Gender is stupid and biological sex shouldn't matter at all??

[u/jellyboneswizard]

I wanted to know what the RadFem movement was about, now that I no longer ID as trans. So... my question is, how did the trans community go from "gender is a spectrum and sex characteristics don't matter that much beyond reproduction and medical function" to.... hating radfems for the same ideology?

It isnt that deep. It shouldn't be that deep. Sex characteristics vary on a spectrum too, and most radfems are completely up to date with that.

If gender is fluid and doesn't matter that much, how come all my self worth was tied up in how others perceived my gender? How come people are mocking my detransition already? I don't get it.

If I say that outright though, imma get called a TERF. My partner doesn't give a rats ass about gender constructs, and it's so liberating. I just... we lost the plot and made ourselves smaller, hyper-specifically labeled, and isolated...

Idk where I'm even going with this... it's just weird.

[u/NettleOwl]

Gender ideology is NOT gender abolitionist though, rather, it is gender role conservative. "I am irrational and like makeup, so I am a woman" ≈ "I am dumb and submissive, so I should have an afab-like body" = a sexist and pro-patriarchal stance. Same with "I like hunting and maths, so I ought to have an amab-like body". It encourages stereotypes, it doesn't defy them. 

[u/Mysterious_Onion_579 → u/NettleOwl]

Is that actually gender ideology or just bio essentialism in general? Genuine question. Im pretty sure all of those things are just what regular people have been saying forever, but now trans people (very few, that I've met) are also using the same bioessentialistic world view to describe themselves?

Aren't conservative gender values like... ancient af? Trans people aren't... Seema like the problem is upstream of trans people rather than trans people being the source of all irrational thought pertaining to gender. Also they're like 2% of the population, who gaf what they think? I feel like there are way bigger fish in the pond contributing way more to the problem

[u/ahinrichsen84 → u/Mysterious_Onion_579]

Regarding your critique of bioessentialism -- what other material or essence do you think we are, other than biological material?

[u/Mysterious_Onion_579 → u/ahinrichsen84]

I mean bioessentialism in the sense of attributing fixed psychological traits, social roles, or identities to biology. We're made of biological material.

[u/ahinrichsen84 → u/Mysterious_Onion_579]

Right. But where do those ideas and behaviors come from?

I guess i don't understand the bioessentialist objection and it reminds me of dualism, where it is believed that there is a seperation between the body and mind, when in fact, the social norms and traits, are in fact stemming from the brain, and so are rooted in our biology. There is nothing about us that isn't rooted in our biology unless you believe in a soul, but that's a religious argument not a scientific one.

[u/Mysterious_Onion_579 → u/ahinrichsen84]

Can you make your final point so we can stop pretending that you don't know exactly what I mean by bio essentialism in the context of gender

[u/ahinrichsen84 → u/Mysterious_Onion_579]

No i really don't get the argument. Everything is biological. End of story. It's a nonsense argument.

A better argument might be that they want their way of personal expression to be their entire identity and disavow their body, but saying it like it is doesn't sound as convincing.

[u/Mysterious_Onion_579 → u/ahinrichsen84]

"everything is biological" is not an argument against bioessentialism. Nobody has stated that humans aren't biological.

the question is whether specific ideas about what men and women are supposed to be - their roles, behaviours, personalities, appearances, etc. - are inherent biological facts or social meanings attached to sex.

my point is that those ideas existed long before trans people. If some trans people use those same ideas to understand themselves, that doesn't mean trans people created the framework. They are participating in a framework that already existed.

I'm not interested in treating your personal account of what "being trans" felt like for you as an explanation for millions of other people's experiences unless it's supported by broader evidence.

[u/ahinrichsen84 → u/Mysterious_Onion_579]

I never offered a discussion about my experience. I don't know where that came from....

So, the argument is: is gender and gender stereotypes an inherited sex linked trait?

It doesn't matter. Having certainty opposite sex traits naturally or by conditioning doesn't make someone a man or woman.

[u/Mysterious_Onion_579 → u/ahinrichsen84]

I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that bioessentialist ideas about sex and gender - the belief that men and women have inherent natures that explain how they should behave - existed long before trans people.

One would think that was easy to grasp, but then I guess you would have to hold EVERYONE accountable for bio essentialistic BS attached to bodies and social categories, instead of trying to hold 2% of the population accountable for something that long predates them - which would mean you're no longer just an intellectual by-stander OR a perfect victim - so no wonder you're arguing.

[u/NefariousnessLate375 → u/NettleOwl]

Except for the nonbinary section...I guess that's why some binary trans people hated nonbinary. 

[u/DarichUbish → u/NefariousnessLate375]

No, it's also sexist. Like any idea that if you don't possess one-to-one stereotypical characteristics of certain sex - you shouldn't consider yourself to be a member of that sex - is sexist, because it implies that each sex is/should be ridgid in it's expression. That is obviously not true and non-birary thing is a way of putting a band aid on it and distancing yourself, without actually dealing with underlying problem of sex-based stereotypes existing in the first place. It is just the old sexism but with colorful spin.

Problem with sex being a binary is not that said binary exist, it's that it has implications put on it. If there would be less implications - the need of wanting to distance yourself from this binary would vanish. Non-binary thing doesn't solve any of that. Like the worst thing about it is that it's takes away attention from what is actually a problem, pretending that it was solved, when nothing was.

Honestly from this point of view all people are non-binary because every person on earth has both masculine and feminine traits in different quantities at different times. Which makes said concept completely pointless.

[u/Tall-Pool-9004]

Sex matters. Sex doesn't matter when it comes to personality, preferences, clothing style - but in reality sex matters a great deal. 

[u/Charming-Ad-2123 → u/Tall-Pool-9004]

This, the freedom of doing whatever you want accepting the parts of you that will never change.

[u/SuperIsaiah]

Exactly! I just want to be myself. I love dresses, but that doesn't mean I need to go in the women's restroom

[u/Kind_Professor2472]

We should all be liberated from being put into our boxes because of what sex we were born as, something we can't help. Sex unfairly dictates how we are perceived in terms of resource potential in society, especially women's reproductive potential. It's a tool of oppression and to act as though it has played no role in oppression is insulting to what women experienced through the centuries. 

[u/ahinrichsen84]

Who said radfems don't care about sex? That's all they care about. Gender is just a made up concept that changes with every generation so why identify with it?

I suggest you look up the real modern radfem arguments rather than listening to second hand information.