Comments by "Vic 2.0" (@Vic2point0) on "Joe Rogan and Thaddeus Russell Debate Gender Being a Social Construct" video.
-
143
-
20
-
@twittyplayzvideos2742 "i think those are actual genders. Not personality traits."
Well if you actually read their definitions though, it's pretty clear that the only thing defining some of them are singular, very specific personality traits (e.g., "anxiegender - a gender affected by anxiety" or "corugender - a gender affected by flashbacks"). So you can call them "genders", but the point is that it doesn't take much for something to be called a gender.
"But again, gender is not determined by sex."
For use of the word "gender" to be coherent, it seems like it has to be synonymous with biological sex. But that's what I'm trying to see, if you can make sense of your worldview at all.
"And again, sex is not DETERMINED by genitals."
Obviously not. But it is determined by your chromosomal makeup which, 99% of the time, is reflected in your genitalia and secondary sex characteristics.
"But he can change his gender to be a woman."
Meaning, he can start identifying as one. Yes, obviously. I can identify as a toaster too, doesn't mean that I am one (and I can also call you a toasterphobe if you dare disagree with me that my gender of "toaster" isn't every bit as valid as these other "genders").
"A child is not a gender, neither is an adult."
See, this is the first hurdle you need to clear. If things like what's on that list can be considered a "gender", I don't see how you can argue that "child" and "adult" cannot also be considered genders. Hell, for all we know, such a thing is already on the list somewhere!
"Children dont wear certain clothes etc."
Neither do people with different personality traits, necessarily. If that's how you're defining "gender", we might as well call it synonymous with biological sex after all.
10
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@natemiller6756 Okay, so you're not responding to my point about "gender" in the phrase "gender roles" and have yet to answer my question about how people "know" they're the opposite gender. To expand on the importance of the question, however, let me just say that we cannot actually know the difference (if any) between what it "feels likes" to be a man and what it "feels like" to be a woman. All any of us have experienced is one or the other, precluding us from being able to compare them, so they can't even answer the question with that. This is why they typically give an answer that exposes their confusion between gender and gender roles (talking about their likes, interests, personality traits, how they want to live their lives, etc.)
"Well when you take into consideration that there's millions of cases of intersex/hermaphroditism than I think that this whole notion that they,re the exceptions doesn't really hold water."
It definitely does. Partly because even a lot of "intersex" people are actually indisputably one of the two genders but with an abnormality of some kind. But mostly because it's still a very tiny percentage of the overall population. Hence, they are the exceptions to the rule, not the rule.
"And no I wouldn't call him black because just like gender race is a social construct as well."
I disagree (I think culture and gender roles are social constructs, but not race and gender). But even granting this for the sake of argument, it makes no sense why you wouldn't call a white man black if he asked you to. Why wouldn't you call him what he identified as, if you would do so for a trans person?
7
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
@paramiind4730 Not at all. It's still the case, that outside of those anomalies, sex is binary. But again, even if it wasn't, it doesn't do anything for the transgender movement because it's still grounded in considerations of the physical. What is scientific, what is observable and objective. These are still irrelevant to the idea that you are whatever you identify as.
Also, note that since I said it's about the chromosomes, I'm acknowledging that a woman could be born with a penis in these extremely rare circumstances. Wouldn't make her a man. The genitalia are simply our best way of determining sex with the naked eye (no pun intended).
All you have to do to understand that gender and biological sex are the same thing, is look at the concept of "gender roles". What are these? Well, they're roles we're expected to play on the basis of our biological sex, not "whatever you identify as". People look at you, determine that you are biologically male, and therefore expect you to do whatever's expected of men in that society. They're basing it on your gender, which is that of a man, even if you choose to buck all of the norms and roles people place on you for being such.
4
-
@paramiind4730 "A binary is ‘a division into two groups or classes that are considered diametrically opposite’."
Right, and outside of those ultra-rare anomalies, a person is either male or female. You make definitions based on the rule, not the exceptions to the rule.
"You previously said chromosomes determine sex"
And it does.
" - but are now suggesting that “genitalia is the best way of determining sex”.
With the naked eye, I said. In other words, even when you can't look at the chromosomes to confirm, the most effective (albeit not perfect) method is go by the genitalia.
"By this logic, you’re suggesting that if a cisgender woman-"
Otherwise known as a woman.
"had a penis, then they would be sexually identified as a man."
If that's all the information we had to go on, yes. But it would be incorrect, if the chromosomes were that of a female.
"I have already said this, but will repeat. In a social context - you can not determine one’s sex in the way you are suggesting - that being genitalia - unless you’re some pervert. This is why we rely on gender."
Nonsense. There are tons of ways to determine, with over 90% accuracy, a person's gender without going along with however they "identify" (which is what you seem to mean by "gender").
And gender itself isn't socially constructed, but gender roles are.
"You are yet to list a way to “objectively” determine who is a man or a woman."
I explicitly said we can go by the chromosomes, which you argued (therefore you knew that I had given this reason, so you don't have to lie). And BTW, if your problem with it is that it's fallible, so is gender identity, since there are a lot of people who grow out of it if allowed to, and some even regret the "gender transitioning" surgery.
Still waiting for someone to make this worldview coherent. How exactly does someone "know" they're the opposite gender? And why are we not similarly obligated to call a white man black (if he so identifies)?
4
-
4
-
4
-
@paramiind4730 No, my point is that it's the trans people/advocates who seem to have confused "gender" with "gender roles" (or one's inclination to follow them). Almost inevitably, when you ask them how they "know" they're the opposite gender, they will base it on their likes, dislikes, personality traits, interests, and how they want to live their lives.
What I'm saying, however, is that the reason for the word "gender" in the phrase "gender roles" is that people are looking at your biological makeup and assigning a role to you on that basis! On the basis of your biological sex, aka your gender.
"You’d therefore suggest if a woman had a vagina, but had chromosomal abnormalities, she’d be a man?"
Typically, even if your genitalia doesn't match your chromosomes, the chromosomes will determine your gender, yes. And as I said, we define these things by the rule, not the exceptions to the rule. If your only objection for this distinction is that it isn't infallible, well let me reiterate: Neither is gender identity! People "grow out of" gender dysphoria all the time! Sometimes they even have the transitioning surgery and regret that.
"despite the fact in social situations, she would be treated as a woman?"
Depends on a lot more than just their genitalia, actually. Some folks have secondary sex traits that betray their genitalia. Those people will be treated (whether accurately or inaccurately) as whatever they "look like" based on secondary sex traits.
And I am still waiting for your answers as to how they "know" they're a different gender, as well as how we're not similarly obligated to call a white man black (if he identifies as such).
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@arthurwise5178 "Do you believe it is wrong for a person to not behave according to their gender roles?"
No, I think gender roles should be mostly disregarded. That being said, the way you dress and present yourself should adhere to the virtue of honesty, especially if you are dating, competing in sports, etc.
So if a man wants to be a "mother" (I had one trans person share his story with me and this is where his views on the subject originated), he should feel free to do all things traditionally deemed the "mother's role" without coming to believe that he's a woman. You can be sensitive, nurturing, into grooming (not the Biden kind, mind you), wanting to teach your child a lot about cooking, all the things we normally think of when we think of what mothers are "supposed to do" while still being a man.
3
-
3
-
@MrMacbridemax "Gender" has always been understood as interchangeable with "sex". As I said in the original comment, there's a reason why the roles we're expected to play solely on the basis of our biological sex, are called "gender roles". We don't say that someone is not conforming to gender; we say that they're not conforming to gender roles and norms, because gender (aka biological sex) is what the roles and norms are based on.
At any rate, it's far more important to acknowledge the incoherence and inconsistency of transgenderism as a worldview. In addition to confusing the inclination/disinclination to adhere to gender norms and roles with gender itself, it requires a person to say they "know" they're the opposite gender because they can just "feel" it. Problem there being, no one can say they "feel like" one gender as opposed to another because we have no basis for comparison. Each of us has only been one gender or the other. So for all we know, the two "feel" the exact same or there is no such feeling at all.
And of course we don't obligate others to call people what they "identify" as in any other case. If a white man identifies as black, tough, he's white. If a child identifies as an adult, tough, she's a child. But if a man identifies as a woman, we must all call him and treat him as one...
3
-
@MrMacbridemax Okay, so the dictionary definition (likely updated within the last few years) seems to be contradictory. The two sexes is a reference to biology, so it makes no sense to say that "gender" is either of the two sexes especially when referring to something other than biological differences.
"The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female."
Which is a whole other problem, in which people seem to be trying to redefine "gender" to include just any personality difference they can think of.
"I don't see that transgenderism as you call it has to be a worldview, even if it can be extrapolated to one."
It is a belief or lifestyle structured around the belief that you are what you identify as. And it shapes everything you do, so I think "worldview" is about right.
"Essentially it's a question of personal identity,"
And how do you define that?
"and if someone doesn't feel the gender, or sex, they were born, they have my full sympathy"
They have mine too, but only because they actually believe that gender is something you "feel" or "identify" as, rather than something you simply are.
"You say we don't have any basis for comparison as to what the different gender roles 'feel' like."
No, I said we don't have any basis for comparison between the genders. And that simply can't be argued. Even biological men who insist that they've always been a girl/woman are testifying that they don't know what being a man "feels like".
"I disagree. I think it's clear in the way society perceives and treats men and women that there are differences,"
I'm not saying there aren't differences between men and women; I'm challenging the claim that there is some internal "feeling" associated with one that can help us distinguish it from another.
"To me, the interesting tension at the heart of the transgender debate is that gender roles must be at once broken down and reinforced. They must be broken down in order to make the case that anyone can identify as anything because these roles are socially constructed, but they must also be reinforced, as otherwise what is anyone transitioning to, from?"
A very good point. And of course, it hasn't escaped everyone's notice that one of the most common things for a biological man who identifies as a woman to do, is adhere to feminine stereotypes to the point of sexism (if we acknowledge the fact that they're actually men).
3
-
@MrMacbridemax "In your original post you make the point that gender roles are constructed, whereas sex is not. Which is both blindingly obvious and sadly necessary to state in these discussions. However, you seem to be of the view that how someone identifies is immaterial, and should be superceded by the biological facts. You say: 'gender isn't simply something you feel, it's something you are'."
Yes, I'm saying gender and sex are one and the same, and they're biological facts upon which social constructs like gender roles and norms are based on.
"But if you mean gender roles aren't something you can 'feel', then I strongly disagree."
I'm not sure just how one would "feel" gender roles, but they can definitely feel self-conscious that they are/aren't adhering to gender roles and norms. They can definitely be of the persuasion that they should/shouldn't act a certain way because of their gender, but apart from that I'm not sure what you're asking.
"For me, while I think it's important not to lose sight of the biological facts, I also think that our ideas of masculinity, feminity, 'male', 'female' and so on are very messy and complicated."
Sure.
"As is identity in general. Gender identities are constructed, complicated, based partly on biological realities, and partly on societal evolutions that continue to evolve."
Depends on how you define "gender identity". But if it's your understanding of your own gender, that has nothing to do with society.
"Yes there are inconsistencies and flawed logic all over the place, but that is the result of the messy roles and boxes that society creates,"
How so?
"rather than evidence that trans people who identify differently than their biological sex are missguided or just plain 'wrong'."
If they are a grown male adult human being identifying as a woman, then they're incorrect about that. This is not to say that they're horrible people, should be treated poorly, etc. But they have subscribed to an incoherent and inconsistent worldview as I've been explaining.
3
-
@MrMacbridemax "They haven't subscribed to a worldview."
If they believe that you're x because you identify as x, that's a worldview. It's just not a very coherent one, and as I say, it's inconsistently applied.
"They haven't made a choice mostly, it's like sexuality."
You can have a worldview regarding these things too. But the choice is in how to interpret the fact that you have feelings, interests, personality traits, etc. more stereotypical of the opposite gender. Some people take that for what it is; others conclude on that basis that they must be the opposite gender.
"They don't identify with the gender role that they are expected to perform based on their biological sex."
Which is just another way of saying they don't adhere to gender roles and norms; like I said, it's a matter of confusing that disinclination with gender itself.
"They feel out of place in their body. It must be a terrible thing."
Granted. But that doesn't lend any validity to the view they've adopted.
"It's not a political stance.
"
Nor am I saying it is.
"My point is that identifying as a 'man' or 'woman' is more than just what genitalia you have."
Not for most of us, unless we're to equivocate on "man" or "woman". I might say, for instance, that I don't feel like a man if some guy half my size beats me up. But I don't literally mean I feel like another gender.
"But the crux of the issue is that they feel a different way than society expects of them based on gender norms."
That's not the issue at all. Tons of people feel different from how society expects them to feel, act, think, etc. based on gender norms, without concluding that they must not be that gender.
"If someone says, 'I am born a man but feel more like a woman and want to live my life as such' would you take issue with that?"
Yes, because it's also incoherent. We have no basis for comparison, as I said, so there's no way of knowing what difference (if any) there is between "feeling like a man" and "feeling like a woman". We don't even really know that there is such a feeling.
But also, it would be far better to just live as you want without calling it "living as a woman" altogether.
3
-
@MrMacbridemax "Some things are empirically self-evident in their existence. E.g. a car is clearly a car."
Right, but not because it identifies as one...
"Other things are more complex, like, I would say, gender roles,"
Again, gender roles and norms are not the same as gender. And even granting that what determines someone's gender is complex (as in intersex people), it doesn't follow from that that how we identify has any bearing whatsoever.
"and self-perception is relevant in definition."
Not if you mean to say that how you perceive yourself determines what gender you are.
"A very small minority find this disconnect in their identity so intolerable that they are compelled to live their lives by identifying fully as the other sex."
And again, the "living as the other sex" part is what's entirely unnecessary. No one's saying you can't live however you like, but you don't have to consider it "living as" a gender you're not. No, not even if it flies in the face of gender roles and norms.
I am glad to know you draw the line somewhere, however. I just don't think it will be enough to ward off what they're pushing. I mean, there's really no reason not to grant that sex is "changeable" or "doesn't exist" once you've done something similar with gender.
And as I keep saying, if what obligates me to call a man a woman is their "identifying" as such, then all bets are off. It can obligate us to call a white man black, to call a child an adult, on into eternity.
3
-
2
-
2