An inclusive way to be gender critical?

[pensivepigeon]

My thoughts on gender and sex are thus:

Gender is a social construct. It is how society and individuals view the presentation of the sexes - in fashion, interests and work roles. Whereas sex is biological, we cannot change it even though we might surgically change our appearance and take artificial hormones which affect our bodily functions.

However because gender is a social construct and we are part of society we can define it. I define gender as

Female = adhering or not adhering to traditional stereotypes regarding names, fashion, interests and work roles.
Male= adhering or not adhering to traditional stereotypes regarding names, fashion, interests and work roles.

If everyone took this on board it would mean safe single sex spaces could be preserved, as people could present themselves however they want, wear what they want but use the single sex space appropriate for their sex without conflict. Uniforms would offer everyone both traditional female and male options which either sex could wear. Ditto with sports, competing takes place within the appropriate sex classes but competitors can wear either the traditional male or female competition uniforms. There would be no confusion and need to agonise over language when providing medical care.

Taking this stance stance means I have no problem when it comes to saying I am of female sex with a female gender.

So am I gender critical? Is this inclusive?

We need to be very focused and ask them "well, what is it?".

And what would we derive from that conversation? Biological sex doesn't necessarily have a bearing on how people express themselves through gender? This is normal in our society. Which is just what I want out in the open.

What we would derive from that conversation is making legislators and legal advisors accountable for the terminology that they use. It's the sort of scrutiny that should be applied already, but clearly it's not happening because many of the people in those jobs are unwilling to ask hard questions. If they are going to provide legal advice on "gender", they need to be able to tell us in plain English what that means, and that's the least we should expect of a democratic society. And that is where the Emperor's New Clothes come in, and court actions succeed.

not expending energy trying to convince the world at large that gender is such a great concept that it should be extended to mean anything that anyone wants it to mean.

I'm not saying that it is a great concept, just tackling the outdated perceptions people have of it and clarifying what it actually more realistically means now, in our current society. Usage needs to change as society has moved on from rigid stereotypes- make the word evolve to reflect reality, then people will realise the concept has become so broad it's not a useful descriptor.

Usage needs to change as society has moved on from rigid stereotypes- make the word evolve to reflect reality, then people will realise the concept has become so broad it's not a useful descriptor.

What practical steps do you propose to achieve this?

"Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. ... Gender interacts with but is different from sex, which refers to the different biological and physiological characteristics of females, males and intersex persons, such as chromosomes, hormones and reproductive organs.
www.who.int › Health topics
Gender - WHO | World Health Organization"

So what are the 'socially constructed characteristics of women, men, girls and boys'? In our society? Could be pretty much any characteristic you care to mention. Which is how I justify my definition of gender.

So discussion of gender definition would be a start.

Then just start clarifying what people mean when they use the word and steer them towards this meaning.

Here's how it normally goes for me:

• So what do you mean by gender then?

• Gender is the societal norms associated with being male or female, stereotypes are BAD.

• Why would anyone want to identify with them then?

• No stupid, gender identity is COMPLETELY different, it's an inherent sense of being that you wouldn't understand unless you feel it is different to your sex. I don't have to expend my labour doing the work for you. Go educate yourself bigot.

Yes, but I'd take that in a different direction. Such as - focus scrutiny on whether socially-constructed characteristics of sex can or should usefully be detached from sex itself in the context of policy. Ask policy-makers whether this thinking applies elsewhere - for example, if an employer discriminates against cornrows, is that not straight-up race discrimination? Would it help anyone to pretend it isn't? Lead them to focus on the material and challenge them to defend their invocations of the abstract and amorphous.

Just found an exchange I had on twitter (not verbatim):

What is 'gender' then?

It can mean different things. If talking about 'gender identity', it basically means sex, i.e. 'gender identity' means 'sex identity'.

Ok, I see lots of people say that it is nothing to do with the body though?

It's complex. But mostly about sex.

But sex is a spectrum. And there's no such thing as a sexed body. But there's a non binary even though that implies there's a binary. There definitely isn't a binary. However by the binary of gender stereotyping sex can be defined as differently to the sexed body, and the naming of the sex should be by the binary and arbitrary sex stereotyping and absolutely not about any physical body can do, like and be anything they want unrestricted by perceived social limits of that body's sex.

Or something.

It makes no sense. But you have to accept that this is a political belief in which feelings create reality, and then facts are selected from and applied selectively to reinforce that chosen reality with the unwanted ones being discarded. It is considered unkind to seek for logic or otherwise jar that chosen reality by pulling up the discarded facts or questioning it.

All of which is absolutely fine, until there is a compulsion to be involved in supporting someone else's selected reality against your own reality. And some people and their realities matter more than others.

Yes Michelle. See also:

Sex and gender are completely separate things but gender ID should be treated as sex in ALL areas otherwise you are denying people exist.

But when it's a case that not recognising and responding to someone as they wish you to means that person as they wish to be ceases to exist....

it works only one way.

When you explain that that's fine, but you exist and wish to exist as an adult human female with a sex, not a gender, and you wish to exist in law and have access to spaces based on sex, so can we both agree to respect and tolerate each other's choice of language, definition and existence please....?

somehow it's perfectly ok that people deny you exist. And no, this thing demanded of you doesn't get extended in return to you.

When you explain that we could just all have spaces and variety and diversity so everyone's needs are met and no one needs to lose because kindness, diversity, inclusion, intersectionality.... ?

No. A future in which all women get needs met too is not acceptable.

At which point my interest in trying to understand or negotiate goes right off the boil.

@pensivepigeonpensivepigeon

"Gender is a social construct. It is how society and individuals view the presentation of the sexes - in fashion, interests and work roles."

This is gender expression, or gender role, not gender identity. Gender expression and gender roles are often informed by patriachal power dynamics.

Sex is the anatomy of an individual's reproductive system, and secondary sex characteristics.

Gender identity is an innate quality, like sexuality, which is quite heritiable. Your gender identity and expression do not have to match. Everyone—transgender or not—has a gender identity. Most people never think about what their gender identity is because it matches their sex at birth. The existence of gender identity is not disputed by psychologists and medical professionals, any more than sexuality is.

Everyone—transgender or not—has a gender identity.

I really don't.

This is about as disrespectful as me insisting that you believe in God, you may just be in denial about it. Please don't enforce a political belief on others that they haven't chosen for themselves, it's not a respectful or kind thing to do.

There you go, OP - this is what we're talking about. Exactly as jelllyfrizz said, almost word for word.

Are you going to combat that by telling the masses that it's also about what hairstyle you have and what music you listen to and what you had for dinner?

I dont have a gender identity - other people can believe they have one if they want if it makes them happy

irrespective peoples personal belief in their gender identity does not over ride the reality of sexed bodies and the pernicious effects of gender stereotyping

@MichelleofzeResistance if you want to deny the existence of an established medical and psychological phenomenon, you go you . It isn't an insult, any more than saying "everyone has a sexuality."

@Kit19 everyone has a sexuality. People can believe they don't have one if they want if it makes them happy.

You said gender identity not sexuality

Sexuality & ‘gender identity’ are obviously not the same thing

DadJoke

I'm fully prepared to accept that I have a gender identity. I feel very strongly that I am not cis so definitely have some feelings about it.

How do I know what my gender identity is, how would I go about exploring this?

And you say you found my posts confusing?

I just referred to the WHO definition which I think is pretty clear and concise. I would use that as a starting point and go from there. What is clear, though from all these descriptions, is that gender expression is extremely diverse and is no clear indicator of a person's biological sex. So the need for single sex provisions and protections remains the same regardless of the cultural phenomenon of gender. (Whether you think there is an inheritable quality/ collective memory/ instinctive driver regarding cultural phenomenon or not)

And as gender expression is no clear indication of gender identity the definition is rendered even broader.

Please carry on.

Sex and gender are completely separate things but gender ID should be treated as sex in ALL areas otherwise you are denying people exist.

To which I would assure the person concerned that I fully acknowledge their existence but explain single sex provision exists to cater to a person's biological (anatomical needs) and protected characteristics exist in order to ensure a person's anatomy is does not detrimentally affect their life chances.

@Biscuitsanddoombar it's an analogy. Gender identity and sexuality are both qualities with high hereditabilty, and both qualities are accepted and documented by medical and psychological bodies. The difference between the two is that the gender critical accept one but not the other.

@jellyfrizz if you answer the question "am I am woman?" yes, then that's your gender identity. If that doesn't match your sex at birth, you are trans. Otherwise you are not. This is all very well documented in psychological literature. Perhaps start there?

@pensivepigeon

Sex and gender are completely separate things but gender ID should be treated as sex in ALL areas otherwise you are denying people exist.

To which I would assure the person concerned that I fully acknowledge their existence but explain single sex provision exists to cater to a person's biological (anatomical needs) and protected characteristics exist in order to ensure a person's anatomy is does not detrimentally affect their life chances.

To which you would be asked why it affects you where people pee (unless you are watching, you pervert)? & Are you saying that all trans people are predators?