Gender Identity is an oxymoron

[CantankerousCamel]

Maybe someone here can explain this to me.

Gender is the name given to the social roles and practises enforced due to sex class

That’s what the word has always meant, it was first coined by some dude called John in the middle of the last century and has always meant this.

Identity is an innate sense of self, personality if you will.

So the two cannot go together, you cannot adjust the social scripting enforced due to your sex class with personality, that’s why it’s enforced. Otherwise it’s not gender.

Obviously feminism has always promoted identity over gender, because how we see ourselves and how we project ourselves should be more important than how society scripts us due to sex class, but that is abolition of gender.

I don’t understand the term ‘gender identity’ I don’t understand why, when people use it, they’re unable to give this alternative definition of either gender or identity that makes those words go together.

An arbitrary understanding of sociology shows that the words are opposite. One is how you see yourself, the other how society scripts you.

I believe Gender Identity is double speak, like Male woman or girl penis.

I did my thesis on gender and sport

Talk about this, you will have 1000 posts.

"PWF" is privileged white feminist.

Small

My point is that ‘gender identity’ is an oxymoron. The words together make no sense as the point of gender is that it is not affected by identity. It’s literally something enforced regardless of how you feel or what you beleive about yourself, that’s why it’s ‘gender’ and that’s why feminists have spent forever fighting against it.

I See it used a lot and no ones ever given me a satisfactory reason why the two words go together in order to mean anything.

Because really they are opposing words

Gender = social
Identity = personal.

The point of gender is that it’s not changed by the personal.

Identity can be shaped by gender because how we are taught to behave and beleive by the society around us (scripting) affects how we see ourselves

Hope that makes a bit more sense, I apologise for rambling before!

Judith Butler of course!

Was a feminist and quite prolific until she started bleating on about stepping into roles (including gender roles) etc. This was who I couldn’t remember earlier, what an arse (and yes, a privileged white feminist to think we can just swap and change)

By the way I am hugely interested in feminist theory and making life easier for women and girls. When I’m not dealing with many children I do my best to
Be as productive as possible with local feminism but the two topics I’ve engaged on this board have put me right off postinf again!

I explained, at length, the testosterone testing requirements and how this real time reflected on the needs of women and girls and it sss totally ignored.

Now I’ve been accused of ‘looking down on people’ Because I wish to discuss a commonly used oxymoron in current sociological thought.

I think I will abandon ‘feminist chat’ from now on. Thanks.

I've clearly missed something here and now I'm very confused

Not sure why the OP is getting a hard time. I was finding it interesting.

Not sure how gender expression fits into the picture.

And yes, I'm a white woman and I absolutely recognise my own privilege. I also went to uni and I absolutely recognise the privilege in my education. Not sure why this makes me somehow not down to earth or uninteresting.

cis
It fits in much the same. An expression is again a personalised concept whereas gender is very much a social scripting enforced upon you rather than something you choose to express.

I suppose a woman wearing high heels is an ‘expression of her gender norms?’

Unlike gender identity, which I see bandied round as the reason men can identify as women, I don’t really understand what on Earth gender expression even means

I wasn’t even suggesting anyone here was a privileged white feminists but merely that Butler who came up with a lot of this triple much have been heavily privileged to believe that women can simple identify into their social roles.

When clearly women are forced, coerced and given no choice whatsoever about which roles they’re given

You'll find contention on this board regarding the term "white feminism", OP - largely because it's so often used by the pomo-addled as a synonym for any gender critical feminism, regardless of race. We have regular ding dongs on the topic so I wouldn't worry about it. It's a rite of passage on here, starting a thread and getting told off for a tiny bit of it! We've all done it.

This has the potential to be an interesting debate, but I'm afraid it won't get off the ground if you won't first abandon the obviously and painfully inaccurate, "Identity is an innate sense of self, personality if you will." Because that's total bull. And if you can't see the difference between a sense of one's "identity" (racial identity, cultural identity, class identity etc.) and one's "personality" then I'm not sure your understanding of sociology is quite arbitrary enough.

You could Google the difference if that helps. It's pretty well noted.

Identity is an internal feeling
Gender is what society expects from each sex - thus it’s externally imposed.

So yes, it is very contradictory as a concept. It’s a soul, basically isn’t it?

I don’t do Cartesian duality. I don’t think I have a soul. I have a body and a personality.

Although of course religious belief is a protected characteristic so anyone who does believe in souls is entitled to that belief, but not to impose it on others.

Ditto gender identity. If you feel you have one then knock yourself out. But don’t impose your beliefs on others and absolutely don’t expect it enshrined in legislation.

But rat the point is that people are saying a gender identity is innate

Whereas I think all the gender/cultural stuff comes from outside. There’s no biological reason for me to like tea to the extent I do - it’s just that I’ve grown up with it. All my cultural identity is from outside. Religious beliefs come from outside. It’s all external stuff

So it’s not innate. That would be like saying someone is biologically catholic.

So yes, it is very contradictory as a concept. It’s a soul, basically isn’t it?

No it isn't. See below on the difference between personality; in short, one is something an individual has and one is something an individual is. I literally ripped these form the top Google results; there are likely better links out there, but they all agree on the distinction.

int.michaelroads.org/identity-personality-individuality/

authentic-systems.com/personality-vs-identity/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_(social_science)

That last one is interesting; personality it says is a part of one's identity, but identity comprises far more than just that. Also it touches on the fact that Identity negotiation is a process in which a person negotiates with society at large regarding the meaning of his or her identity.

Which is exactly the point isn't it. Gender stereotypes are not exclusively imposed externally, and they are not exclusively expressed from within (for the purpose of being identifiable as part of a group, for example). There is a reciprocal relationship between externally imposed gender stereotypes and individuals; a negotiation. Think of "gender identity" as the place from which you undertake that negotiation, then the penny might drop for you OP.

So much seems to depend on agreeing definitions of terms. There can be no realistic debate when there cannot even be agreement of what the words mean. This is where we are at with the simple stuff like woman and man, male and female. We all know what they mean but there is an attempt to obfuscate by introducing more and more layers of definition that themselves use vague undefined and undefinable terms.

If we can’t agree what woman means how can there be any meaningful discussion of a concept as nebulous as ‘gender identity’.

I have only recently come across the Yogyakarta Principles but they define gender identity. You might well think this definition is at odds with our everyday understanding of the term identity but this is the definition that is being used to shape the changes that we are pushing against.

"Gender identity is understood to refer to each person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth, including the personal sense of the body (which may involve, if freely chosen, modification of bodily appearance or function by medical, surgical or other means) and other expressions of gender, including dress, speech and mannerisms."

because this board refuses to understand the well established terms of gender identity, there is a desperation to use 'gender' as only ever meaning gender expression.

Two entirely different things.

Which is exactly the point isn't it. Gender stereotypes are not exclusively imposed externally, and they are not exclusively expressed from within

I think they are - now I might not mind some of them, and so start doing some by my own choice, but doesn't mean that I thought the idea up myself. I got it because society suggested that I wear a skirt/take up knitting/be the one to look after kids.

Perhaps I would, if raised in total isolation, come to the idea of wrapping a piece of fabric around my waist - but at that point, that's not a gendered item of clothing, because there is no externally imposed gendering to exist, therefore it's still not a gender expressed from within - it's just a piece of fabric.

Bowl the stereotypes are not innate; the way we signal our allegiance to one group or another (or to one "gender", seeing as that word is literally translated as "group"), that is not innate.

The desire to signal allegiance to different social, cultural, economic and sex-facilitating classes is innate.

So I don't want people to think that as a woman I have to wear make-up, because I don't. I don't wear it in the daytime and I refuse to submit to the expectation, because it's bull. The "wearing make-up" is not innate.

But on a Friday night if I wanted to get laid (in my younger days) I accepted that to be easily recognised as a hetero woman it was fairly normal to wear make-up. I wanted people to know I was a member of that group, so I wore make-up.

The "wearing make-up" was not innate. But my desire to signal my hetero-woman identity in an "attracting a mate" scenario - through whatever stereotypes abounded - THAT was innate.

Very basic example there, it's obviously much more nuanced in both cases than written here. But hopefully it suggests the distinction between stereotypes which control (externally imposed) and stereotypes which identify (leveraged by the individual).

Very basic example there, it's obviously much more nuanced in both cases than written here. But hopefully it suggests the distinction between stereotypes which control (externally imposed) and stereotypes which identify (leveraged by the individual).

I feel like I'm on the cusp of getting it.

So. Tea drinking and britishness - if I want to signal that I'm British, I will take my tea frequent, and with milk. So that would be me displaying my British Identity through the use of that British stereotype. Whereas my mum offering tea at every point possible, is externally enforced Britishness.

Where I'm still hitting a bump in understanding is what about that is innate? I don't innately like tea with milk (well, I guess I do, but that's personal taste, not because I'm British - I don't think there's some genetic component to British people what makes them desire milk in their tea) - it's just what I've been exposed to, and what I'm used to. I choose to continue it, and can signal I'm British because I have that cultural experience.

genetic component to British people what makes them desire milk in their tea

which

The ‘intersex male raised as a girl’ story near the top of the thread is actually the story of a newborn boy whose penis was destroyed during circumcision.
He was an identical twin and thus the perfect subject for an (questionable ethics) experiment. He was raised as a girl but always felt wrong. When he learned the truth he began living as a penis-less boy. He eventually committed suicide. Heart breaking.

It’s some years (15?) since I read Judith Butler’s Gender Trouble, but i’ve noticed it’s being mentioned a lot lately, usually by TRA. It seems to me that it’s being deliberately misinterpreted.

Butler’s premise, that gender is performative (it continues to exist because we perform it’s stereotypes on an ongoing basis) actually supports the radfem idea that there is nothing innate about it.

Where I'm still hitting a bump in understanding is what about that is innate

The fact that you know you are British is innate. You know it, it is a part of who you are, you know that the stereotypes of Britishness apply to you; that knowing is your identity. It is an innate part of you.

If you woke up tomorrow and confusingly everyone thought drinking coffee was a very British thing to do, not tea, they might doubt your being a real Brit and you might feel a bit insecure about it. You might decided to drink coffee all day instead, just to externally reinforce your identity. Everything outside you may have changed, but your internal sense of your identity will not.

The performative/imposed nature of gender is a feedback loop.

The fact that you know you are British is innate

How can where I was born be innate - isn't it just luck? My son was born abroad, he holds another country's passport - is he innately of that country? Not really - he's also British by ancestry but hasn't lived there much, but he's still British too.

You know it, it is a part of who you are, you know that the stereotypes of Britishness apply to you

Only the ones that have been socialised into me, and I haven't bothered to get rid of because they're not a problem or I like them... I have aspects from all the countries I've lived in - the stereotypes of Britishness don't apply to me entirely, and even if they didn't at all, it wouldn't make me any less British - I'm British by birth, not because I drink tea and know what toad in the hole is.

that knowing is your identity. It is an innate part of you.

But I know I'm British because that's where I was born, and raised - that's all being British means - there's some tendencies towards various things (and those things change depending on which bit of Britain you're from) - but those are cultural, a cultural identity I suppose to me sounds like habits, and habits are optional.

The performative/imposed nature of gender is a feedback loop.

So not innate - I'm British so I drink tea/I drink tea because I'm British.

correlation rather than causation to put it another way.