"A cis woman may say “I’m a woman because I was born in a body read as one”

[Hepwo]

https://twitter.com/ButNotTheCity/status/1675875028704063489

A paper for you to critique! The thread title is a quote from the twitter thread by the author so if that's the hypothesis then it's all a bit wonky from the start!

It goes on...

Why? Because it’s not about whether the body makes the gender but rather about the fact that her brain looked at the social messages associated with her body and decided to identify as a woman because of them. It’s still the identification that makes the woman.

I am having a laugh over this woo in the twitter thread, never mind the paper.

There's a podcast too. I may listen for increased entertainment value.
https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/florence-ashley/episodes/What-is-it-like-to-have-a-gender-identity-e26fc9s/a-aa31h25

The author is Canadian.
Enjoy!

>her brain looked at the social messages associated with her body and decided to identify as a woman because of them

🤬

Can't read the twitter thread. Probably just as well.

It was always implicit in the ideology, but this is the first time I've seen one of them have the balls to say outright that women are choosing our oppression.

I think I can honestly say that I have NEVER said, "I'm a woman because I was born in a body that was read as one"

Has anyone?

So can anyone explain where babies come from? I’m a bit lost

Elon Musk’s tech woes mean I can’t read that, but on balance that’s probably a good thing

But are you a cis woman?

I think for the rest of us, we just have to trust that this is what women who identify as "cis" experience, as most of us can never experience it for ourselves.

And also I can't access Twitter, OP.

"I'm a woman because I was born in a body that was read as one".

It's a rubbish hypothesis because if it were true it would mean that all girls who looked boyish/masculine would develop a man gender identity, and all boys who looked girlish/feminine would develop a woman gender identity. It would also mean that boys/men who presented and behaved in a typically masculine way could never become trans. Nor would a girl/woman who was typically feminine ever become a transman.

It would also mean that your chances of becoming trans depends on the society that you're in and how well in that society you are "read" as male or female.

Absolute drivel.

The lengths sone people will go to to try and deny reality is interesting to observe.

For those of you who can't read Twitter - all I can say is -lucky bastards.

I only read a few, but I lost the will to live

I remember Jack Dee saying that when he was an alcoholic he was sat, drunk, in his car trying to drive it, but not able to make it go. A police car drew up alongside him. Instead of throwing the book at him, he said the copper just looked at him and slowly shook his head. It was then that Jack Dee realized he was sitting in the back seat of his car.

I feel this is the perfect analogy.

i certainly feel like that copper.

You might as well say "her brain looked at the social messages associated with her body and decided to identify as a human because of them. It’s still the identification that makes the human". This is arguably true from a certain point of view (if you think 'human' is just a category imposed on the messy reality of the world by our brains on the basis of a social convention). But it would be crazy for someone who belongs to our species decides they're not a human because they don't feel like it.

The thing about "social messages" is they require a level of agreement across society. A small group of individuals can't just choose to redefine the "social messaging" of what words mean for everybody else. Even if you could make a case that woman genuinely means something different for different people, that wouldn't make either group right or wrong.

That's hard for homework.

Utter woo bullshit.

“It’s a valuable read for anyone for anyone who wants to better understand ……. transitude from a non-pathological perspective… “

Transitude? I don’t understand that word. When I Google it I get definitions for it as a word in French first defined in 2014 by another academic, references to the writer of this paper, or it’s an alternative form of transit

If the author wants the article to be accessible to a non-academic audience, as the tweets claim, I suggest they only contain words which are more easily understood.

I gave up after that. I’ll save the rest of my 600 tweets for something else.

Im currently identifying as still having Twitter issues!

Why? Because it’s not about whether the body makes the gender but rather about the fact that her brain looked at the social messages associated with her body and decided to identify as a woman because of them. It’s still the identification that makes the woman.

I'd like to hear from some of our regular yaysayers about how to explain this incredible insight.

If "insight" is the word...

No matter how many times I read that first paragraph my head can't make it go in. it may as well be written in Cantonese my brain is just going nope. Nope. Nope.

Haha. Well, the explanations for why elective plastic surgery is “life-saving” were always going to struggle.

I'm going to make a drink then be brave and go read!

I made it to page 5 but I'm tapping out!

The author did qualify it as a cis woman, and they are true believers so maybe they do!

Are newborn babies read as "women" then?

Transitude? I don’t understand that word.

Beautiful! A new neologism for us all to get to grips with, while we flounder trying to make sense of these higher beings.

No such thing as a cis woman . Women and transwomen.

Explain to me please! Is this person saying that gender is a social construct and nothing to do with the physical body? Are they actually separating sex and gender. Am I being ridiculously dim? (I often am so don't hold back, I can take it.)