# Is it wrong to ignore the gender identities of people like Chelsea Manning? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 24, 2017, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080 "2017-01-24T22:16:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/101 "2017-01-26T20:26:24Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Huh? Where did you get this from? I’m not Miller, but I’m going to guess because that’s roughly when Middle English strode onto the scene and gave us the specific words man and woman. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/102 "2017-01-26T20:37:17Z")
> [@HumbleThinker](#): > > But what if the subjective state of mind is based on objective facts, in this case brain structure? A penis isn’t an objective fact? ISTM that the evidence that males have penises is a lot stronger than the evidence that transgenders have male brains, which is a lot more preliminary and equivocal. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/103 "2017-01-26T20:38:43Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > A penis isn’t an objective fact? Not for the vast majority of people that you meet, unless you have powers and abilities beyond that of normal folks. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/104 "2017-01-26T21:03:30Z")
You could be like Crocodile Dundee and just start grabbing the crotches of people you meet. That’s how he reacted to meeting transgendered people for the first time in NYC. I would not recommend that course of action though. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/105 "2017-01-26T21:05:38Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Not for the vast majority of people that you meet, unless you have powers and abilities beyond that of normal folks. Nah, you just gotta grope everyone’s crotch when you first meet them, to be sure. If you’re still unsure, take a cheek swab for further testing. Wouldn’t want to use the wrong word, after all, and of course asking them is no help there. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/106 "2017-01-26T21:06:56Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Which is why I said originally that the dispute can’t be resolved. One side wants to use terms to refer to objective facts, and the other to refer to subjective states of mind. Both sides are saying “you have to mean what I want, not what you want”. > Regards, > Shodan You appear to be asserting a claim not uncommon among conservatives, namely: _All elements of human gender and sexual identity are matters solely of will power._ There is a vast body of research supporting the very opposite: Gender identity, sexual orientation, and related issues are _not_ matters of will power. They are not choices. They are not due to subjective states of mind, but instead are due to objectively observable physical states (of brain structure as it interacts with hormones). (A gateway to a lot of the research: [http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx](http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx) More: [Is There Something Unique about the Transgender Brain? | Scientific American](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/) [Is gender identity biologically hard-wired? | PBS News](http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/biology-gender-identity-children/) [Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=research+origin+%22Sexual+orientation%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C10&as_vis=1) The right has its own “research” proving that it’s all a matter of will power, of course. But if we limit the discussion to actually _respectable_ research, you are left high and dry. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/107 "2017-01-26T21:19:04Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Huh? Where did you get this from? [From Merriam-Webster:](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man) > [@](#): > > **Origin and Etymology of man** > Middle English, from Old English man, mon human being, male human; akin to Old High German man human being, Sanskrit manu > > First Known Use: before 12th century Obviously, I’m not arguing that nobody had the concept of "men"and “women” before those specific English words for them evolved into their current form. I’m just using that coinage as a handy reference point to demonstrate that these concepts about gender are really, really old, and - like most things people thought about human biology a thousand years ago - are not very accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/108 "2017-01-26T21:22:04Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Not for the vast majority of people that you meet, unless you have powers and abilities beyond that of normal folks. Do you mean that he wouldn’t be able to tell if someone had a penis through normal interaction with the vast majority of people that he meets? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/109 "2017-01-26T21:53:10Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Do you mean that he wouldn’t be able to tell if someone had a penis through normal interaction with the vast majority of people that he meets? Yep. He might suspect, and usually guess correctly, but he won’t have “objective fact” for most people he meets. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2017, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/110 "2017-01-26T22:05:24Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Why is it the most useful, as opposed to chromosomes or genitalia? Neither of your Wiki cites show that. > > Regards, > Shodan I refer you to the _other_ post I made: > [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > […] > > It’s complicated. Here’s what isn’t complicated: there’s only one of those factors that has a substantial impact on well-being when it comes to how we label each other or how we are labeled. And that’s _gender_. Your chromosomes don’t care if you call yourself a girl. Your dick certainly doesn’t. Your mind does. > > To me, that’s the crux of the issue. Misgendering people can do a lot to aggravate things like gender dysphoria. Forcing a transwoman to use the men’s bathroom [is a legitimate mental health risk](http://europe.newsweek.com/transgender-bathroom-law-study-suicide-454185?rm=eu), along with all the other dangers posed by placing someone who looks like [this](http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/869/540/dbb.jpg) in a men’s bathroom. > > So this: > > Is nonsense. If you want to define a person as “male” or “female” based exclusively on their genetics, or what they have in their pants, that’s fine, but don’t pretend you’re speaking the gospel truth. You’re voicing your opinion on how we define such terms. And it’s a _harmful_ opinion. My point with the wiki links is that you can’t just state a general case that the crucial thing is genetics or whether someone has a penis. Bailey Jay has a penis and is _absurdly_ attractive. Women with Androgyn Insensitivity Syndrome have XY chromosomes and yet display as women and have female genitalia. > [@Shodan](#): > > Which is why I said originally that the dispute can’t be resolved. One side wants to use terms to refer to objective facts, and the other to refer to subjective states of mind. Both sides are saying “you have to mean what I want, not what you want”. > > Regards, > Shodan As various people have pointed out to you throughout the course of the thread, _including my own post that you quoted_, this simply isn’t true. Hell, even if we _didn’t_ have strong evidence indicating that gender identity is grounded in physiology, we would still have good reason to point to it as the most important factor, for all the same reasons I named above. Because when a psychological state like this is persistant, consistent, and unchanging, it needs to be addressed. We don’t have a direct physiological link to sexual orientation; this does not mean that being gay is just a “subjective state of mind”. It certainly doesn’t mean that one’s sexual orientation is not a fact. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/111 "2017-01-27T14:27:36Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Yep. He might suspect, and usually guess correctly, but he won’t have “objective fact” for most people he meets. Fair enough. But in that case, how would “brain structure” be an objective fact? ---
**Author:** ![HumbleThinker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@HumbleThinker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumbleThinker)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/112 "2017-01-27T17:52:52Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > A penis isn’t an objective fact? > > ISTM that the evidence that males have penises is a lot stronger than the evidence that transgenders have male brains, which is a lot more preliminary and equivocal. > > Regards, > Shodan I’m not expert in physiology, but I do not believe a penis by itself is responsible for a subjective state of mind, though certain actions with said penis certain can be. Brain structure is, however, which was the point. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/113 "2017-01-27T17:57:57Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Fair enough. But in that case, how would “brain structure” be an objective fact? It wouldn’t be, for most folks, short of some unusual technology. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/114 "2017-01-27T18:16:00Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It wouldn’t be, for most folks, short of some unusual technology. So all the posts in all the threads that list scientific studies of the brains of transgender people are moot, since brain structure is not an objective fact? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/115 "2017-01-27T18:59:28Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > So all the posts in all the threads that list scientific studies of the brains of transgender people are moot, since brain structure is not an objective fact? No, since I’m talking of “objective fact” as **Shodan** used it – fact as could reasonably be determined from mundane interaction with people day to day. It might be fact in other senses, such as how, scientifically, the brains of transgender people work. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/116 "2017-01-27T19:09:37Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > No, since I’m talking of “objective fact” as **Shodan** used it – fact as could reasonably be determined from mundane interaction with people day to day. It might be fact in other senses, such as how, scientifically, the brains of transgender people work. I’m not sure that is how \*\*Shodan \*\* was using it. I thought it was “something tangible that could be observed or measured to determine something” Of course I could be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/117 "2017-01-27T19:16:25Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I’m not sure that is how \*\*Shodan \*\* was using it. I thought it was “something tangible that could be observed or measured to determine something” > > Of course I could be wrong. You can measure the brain differences. With an MRI. Which I assume you do not have in your pocket. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/118 "2017-01-27T19:26:10Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > You can measure the brain differences. > > With an MRI. > > Which I assume you do not have in your pocket. The differences in brain structure being discussed here aren’t observable in an MRI. They can only be done by autopsy. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/119 "2017-01-27T19:26:44Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > You can measure the brain differences. > > With an MRI. > > Which I assume you do not have in your pocket. I agree. You can also look to see if there is a penis. So what? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2017, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080/120 "2017-01-27T19:34:43Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > The differences in brain structure being discussed here aren’t observable in an MRI. They can only be done by autopsy. Okay. I had thought on a different thread that there were in fact claims that the differences were visible by MRI. If that is not the case, then I retract that, but still maintain that there are objective differences that apparently require even more intrusive measures than I thought. > [@Slash1972](#): > > I agree. You can also look to see if there is a penis. So what? By the same token that you should not ask to see a man’s penis before allowing him to call himself a man, you shouldn’t have to ask for an MRI or autopsy of their brain before referring to them by the gender to which they identify. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-wrong-to-ignore-the-gender-identities-of-people-like-chelsea-manning/778080.md?page=7)