Gender identity model

In My Humble Opinion
21

No

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

22

THEN WHY DO YOU CARE ABOUT WHO THEY ARE BANGING?

I’m sorry to be frustrated, but this KEEPS coming up in discussions of people’s identities like it somehow proves a point or makes a difference, and it really just is totally and utterly irrelevant to the whole concept.

If your answer is NO, then your “conceptual framework” of sexual identity does NOT include some presupposition of a “gendered” (ie: intrinsic-to-their-sexual-identity) sexual orientation, and thus you’re just being a voyeur by asking about it. As my grandmother says “That’s tacky.” Don’t be tacky.

Now, I feel like I have to say that if your framework DID include some presupposition of that nature, *you might **not *be wrong, but I believe it’s a currently impossible task to try and figure out how and where any possible correlations or statistical likelihoods even laid out, and could easily be a truly insulting process to try and tease those things out from an actually representative variety of people, many of whom are already disadvantaged in really physically dangerous, stigmatized, and dehumanizing ways. (And to be blunt: I think that presupposition along those lines IS wrong, but we can’t prove it right now and I’m trying really hard to be fair and scientific rather than responding just out of frustration.)

23

Based on your feedback, here is model Gender Identity Model v II

  1. Gender expression - behaviour, mannerisms, interaction with society and others
  2. Gender Identity - spectrum of personal identity
  3. **Phenotype **- e.g. hormones, hair distribution, breasts, adam’s apple, genitals
  4. **DNA **- genes
  5. **Chromosomes **- XX, XY, XXY etc

Each level builds on the abstaction of the previous level.

I have taken sexual attraction out, because as other posters have said, this has nothing to do with gender. I broke up top level into personal identity and societal interation.

24

You really should make it into:

  1. Gender expression
  2. Gender Identity
  3. Phenotype
  4. Nucleotides
  5. Base Pairs
  6. DNA
  7. Nucleosomes
  8. Heterochromatin
  9. Chromosomes

Because if you are going to insist on going with pointless, redundant distinctions, why not go all out?

25

You didn’t include my feedback, which is that the whole idea of layers resting on one another, like abstraction layers is a bad idea to begin with.
Probably the strongest connections is genes -> phenotype but even there there’s a lot of potential for the maps to just be mere correlations as environment, including womb environment, have a significant impact.