Unlimited potential: Report of the Commission on Gender Stereotypes and Early Childhood

Yes, I agree it is helpful in that way.

I find the comparison with religion fine. Or if not religion, spirituality. A feeling there is it must be 'something else'.

I don't have that feeling and I can't imagine it. My friend does, she can't imagine not having it. I can understand that she has this feeling and say ok. But what she can't say is that this is a universal thing because it clearly isn't. Or that it's unusual not to have it. Or that everything should be organised as if it's a defining thing about humans etc.

So for me it's helpful.

I don’t find the God and soul comparisons useful.

They have a limited use in the sense that as gender identity is being described as neither based on the body nor the personality the only remaining realm is the supernatural.

It is not useful in the sense of if you haven’t experienced it is incomprehensible and nebulous. God and the soul have got descriptions that are cohesive enough to create religious doctrines. If you ask what God is there are descriptions of him/her/it.

I am still waiting to hear a description of a gender identity.

The best comparison is one I heard recently on a podcast. Someone claims we all have multiple personalities. Some people say they only have one. The people who think they only have one are wrong; it’s just that in their case all of their personalities are identical so they don’t notice them all.

That’s the same as the notion some people don’t notice their own gender identity.

They cannot possibly know we all have gender identities, and even if we do, they need to explain what one is.

If there was no interest in accessing stuff meant for a sex, based on gender instead, then everything would be ok.

And if children weren't being given harmful medication and being persuaded by adults that their healthy bodies need this medication.

I know what you mean blibby and agree.

In the end though whether this internal sense exists or not, and whether the stereotypical preferences etc are cause or symptom. Is irrelevant. Because biology exists. And if it was all about names and clothes and even pronouns then ok. Not much fuss. It's the bit where biological sex becomes irrelevant and men get put in prison that there's a problem.

If there was no interest in accessing stuff meant for a sex, based on gender instead, then everything would be ok.

Which is why I think the religion/god/soul analogies are quite useful.

They are. I accept my disbelief in an innate gender identity that can sometimes be found in the wrong sexed body is a belief rather than something I can know. Just as I cannot know there isn't a flying teapot orbiting the Earth and if someone tells me there is, I might be sceptical of this claim.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

I still see no reason to believe in innate gender identity, because I've not heard any rational argument which has convinced me I should.

But someone who is not GC could believe gender identity is innate but the expression of it follows stereotypes set culturally. In that reading, the natal little girl and the trans little girl both love pink and sparkles because they both believe themselves to be girls so they subsconciously (or often consciously, based on my own childhood) follow the girl stereotypes. So the girly stereotypes in the trans girl are proof they are a girl because only girls naturally like this stuff, but evidence they may identify as a girl and therefore aligning to those stereotypes.

The problem is that take away the sparkles and nobody seems to be able to explain what gender identity is. What is this innate thing that I am supposed to share with Caitlyn Jenner but not Stephen Whittle?

Until someone can actually explain the set of feelings/emotions/tastes that as a woman I am supposed to have (and share with my fellow women around the world), then gender will remain a fluffy idea around ‘boys like blue and girls like pink’ and have nothing useful to offer.

But this still doesn't answer the question about what a gender identity actually is. I've been trying to work this out for years, and I still feel no closer to understanding. yes I agree, it doesn't address this. Which is why I think the religion/god/soul analogies are quite useful.

The way it's explained is inadequate & depends on us all having one - that we don't notice ours because it matches our 'assigned' sex. I saw one tra trans woman explaining it a bit more convincingly - more like a mismatched sex identity. That depends on the existence of the two sex categories (to identify with/as) so contradicts the 'sex is a social construct' idea. But I don't think that goes down well with the other trans activists.

But none of it, however it's explained, means a male person is actually female, or that gender identity (whatever it is) should overwrite sex in policy and law.

But the thread is about the Fawcett's stereotype research, and there is alot in there which is useful to us & others who are keen to relieve the pressure on girls, the princessification & later the hyper sexual femininity.

So alignment with opposite sex stereotypes is only seen as an indicator of a tran identity in the case of a child who themselves claims to be trans.

And why would they claim to be "trans", in the first place? When Mermaids types describe how their children "knew" they were meant to be the opposite sex they always describe it in terms of stereotyped likes or behaviour.

Trans activists I follow on twitter are also about trying to free up what they call 'gender expression' for children they consider 'cis'. Ie boys should able to paint their nails or whatever. They hold both positions at the same time (some children are trans, and boys should be able to have long hair paint their nails) & they are not necessarily contradictory if you believe in gender identity as an integral component of a person.

But this still doesn't answer the question about what a gender identity actually is. I've been trying to work this out for years, and I still feel no closer to understanding.

Isn't a gender identity based on 'gender' i.e. stereotypes? Otherwise, why call it a gender identity? And if it's not based on stereotypes, why is it called a gender identity and not just a personality?

How does a boy who is transgender different from a boy who just likes playing with girls and playing with toys which are marketed to girls and dressing 'like a girl'? Surely the only difference is inside their heads, and at what age should we start to believe that the child understands this better than educated adults like me who haven't got a clue what a gender identity feels like even though I've spent far too much time here reading about it over the last few years?

There are probably lots of people other than trans people who feel detached from their bodies to one degree or another but don't latch onto gender as an explanation. I'm starting to ramble now but making sense of this is a process...

Yes, I think we can look at psychological conditions like anorexia, BDD and BIID. Charles VII of France believed he was made of glass. The limited brain structure evidence there is supporting transgenderism suggests that there may be a difference in the part of the brain associated with bodily self perception in heterosexual MTF trans people, but they do not have any sex atypical similarities to females.

wearing as much typically 'feminine' clothing as possible and wearing lots of make up is a logical and understandable approach

It's "typically feminine" through the male gaze. It's all about stereotypes and perceptions of sexual roles.

I think the problem is that some male people believe there is any way at all that they can genuinely be seen as female, and that the rest of the world should accept it.

I don't have any truck with gender identity ideology at all. I don't think some MTF trans people have honorary womanhood, so their motivations are largely irrelevant to me.

Really agree with your points @Blibbyblobby

I remember seeing a tweet ages ago from one of the Corbynistas - she was talking about the argument about whether some trans women play into sexist stereotypes by wearing a lot of make up or hyper-feminised clothing. And she pointed out that if you're a trans woman and just want to be accepted as a woman, wearing as much typically 'feminine' clothing as possible and wearing lots of make up is a logical and understandable approach. That it's not an aggressive pastiche, which I think we GCers can sometimes think it is, but an absolutely genuine desire to be seen as feminine.

Really helped me to look at it from a better perspective I think. God knows there have been times in my life where I've done typically 'feminine' things (hair removal, short skirts, high heels) purely because I wanted to fit an idea of what a feminine woman should look like.

This is also true from stripesnomore:
there have been no real explanations of what a gender identity actually is or what it feels like to have one. Very occasionally someone will go against the beliefs of trans activists and say it is about feeling innately feminine. But in general no explanation is given.
which is why people end up here.

But, Fawcett's work on this is important, and the finding deserve to be acted on.

This is an interesting discussion that gets to the heart of the issue - Blibbyblobby is mostly right and is putting forward a view that isn't seen on this board enough (at all?).

We have to be much finer in trying to explain how the ideas that underpin current trans rights can entrench sex stereotypes, especially the way they are sometimes (or often) explained to children - and that's serious - but that it's not as simple as the way the gc discourse often presents it - eg that they (the other side) believe that if you like pink/play with dolls then you are a girl.

Trans activists I follow on twitter are also about trying to free up what they call 'gender expression' for children they consider 'cis'. Ie boys should able to paint their nails or whatever. They hold both positions at the same time (some children are trans, and boys should be able to have long hair paint their nails) & they are not necessarily contradictory if you believe in gender identity as an integral component of a person. However - it's very easy for children to hear 'a boy who paints nails, likes dolls, is probably a trans girl, when they meet these ideas.

Also, FWR is not a class. Nor are we a psychological research group capable of drawing up a set of criteria that would describe common characteristics of gender identity. I would love to see such research though.

‘But we, by which I mean FWR as a class, aren't doing that with people who claim they have a gender identity. We don't listen to many subjective experiences. We take each individual and demand they express their story and experience in a framework we predefined that takes our own beliefs as fact. That's my point about the GC stereotype "gotcha" being a failing of GC analysis.’

I have been reading these debates for ten years and there have been no real explanations of what a gender identity actually is or what it feels like to have one. Very occasionally someone will go against the beliefs of trans activists and say it is about feeling innately feminine. But in general no explanation is given.

To go back to your analogy, there have been thousands of descriptions of what experiencing God is like. If you do along to the Catholic Church and claim to have had a vision, they have criteria from which to verify your claim. Similarly if you make claims of enlightenment the experience will have parameters in Buddhism.

Your experience of God may be subjective, but for it to be accepted by others your description of it would have to include certain characteristics. The problem with gender identity isn’t that people are experiencing it subjectively, it is that their descriptions of the experience include no characteristics.

Gender identity is an empty category. There is no explanation of what feeling like a girl entails.

If we are all supposed to be having some female gender identity that is shared, it must have some characteristics that we can agree we each subjectively experience. At the moment no characteristics are being given.

I understand that if I went and lived in another culture I would do different feminine things to fit in with other women, and I’d expect feminine gay men would do the same. But we keep getting told that gender identity is not about femininity.

I think I get where you’re coming from now. I think it’s impossible to generalise, though. A teenage girl would differ from a pre teen boy, would differ from a grown man etc. It just seems such a blunt tool, given the infinite possibilities of human expression and experience.

That's what I mean "the sense of it", I don't believe their is an inner sense of gender but I am intrigued about what the feeling that trans people ascribe to "gender feeling" actually is and where it comes from.
I don't think it's beyond the bound of possibility that theres a physical sense of belonging in your body that has an organic basis, a sense of embodiment and that it could go wrong like any other sense can but I can't see how it could be gendered (none of the other senses are). There are probably lots of people other than trans people who feel detached from their bodies to one degree or another but don't latch onto gender as an explanation. I'm starting to ramble now but making sense of this is a process...

[quote Wbeezer]@Blibbyblobby I was literally just thinking along the same lines as you. My analogy is a bit less intellectual : it's a chicken and egg situation, does a trans child choose the stereotypical activities/likes of the opposite gender because of an inner gender/body incongruence or does liking the stereotypes of the opposite sex make them think they must have a mismatched gender/body? Difficult to work out with small children who don't have the language, possibly more obvious with an AGP adult.
I still think stereotypes are bad and sex is real[/quote]
I’m not sure if I’m spectacularly missing the point here, I feel I must be, but what would the source of the sense of inner gender be, if not from looking at the stereotypical behaviours and presentation of the opposite sex? You can’t know how someone else feels inside, you can only imagine. It’s arguing for some sort of quasi mystical powers of insight, or the possibility of a male brain in a female body, which I just don’t think can exist. The sense of it existing, yes, but not the actual mismatch.

I feel like I’m missing something here 😭 and it’s frustrating me.

@Blibbyblobby I was literally just thinking along the same lines as you. My analogy is a bit less intellectual : it's a chicken and egg situation, does a trans child choose the stereotypical activities/likes of the opposite gender because of an inner gender/body incongruence or does liking the stereotypes of the opposite sex make them think they must have a mismatched gender/body? Difficult to work out with small children who don't have the language, possibly more obvious with an AGP adult.
I still think stereotypes are bad and sex is real

OK, so if it’s only the first criteria that really counts, then what are the rest of them for? Are they necessary or not? Are they helpful or do they actually just confuse the issue? I also think it’s entirely possible for a child to express a desire to be the other sex, but not to have dysphoria. Then there’s the fact that it’s transphobic to think that dysphoria is a prerequisite for being trans...

I actually don’t doubt at all that dysphoria exists, that people desperately want to be the opposite sex, that distressed children do express that distress through vociferously resisting sex role sterotyping, and that for some people presenting as the opposite sex relieves that distress. No argument from here- it’s not for me to dispute any of that, and I don’t. I dontt think many gender critical feminists do (although we do disagree with any of that immediately overriding biological sex in public life).

But I do think that the increasingly pink and blue world we live in increases the amount of children who are distressed by the gendered expectations put upon them, and we are too keen to pathologise that, when in fact it’s a very normal part of childhood to resist sex role stereotyping. It certainly plays a part in the massive increases in young people identifying as trans or having difficulties around gender.

I’m sure I’ve wandered far off the point here...