Non binary confused and sad

[Mumteedum]

I am late forties and until now non binary people haven't entered my orbit. I work in HE, and have had plenty of trans students so it's only been a matter of time.

As with any of my students, I will support them and never offer any judgement. I'm grateful that so far my uni does not compel anyone to state pronouns etc.

But I suddenly just feel sad and confused about this whole thing. I sort of 'get' trans even though I recognize the pressures and issues around it.

Non binary to me for a young woman who lives in a female body just feels like a sad thing. That they are rejecting womanhood. I don't understand really. What do they think being a woman is? How can anyone say what feeling male or female is? I look at all these gender definitions and it's just exhausting. I feel sad that being a woman can't mean all the different types of people it always did, anymore.

They have to work out their sexuality and their gender based on vague and confusing definitions. I grew up knowing I fancied boys but never gave a thought to gender beyond not particularly liking stereotypical stuff like dolls and was a bit of a goth in my teens. Have we just replaced teenage identities like goths or whatever, with this gender stuff? I really feel for young people.

Many of my previous trans students have mentioned they should deal with their identity or they must get on with transitioning. It seems so pressured. I didn't have any trans students until about 2015.

I feel old. I am not cis and wont be stating my bluddy pronouns anytime soon. Sorry for the ramble. Just needed to get it out.

I spent my 20s trying to run away from things. I hated being female. I hated myself. I think back about the things i said at the time and my thoughts and actions and there is no way i wouldn't be non binary if i was 19 today.

It took me a long time to recognise that you can't hide or run away from yourself. I didn't fit in with others for various reasons, and I never will. I lacked maturity and emotional security. I got older and realised what all the angst about identity was. I still have massive social anxiety (possibly its aspergers but not sure going down the route of trying to get it formally recognised is particularly helpful).

This is exactly the same thing but asks others to participate and enable it.

Its directly related to lack of self confidence, depression and anxiety. Its related to frustrations about gender stereotypes and the way others treat you in a negative way.

Gender identity is gendered stereotypes and the reinforcement of them. Trans identities legitimise gender stereotypes and advocate hormones and surgery to 'corrrect' what is seen as a problem rather than acknowledging the problem is society's stereotypes. Non binary identities try to reject the stereotypes but fails to accept sex is a material reality that can not be avoided and instead tries to create a bubble of avoidance type behaviour around sex. Non-binary identities also legitimise and perpetuate body dysphoria without trying to resolve underlying issues.

Avoidance type behaviour should be identified not enabled.

Material reality is that sex exists and our bodies just are. We can hate them and we can self harm but we ultimately can't change what we are born because srx is real and exists and the problem is stereotypes not sex.

@pensivepigeon

You could be trans and agree with the statement or non binary and agree with the statement or gender fluid and agree with the statement:

                      <span class="italic">There is no causal link between sex and gender.</span>

This is the middle ground.

You can not get rid of gender stereotypes if you enable gender identity.

Gender identity can not exist without gendered stereotypes. It just disappears in a puff of smoke without them.

My issue with non binary is not necessarily what they seem too be rejecting, but the assumption that the vast majority of other people accept those same things.

Gender identity is gendered stereotypes and the reinforcement of them.

For you maybe. It doesn't have to be. It is not for me. I am comfortable in my skin. I am female. I am a woman. I am infertile and have had a mastectomy due to cancer treatment. I have opted out of surgical reconstruction. My body reflects me and my history. My roles in life reflect my personality.

It just disappears in a puff of smoke without them.

You don't get it do you? This is my whole aim!

@pensivepigeon

It just disappears in a puff of smoke without them.

You don't get it do you? This is my whole aim!

No its not.

I think it is for me to state my aims @RedToothBrush.

You can state your opinion. Others can tell you if its a load of cobblers though.

Can see sex = cant see sexism.

It doesn't stop sexism. It just stops you identifying it as sexism.

It just stops you identifying it as sexism.

Don't conflate gender with sex. Gender identity, if it is recognised that there is no causal link between sex and gender does not prevent people recognising sexism. It is for people themselves to decide their own gender identity. People just simply are their sex.

I don’t think gender stereotypes are necessarily separate from sex though and I think it harms feminism to insist they are.
Some are obviously, women can be engineers or physicists or sports commentators but sometimes sex does matter particularly in terms of roles that need strength, size etc where men will be better suited or roles that need smaller hands, dexterous fingers such as craft work, sewing etc. For me, it’s about recognising that roles that women are traditionally more suited to are equal to those that men are, not inferior as we are often told. So for example in a supermarket women on the till are equal in status and pay to the men in the warehouse. Or in a factory sewing and making clothes in a clothes factory is equally important as making Cars in a car factory.
Child care practitioners (mainly female) are equal to refuse collectors (mainly male) in a local council pay structure.
It’s about valuing women’s roles and what women are good at as much as we value men.

Don't conflate gender with sex.

there is no causal link between sex and gender

I’m also struggling to understand your point. It would help if you could clarify what you mean by “gender” here.

Are “woman/female” and “man/male” genders and/or sexes, do you think? If there is no link, why do they use the same words?

Many of my previous trans students have mentioned they should deal with their identity or they must get on with transitioning. It seems so pressured. I didn't have any trans students until about 2015

Social media has created a pressure for people to make definitive statements about themselves. The on-line world and communities have to rely on what people say about themselves because the subtleties and perceptions involved in face to face interaction are missing.

On-line you can be whoever you want; most people adopt usernames that are not their 'real' name; and your on-line presence takes on a recognisable shape. Personal lives and 'identities' are mediated via strong visual imagery, usually consciously constructed; by carefully chosen icons, emojis and so on.

Gaming also sets up this sort of dynamic too. You choose an identity and you interact with others on the basis of it.

I used to be a teacher, and even 10 years ago trans pupils were just not a thing at all.

I don’t think gender stereotypes are necessarily separate from sex though and I think it harms feminism to insist they are

I agree with your point. There are some traits that are linked to the reality of biology; although they can be over-ridden by strength of individual character; or accommodated within 'gender non conforming' roles and pastimes.

The problems arise when certain traits are enforced or rigidly formulated, so that one can never step out of them, or express other types of trait - based on sex alone.

I think that some of the modern trans narrative has arisen out of a denial of any natural differences between the sexes. The idea that all expressions or roles, as they relate to sex/gender, are socially constructed.

The problems arise when certain traits are enforced or rigidly formulated, so that one can never step out of sex based role

I've just read this thread and my brain is starting to explode.

It is for people themselves to decide their own gender identity. That demands that we see gender as a 'syndrome' a collection of traits / preferences found together which meets the definition of a gender identity such as gender fluid, and the 100 others you can choose from. You can do questionnaires to pinpoint which you are.
It's like astrology (but less scientific).
I don't care if people want to engage in defining their gender but it has no more significant place in our laws, culture etc than astrology.
Many human traits can be defined eg openness, introversion, I really can't see what is to be gained by carving out some and labelling them genders. Please someone define 'gender' without reference to sex stereotypes and explain why they warrant a special label.

It doesn't manifest differently between the sexes. We need to redefine what gender actually means in reality to reflect this

You sound like you are looking for a 'truth' to gender - what (in social or behavioural terms women and men 'really are'). In fact, this is a social (patriarchal construct) - there is no 'truth'.

I agree with your point. There are some traits that are linked to the reality of biology; although they can be over-ridden by strength of individual character; or accommodated within 'gender non conforming' roles and pastimes

These traits tend to be most strongly correlated with the realities of pregnancy and motherhood.

Many of us grew up with the model of lesbian feminism as the model to aspire to; even if we were heterosexual. I certainly did. I used to wish I was a lesbian. That way I could be 'free' of the dynamics involved in male/female relationships. Heterosexual relationships were viewed as being bad for women; the source of their oppression.

I don’t think gender stereotypes are necessarily separate from sex though and I think it harms feminism to insist they are.
Some are obviously, women can be engineers or physicists or sports commentators but sometimes sex does matter particularly in terms of roles that need strength, size, etc where men will be better suited or roles that need smaller hands, dexterous fingers such as craftwork, sewing, etc. For me, it’s about recognising that roles that women are traditionally more suited to are equal to those that men are, not inferior as we are often told. So for example in a supermarket women on the till are equal in status and pay to the men in the warehouse. Or in a factory sewing and making clothes in a clothes factory is equally important as making Cars in a car factory.

You seem to be confusing what men or women might like with what kinds of jobs they can and should do - and the extra layer to this is where gender comes in and boys and girls are told what they should like and not like. Boys should, for example, be given equal encouragement with crafts as girls. Weren't Fairisle jumpers knitted by males? And, in a work sense, was tailoring not traditionally a male occupation? Maybe women will not be as good climbers or cable-tossers as men, but girls should be encouraged to try and if they like these activities to proceed with them.

I'm another one who thinks it would be more obvious if pp used a worked example to demonstrate what she means.

10 people in a room.
5 are male, 5 are female.

2 of the ten are strong believers in something called 'gender identity'. 8 are not.
One male declares a female gender identity.
One female declares a male gender identity.

The 5 actual females all agree they have fundamentally different personalities. 4 reject they share any group or gender identity at all.
1 female claims to have the same group mental identity of the males.
Of the males, the same situation as the females. All 5 agree, no shared personality, no shared mental gender identity.
1 male insists he has the gender identity of females.

What we have here, is the impossible situation of a person claiming to share the mental/group/personality/gender identity type of a group of other people.
WHILST THOSE OTHER PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ANY TYPE TO BE SHARED.

You also have the nonsensical situation that the only person with an apparent female gender identity is male, and vice versa.

By no imaginable leap of logic can one conclude that an individual personality, found only in one male, is therefore 'the group female gender identity'.

Logic dictates
To claim you possess any given important, defining characteristic unique to the opposite sex, you must first demonstrate:

1. What the opposite sex IS, and what ARE these unique defining characteristics of that sex that distinguish it from the other.
2. That you possess one or more of these uniquely defining characteristics yourself as a member of the opposite sex.

The moment you prove 2, you've undermined and disproved 1.

The moment you find a characteristic exists in both sexes, you've discovered it's NOT a unique defining characteristic of sex after all.

Yes, if you will. Redefine gender as personality. However, you need to be able to frame it so those used to referring to their gender will adopt this meaning and bridge the refinement of usage with the old usage.

There’s no need to “redefine gender as personality”. We already have a perfectly good word - personality - to describe someone’s characteristics and behaviours which is completely separate from their biological sex.

Ditching gender ideology means we have people’s sex, and their personality. There’s no need for another word that also means personality.

Ditching 'gender' necessitates challenging patriarchy.

Logic dictates
To claim you possess any given important, defining characteristic unique to the opposite sex, you must first demonstrate:
1. What the opposite sex IS, and what ARE these unique defining characteristics of that sex that distinguish it from the other.
2. That you possess one or more of these uniquely defining characteristics yourself as a member of the opposite sex.

The moment you prove 2, you've undermined and disproved 1.

The moment you find a characteristic exists in both sexes, you've discovered it's NOT a unique defining characteristic of sex after all.

This is a perfect breakdown 👏 thank you Barracker