Government definition of gender identity ideology

[AbnerBrown]

The definition in the draft Department of Education guidance is “the belief that a person can have a gender that is different to their sex”.

Does anyone else think this is a shit definition? Like defining Christianity as “the belief that a person can have a faith as set out by the doctrines of the Church”?

I’m not a Christian but it’s very clear to me that some people have such a faith. Similarly, I think gender is baloney but it’s very clear to me that some people have a strong sense of gender. It always seems utterly incoherent to me, but it seems to be something they have. So by this definition I am a believer of GII.

I’m struggling to form an alternative. I’d strongly prefer a definition that covers “the belief that every person has an internal sense of their gender” but is this enough?

“The belief that every person has an internal sense of their gender that can be different to their sex” doesn’t quite work as how can gender match sex when they are such different concepts?

But “… that can be different to societal gender norms” may capture the gender critical gender non-conforming?

overthinking due to hangover. Other thoughts?

What I'm describing is more like how someone who is anorexic might have the self perception that they are fatter than they are, so they keep dieting because their self perception isn't the same as reality. They are mistaken.

Yes, I see what you mean. There is something extra happening with anorexia.

So do you believe that you could have thoughts and consciousness that actually belong to someone the opposite sex? If you're female, do you think you could have the consciousness of a man, or think like a man? That just sounds like sexism. Either that or you're just mistaken or perhaps suffering from a delusion that you're actually the opposite sex.

No, because I think your thoughts are just your thoughts, and it’s impossible to be in the wrong body. I was speculating though that it might be possible that someone could interpret that sense of consciousness as their separate soul, if they believed in separate souls. And, that then if someone with a female body had the thought they were male, they could interpret it as an indicator of a male soul / essence. I was wondering as well whether it might be that not everyone has the same internal experience of consciousness, because I can imagine someone having my experience of consciousness interpreting it as a (seperate) soul, even though I don’t interpret it that way. Some people don’t seem to be able to imagine how it would be possible. So, do they have a different internal experience of consciousness? Similar to how I don’t visualise images, so it just seemed strange to me that people talked about visualising things, and I thought it was just a metaphor for thinking, until I heard that some people actually can form mental images. I was speculating about how people’s internal experiences differ, and that it might also be true of the experience of consciousness.

No, because I think your thoughts are just your thoughts, and it’s impossible to be in the wrong body. I was speculating though that it might be possible that someone could interpret that sense of consciousness as their separate soul, if they believed in separate souls. And, that then if someone with a female body had the thought they were male, they could interpret it as an indicator of a male soul / essence.

So you seem to be agreeing that if people say they believe that they are a "man in a woman's body" or that they were "born in the wrong body", it follows that they either believe in a gendered soul or essence or they are suffering from a delusion, mistaken or lying.

I have no idea what you're trying to say in the rest of that paragraph.

Edited to add: if your experience of consciousness is so off that you genuinely believe things that are not true, then what you need is some psychotherapy, not a world in which others are compelled to believe your fantasies.

I think self-perception is a slightly tricky word. A person’s self-perception can be (and often is) significantly skewed. An anorexic person’s self-perception that they are fat for example.

I am aware that I am female because of my anatomy. It is not a feeling of femaleness and therefore it is not a “gender identity”. A man can never have the awareness that he is female because he isn’t. Any “self-perception” that he is female is demonstrably false. Therefore it can only ever be a feeling.

I agree with your point but smiled and nodded at your username. Nice

So you seem to be agreeing that if people say they believe that they are a "man in a woman's body" or that they were "born in the wrong body", it follows that they either believe in a gendered soul or essence or they are suffering from a delusion, mistaken or lying.

I think those are possible, but I think often it’s not used in a literal sense, more like a metaphor, or placeholder description, for an internal experience that someone is finding it difficult to articulate. You can see that when you listen to some detransitioners. They seem to sometimes express their experience in those terms for a period of time, but never really believe it, and when they have done more introspection and feel they have a better explanation for them, change how they describe their experience. Unfortunately that can be after body modifications they subsequently regret. So, I don’t think it follows that someone saying those things necessarily believes they have a gendered soul, or is delusional, etc. They can be being non literal and just struggling to articulate and make sense of their internal experience. I think it can make it difficult for those people to get help if people assume they must be being literal, rather than help them to think about what their experience actually is, and what they really believe about it. And, maybe if people had helped them in that way, some of those people wouldn’t be in the situation they are in.

I have no idea what you're trying to say in the rest of that paragraph.

I was trying to get my mind around what people meant when they said they didn’t think they had an identity, but signalbox has explained her experience, and now I understand why I was confused:

I am aware that I am female because of my anatomy. It is not a feeling of femaleness and therefore it is not a “gender identity”. A man can never have the awareness that he is female because he isn’t. Any “self-perception” that he is female is demonstrably false. Therefore it can only ever be a feeling.

“Identity” just means “sense of self”. So, when people were saying they didn’t think they had an identity, I thought they were saying they had no sense of self. But, signalbox has described a sense of self. So, it’s not that people haven’t got a sense of self. They just, for some reason, don’t want to use the word identity to refer to it.

”identity” isn’t a belief at all. It’s just a word to refer to sense of self. Beliefs in souls, and male and female essences are beliefs, and it’s those things which are contested beliefs, not whether people have a sense of self (identity). The definition in that draft guidance is therefore nonsensical, as identity isn’t a belief. We all seem to agree that souls are a contested belief. I understand why I was confused by what some people were saying now though. Thanks.

Gender is a social construct, though. I teach my son that, because I want him to grow up a feminist.

@Marrongrass I wanted my son to grow up to understand a different type of feminism. Not one where we’re supposedly the same as men.

Ah, fair enough. I don't believe there are differences other than biological sex differences.

“Identity” just means “sense of self”. So, when people were saying they didn’t think they had an identity, I thought they were saying they had no sense of self. But, signalbox has described a sense of self. So, it’s not that people haven’t got a sense of self. They just, for some reason, don’t want to use the word identity to refer to it.

The ‘some reason’ I don’t want to use the word ‘identity’ or ‘self-perception’ or ‘sense of self’ when I talk about being female is because those words do not fit.

I think our definitions of identity are not the same. For me an identity or a person’s self-perception or sense of self of themselves does not have to align in any way with reality. Which is how we end up with men saying they are women or able bodied people identifying as disabled.

If men can have a ‘sense of self’ that they are female that is not the same thing as a woman who has an awareness of the material reality of her body is it? A woman could have no feeling at all about being female and she will still be female. I am aware that I am female in the same way I am aware that my sister is female or my Mother was female or my dog is female.

“A woman could have no feeling at all about being female and she will still be female.”

Exactly, she could have a sense / awareness that she was female and she could have no sense / awareness, but either way she would still be female. You have said you are aware / do have a sense you are female.

It’s difficult to argue that you don’t have a sense that you are female, while also saying that you do have a sense that you are female.

People perceive things differently and disagree about the nature of reality all the time. Reality is just reality regardless of any words or perceptions we apply.

It’s no bad thing to be aware that we are making perceptions of the world around us, and of ourselves, whether that’s our body or our thoughts, and that our perception may not be reality, and could change.

Helping people understand that, is a way to help people struggling, I think.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this.

It’s difficult to argue that you don’t have a sense that you are female, while also saying that you do have a sense that you are female

The way I understand it is that what we're perceiving as a "feeling" is our individual response (as a human being with an emotional conscience) to all of the sex-based expectations and limitations that we've experienced throughout the whole of our lives. "Because you're a girl, you're going to play netball in PE while the boys play football", "Congratulations on your baby girl! [ hands over gift of pink dress and dolls]" etc.

Every culture treats females and males differently from each other, from the moment they are born. Some cultures more radically than others. Some of it is conscious, much/most of it is unconscious. The latter particularly so in secular societies. The feelings that we experience in relation to this over our lifetimes aren't "male" or "female" feelings: they are simply our own personal feelings that have built up over time. They form part of how we make sense of the world and how we fit in it. Because women in any given society have experienced many of the same expectations and limitations as each other (and because we have the same biology as each other), there will be some commonality of "feelings". Likewise with men. But that still doesn't make the feelings masculine or feminine.

If men can have a ‘sense of self’ that they are female that is not the same thing as a woman who has an awareness of the material reality of her body is it? A woman could have no feeling at all about being female and she will still be female. I am aware that I am female in the same way I am aware that my sister is female or my Mother was female or my dog is female.

This. It's a key distinction. It's the same when self justifying males say that women also have feelings of autogynephilia because they fantasise about themselves having sex as a woman. Yes, they are women, and males are not.

Knowing my sex is not the same as a male "knowing" he is the opposite sex "gender"

I've been using the analogy in RL of belief in Guardian Angels.

Some people believe they have one. But I don't believe in them.

So: “the belief that a person can have a gender that is different to their sex”.
Would be: "the belief a person has a Guardian Angel."

Belief in this des not require you to beleive everyone has one just that you or this person does.

But I don't belive anyone has one.

And I'm certainly not required to pretend they do, to be nice, or to say hello to them and their gurdaian angel when I speak to them, otherwise they'll kill themselves.

They are free to believe this, I'm free to believe they're nuts.

Yes, I agree. The only difference, or extra thing, about how I’m thinking, is that I view the thing I’m perceiving, and my perception of it, as distinct. If the things I perceive and my perceptions of them weren’t distinct, I could never misperceive anything. And, obviously, I can misperceive things. That’s the only difference.

My teenage son was telling me gender is just a social construct and talked about how the French gender inanimate objects. I just felt really confused and didn’t know how to respond.

@Marrongrass I wanted my son to grow up to understand a different type of feminism. Not one where we’re supposedly the same as men.

Gender is a social construct (based on stereotypes, mostly about how women and men should think, dress and behave). Sex is not a social construct. We are different from men because of our biology, but also because of the way we experience the world as a direct and indirect result of our biology. We are not different from men because we like pink, wear dresses and want to be ballerinas.

“Identity” just means “sense of self”.

Whose definition is that? My OED says nothing about 'sense'. It says 'The fact of being who or what a person or thing is' (ny caps).

I don't sense I am a woman. I just am one. I certainly have feelings about being a woman. I don't have a feeling/sense that I am a woman. That's just a fact.

It appears to be a definition from the social sciences to do with how humans place themselves in groups.

In every example I saw (in a v cursory Google!) they used gender rather than sex, so assuming that this was deliberate rather than lazy use of language by the academics, I'm not sure that the fact of a human's sex is included.

I.e being a particular nationality might be how you identify (assumes something other than the basic fact, such as emotion, belonging) but you don't identify as living at 5 Acacia Avenue - that's just a bit of information about you.

I don't sense I am a woman. I just am one. I certainly have feelings about being a woman. I don't have a feeling/sense that I am a woman. That's just a fact.

You know you are a woman, and even if you didn’t know it, you would still be a woman.

So, your knowledge and the fact you are a woman, must be different things, as you can lose the knowledge, but it doesn’t change the facts. You wouldn’t cease to be a woman if you had a brain injury and lost that knowledge.

That’s all I’m saying.

Anyway, I was only really trying to understand what people meant when saying they felt they had no sense of self, and I understand that now.

I was only really trying to understand what people meant when saying they felt they had no sense of self, and I understand that now.

Nobody on this thread has said they have no sense of self.

Claims to have understood whilst simultaneously demonstrating a distinct lack of understanding.

Identity, traditionally, has not been defined by the individual alone but in negotiation with community. It is a two way process. How others perceive you, how they respond to you and how you respond to them. I don’t suppose there has ever been a time in history before when attempts have been made to create a society where individuals tell others how to perceive them and how to respond to them and that expectation has been backed up by the law.

Identity was rooted in relationships with family, friends and community in the past.

Now it seems to be about rumination and spending lots of time online. I feel sorry for children now, having this pressure to identify themselves as this or that, to answer that difficult question, “who are you?”. It must be disorientating, discombobulating, as if there is no solid ground under their feet, nothing to hold on to.

I understand the things you are concerned about. I’m not saying you shouldn’t have concerns. Reality though is that people use their senses to determine what sex they are, and therefore they have a sense of what sex they are (sense of sex / gender also referred to as gender identity - I know some of you will say it’s sex not gender, but sometimes, as in this context, the words are used interchangeably).

I consider that I use my senses to sense my body characteristics, but I don’t believe in gendered souls or male or female sex essences. I’m not saying it’s wrong to have concerns, but some of you seem to have become so caught up in the politics, that you are trying to deny that you are using your senses. I don’t see how it’s beneficial to try to deny reality. If you want to keep trying that’s up to you, but people will tie you in knots if you try to tell them you just know you’re female without using your senses, that you don’t have a sense that you’re female, but actually you do, and if they think they use their senses they must believe in gendered souls. It’s completely illogical.

Reality is though that you're personally welcome to embrace mixed sex facilities and enjoy your privilege of not wanting or needing single sex spaces. No one's stopping you, go have a lovely time.

What you're not welcome to do is wangle endlessly about nonsense around 'no one can tell what sex anyone is' to your goal of forcing women who do not consent and have needs that you don't, to submit to men and their penises everywhere and either give up privacy, dignity and their own needs, or be excluded in punishment. Because that would be being a complete sexist arse.