Poll: There are only 2 genders....right?

[Sleepy Sol]

Given that I haven't done a whole lot of research on the subject, I'm really not sure how exactly to explain my views on gender. But I guess I would say that while I think gender is a spectrum rather than always being represented as two extremes of male or female (kind of duh, I think), I feel like I've been conditioned to really believe that those two extremes are the only particularly significant ones to be worth denoting? Like a straight line between male and female with differing degrees of attachment to a particular gender identity based on where you are on the line. I don't know if that really makes sense, though.

...I guess. That probably sounds kind of off, I suppose. When it comes to transpeople I just refer to them based on their gender preference, so that's still just between a binary gender concept to me.

I think I'm still a little malleable as far as being accepting to the idea of a third or even fourth gender classification, but there just hasn't been any such concept to my knowledge in current American society. So it's not always something I give much weight to most of the time.

 

[TWRule]

As others have pointed out, there is a sex/gender conceptual divide. What makes that difficult to accept for some people is that gender happens to be closely culturally associated with sex (even those claiming to be somewhere on a 'spectrum' between man and woman are making used of those ideas of the two 'well-established' genders).

However, it is not necessary that the two concepts be so linked.

Take, for example, the ancient Taoist outlook: here, Yin is associated with the feminine, Yang with the masculine, and one of their teachings is, "know the masculine, yet keep to the feminine". This teaching presumably applies to biological males and females alike, and it is not drawing on traditional gender roles in saying everyone should act 'effeminately' - rather, it's explained that femininity should mean compassion, a nurturing patience and calm, gentle leadership, creativity, etc., while yang stands for vigorous activity, destruction, etc. (which is conceived of as still having an important role to play but not necessarily what be dominant in interhuman dealings).

Likewise, from other philosophies, I've heard suggestions that the masculine and feminine could be matched up with general ways of interacting with the world (and ultimately worldviews): the scientific and the philosophical respectively. So again, a biological male could more properly belong to the 'feminine' here and a female to the 'masculine' and vice versa.

TL;DR: Gender can be philosophically reinterpreted (it isn't necessarily bound to the concept of sex), and thus there is no particular reason only two genders must exist unless we happen to choose a scheme that has philosophical justification for limiting it to two.

 

[Bocaj2000]

EDIT: /*-- I forgot to mention that 'sex' and 'gender' are different: 'sex' refers to biology, in which case there are three if you include the intersex. Gender is about which sex a person identifies as. This is a bit more complicated.--*/

I guess the question is whether or not a man whom identifies as a woman is the same as a woman whom identifies as a woman. In this case, my answer would be yes, which still retains the gender binary.

The problem is that there are such thing as genderqueer people whom identify as both/neither. Although they are in the minority, they still count as a gender.

 

[Ambitiousmould]

I certainly don't take people's word anymore on the internet; in the age of Tumblr and everyone claiming to be asexual and trans-asian and otherkin, I simply now ask for the old internet adage: "pics or it didn't happen".

Isn't Trans-Asian an airline?

OT: Same as most, there are two biological sexes. Gender is a whole other thing that to be honest I don't pay much attention to. If some 8ft tall bearded biological male comes up to me and says, "I'm a lady" then that's fine. Whatever. I honestly don't give much of a shit.

Thinking about it, though, two genders doesn't seem so bad a concept. If someone identifies as a female when they're biologically a male, then I shall regard them as a female, still two genders though. I'm not saying this with any conviction, though. It wouldn't be hard to convince me otherwise.

I draw the line at humans claiming to be a wolf or dragon born in a human body. That can fuck right off. The exception being some severe mental disorder causing some form of delusion. I put 'Otherkin' in the same category as astrology, herbal tea, phrenology, and weather forecasting.

 

[Azure23]

The ethnocentrism in this thread is staggering. Did some of these people simply never take anthropology classes? In the western world we have an annoying tendency to conflate gender and sex and come up with all sorts of flimsy justifications why we think that way, when in reality gender has far more to do with cultural and anthropological influences than just biological sex. Many cultures in the world have more than two gender identities. The anthropologists, sociologists, sexologists, and psychiatrists of our time recognize that gender is a spectrum, it's pretty damn arrogant (not to mention obtuse) to simply define gender on the basis of biology. And even then, intersex individuals exist, there are many different chromosome alignments (some of them not exactly functional but still, it's biology.)

 

[Azure23]

I would be reluctant to really take the concept of gender too seriously. As far as I am aware the term was created by some hack doctor who attempted to legitimize the concept using child abuse and lies. The fact that so many supposed academics grabbed onto the idea's and hung on for dear life, rather than distance themselves from it over the fail state outcomes of the results of his experiments, if not even for moral reasons, is something I find really troubling.

If you're referring to the infamous "study" where the doctor essentially forced one of two male twins to transition then you are laughably incorrect. Gender as a concept has been around for a looooong time.

 

[Skatologist]

64?! Does anybody have a source for that? Heck, can anybody list even half of those?

Stretching it, the most I can come up with is 8:
-Male
-Female
-Male identify as female
-Female identify as male
-Male identify as none
-Female identify as none
-Male identify as both
-Female identify as both

Or am I missing a layer of complexity here? Is there such a thing as a male who identifies as a female that identifies as a male?

There was a FaceBook update about a year ago that allowed for quite a lot of choices with 56 options, but I'm not sure where this 64 was coming from. To be fair, there was only really a few options considering many you'd be able to fit in many different categories. I technically fit 5 categories.

Oh, and disagree.

 

[KenAri]

I think there are a load of different genders; chromosomes and shit can get all whacked up sometimes. But I still only refer to people as male or female. It's easier and I don't care enough to ask everyone what they wanna be called.

If you self-identify as a cobra with laser-vision and have decided you can only procreate with non-organic vegetation under a red moon, if there's a wang swinging between your legs, whatever; I'm calling you a guy.

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

I disagree, there are no genders. There are two sexes, those really exist. Gender is just a mental abstraction based on observing similar behaviors, it has not real substance or existence. Gender and sex have no real relation, so declaring yourself to be of a certain gender doesn't mean you get to be a different sex. I.E. declaring yourself to be a female(gender) doesn't mean you get to be a woman(sex).

 

[dangoball]

Oh my, joining these discussions is always fun. I personally don't care that much, as long as you're not hurting anyone feel free to identify as an airship. I'll think you're silly, but that's about it.

As for actual scientific approach, well, there is "sex" and "gender".
Sex - what tools you got under the hood
Gender - social construct pertaining to roles in society
As you can see from these made up but still close to actual definitions, gender is dependent on society. How so many people fail to grasp the concept that sex is not the same as gender eludes me. However, there are still people who think all Muslims are terrorists and Islam is the plague of the world so I'm not that surprised.

Also, this:

The ethnocentrism in this thread is staggering. Did some of these people simply never take anthropology classes? In the western world we have an annoying tendency to conflate gender and sex and come up with all sorts of flimsy justifications why we think that way, when in reality gender has far more to do with cultural and anthropological influences than just biological sex. Many cultures in the world have more than two gender identities. The anthropologists, sociologists, sexologists, and psychiatrists of our time recognize that gender is a spectrum, it's pretty damn arrogant (not to mention obtuse) to simply define gender on the basis of biology. And even then, intersex individuals exist, there are many different chromosome alignments (some of them not exactly functional but still, it's biology.)

I know TEH BIAS has become a bit of a dirty word in online communities, but people have to realize that they approach any new information from an inherently biased standpoint. That in it self is not bad. As long as that standpoint is reflected, it's actually what lets us reach any semblance of understanding. But when people think "this is not how it works, because this is not how people thought it works while I grew up", there is a problem.

 

[Sleepy Sol]

There was a FaceBook update about a year ago that allowed for quite a lot of choices with 56 options, but I'm not sure where this 64 was coming from. To be fair, there was only really a few options considering many you'd be able to fit in many different categories. I technically fit 5 categories.

Oh, and disagree.

Huh, that's kinda interesting, now that I look at it. From what I saw, a lot of these seem redundant, but I guess it's just supposed to be that way so a person can use whatever label they feel comfortable with? I mean, I don't even know if I'd consider trans a gender of its own, personally. I just try to treat people as they identify, so a trans woman is just going to be a woman to me and vice versa.

Is that kind of a weird way to view it? ._.

quick edit: though I don't really think that male or female is the only way to identify, really. I probably didn't really make that clear in my initial post. I dunno, a lot of this stuff confuses me a bit.

 

[Charli]

I've never confused the terms sex and gender, so growing up people who blended the two kind of confused me, but alas, I did not question it. Now it's become a more hot topic I can be vocal about my opinion to some degree that I agree they are not the same thing.

People have explained it well enough in my thread that I need not chime in with much else.

 

[f1r2a3n4k5]

Biological stand point, yes due to chromosomes. Female being XX and male XY.

If you define sex like that, where do you put the people who don't fit and the people with Klinefelter syndrome?

Having a Y chromosome makes a human biologically male since they will develop a penis and testis, regardless of having an extra X chromosome. The Y chromosome is the sex differentiator for humans.

Except that hormone disorders such as congenital adrenal hyperplasia can cause the body to develop incorrectly to their chromosomes, both early on and/or later in life.

Plus it begs the question of where XYY syndrome people like myself fall into it all.

Now there's no real difference to be observed in those who are XYY and those who are XY (hell, my doctor and I didn't even know until I had a test done that was unrelated to it).

Or how about someone like me who was born with XX Male syndrome?

Even with XX male syndrome, you still possess the SRY (sex determining region Y) gene on your second X chromosome. Normally that gene is attached to the Y chromosome, plus the other genes that bring about stereotypical male physical development. During crossing over in meiosis, it's possible (though exceptionally rare) for the SRY gene to attach to an X chromosome instead.

As for klinefelter syndrome, etc, from a purely technical standpoint, it's relatively simple: if you have a Y, you are biologically male. It doesn't matter if you're XXXXXXXXY, or if you have a completely female phenotype, you're still technically male. 99.999% of the time, Chromosomes determine biological sex, but really it's the genes associated with those chromosomes that actually determine sex.

So in other words, even with XX male syndrome, you still possess the 'male genes', so you are biologically male. Even intersex humans are still technically male or female, but obviously you can't look at a person and know what their genotype is.

TLDR, for purely biological purposes and when we're talking genotypes, yes there are only two human sexes, but it doesn't have much to do with your appearance, and gender is a separate issue.

It's a touch more complicated than that.

In say, Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, the genotype is XY, but the phenotype is generally heterosexual "female."

In fact, in CAIS/PAIS, the person might not even be aware until they try to get pregnant. No luck? Here, have an ultrasound. What's that? You have rudimentary testes in your abdomen.

Are they male? Should they drop what they knew of their life for the past few decades and pick up as male?

 

[pearcinator]

Agree. What you are is determined by what you got between your legs. Unless you are born with absolutely nothing there (which I don't think is possible, and if so it would be a birth defect) there are only two sexes.

 

[Karadalis]

I dont even think we have a fitting word for what people talk about when they refer to "gender"

Our closest word is "Geschlecht" but this word refers to sex rather then gender.

I think what most people are confused about is that the misunderstanding between sex and gender goes both ways.

When someone says "arent you a man?" he usually means what you have hanging between your legs... if you then shout at him "im identifiying as a star fairy child sea lion you opressive shitlord!" then youre both incredibly arrogant (how was he to know what obscure thing you identify as today in the first place?) you also make the same mistake that people make when they confuse sex with gender.

If a person says "arent you a man/male" he most often refers to your biological sex, because unless you are dressed the part it becomes really difficult to figure out what type of gender you have chosen for yourselfe. Because gender is not something you can just "see"

So how about those asking for more tolerance show some more tolerance eh?

 

[Parasondox]

What's an "Otherkin"? I keep seeing that a lot when people identify themselves as that but what is it?

 

[L. Declis]

I certainly don't take people's word anymore on the internet; in the age of Tumblr and everyone claiming to be asexual and trans-asian and otherkin, I simply now ask for the old internet adage: "pics or it didn't happen".

Isn't Trans-Asian an airline?

Probably. It sounds shit.

But then, I did fly American Airlines which was so uncomfortable that I tried drugging myself with medicine and booze in the hopes it would knock me unconcious for the 20 hour flight.

 

[rcs619]

So lately I've been coming across all types of discussions on the internet.

Supposedly at the moment I'm supposed to accept that there are like what 64 gender types?

I'm sorry to say people but I think that's ridiculous.

You can be a man
You can be a crossdressing man
But you're still in your essence a man that's just biology.
You didn't grow a new reproductive organ or create new hormones that justify you being a new gender.

BUT WAIT

You were born a man, but you feel like a woman.
What does that make you then?

Well if you have a sexchange.
That makes you a woman.

If not... that makes you a man who feels like a woman but doesn't dress that way nor willing to change his gender.


Same goes the other way around ofcourse.


This is my opinion obviously, but what do you guys think?

And can someone even explain to me what in the world qualifies something to be a new gender outside of biology?

Okay, sticking to biology for the first part here. Biologically, normally, there are only two genders. These are controlled by which combination of the two sex chromosomes you possess, as passed down by your parents. However, there are legitimate cases where errors happen during the fertilization process, or even the meiosis process that creates your sex cells. Sometimes people have more copies of sex chromosomes than they should, or they don't work properly. There's a pretty well-known case of this woman who was anatomically female by all appearances, but instead of ovaries, she actually had internal, vestigial testes and never knew it until well into adulthood. Apparently she had an XY chromosome combination like a normal male, but one of the key parts of her Y chromosome was not functional, so the X chromosome overcompensated and she expressed almost totally feminine traits.

There are quite a few different biological issues, with varying degrees of seriousness and various phenotypic expression.

What you're talking about here (and what most people really mean when they talk about this sort of thing) is sexual identity (or... gender identity? I'm honestly not sure what the best term is, as both aren't quite completely accurate). That, is a whole other issue all its own, and I don't believe we truly actually understand the mechanisms behind it all that well yet. The most compelling ideas I've seen on the subject have to do with brain chemistry, and different hormones and signals expressing in ways that are not quite the norm for the given gender. I feel like it's important to remember that there is a distinction between cross-dressers and drag queens (which tends to be more along the lines of a fetish), and actual transgender people (which does seem to be a legitimate biological issue related to brain chemistry and likely many other factors we don't understand yet).

It's definitely an interesting thing to study though, since it does seem to imply that sexual identity may actually be more dependent on how your brain is wired than your actual, physical chromosomes (although, under normal circumstances, those chromosomes are likely some of the main driving factors behind the brain chemistry), and understanding how neurology and biology interact in regards to sexual identity could shed more light on things like homosexuality, bisexuality, and various other ways people look at sexual identity, gender identity and attraction. It's interesting stuff. So yes, most of the time, you're either physically male or female, but when you get into the actual brain chemistry and neurology behind how you mentally identify... that's just, a whole mess of stuff we don't quite understand fully yet.

 

[loa]

So gender is a social construct and not the same thing as the biological sex and there are not "64", there are 3.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Biological stand point, yes due to chromosomes. Female being XX and male XY.

If you define sex like that, where do you put the people who don't fit and the people with Klinefelter syndrome?

Having a Y chromosome makes a human biologically male since they will develop a penis and testis, regardless of having an extra X chromosome. The Y chromosome is the sex differentiator for humans.

Except that hormone disorders such as congenital adrenal hyperplasia can cause the body to develop incorrectly to their chromosomes, both early on and/or later in life.

Plus it begs the question of where XYY syndrome people like myself fall into it all.

Now there's no real difference to be observed in those who are XYY and those who are XY (hell, my doctor and I didn't even know until I had a test done that was unrelated to it).

Or how about someone like me who was born with XX Male syndrome?

Even with XX male syndrome, you still possess the SRY (sex determining region Y) gene on your second X chromosome. Normally that gene is attached to the Y chromosome, plus the other genes that bring about stereotypical male physical development. During crossing over in meiosis, it's possible (though exceptionally rare) for the SRY gene to attach to an X chromosome instead.

As for klinefelter syndrome, etc, from a purely technical standpoint, it's relatively simple: if you have a Y, you are biologically male. It doesn't matter if you're XXXXXXXXY, or if you have a completely female phenotype, you're still technically male. 99.999% of the time, Chromosomes determine biological sex, but really it's the genes associated with those chromosomes that actually determine sex.

So in other words, even with XX male syndrome, you still possess the 'male genes', so you are biologically male. Even intersex humans are still technically male or female, but obviously you can't look at a person and know what their genotype is.

TLDR, for purely biological purposes and when we're talking genotypes, yes there are only two human sexes, but it doesn't have much to do with your appearance, and gender is a separate issue.

It's a touch more complicated than that.

In say, Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, the genotype is XY, but the phenotype is generally heterosexual "female."

In fact, in CAIS/PAIS, the person might not even be aware until they try to get pregnant. No luck? Here, have an ultrasound. What's that? You have rudimentary testes in your abdomen.

Are they male? Should they drop what they knew of their life for the past few decades and pick up as male?

As I said: "...for purely biological purposes and when we're talking genotypes, yes there are only two human sexes, but it doesn't have much to do with your appearance, and gender is a separate issue."
Genotypes and phenotypes can be very different things.