How My Views On The Gender Debate Have Evolved.

on

(TL;DR, the friends I have made -through existing- me reconsider for their sake -and everyone else's- my views, to be inclusive, fact based, and for the sake of seeing how my views evolved).

    This post has been a long time coming. Over the course of the last five years, gender was hotly debated. Gender equality (or inequality), transgender rights (this is literally the first time that's been said on this blog), the pronoun debates, transgender medical procedures, tolerance, etc. And I was involved in a small part of those debates. And after 2017, I thought I left that all behind.


    For the sake of honesty, here were the views I held on to for a long time, (I will explain why I held those views, and where I stand now:


  1. "There are only two genders, that's it."
  2. "Biological sex invalidates gender identity."
  3. "The only valid pronouns are "she/her" and "he/him."
  4. "Trans people should be able to use the bathroom of their preference." (Take gender markers off of bathrooms) I still agree with this.
        
    Before I go any futher, I have always believed that regardless of your identity, you don't deserve to face violence, discrimination, or any other marginalization over your identity. I'll stress this a few times (I gotta rewire this brain).


    It was 2016. As I was getting increasingly political, the hotly debated issues of the day were:

  1. Feminism -vs- anti-feminism.
  2. The gender debate.
  3. "Political correctness".
  4. Black Lives Matter -vs- "All Lives Matter".
  5. The 2016 Presidential Election.

    All of these issues had my attention, but the first four mattered most, as the subjects were truly fascinating. And for someone who was in his early teens, these subjects came to my attention at an important stage of development: figuring out who I am. At the time, I already thought I had it figured out, but I really did not. The reason I believed that there were only two genders was because the arguments to the contrary were absolutely unconvincing. I used to argue about the deifintions of gender, sex, synonyms, and other words for hours because the debate was so fascinating.


    Gender:


    I used to heavily emphasize the word "especially" to argue that it didn't only mean that it referenced social and cultural diffrences. This definition is different from the 2017 definition, and I cannot find that one, so I cannot remember how I used that one.



    


    This definition appears to be slightly different from what I saw in 2017, but it resembles it quite closely. The synonyms of sex and gender were the link I used (that's what is not included in the 2021 definition).



    During the debates (largely in 2017), I argued that since sex and gender had the same synonyms as one another, and considering that those who said "non binary is valid" without proving it (it was incumbent on them to provide evidence for the claims they made), it was rational to reject their claims. People often said that "biology proves there is only two genders", and left it at that because they only watched videos by "anti-SJW" (Social Justice Warrior) YouTubers who essentially said what their fans paid them to say, and they didn't look further into it. I looked into it because when I got into the debate, I wanted to not just defend my points against my opposition, I wanted to prevent them from finding anything to use to overturn what I said.


    Here's the abstract from the article "Only two sex forms but multiple gender variants: How to explain?":


    "Are sex and gender interchangeable terms? In classical biology, both are sometimes but not always used on an equal basis for some groups of animals. However, for our own species the Homo sapiens, they are not. A major question is why are there only two types of gametes (sperm- and egg cells), two types of sex steroids, (androgens and estrogens in vertebrates, and two types of ecdysteroids in insects), while the reproduction-related behaviour of the gamete producers displays a much greater variability than just two prominent forms, namely heterosexual males and heterosexual females? It indicates that in addition to a few sex-determining genes ( = the first pillar), other factors play a role. A second possible pillar is the still poorly understood cognitive memory system in which electrical phenomena and its association with the plasma membrane membrane-cytoskeletal complex of cells play a major role (learning, imitation and imprinting). This paper advances a third pillar, that hitherto has been almost completely ignored, namely the cellular Ca2+-homeostasis system, more specifically its sex-specific differences. Differential male-female genetics- and hormone-based Ca2+-homeostasis with effects on gender-related processes has been named Calcigender before. It will be argued that it follows from the principles of Ca2+- physiology and homeostasis that all individuals of a sexually reproducing animal population have a personalized gender behaviour. Thus, subdividing gender-behaviours in hetero-, homo-, bi-, trans- etc. which all result from a differential use of the very same basic physiological principles, is too primitive a system that may yield false sociological interpretations."


    I'd recommend reading the whole thing, it's a mind blowing one.


    From the "Gender" section:


    "If sex and gender would have the very same meaning in all sexually reproducing species, there should be no need for two terms: Sex would suffice. Gender does indeed have no meaning in the few species which only produce one type of gamete, which is egg-like, thus in the few species in which no males occur. Such species have special means to maintain the diploid status of their somatic cells. Gender requires the presence of males and females. But why is there need for two terms? In non-human animal research, gender is commonly used to refer to the biological sex of the animals. Thus in classical biology, the nature of gender is not a hot topic, and hardly ever have efforts been undertaken to come up with a good definition. The opposite situation prevails in the humanities, in particular since the 1960-ties, when some sociologists and historians started raising questions about the reasons why males and females behave so differently, why specific tasks were typically attributed to females or males, and why man and woman were not always treated as equals, e.g. in receiving the same pay for the same work/job. An answer like e.g. God had a different set of tasks for man and woman in mind (see e.g. the story of creation in the Book Genesis of the Bible, or other stories in other cultures) when He created the species Homo sapiens as heterosexual as He had done before in other species; was rightly no longer accepted as a valid argument. Even to date, defining gender remains tricky."


    This is where a lot of hardline gender binary advocates (then including myself) ran into the wall, as the definition was so narrow it became almost impossible to explain the definition (from memory, and not from notes, but if I timed it right with my brain, I could explain). I once had a 2.5 hour debate with a British guy over the issue (the recording was lost), and that was easily my best debate in terms of the energy both of us had. After that, that's where my passion for the subject grew cold. After saying my final thoughts on the subject, I had no interest any further in beating a dead horse, after debating countless people on the matter over the course of one year, six months. Until 2018.

    I met a Canadian woman (through political Twitter), and we discussed various issues:


  1. How to end racism (She was visibly surprised to see that our views were almost identical)
  2. Capitalism (she's a socialist, I'm a hardcore anti-communist)
  3. Ancap memes (seriously the best)
  4. Feminism
  5. Gender (this would be fully hashed out at a later time) 

    When we finally conversed, we discussed pretty much what I said above, and went into the following opinions I held:

  1. "Just because you say you're 'non binary' does not change the reality of your sex." 
  2. "Intersex isn't a large enough group to be its own sex."
  3. And my attitudes about trans rights.

    Let me start in reverse order. No one deserves to die for being trans. Never would I support that. Even if I strongly disliked someone for something they said or did, a transphobic person killing them would never be okay with me. And considering that the population of people who are intersex is as "high" as 1.7%, that's not enough to consider them their own gender, or sex. Imagine an envelope manufacturing plant, and two types of envelopes are used. 


    If one machine has the paper roll too far on one side of the machine, and the envelopes are misshapen, that does not create a new type of envelope. That being said, it is and always will be abhorrent and (ought to be if it isn't already) illegal to force an intersex indiviudual to have a corrective surgery without their consent. So far, I've not changed my mind on it as I've not seen a sufficient rebuttal on the matter (of the idea that intersex is its own gender or sex), but I'm open to changing my mind. And while some may identify by their sex or gender, so far the statement mostly stands, although it's mainly toothless in the area of "appearance", since someone who may or may not "pass" doesn't work, since there are cisgender people (those who aren't trans) who may appear more masculine or feminine than usual (according to the trends).


   What mainly changed my mind about this was the big question of "who does this harm if these people identify as "non binary", and use "they/them" pronouns? The answer: no one. When people claim the "Fabric of society will be torn", keep in mind opponents of interracial and same sex marriage said the same thing. I eventually realized that it truly was none of my business. Are there more than two genders? I don't know, but I am interested in learning more. Are non-binary people valid? I guess, I'll let them take the lead on living their lives. Will I use their preferred pronouns? Yes, because it's a reasonable request.


    (Also: Give this a read.)


    When a number of friends came out as trans (transman or woman), or as nonbinary, it gave me a reason to reconsider. Never once did I misgender them, but I did others. Since 2018, I've made extra sure not to do that again, considering that words absolutely have more power than some say. And sometimes it's out of your hands the amount of power words have. Another thing that I considered were the following:

  1. A woman who loses her womb to cancer is not a "former woman". Thus, it's okay to call a trans woman (who does not have a womb) a woman.
  2. Gentials aren't the sole indicator of your identity.
  3. The request of respecting someone's pronouns are not the end of the world.
  4. Words and their definitions change over time. That's okay.

    The same thing applied with trans people and sexuality, with a science paper convincing me that- well... how do I explain? Well.. here's this. (TL;DR, you have nothing to worry about -sexual orientation wise- if you date a trans person -love who you do, those who mock you are losers-). The obsession with labeling everything is quite toxic, and that's why my statement of "live and let live" is my motto. Some might be disappointed with me renouncing my prior support of the gender binary, and some might be ultimately disappointed with me not explicitly saying that I support a gender spectrum, but here's the thing (where I stand now):


    It's not up to me to decide your life. You must live your life how you see fit. Live it in spite of the blowback (if you don't out of concern of your safety, I understand), because if you don't, you'd be living a lie, and considering the fact you only live once, live it truthfully. If you ask me to respect your "they/them" pronouns (I can't imagine accepting "Xe/Xer". etc pronouns), I will. All I ask is you be patient if I make a mistake, I self-correct quickly, and for the record, I am still reading up on the gender debate to learn more about this, in the interest of moving beyond talking points.


    Having trans friends doesn't make you incapable of being transphobic, but the trans friends I have made me reconsider my old views out of respect for their lives, and their wishes (of their pronouns being respected), as well as giving them (and people like them) the chance to make the case of why they believe they are right, and if they are, I'm happy for them. I never hated anyone who identified as trans, because that isn't a crime, no matter what violent transphobes have to say.


    I hope those who identify as non binary are correct in their opinion on gender, for their sake. If I had a nickle for everytime I said "they, them, their", I'd be rich. Ciao.



Follow my Twitter: @SkylerSatterfi1


Support the blog: http://paypal.me/SManSpeaks




Comments

Post a Comment