The basic illogicality of internal "gender identity"

[Dolorabelle]

I was reflecting on something a man I know (not a friend) who has subsequently transitioned to transwoman said about 'gender identity.'

As a man, he was staunchly anti-feminist, and also pretty anti-women - not a very likeable person , socially difficult etc but he was adamant about having an understanding of gender identity and mansplaining it to me, when faced with the standard understanding of the distinction between sex (biological) and gender (socially/historically constructed roles).

Anyway, he tried to explain it like this: "It's an internal sense of being a man or a woman." Well, yes, we've heard that before ...

But it got me thinking:

This was a man who was clearly uncomfortable in a masculine gender stereotype.

So - without ANY actual knowledge of women, he simply assumed that as he was so unhappy & uncomfortable as a man, he just must be a woman.

HOW DOES HE KNOW?

I'm still obviously rolling this over in my mind a couple of years later (he's since had some medical transition - I suspect just the DD artificial boobs* insert, not the "bottom" surgery).

It's the most illogical and totally BINARY thinking I've come across. I've been gender critical since before it was a thing - I agreed with Germaine Greer about the admission of a transwoman to a women's single sex college at Cambridge way back when.

But I still can't get my head around this. As women, I think it's a pretty common experience to struggle with socially constructed (and constraining) gender roles of femininity - there's no essentialist reason why the ability to bear children, for example, necessarily makes us generally more "nurturing." We might love & care for our own children , and not give a toss for anyone else's.

But when I was 13 and realised that life and the world was totally unfair on women, I didn't immediately think "Oh, crikey I must be a 13 year old boy then" I struggled both personally and politically with patriarchy. I became a feminist. I changed & challenged myself.

So this man - now transwoman, but (so I don't get deleted) he was definitely a man when we had this conversation - just decided that although he could do things to challenge the masculine stereotypes, that wasn't it. Because he didn't like being a man, he must necessarily be a woman.

It's just bonkers in its illogicality.

*I hate this word for breasts, but in this instance "boobs" is appropriate.

I was talking about this with ds only this morning (the CPS guidance has brought this topic of conversation back to table whereas he was getting thoroughly fed up of my rants)

Anyway, I was saying that for all the people saying 'I knew I was really a woman/man from an early age because I felt like a woman/man' HOW can they say that? HOW can they possibly say that they feel like anyone other than themselves? I accept that they can feel that they don't fit into the societal stereotypes for their sex, but how can they possibly feel like anyone else?

Also this comment:

So - without ANY actual knowledge of women, he simply assumed that as he was so unhappy & uncomfortable as a man, he just must be a woman.

made me think of that twitter thread where Sally Hines said when asked about how she knew she was a woman, said she didn't feel strongly that she wasn't, so she supposed she must be! (or words to that effect - I wish I'd got screenshots)

Yep it really is.
Basically they're asking which clan do I feel I should be in? Ignoring the fact that male and female are not in fact clans or political parties, there is no overriding principle of what women are like and what men are like. The only common factor is biology. If you let people identify in and out you render the categorisation meaningless and pointless.

Lest we forget . . . how many of the men who, like your friend, chunter on about this mysterious "gender identity thingie" that they can't quite explain are just spouting the official line?

When they say, "I just feel like a woman" it is natural to think, "That must mean someone like me".

How could that be? Are they mind readers?? Where do they get these ideas of what it might "feel like" to be a woman?? Maybe close observation and study of women performing "femininity" in the Woman Zoo?
mirandayardley.com/en/pornography-and-autogynephilia-in-the-narratives-of-adult-transgender-males/

What sort of "womanhood" might a man who "was staunchly anti-feminist, and also pretty anti-women" feel that he embodies? Maybe a checklist would help?
mirandayardley.com/en/17-signs-i-am-an-autogynephile-and-didnt-know-it/

Your man might be the exception - but such men really, really are the exception in this demographic. That is why you will be told that this phenomenon does not exist - despite numerous researchers documenting it over decades.

If you type the word for this "self-love that must not speak its name" here on Mumsnet, expect those who want everyone to forget about it to report your post and it will very likely be deleted. As mine might be for even alerting you to this possibility.

See this answer "This is something we'd look at on a case by case basis, though we'll definitely delete posts which generalise." :
www.mumsnet.com/info/trans-rights-moderation-policy

Basically they're asking which clan do I feel I should be in?

This is it - it's a mad continuation of all those quizzes about which hogwarts house you belong in.

The trouble is that it's actually real, and a serious subject that they've brought down to the level of no-one wanting to be slitheryn

How could that be? Are they mind readers?? Where do they get these ideas of what it might "feel like" to be a woman?? Maybe close observation and study of women performing "femininity" in the Woman Zoo?

I'd always assumed it was from reading, and thinking 'that person's inner monologue sounds like mine/I identify with this character'.

FebruaryRainandSleet - "I'd always assumed it was from reading, and thinking 'that person's inner monologue sounds like mine/I identify with this character'. "

Ah! The "Wuthering Heights" Theory! (I just made that up)

However, that is far from the lived experience of those like the OP's friend, as recounted in the days before they learned to construct a more socially acceptable narrative. See this brief report with its proposal of a "Five Step Career Path" in a study reported 50 years ago:
www.tbuckner.com/TRANSVES.HTM

Reading is a pleasurable, solitary activity that can indeed lead to a journey of self-discovery. However, It is a quite different solitary, pleasurable preoccupation that is at play in most such cases.

This online forum for those who are trying to kick the habit, a place where conversations and confessions happen out of earshot of mums, wives, sisters and female friends is (WARNING!) NSFW:
www.reddit.com/r/TGandSissyRecovery/

Whether you peeked/peaked and have now recovered or if you just skipped over that link, Kay Brown's website "On the Science of Changing Sex" has some relevant articles:

( "Kay Brown is an eminent transactivist who transitioned as a teenager over four decades ago exploring the science of transsexuality and transgender experience." Kay is on Mumsnet as @sillyolme
ps. That website is not to be confused with the similarly named transactivist site "sillyolyou")

1. On Acceptance of Autogynephilia
sillyolme.wordpress.com/2017/12/12/on-acceptance-of-autogynephilia/

2. Advice for Wives/Girlfriends of Autogynephiles
Or, “Help! My Husband Wants A Sex Change!”
sillyolme.wordpress.com/advice-for-wivesgirlfriends-of-autogynephiles/

3. Once Again, With Feeling…
Or, How Do We REALLY Know That There Are Two Types of Transwomen?
sillyolme.wordpress.com/2017/02/04/once-again-with-feeling/

4. A Clinical View
sillyolme.wordpress.com/2014/02/14/a-clinical-view/

5. The Elephant in the Room
"Or, Is the “Third Type” of MTF Transgender Simply Mentally Ill ??"
sillyolme.wordpress.com/2017/11/09/the-elephant-in-the-room/

(I am not suggesting that this last article applies to the OP's friend but it seems important to include a link as a follow-on from No. 3 above.)

• - - - -

I try to read widely around the subject of Gender Identity, including "transactivist" points of view as well as Gender Critical perspectives. However, Kay makes this point in another Mumsnet thread "Break It Down For Me?"

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3145470-Break-it-down-for-me#92523584

SillyOlMe said:

"I'm the author of the linked essay on autogynephilia. Transwomen, both hsts and agp who attempt to write about autogynephilia are just as suppressed, perhaps even more so, given that doxxing and outing one as trans, especially for hsts that are deep stealth, is the constant threat should one break the silence and write about the subject in an honest manner. Here is a link to another essay I wrote ten years ago:

www.transkids.us/invisible.html

And the aftermath of having written that essay:

sillyolme.wordpress.com/2014/12/09/what-the-next-wave-of-transgender-activists-need-to-know/

• - - - -

That last article was written in Dec 2014:

"What the NEXT Wave of Transgender Activists Need to Know"

"This post marks five years of writing on the subject. It seems a good moment to stop and reflect on the reasons I’ve been writing, and to explore what has changed in my lifetime. I’ve tried to keep the material mostly about the science and its implications. It hasn’t always been easy, as there is in the background, from what I would call the “Second Wave” of transactivists, a powerful and very ugly, campaign of disinformation. Why do I say, “Second Wave”? Because I, and a few folks I knew from the ’70s and very early ’80s, were the “First Wave”."

Continues at:
sillyolme.wordpress.com/2014/12/09/what-the-next-wave-of-transgender-activists-need-to-know/

• - - - -

BTW The thread "Break it down for me?" has lots of useful links and discussion if you have not seen it already:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me?

It really is unbelievable. One thing I find utterly amazing is how these newly-hatched ladies have a whole bunch of people they could check in with to see if they're getting it right, but somehow, they never seem to have any questions, and in fact, from day one, they seem to be much more expert on what a woman is than the ones who've been Assigned the job from day 1.

Well, I don't know.

I think the gender narrative as it exists now is pretty dumb, and it isn't in line with actual scientific knowledge about identity.

However, identity is a thing. We can have a tribal identity, a national identity, even a sense of personal identity, family identity. These are all constructed but clearly they reflect a capacity of sorts that human's have, probably as a way of creating group cohesion. I don't see why we'd not have a gender identity.

I do think it would clarify a lot if we called it a sexual identity though I don't think it would actually be an incorrect use of gender to use that word for it.

Ugh, humans have. Not sure where that apostrophe wandered in from.

Here's a Twitter thread on some of the history of 'gender identity'.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1224766770805866499.html

MoleSmokes great resources, thanks for sharing.

Do you still have to be subjected to it or have you managed to avoid being in their company?

No thank goodness, they've stopped attending the activity where I encountered him (NOTE: this person was male at that point, and is I think NOT on a GRC pathway, so it's all self-ID). They complained that the rest of us didn't include them in our general conversations. Which was not true - we tried. And this person is not a friend - please don't refer to them that way. As someone commented to me at the time, you can have mental health issues and still be an arsehole.

But it has stayed with me - this utterly illogical binary - that if you aren't comfortable as a man, then the ONLY thing that means is that you're a woman.

It's bonkers.

However, identity is a thing. We can have a tribal identity, a national identity, even a sense of personal identity, family identity. These are all constructed but clearly they reflect a capacity of sorts that human's have, probably as a way of creating group cohesion. I don't see why we'd not have a gender identity

Yes, up to a point, Lord Copper - I mean Goosefoot - "identity" in one way of using the word simply means - the aspects of one's background and abilities that make up one's character.

But if it's used in a politicised way, then accuracy is really at stake. Our attempts to ameliorate structural inequalities in white capitalist patriarchy mean that certain identities are significant.

Once we stop assuming that the white heterosexual male is the default norm or "universal" referent, then differences become significant.

But if someone who is not BAME, for example, wants to claim the mitigations reserved for those of BAME "identity" - or background - then something is going wrong. Those mitigations are there to try to adjust for structural oppressions & inequalities.

Ditto those for sex.

And I've wondered myself about my own "gender identity" - I am female and that's an important part of my character-identity. But I have NO truck with gender as an oppressive structure into which I've been conditioned/socialised. I battle against that all my life - in both an internal personal struggle and an external political struggle.

But I don't assume that therefore, I must be a man ...

The linguistic hoops we have to jump through on this board in order to have a perfectly lawful and factually accurate conversation...

However, identity is a thing. We can have a tribal identity, a national identity, even a sense of personal identity, family identity. These are all constructed but clearly they reflect a capacity of sorts that human's have, probably as a way of creating group cohesion. I don't see why we'd not have a gender identity.

But our tribal identity has to be for our actual tribe, otherwise it's viewed as cultural appropriation.

Our national identity has to be for our actual nationality - I think people would (rightly) regard me as a bit nuts if I decided that my national identity was French, even though I am British and live in the UK.

Family identity - I'm a member of my family, not anyone else's.

So we could have a 'sex identity' as a member of our own sex, but a 'gender identity' as the opposite sex is appropriation. Although I can't see why people shouldn't have a gender identity in terms of masculinity or femininity. So a man might be a feminine man or a woman might want to describe herself as a masculine woman. This would be truly progressive, and doesn't require appropriation of the experience of people belonging to another group.

But if it's used in a politicised way, then accuracy is really at stake. Our attempts to ameliorate structural inequalities in white capitalist patriarchy mean that certain identities are significant

I'm not sure why you feel the need to be nasty because I didn't totally agree with what you said. People ask if we are inclined to purity spirals here... well....

But yes, accuracy is important. And I think I said that I thought the current gender identity narrative was "pretty dumb" and also not in line with scientific understanding about identity.

But there is a really strong tendency by many posters here to simply say that gender identity is a ridiculous and completely illogical idea, and that it has nothing to do with questions about transgenderism.

But that's not really accurate either, is it? Identities are talked about, at great length, is psychology, there is a lot of research into them. And in fact there is some real scientific thought that certain problems relating to sexual dysphoria may be related to identity, and especially that ROGD may be have identity disorders as a very important element.

I'm not a fan of ignoring those elements because the idea of gender identity, or gender at all, doesn't fit in with an ideological position that we should abolish gender.

I think some people can very strongly feel things about their own body that aren't true, iyswim. So anorexics may wrongly believe they're fat. People with body dysmorphia imagine themselves to be ugly. There is a group of people who really see themselves as disabled and go out of their way to find a surgeon who will amputate their leg.

On a more mundane level, I'm sure a lot of us feel a kind of dissatisfaction with the way we look and believe that somehow the "real" us is slim and beautiful, not overweight and haggard. (Or is that just me?)

So it makes sense that there are some people who really desperately feel that they are the wrong sex. They don't know how it feels to be the other sex, but they think they do. It's very hard to know what goes on in someone else's head. Some people are convinced they have a personal relationship with God. I'm convinced they're wrong, but then they would say that I'm in no position to judge what happens in their head.

I don't think I have an internal sense of gender identity, but I don't actually know how that's supposed to feel, so perhaps I do without realising it?

At this point, I feel, like Douglas Adams's God, I'm about to disappear in a puff of logic.

Thanks to MoleSmokes for the links to my blog. (Yes, please do NOT confuse that other blog "Sillyolyou" with me or mine... that other one was created to lampoon my work and to create confusion.)

I may have a few other useful links on it for the present topic of "gender identity" in transsexuals & transgender (not always the same phenomena):

The Origins of Cross-Gender Identity In Transsexuals
sillyolme.wordpress.com/2009/12/28/the-origins-of-cross-gender-identity-in-transsexuals/

The Gender Identity Fallacy
www.transkids.us/gid.html

Yes, absolutely, the two concepts of "being trans" and being "non-binary" are incompatible. You don't expect any of this drivel to make sense do you?

Yes people have various identities but with most of them we understand that they are constructed and not innate. Nobody is a Yorkshireman or a Conservative or an atheist in the womb.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to be nasty because I didn't totally agree with what you said
@Goosefoot I certainly wasn't intending to be nasty - I'm sorry you read my post that way. Not sure what was in it that was "nasty" to you personally.

I was partially agreeing with you, but taking issue with some points. It's the "Yes, but ..." form of dialogue which can build common understanding and generate new ideas through discussion.

@OldCrone put my meaning better than I did - here:

So we could have a 'sex identity' as a member of our own sex, but a 'gender identity' as the opposite sex is appropriation. Although I can't see why people shouldn't have a gender identity in terms of masculinity or femininity. So a man might be a feminine man or a woman might want to describe herself as a masculine woman. This would be truly progressive, and doesn't require appropriation of the experience of people belonging to another group

And, for the record, I wish we lived in a world where there is nothing "wrong" with being a "feminine man" or a "masculine woman." But these are two groups who do still bear the brunt of [usually male] violence - both physical and verbal.

It's weird isn't it? Julian Clary or Boy George are much-loved entertainers & public figures who do the "feminine man" thing without having to say they're trans or pansexual or whatever. They emerged in the 1980s - I doubt such characters could emerge now - the 80s weren't all bad, were they (well, apart from the Thatcher-Reagan love affair and neo-liberalism and globalisation and ...)

In terms of gender non-conformity, the 80s were much more progressive than today.

Indeed! And the 70s even more so.

I think it was because we could see the enemy, loud and clear. Sexism was obvious.

It's like faith.

I volunteer at a centre which has a religious group the session after.
The lady who runs it told me, with absolute certainty, that Jesus told her to set up her class.

I have absolutely no concept of what having a Jesus tell me to do would be like; just as she has no concept of life without the guidance she gets from him/his voice.

The difference being that neither of us tries to tell the other we are bigoted for believing/not believing, nor have I once been assaulted by her.

I certainly wasn't intending to be nasty - I'm sorry you read my post that way. Not sure what was in it that was "nasty" to you personally. I was partially agreeing with you, but taking issue with some points. It's the "Yes, but ..." form of dialogue which can build common understanding and generate new ideas through discussion.

Ah, well I'm sorry then, I read you entirely the wrong way, I thought you meant I was disagreeing just for the sake of it.

As far as the concept, I think we do actually need to differentiate out different types and origins of what is being called gender identity. There are people who I would say are "appropriating" in a certain sense - in terms of it's political meaning. And there are people taking the piss too, who have no real identity issue and either are deliberately being manipulative, or are not thinkers and have just gone along with what seem to be the new social claims.

But as far as the internal sense of identity, that's not a political thing. It is a set of structures and boundaries that are built up over time in our mind, which are important to a stable personality. Our sense of our body as being ourselves is part of that, and like RoyalCorgi said there seem to be a number of things that can go wrong along those lines, at least some in relation to some sort of trauma, especially during periods where identity formation is really active. (And I think some of the personality disorders are linked to issues with identity too - I might be misremembering though.)

I would not tend to call someone who has sexual identity issues of that type "appropriating." Even if a few of them end up "living as the other sex" as it were in order to control symptoms, I don't think that's really what's going on. I would like it to be very clear in people's minds that these examples are not biological women (or men in those rare cases) or even women at all in the normal sense of the word, that it's not some sort of inner essence that has been revealed, that while certain things associated with women may be opened to them, others may not. And I'd like people to realise it's a fairly rare thing, not something we need to be hyper-vigilant about spotting in kids etc.
Even teen girls with RODG, it seems to be in part issues around identity formation, though in that case it seems like the best approach is to help them overcome them, as most girls do eventually.

But I can't see any reason we'd dismiss the whole idea of identity.

In a way I think being masculine and feminine are a whole different ball of wax, and it's an unfortunate confusion that people are seeing this as "gender". To some extent I think we've always realised there are some masculine women and feminine men, but how that is expressed may be more or less flexible. I'm not sure how important that flexibility is. If we lived in a place where by necessity everyone wore close to the same clothing, or almost no clothing, how would we express that? Would it be a problem that it would be limited? Sometimes I think we've contributed to the current problem by putting too much emphasis on the need to express ourselves in order to be authentic and self-actualised. It almost creates more pressure than it relieves at times, and it makes us pray to a sort of consumerism around our own image - including our image of ourselves. I wonder if that has had a hand in making young peoples identities more fragile?

Goosefoot, I appreciate your efforts here. I feel as if you are trying to communicate something difficult. I enjoy watching Rose of Dawn, but I honestly don't think of her as a woman, though I can understand she is happier that way. I like Blair White, too. I can understand that certain people in this world really do want to live as the other se, whatever that means to them. I don't think anyone here would be having a problem if there were a few sincere people who were just quietly living their lives and doing their best and being part of the world, as may I take ityou? are trying to be. People who try to communicate sincerely and don't talk over and try to control the group with which they identify.

I do understand that identity is complicated, personally. I raised my children in my husband's religion, and was an active member of his faith's religious organization. So I know how it feels to identify with a community but not be part of it (I don't believe in God so I could not make myself join any faith, but I also have respect for faith traditions like this one). Because I come from a more privileged faith, I felt that my role should be one of respectful support and service to the community. To this day, I feel that in reality, I have an honored role as an insider/outsider--someone who understands issues within the community and can communicate them with people outside the community.

If more trans women took an attitude of respectful service and appreciation toward women, instead of demanding care from them, then they would get a very different response. If, instead of demanding validation and crying about their neediness andwell, you know all the ways women are pissed offthey got on the front lines of fighting for women's reproductive rights, or learning why women are undrpaid, or really digging into all the ways that women are treated like shitthe real, honest, dirt of what it's like to be a womanthen they would find that women were powerful allies in their defense, not cynical and wary.