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

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Holy shit this thread has become just head-smackingly stupid.

The amount of people here who refuse to educate themselves on the ACTUAL ACADEMIC DEFINITIONS OF GENDER AND SEX and instead just parrot whatever bullshit they were taught growing up is truly sad. Sexual dimorphism exists, yes, all you idiots give yourself a cookie. Socially and anthropologically constructed gender roles and identities exist, and those are incredibly varied and not fully described by two terms. I don't give a fuck where you grew up. Take an anthropology class, learn about other cultures, and for fucks sake stop assuming that the western concept of binary gender is all there is.

And stop comparing trans individuals to otherkin. It's not clever, it's not a "gotcha" point. All you're doing is telling whoever you're talking to that your opinion isn't worth listening to. Literally all you're doing is complaining that someone else is complaining, and when they're complaining about having roughly quadruple the average suicide rate and depressingly high incidences of assault, you really just come off like an asshole.

That is an awful amount of anger. You have all the right to disagree, no need to call people names. Gender and Sex for me are intrinsically related. Gender roles were assigned to a particular biological sex for a reason. Hence biological dimorphism affects gender.
Unfortunately the "academic" definition of gender is very polluted by several agendas, so it is not a valid point

I'm curious as to what agendas you specifically mean there.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Unfortunately the "academic" definition of gender is very polluted by several agendas, so it is not a valid point

I guess this is why I find the hard science academia (physics, chemistry, biology, math) a lot more credible.

There's less politics involved in it. There are a lot more "hard" answers, and stuff can be calculated, and shown to be a certain thing regardless of any philosophical or political opinions.

 

[Vivi22]

To me it's as simple as biology, but there's no harm in humoring people and accepting they can identify with whatever they feel like.

Not even close. Gender as a technical term refers to identity, biologically using sex is more accurate term.

I meant exactly what I said, o judger of closeness: to me they're one and the same, but I believe in humoring people.

Ones biological sex has little to nothing to do with gender which is a social construct. You may have meant what you said, but what you said was incorrect.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

I'd say there are only two genders. Many, many, many forms of sexuality - but only two genders.

 

[Callate]

Usual disclaimer:

The idea that "Gender" refers to things like psychological self-image, social status, or behavior/societal expectation, and not referring to biological/physiological status, is of very recent coinage, something that often gets overlooked. Most dictionaries still regard "sex" and "gender" as being interchangeable. It is certainly useful for some purposes to recognize "transsex/transsexual" and "transgender" as being significantly different things, but it's wise to try to be clear in one's usage and not leap to rip the head off of anyone who is using what you feel to be "wrong" terminology.

Carry on.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

To me it's as simple as biology, but there's no harm in humoring people and accepting they can identify with whatever they feel like.

Not even close. Gender as a technical term refers to identity, biologically using sex is more accurate term.

I meant exactly what I said, o judger of closeness: to me they're one and the same, but I believe in humoring people.

Ones biological sex has little to nothing to do with gender which is a social construct. You may have meant what you said, but what you said was incorrect.

On the other hand, I think you're incorrect. I'm not sure where that leaves us.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

To me it's as simple as biology, but there's no harm in humoring people and accepting they can identify with whatever they feel like.

Not even close. Gender as a technical term refers to identity, biologically using sex is more accurate term.

I meant exactly what I said, o judger of closeness: to me they're one and the same, but I believe in humoring people.

Ones biological sex has little to nothing to do with gender which is a social construct. You may have meant what you said, but what you said was incorrect.

On the other hand, I think you're incorrect. I'm not sure where that leaves us.

Well there is enough evidence academically and in the medical and psychological fields that say you're incorrect. If you disagree with the experts, then your position is impossible to back up except from a personal standpoint, which can end up make you looking backwards. No offence intended there.

 

[The_Darkness]

SNIP

On the other hand, I think you're incorrect. I'm not sure where that leaves us.

At the end of the day, words mean whatever the people using them want them to mean. Many people do use the words 'gender' and 'sex' interchangeably.

However, it can be considered more useful if sex refers to being biologically male/female/intersex, whereas gender refers to one's mental perception of they are male/female/transgender.

Take, for example, recorded cases of people feeling that they were born in the wrong body. If we define gender and sex as above, then we can say "this person's sex is male, but their gender is female" to explain the situation. However, if we treat the two words as interchangeable, then we're forced to use slightly clumsier sentences such as "This person is physically male, but they are mentally female." We can do more with language if the two words don't mean exactly the same thing.

(This relates to Callate's post above - it's only recently that this idea has caught on within the English language.)

If we do accept gender as an individual's mental perception of who they are (for convenience within language), then we can further include people whose gender doesn't match up to male or female - leading us to a gender spectrum rather than a gender binary.

***

On a side note, it's worth noting that brain scans have detected differences between cisgender people (whose gender and sex match up) and those who are transgender (gender and sex don't match up). More on that here [http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20032-transsexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan.html].

 

[Dizchu]

Is it not biologically accurate to call someone with a penis a man and someone with a vagina a woman?

"Man" and "woman" are words humans invented to describe certain groups of people. Biological sex is not treated merely as one variable like eye colour, hair colour, skin colour etc. It has a certain cultural significance that brings with it societal expectations. If these expectations did not exist, nobody would have a problem with being called "man" or "woman" because it'd be like calling someone a "blonde" or "redhead", ie. it's a trait that isn't seen as the foundation of someone's entire identity. But because these societal expectations exist, inevitably there will be people who don't adhere to what is commonly expected of biological males/females.

If we lived in a utopia where zero sexism existed and zero expectations were conjured up when learning about the biological sex of a person, this discussion wouldn't be happening. But we don't, sexual dimorphism is celebrated and because it is so ingrained in our culture, transgender people will inevitably exist.

You can be biologically essentialist about this if you want, but you have to understand that "man" and "woman" as words and concepts carry far much more weight than just "was born with a penis/was born with a vagina". It'd be disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

 

[viscomica]

Oh boy, how I love this forum.
The people have spoken!
(Seriously though, there isn't a day the first page of the Off-topic Discussion isn't filled with the words "gender","feminism" or something of the sort. Not saying that there's anything wrong with it, but it's starting to feel like some people would rather create threads that they KNOW will get loaaaaads of comments rather than thinking something original and relevant to say)

 

[Johnny Impact]

Your gender is dictated by the organs you had at birth, regardless of any thought process or surgery you may have undergone since. Of course, you may look at it a different way if you wish. Make it as complicated as you want. It's your life. I really couldn't care less, which is why I keep to simple binaries. It's not worth thinking about.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

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.

Wait, all this time of hearing about the infamous 56 gender options ... and that's the list? The vast majority of them are simply double ups, or very slight variations in terminology.

I'd say two.

Not as in two absolutes, but even looking at that Facebook list there's a complete absence of a true third.

Everything is either male with some prefix, female with some prefix, neither with some prefix, both with some prefix or in-between with some prefix.

The very first option on the list is agender, followed closely by androgynous. You didn't read the list, did you?

 

[Eliam_Dar]

I'm curious as to what agendas you specifically mean there.

sorry if I sounded like a conspiracy theorist or something like that, but there are certain movements that are redefining certain words to suit their ideology. Unfortunately most social sciences are prone to this, since the object and subject of study cannot be separated.
As for what agendas I mean, you may be surprised that I was not referring to the LGBT community at all, but to radical feminists (and similar political movements), and lets leave it at that.
I have already stated in a previous post what I think that gender is (for me it is intrinsically linked to the biological function), if anything is really a social construct, that is the gender identity, not the gender itself.
Having said that, I also would like to add that I actually support (as I have stated previously) the idea that anyone has the right to be identified as they please.
To quote myself:

Having said that, if you are a man that feels like a woman, and desires to be addressed in that manner, I don't have any problem, and I will do that. In fact, I don't really mind to use any personal pronoum, and acknowledge any gender identity anyone desires (but don't expect from me to know at first sight).
Marry whoever you like, love anyone you want, as long as you are consenting adults go ahead.

Am I right? I don't know, but so far that is the conclusion that I have. Can it change? yes, nothing is set in stone, I like to consider myself open minded.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I'm curious as to what agendas you specifically mean there.

sorry if I sounded like a conspiracy theorist or something like that, but there are certain movements that are redefining certain words to suit their ideology. Unfortunately most social sciences are prone to this, since the object and subject of study cannot be separated.
As for what agendas I mean, you may be surprised that I was not referring to the LGBT community at all, but to radical feminists (and similar political movements), and lets leave it at that.
I have already stated in a previous post what I think that gender is (for me it is intrinsically linked to the biological function), if anything is really a social construct, that is the gender identity, not the gender itself.
Having said that, I also would like to add that I actually support (as I have stated previously) the idea that anyone has the right to be identified as they please.
To quote myself:

Having said that, if you are a man that feels like a woman, and desires to be addressed in that manner, I don't have any problem, and I will do that. In fact, I don't really mind to use any personal pronoum, and acknowledge any gender identity anyone desires (but don't expect from me to know at first sight).
Marry whoever you like, love anyone you want, as long as you are consenting adults go ahead.

Am I right? I don't know, but so far that is the conclusion that I have. Can it change? yes, nothing is set in stone, I like to consider myself open minded.

Oh god radical feminists, yeah, just... Even most regular feminists are weird about transgender people. Like we're taking something away from them.

Yeah you're right enough. Personally I see it this sex as in physical biology and gender as in identity are how I like to separate the terms, that way it can be rather clear which you're referring to. Though with your explanation I will agree that you seem like quite the open minded sort.

 

[Sleepy Sol]

Wait, all this time of hearing about the infamous 56 gender options ... and that's the list? The vast majority of them are simply double ups, or very slight variations in terminology.

I'd say two.

Not as in two absolutes, but even looking at that Facebook list there's a complete absence of a true third.

Everything is either male with some prefix, female with some prefix, neither with some prefix, both with some prefix or in-between with some prefix.

The very first option on the list is agender, followed closely by androgynous. You didn't read the list, did you?

Kind of the impression I got with my look at at the list as well. Redundancy and I think it could be condensed further than 56 separate terms. That and some just don't actually seem related to gender as I understand it. Granted, my understanding probably isn't that great.

And I'm personally wondering whether I'd find a lack of gender identity or an androgynous identity as being genders in themselves. But I should probably stop talking about these things until I've at least tried to self-educate myself a bit more.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

Wait, all this time of hearing about the infamous 56 gender options ... and that's the list? The vast majority of them are simply double ups, or very slight variations in terminology.

I'd say two.

Not as in two absolutes, but even looking at that Facebook list there's a complete absence of a true third.

Everything is either male with some prefix, female with some prefix, neither with some prefix, both with some prefix or in-between with some prefix.

The very first option on the list is agender, followed closely by androgynous. You didn't read the list, did you?

Kind of the impression I got with my look at at the list as well. Redundancy and I think it could be condensed further than 56 separate terms. That and some just don't actually seem related to gender as I understand it. Granted, my understanding probably isn't that great.

And I'm personally wondering whether I'd find a lack of gender identity or an androgynous identity as being genders in themselves. But I should probably stop talking about these things until I've at least tried to self-educate myself a bit more.

Possibly one of the stupidest redundancies on it are the trans male/man/female/woman and trans* male/man/female/woman. Trans* male isn't even a thing. Trans* is basically just a short hand for saying trans plus everyone else outside of the binary; it's not an actual identity in itself.

Trans is a prefix that has meaning in terms of gender, trans* is an umbrella term.

 

[Eliam_Dar]

I'm curious as to what agendas you specifically mean there.

sorry if I sounded like a conspiracy theorist or something like that, but there are certain movements that are redefining certain words to suit their ideology. Unfortunately most social sciences are prone to this, since the object and subject of study cannot be separated.
As for what agendas I mean, you may be surprised that I was not referring to the LGBT community at all, but to radical feminists (and similar political movements), and lets leave it at that.
I have already stated in a previous post what I think that gender is (for me it is intrinsically linked to the biological function), if anything is really a social construct, that is the gender identity, not the gender itself.
Having said that, I also would like to add that I actually support (as I have stated previously) the idea that anyone has the right to be identified as they please.
To quote myself:

Having said that, if you are a man that feels like a woman, and desires to be addressed in that manner, I don't have any problem, and I will do that. In fact, I don't really mind to use any personal pronoum, and acknowledge any gender identity anyone desires (but don't expect from me to know at first sight).
Marry whoever you like, love anyone you want, as long as you are consenting adults go ahead.

Am I right? I don't know, but so far that is the conclusion that I have. Can it change? yes, nothing is set in stone, I like to consider myself open minded.

Oh god radical feminists, yeah, just... Even most regular feminists are weird about transgender people. Like we're taking something away from them.

Yeah you're right enough. Personally I see it this sex as in physical biology and gender as in identity are how I like to separate the terms, that way it can be rather clear which you're referring to. Though with your explanation I will agree that you seem like quite the open minded sort.

And I just saw you other thread, I'll read it in detail as soon as I have some time =)

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Biologically speaking there are two genders, with a caveat of a "third" that really is more of a chromosomal fuckup that results in hermaphrodites. But aside from that, yes there are only two genders when it comes to biology.
In terms of gender identity, which is a concept I'm still kind of wary about speaking about since I'm unsure exactly where I fall in that category, apparently there are many different gender identities that people can equate themselves to.
One can have all the cosmetic surgery in the world to "change" their gender's look, and have supplements to make them feel more like that gender, but biologically speaking they're never going to be that gender, just a facsimile.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying anything against people who want to look more like the gender they feel they should have been born as, but in all honesty one should still recognize that biologically you can't change your chromosomes. At least not yet and thus by scientific terms, there are only two genders.

Let me amend something here: The usage of the word "gender" has changed in recent years and has nothing to do with biology anymore apparently, but its tough for someone who grew up being taught that male and female were genders and had to do with what chromosomes you were born with.
I try to differentiate the term by using the additive "identity" so as not to confuse myself and others who grew up with the same knowledge.
In today's world, biology uses the word "sex" to define male or female rather than "gender" but I still have trouble with it because its years of conditioning. I've nothing against anyone who feels they don't identify with the gender/sex they were born as, which to my thinking is called "gender identity". People will probably tell me I'm wrong in my thinking but the concept is one I've always had trouble changing my personal definition of, hence why I try to use "gender identity" rather than just "gender".

 

[Olas]

People here are saying that sex is a biology thing, while gender is a cultural thing, but it's still a cultural thing based on biology.

In roughly the same way a movie like Rudy or The Amityville Horror is "based on" a true story, perhaps.

What's that supposed to mean?

 

[NeutralDrow]

People here are saying that sex is a biology thing, while gender is a cultural thing, but it's still a cultural thing based on biology.

In roughly the same way a movie like Rudy or The Amityville Horror is "based on" a true story, perhaps.

What's that supposed to mean?

It means that just as a movie can plausibly claim to be "based on a true story" with a bare minimum of factors having actually occurred in real life (there was a guy named Rudy who played in a Notre Dame football game; there is a house in Amityville), cultural gender definitions can be claimed as "based on biology" from very minimal, broad standards (a tendency towards different muscle distribution, capability of childbirth).

And both tend to be claimed for manipulative reasons, movies because being "based on a true story" drums up more interest than its own merits, and genders being tied to biology in order to claim their essentialist status. Not accusing you of this, of course, but "biology" tends to be claimed by people who believe it to be an equal or near-equal to culture as an influence on gender, while either not realizing or ignoring that even the definitions of "femininity" and "masculinity" vary widely depending on the time period and group of people examined.

In other words, it's technically true, but doesn't say nearly as much as it's trying to imply.