, so it cannot be a result of social influence. Suicide has historically always been in opposition to social influence, so it cannot be a result of social influence.
Besides - and this is important - social influence need not be aligned to significantly shape one’s personal identity. Othering is a powerful social force that places direct social pressure on an individual not to identify with the in-group. The taunting AHunter3 described eventually backfired because he interpreted it as othering, and so he removed himself from the in-group and embraced the other identity.
~Max
Absolutely. Virtually everything in biology (including psychology) is a result of both nature and nature.
The term “social construct” by definition excludes innate or non-social causal factors. That’s what I’m arguing against. My position (and the position of anyone not indoctrinated by evidence-free social science dogma) has always been “both”.
You need to contemplate how society organizes exceptions to the rule. In medieval Europe, there was immense social pressure to be (and behave as, and present as and be treated as) an obedient God-fearing Christian. It may look like there was zero social pressure to be a witch.
But “you are a witch” was exactly the social response to someone who defied (or simply failed to match up with) certain social expectations. It most assuredly wasn’t an attribution made with acceptance — it was intended to be a deterrent — but if, for the individual, the payoffs for turning away from the behaviors was personally worse than the payoffs for embracing an identity as “witch”, you get someone who may start to think of themselves as a witch. Even given the prospect of a really negative outcome.
Now, in my case, the stuff bolted on to “you’re a sissy you’re a freakin’ GIRRL” was only marginally less offputting than the stuff I was avoiding in being repelled by the prospect of being like the other boys. Society has all kinds of connotations attached to being a feminine male, and I didn’t like those either. So I get to testify from firsthand experience that it is really really difficult to synthesize an identity that people are not casting you as and that you don’t hear anyone, ever, speaking of.
So mostly if there’s an available identity formulation that isn’t abhorrent, you’re going to accept it. And yes society gives you a range of choices, in hierarchically descending order of how it, collectively, would prefer that you be and behave as.
So yes, not only is there social pressure on you (if you aren’t gonna be a normal boy) to be a gay guy or a trans woman, those identities are (and have been) out there and available as formulations; you would not have had to synthesize them from scratch inside your head, you get called those things, and treated as such, and it is an identity albeit a pariah identity.
Obviously it hasn’t. If you are born in Afghanistan today, there is strong social pressure to be a religious extremist.
Are you suggesting that the urge to have sex is a social construct? I don’t think you’ll get much traction with that idea.
Obviously it hasn’t. If my partner leaves me, it may make me so unhappy that I want to kill myself. If people ostracize me, it may make me so unhappy that I want to kill myself.
Where do you come up with this stuff?
Not by my definition.
My post #60 stands. With your definition of social construct, no identities are social constructs because I can decide everyone’s identity unilaterally. Social identity would be an oxymoron, which it isn’t, therefore your definition is logically absurd.
I mean, just look at your own post and put two and two together.
Therefore nothing which innate biology or psychology factors into can result in a social construct.
All social constructs require social causal factors.
All social causal factors are based on societal behaviors.
All societal behavior incorporate innate biological and psychological factors.
Therefore all social causal factors incorporate innate biological and psychological factors.
Therefore all social constructs incorporate innate biological and psychological factors.
But nothing which innate biology or psychology factors into can result in a social construct.
Therefore there are no social constructs. QED, absurdity.
~Max
Sure, but where did the behaviors come from in the first place?
You still seem to be conflating the existence of a category with the inclination to feel that you fit that category. Of course anyone can imagine a trans person conceptually, just as one can imagine a centaur. But that doesn’t make a person feel that they are a trans person or a centaur. Where does a trans person internal sense that they are a trans person come from? Certainly not from cis-normative societal pressure.
You cannot respond by saying (as did @BigT) that they have a certain set of attributes that fit well with a trans identity, because that’s just reframing the question as “where did those attributes come from”. Again, certainly not from cis-normative societal pressure.
If it helps, it is my understanding that say, a transgender woman identifies as a woman, and also interprets societal pressures directed towards predominantly cis-women as applying to themself.
This cis-normative you keep repeating is a bit odd to me, because my sense of history is that the categories were man and woman and that transgender was simply invalid; there was little to no consideration of transgender as distinguished from cis-gender. If a transgender woman “passes”, then for all practical purposes so far as society is concerned that individual is a woman, at least until revealed to be transgender, after which she would have been considered a man pretending to be a woman.
~Max
This makes no sense at all. Society is very strongly saying that these pressures do not apply to someone born with a penis. So where did this “interpretation” come from? Not societal pressure.
That’s what cis-normative means.
Irrelevant. As a fait accompli, an individual who adopts a transgender identity in such a society has already decided that society doesn’t dictate his or her personal gender identity. He or she chooses to interpret societal pressures as applying to him or herself, by using a different definition of gender than society at large.
~Max
We’re discussing what causes something, and your response is to declare it a fait accompli?
There are two things happening, either of which could be happening without the other, so let’s look at them separately FIRST.
a) The individual feels that they aren’t what is expected of them, and although that causes a lot of difficulties, they don’t want to be what is expected of them. That does not, in and of itself, spell out what it is that they are instead.
How that feels is unsettling, worrisome. When that someone was me, I worried a lot that it meant there was something fundamentally wrong with me.
This much of the situation is all about feeling at odds with the conventional identities being foisted off or projected onto one. It may or may not have innate elements to it. (I mean, why me, and why not the rest of my classmates?) It certainly has social elements to it, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t innate ones. Then comes
b) Available to me are the other identities that other people, especially other misfitty pariah type people, have selected. And the identities that people cast me into when they decide I don’t match up with how I’m supposed to be. If one of those seems to fit, it may give me an explanation for why I’m different and it gives me a way to be and behave in this world that’s less wrong-feeling than the conventional identity originally shoved at me. That part is entirely social.
Going back specifically to being gender-variant (transgender or genderqueer or nonbinary or whatever), you can have the first part, the sense of absolutely not being the person you’re expected to be, with a lot of innate built-in components (although you still need the social to realize it is resulting in you being different from others).
But for the “b” part… you absolutely positively can’t have an innate sense that your gender is such-and-such. To match your feelings about yourself to the array of identities that exist, you have to know they exist and you have to recognize that who you are matches up with one of those patterns.
There are people who have intense feelings that they were born to be a doctor, or a farmer, or a lawyer, or a singer. There’s no biological basis for those things, but obviously they’re all real things that people decide to be.
I actually have no problem saying a gender binary exists and is real. Where it goes off the rails is where people decide that the gender binary is some kind of unbreakable law of the universe, a thing that I can judge you for conforming or not conforming to. There’s nothing behind that except for some people insisting that their way of making sense of the world is the only possible way.
Men exist, women exist. Pick one. Or pick neither. Or pick some other thing. It’s your life, nobody else’s.
…what definition are you using?
Sorry, a misunderstanding of the question on my part.
Where does a trans person internal sense that they are a trans person come from? Certainly not from cis-normative societal pressure.
To appropriate your own language, in response to societal pressures to conform with societal gender stereotypes, the individual rewrites the categories of gender identity so as to place themself in the opposite category and alleviate societal pressures.
This rewriting of the categories of gender, hitherto appropriated from society at large, results in the individual identifying as a gender separate from the gender assigned at birth. Therefore they are now transgender and also identify as transgender.
The original gender-noncomformative personality or behaviors are not strictly caused by societal factors.
~Max
But why do they feel that way in the first place? You can keep taking things “up a level” but it does not address the fundamental issue.
Societal pressure can have somewhat unexpected consequences. But it is just not credible that immense cis-normative societal pressure (to a point of literally murdering people) somehow causes people to persistently assert a trans identity.
You have to be absolutely desperate to cling to a blank slate model to believe this. It’s preposterous.
But why? Again, you are just taking things “up a level”.
Social Construct
Something that exists only in the context of society, and has no meaning outside of that context.
While not perfect, one test I use to falsify the assertion that something is a social construct is to ask if a feral child could develop a concept in isolation. If it’s possible in theory, it’s not a social construct.
~Max
I don’t intend to come across as trite or demeaning, but what are your thoughts on the rest of that sentence so I can craft a response?
the individual rewrites the categories of gender identity so as to place themself in the opposite category and alleviate societal pressures [to conform with gender stereotypes for the gender previously identified as].
~Max