I don't need to question it. Male or female, cis or trans. That's what it comes down to. Anything else is simply someone that fits into the above that opposes gender norms, good on them for doing so but it's not a gender.

I think you’re oversimplifying a little. The male and female genders are not mutually exclusive; there’s so much crossover, and a spectrum between masculinity and femininity, and transgenderism as a result is very complex, and cannot, in my opinion be boiled down to such crude categories; unless you’re referring to legal gender or biological sexual characteristics (which in itself is not black-and-white).

Of course it can be simplified to that extent. You're confusing gender for social constructs for the most part. Just because a man is feminine (but not trans) doesn't mean that he's some other gender. He is simply a feminine cis man.

You're either a man or a woman, cis or trans. Everything else after that is just preferences.

Oh yeah definitely. But those people who are "gender fluid" what are they basing the "fluidity" on? You have to have two defined opposites to say you are fluid between them.

Or another way of looking at it, you're overcomplicating it.

.

Yeah exactly and that's not helpful for equality between the sexes imo

I understand you’re trying to be woke af but don’t patronise people for expressing their opinion, in a thread you created to cause discussion.

I don't have time to start going too into depth really but just something to consider for now;

Whilst I do (broadly) agree that gender is a societal construction, it logically cannot have been constructed "for the purpose of the patriarchy", as the very concept of patriarchy requires gender as a precursor. That is to say, "the male" HAS TO predate "the patriarchy", and thus, gender can't be a social norm created to serve the patriarchy. Thus, for me, a patriarchal society is a wide-scale secondary symptom of a gender divide, not your starting point.

The crux of our disagreement I think is in my belief in gender and social constructs as being intimately linked whereas you dinstinguish between then.

I am merely questioning the accepted norms.

Wow rude :skull: I’m not trying to be ‘woke af’, I’m merely discursively questioning accepted beliefs. If you have something constructive to say, please share it.

Sorry I don’t think I articulated that well at all. Patriarchy is an abstract, contest idea anyway, but what I was trying to say is that the binary classification of gender and resulting subordination both is propounded by and enables masculine oppressors.

It does, but to address it you have to consider its origins (I think this is a here a lot of people go wrong; assuming that the origin is necessarily societal or worse, that it "doesn't matter" as though it's possible to change the current status quo without understanding the roots of gender roles.)

Gender is something that simply exists, the only thing we aided with is giving people who know they are the opposite sex a chance to transition but gender norms and societal constructs are of our own making.

what about someone who is happy with a part transition, say "female to male trans" who gets rid of breasts but keeps vagina, only bc that's what s/he feels this combination reflects them accurately (it could be other way round, a chick with a dick)
and is androgynous in terms of looks and behaviour, and bisexual
where should s/he be placed in the two-gender world?

Gender exists only in the way that society created it. Yes it ‘exists’ but it’s not an indestructible construct. Sex on the other hand does physically exist.

That’s a very interesting point. What such a person would feel is dysphoria with societal gender but not sexual characteristics. And such a person is a prime example of how problematic binary gender can be.

I use to be very firm in my belief that there are only two genders and that people who identify as gender fluid were attention seeking but the more i've looked into it the more I towards the idea that gender is a social construct.

Now sexuality I know is a social construct. Maybe the reason people feel as if a bunch of sexualities are just popping up everyday is because it might just be impossible to try and represent every individuals sexuality in a couple of groups. I'll use myself for example. In the past I've had sexual encounters with and have been attracted to women. i also wouldn't rule out dating a trans man/woman or somebody who's non binary. However I identify as gay because i'm only actively dating cis men atm. Sexuality I've always seen as being on a spectrum but a spider diagram might be more accurate tbh :laugh:

(sorry for any typos I'm a mess today).

I think that when people have a bit too much time to themselves and dont have much else on they start to obsess about stuff like this


Busy people who have things to do tend not to bother tbh

Two sexes, heterosexual and others.

Do you mean tax paying workers just get on with life whilst school/college/University attenders are constantly getting indoctrinated with this bollox?

:clap1:

I personally struggle with the somewhat limiting sexuality categories. I am somewhat attracted to the female body (and have been intimate w one or two :skull:) but I am far more attracted to men by a long way and would only get into a homosexual relationship. I don’t think bisexuality and homosexuality as labels do justice to the spectrum.

None of the info in the OP was indoctrinated into me at university or school, I learned all this independently of my own accord

to be fair I doubt you can make that call as you would not know

Its like when people say that advertising does not affect them and then you look in their fridge and hey presto..

what the hell does being a tax payer have to do with it??

I don't count genitals as part of defining gender - a transwoman will always be biologically male, even if her penis is turned into a surgical wound. But we'd call her a (trans/)woman.
The person in your apocryphal example is a transman who hasn't had bottom surgery.