What is the difference between gender and gender norms?

[Abomination]

One can be deluded about a particular subject without being deluded over every other subject. Hell, religions exist.

I'm pretty sure if someone exhibited an actual delusion. Say, if someone believed that they were responsible for causing earthquakes, or that a famous celebrity was in love with them and sending them secret messages, you would not give much consideration to the fact that they were only delusional about one thing. You would correctly identify that something was very wrong with them.

Normal religious beliefs are not delusions, no matter how many fedoras you wear. You may disagree with them or think they are silly, but they are things a person can arrive at through a normal process. A religious person can usually explain why they are religious, and it is common for religious people to change their minds or even to abandon religion altogether.

Again, the way you are using delusion is a metaphor (an unfortunate metaphor, given that you're talking about people who in the past would have been confined to insane aslyums). I'm just pointing out how weird it is that you can use metaphor like this, but can't understand the metaphor of a person being "less human".

I am not the one who brought up the use of delusional about a very specific topic for one to be delusional about. It has been established since the beginning that the delusion was in the belief that one particular thing begets and is required for another. It was stated and covered multiple times.

The accusations of denial of personhood were not.

They are intrinsically linked. They feed off each other. "Men are supposed to be stoic and provide for their families and be the front line of defence of the household" and so men are expected to do so and feel they should behave so in order to be a man. The role defines the identity.

Even if that were true (spoiler: it's not) they still are not the same thing.

The link between the two is impossible to deny. What is expected of and the behaviours of genders completely feed off each other.

You may have noticed that the vast majority of men who do not meet traditional gender expectations, or even those who are consciously gender non-conforming, have not decided to become women. If the role defined the identity, then those who failed to meet the role would reject the identity. No idea of non-conformity would be possible.

Hold on, just because someone rejects what they should do in order to be a man does not mean they therefore must be, or identify as, a woman.

The reality is that it's woefully simplistic to assume there is a single normative or hegemonic male role at all. The mythical alpha Chad foretold in incel forums, for example, is not defined by a requirement defend his home or provide for his family, but rather to slay mad puss, exist in a state of permanent contrapposto and exhibiteth a brow ridge most pronounced.

Of course there isn't because expected gender roles are a social construct which are completely determined by the social circle in which one occupies.

Which clothing section do you shop in?

Which public bathrooms do you use?

It is impossible to live in a gendered society and not consider gender in your choices. Since you are presumably gender normative, you can pretend you aren't considering it, you can pretend there is only one choice and that you are making the only natural or reasonable choice, but gender has defined what is natural for you. If you won't go against what you see as nature, that is a choice.

I wear clothing that suits the needs and functions of the day and what does not draw attention to me. I dress to suit my environment, both social and otherwise. I use the bathroom that presents me with the best opportunity for privacy or cleanliness. I prefer to use the disabled bathroom that typically has no gender indicator because it's typically the most clean.

It's easy to reject it, just don't... conform.

We don't.

I mean, it's hard when irritating cis people on the internet start calling you delusional whenever you won't conform, but at the end of the day we're the ones who didn't kill ourselves. The reason we didn't kill ourselves is that we learned not to care what you think.

Nobody was calling someone delusional for not conforming.

What the fuck is with the killing yourself aspect of this conversation? This is going down the same line as denying personhood, or is this another metaphor I'm failing to grasp?

Since when is having a differing opinion about how to approach gender identity the same as encouraging suicide?

 

[Terminal Blue]

I am not the one who brought up the use of delusional about a very specific topic for one to be delusional about. It has been established since the beginning that the delusion was in the belief that one particular thing begets and is required for another. It was stated and covered multiple times.

I know what you're referring to as delusional. It is not a delusion.

For the record, I'd be surprised if even a tiny minority of trans people actually believe that taking hormones actually defines your gender. That would be a weird thing to believe. It would not be delusional, but it would be a weird thing to believe. However, the actual argument that Dreiko is making and that you are defending is that taking hormones is in and of itself a sign of delusion. Neither of you can fathom the concept of a person taking hormones to change their physical gender presentation as anything other than a blanket statement that identifying as a man "begets and requires" hormones.

It's nonsense, and it shows that you have no real understanding of what gender is or the issues you're discussing. For one, the medical consensus is strongly against prescribing people hormones or allowing to physically transition unless they are already in role. Generally, a person has to be living as a woman or transfeminine identity already before a doctor will allow them to take hormones. It's not a statement of gender identity and is in no way required for a person's gender identity to be authentic.

The link between the two is impossible to deny. What is expected of and the behaviours of genders completely feed off each other.

And?

They are still not the same thing.

Hold on, just because someone rejects what they should do in order to be a man does not mean they therefore must be, or identify as, a woman.

Exactly.

If role defined identity, then maintaining a "male" identity would be predicated on meeting a "male" role. It is not. You know it is not, so why are you still pretending that these things can't be separated?

Of course there isn't because expected gender roles are a social construct which are completely determined by the social circle in which one occupies.

And yet apparently role defines identity.

How does that work?

I wear clothing that suits the needs and functions of the day and what does not draw attention to me.

Translation: "I wear clothing appropriate to my assigned gender".

For someone who talks a big game about rejecting conformity and not caring what others think, it's weird that you'd consider what's going to draw attention to you..

Nobody was calling someone delusional for not conforming.

Unless non-conformity questions the position of the "natural" body as the authentic source and basis of social gender, because that's just crazy.

What the fuck is with the killing yourself aspect of this conversation?

Because being non-conforming is actually really hard. It's so hard in fact that people do kill themselves because they can't deal with it. It's disingenuous to sit there from a position of conformity and tell genuinely gender non-conforming people that they need to reject conformity. Because remember kids, real non-conformity is being a cis person who rigidly adheres to gender norms but thinks they're being radical by not consciously thinking about it.

Who gave you the right to decide who is and isn't delusional? Who gave you the right to demand other people non-conform in ways which conform to your need for self-deception? Saelune is right. This isn't your lane, and you don't have the knowledge or the experience to pass judgement.

 

[Abomination]

I am not the one who brought up the use of delusional about a very specific topic for one to be delusional about. It has been established since the beginning that the delusion was in the belief that one particular thing begets and is required for another. It was stated and covered multiple times.

I know what you're referring to as delusional. It is not a delusion.

For the record, I'd be surprised if even a tiny minority of trans people actually believe that taking hormones actually defines your gender. That would be a weird thing to believe. It would not be delusional, but it would be a weird thing to believe. However, the actual argument that Dreiko is making and that you are defending is that taking hormones is in and of itself a sign of delusion. Neither of you can fathom the concept of a person taking hormones to change their physical gender presentation as anything other than a blanket statement that identifying as a man "begets and requires" hormones.

It's nonsense, and it shows that you have no real understanding of what gender is or the issues you're discussing. For one, the medical consensus is strongly against prescribing people hormones or allowing to physically transition unless they are already in role. Generally, a person has to be living as a woman or transfeminine identity already before a doctor will allow them to take hormones. It's not a statement of gender identity and is in no way required for a person's gender identity to be authentic.

Yes, so we are in agreement.

The link between the two is impossible to deny. What is expected of and the behaviours of genders completely feed off each other.

And?

They are still not the same thing.

Two things do not have to BE the same thing to have such a close relationship as they determine and define each other.

Hold on, just because someone rejects what they should do in order to be a man does not mean they therefore must be, or identify as, a woman.

Exactly.

If role defined identity, then maintaining a "male" identity would be predicated on meeting a "male" role. It is not. You know it is not, so why are you still pretending that these things can't be separated?

I never said they couldn't be? We are in agreement here? I don't understand why you have brought this up.

Of course there isn't because expected gender roles are a social construct which are completely determined by the social circle in which one occupies.

And yet apparently role defines identity.

How does that work?

Because it's how one understands how a member of a gender is supposed to behave. Sex, role, identity. They're all called male and female for a reason.

I wear clothing that suits the needs and functions of the day and what does not draw attention to me.

Translation: "I wear clothing appropriate to my assigned gender".

For someone who talks a big game about rejecting conformity and not caring what others think, it's weird that you'd consider what's going to draw attention to you..

Because I am a private person. I do not want to be bothered and the functionality of clothing is more important to me than its appearance. I wear dark blues, greens, and greys because they blend well and draw little attention. Infer from that what you will, gender has nothing to do with it.

Nobody was calling someone delusional for not conforming.

Unless non-conformity questions the position of the "natural" body as the authentic source and basis of social gender, because that's just crazy.

Nobody was calling someone delusional for not conforming. This whole message of delusionality was drawn from a specific instance not relating to anything you have been talking about.

What the fuck is with the killing yourself aspect of this conversation?

Because being non-conforming is actually really hard. It's so hard in fact that people do kill themselves because they can't deal with it. It's disingenuous to sit there from a position of conformity and tell genuinely gender non-conforming people that they need to reject conformity. Because remember kids, real non-conformity is being a cis person who rigidly adheres to gender norms but thinks they're being radical by not consciously thinking about it.

If you are going to do nothing but infer beyond what I have said here and then pull some sort of attempt of guilting through... threats of suicide? The hell is going on?

Who gave you the right to decide who is and isn't delusional? Who gave you the right to demand other people non-conform in ways which conform to your need for self-deception? Saelune is right. This isn't your lane, and you don't have the knowledge or the experience to pass judgement.

What? Rights? Demanding? Stay in my lane?

Fuck this for a conversation, not dealing with this kind of hysteria.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Yes, so we are in agreement.

We won't be in agreement until you stop defending the indefensible position that it's okay to describe trans people wishing to change their gendered presentation as "delusional."

It's inaccurate, and yes it is dehumanizing.

I never said they couldn't be?

You literally did.

Again, you are confusing involuntary psychological attachment to the idea of gender (gender identity) for the existence of restrictive gender roles, and assuming those are the same thing. They empirically are not.?

They are intrinsically linked. They feed off each other. "Men are supposed to be stoic and provide for their families and be the front line of defence of the household" and so men are expected to do so and feel they should behave so in order to be a man. The role defines the identity.

Did you think about the implications of what you were saying?

Because it's how one understands how a member of a gender is supposed to behave. Sex, role, identity. They're all called male and female for a reason.

Understanding how a member of a given gender is supposed to behave does not define your gender identity. A person does not rationally decide to adopt the gender identity that matches their role. If anything, it's more likely to be the other way around. Gender identity is a purely involuntary and deeply personal attachment. Both cis and trans people are perfectly capable of negotiating where they stand in relation to their gender "role", and doing so has no bearing on their identities.

Also, I do not identify as male or female.

Because I am a private person.

Why would you need to wear certain clothing to be a private person?

If you are going to do nothing but infer beyond what I have said here and then pull some sort of attempt of guilting through... threats of suicide? The hell is going on?

Yeah, I'm kind of past this whole devil's advocate thing where you think you can defend a transphobic argument and then pretend the substance of the argument wasn't the point.

Noone is threatening suicide. I'm just pointing out something that should be obvious. Actually being gender non-conforming in this society is rough. It's psychologically devastating, in fact. You can sit there and talk about how conformity sucks and everyone should just do what they want, but you'll freely admit you dress to fit in, because it's easier. Out here in the real world it's never a free choice.

You have a certain luxury, being a cis person. You get to pretend that gender doesn't matter to do you while also doing gendered things. You get to pretend it's just a rational choice you've made to make life easier for yourself, and has nothing to do with gender, when if a trans person did the same it would be all about gender and thus, presumably, delusional. Even at the least charitable interpretation, a trans person taking hormones in order to pass is just doing what you'll openly admit you yourself do, trying to navigate a gendered society in a way that makes life easier.

That's the dehumanization here. You understand (correctly) that you are allowed to be a complex being whose choices and behaviour do not necessarily determine or change who you fundamentally are. You understand that wearing male clothes to pass in a gendered society does not make you "deluded" by the fiction of gender. Are other people also allowed to be complex beings?

 

[Silvanus]

That's cause I never called trans people delusional for just being trans. I called the trans people people who believe taking testosterone affects how much of a man they are delusional on the basis of testosterone not mattering at all in that regard, not on the basis of them being transgender. I'm literally responding to them in 100% the same way I'd respond to my uncle if he one day up and decided to take testosterone to be more of a man.

I'm of the opinion that they are already fully a man hence don't need more testosterone, not sure how that's being for social ostracizing or what have you.

Out of interest, do you therefore believe biological determinists are delusional?

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

That's cause I never called trans people delusional for just being trans. I called the trans people people who believe taking testosterone affects how much of a man they are delusional on the basis of testosterone not mattering at all in that regard, not on the basis of them being transgender. I'm literally responding to them in 100% the same way I'd respond to my uncle if he one day up and decided to take testosterone to be more of a man.

I'm of the opinion that they are already fully a man hence don't need more testosterone, not sure how that's being for social ostracizing or what have you.

Out of interest, do you therefore believe biological determinists are delusional?

Do people really believe that in this day and age? I was under the impression that that was an age-old myth from back when we were first learning to analyze these ideas. Clearly that notion's wrong and it's more of a blend between genetics and environment so if there were to be someone who thinks only your genetics affect how you turn out they'd definitely be delusional and also really dumb lol.


Just gotta be careful and not go the exact opposite end which claims genetics have nothing to do with how someone turns out. That's just as dumb as thinking it's all about your genetics but in a more quantifiable way which makes it also ignorant and unscientific to believe.

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

Sort of? It was indeed a segue not an analogy, which I explained at the time, but I'll accept that it may have been seen as a direct comparison and people wouldn't like that. So sure, my bad, if I have to more thoroughly explain myself I'll do that. My problem is...well, see above. If Abomination is so principled that he calls me out on maybe comparing the two, why isn't he doing the same when Dreiko actually does? If he has an issue with me mentioning being trans and mental illness within the same argument, why is he silent when Dreiko out and calls trans folk delusional? It just shows his argument up as hollow and disingenuous, and I'd really quite like it if he just admitted that

That's cause I never called trans people delusional for just being trans. I called the trans people people who believe taking testosterone affects how much of a man they are delusional on the basis of testosterone not mattering at all in that regard, not on the basis of them being transgender. I'm literally responding to them in 100% the same way I'd respond to my uncle if he one day up and decided to take testosterone to be more of a man.

I'm of the opinion that they are already fully a man hence don't need more testosterone, not sure how that's being for social ostracizing or what have you.

You?re saying that trans people are deluding themselves if they want to transition. This is the same unfair ?reasoning? that people use when they say ?oh well I don?t mind people being gay but do they have to shove it down our throats?!? because they saw two dudes holding hands. You seem to be under the impression that this is just some cosmetic thing like steroids, but this is people?s actual mental well-being we?re talking about here dude. Show some empathy and think outside your own viewpoint

 

[Silvanus]

Do people really believe that in this day and age? I was under the impression that that was an age-old myth from back when we were first learning to analyze these ideas. Clearly that notion's wrong and it's more of a blend between genetics and environment so if there were to be someone who thinks only your genetics affect how you turn out they'd definitely be delusional and also really dumb lol.

With regards to sex & gender, biological determinism is extremely (depressingly) widespread, yes. I think we've already had people espousing it in this thread.

Just gotta be careful and not go the exact opposite end which claims genetics have nothing to do with how someone turns out. That's just as dumb as thinking it's all about your genetics but in a more quantifiable way which makes it also ignorant and unscientific to believe.

Well, indeed-- that's why I find it easy to accept that body chemistry affects how someone feels about their gender identity. Not that those chemicals determine it, of course, but that they can make the body more comfortably fit the identity.

 

[Saelune]

We didnt create this crazy obstacle course of gender, sex, gender roles, and identity. But we're the ones constantly pushed through the hardest part of it.

I wish it easily made sense and could fit inside some easily understandable logic, but it doesnt and wont as long as people keep holding us to increasingly unfair definitions and standards that they never apply to themselves.

But then people still pretend gay romance is 'shoved down our throats' while ignoring how often straight romance is shoved down our throats and how important straight cis identity is important to themselves too.

My god, people still have to comment a million times on cute cat videos 'Wow, I am a man and even I went Aww'. Or men asking if it is too girly to cook or knit.

Everyone's gender identity is fucked up, not just ours, we're just the ones trying to do something about it.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Do people really believe that in this day and age? I was under the impression that that was an age-old myth from back when we were first learning to analyze these ideas. Clearly that notion's wrong and it's more of a blend between genetics and environment so if there were to be someone who thinks only your genetics affect how you turn out they'd definitely be delusional and also really dumb lol.

With regards to sex & gender, biological determinism is extremely (depressingly) widespread, yes. I think we've already had people espousing it in this thread.

That's not really biological determinism. They are determining things based on biology, sure, but biological determinism in a scientific sense that you were asking about is about the general "you turn out however you turn out based entirelly on your genes" notion. This is regarding everything so just because it's clearly untrue for everything you can't jump and call anything determined by biology "biological determinism". Observing only women can give birth is not the same as saying only the kids of the nobility can be smart.

Trying to muddy the waters by likening the two here is incorrect. The actual scientific movement was patently ridiculous because it implied that if a billionaire has twins and abandons one of them in a decrepit orphanage it has the same chances of growing up successful as the other kid which the billionaire is going to take care of. It's just ridiculous on its face. I think this stemmed from people wanting to feel special so they went on to misunderstand the fact that good upbringing makes for successful people to the success being a part of their genetics. The fact that most people would be unable to afford such an upbringing for their kids at the time also contributed there. People thought their ability to be able to afford such an upbringing was their innate trait and not something anyone could do if the circumstances allowed them the opportunity.

Well, indeed-- that's why I find it easy to accept that body chemistry affects how someone feels about their gender identity. Not that those chemicals determine it, of course, but that they can make the body more comfortably fit the identity.

The key thing here is that there's a limit to this. If you're handed lemons by life you can make them into something sweet despite them tasting sour by themselves but you can't make them into oranges. If you take some lemon juice and just pour some dye in it to make it orange, it's still gonna be lemon juice, just orange lemon juice. It won't smell or taste like orange juice and if anything it'll be bad lemon juice too because of the food coloring affecting the flavor.

There's such a thing as a fundamental nature to things, which is unchangeable, and then there's the more minor arbitrary stuff that you can mess around with.

We didnt create this crazy obstacle course of gender, sex, gender roles, and identity. But we're the ones constantly pushed through the hardest part of it.

I wish it easily made sense and could fit inside some easily understandable logic, but it doesnt and wont as long as people keep holding us to increasingly unfair definitions and standards that they never apply to themselves.

But then people still pretend gay romance is 'shoved down our throats' while ignoring how often straight romance is shoved down our throats and how important straight cis identity is important to themselves too.

My god, people still have to comment a million times on cute cat videos 'Wow, I am a man and even I went Aww'. Or men asking if it is too girly to cook or knit.

Everyone's gender identity is fucked up, not just ours, we're just the ones trying to do something about it.

Cis people are not God lmao. What you're attributing to "us" is the result of millennia of evolution and survival of the fittest. The most optimal method to survive in existence that through trial and error was discovered, thanks to billions if not trillions of deaths. And even then, nobody actually chose it or came up with it intentionally at the time. It just organically emerged.

If you believe in evolution and natural selection, it's either that or there's just no humans. At this point this is just as innate as things such as snakes and the dark being instinctively scary to a lot of people.


Oh and those people who need to explain that they're a man regarding videos of cute cats are not upholding this stuff, they're actually super insecure and are being enslaved to it lol. I think they're pretty pathetic so I find it amusing to deem them as in control of anything at all, since they clearly can barely control their own emotions.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Cis people are not God lmao. What you're attributing to "us" is the result of millennia of evolution and survival of the fittest. The most optimal method to survive in existence that through trial and error was discovered, thanks to billions if not trillions of deaths. And even then, nobody actually chose it or came up with it intentionally at the time. It just organically emerged.

If you believe in evolution and natural selection, it's either that or there's just no humans. At this point this is just as innate as things such as snakes and the dark being instinctively scary to a lot of people.

If only the term "Social Darwinism" wasn't already taken.

Anyhoo, usual rebuttal would be about how ideas of gender vary a lot between cultures and time periods (usually lil Devil x will have something to say about this), the way "we" are isn't the one and only way nor is it optimal.

That it's not something created on purpose by someone/s and that it did evolve over time is certainly true, just not terribly relevant to it being a problem.

 

[Saelune]

We didnt create this crazy obstacle course of gender, sex, gender roles, and identity. But we're the ones constantly pushed through the hardest part of it.

I wish it easily made sense and could fit inside some easily understandable logic, but it doesnt and wont as long as people keep holding us to increasingly unfair definitions and standards that they never apply to themselves.

But then people still pretend gay romance is 'shoved down our throats' while ignoring how often straight romance is shoved down our throats and how important straight cis identity is important to themselves too.

My god, people still have to comment a million times on cute cat videos 'Wow, I am a man and even I went Aww'. Or men asking if it is too girly to cook or knit.

Everyone's gender identity is fucked up, not just ours, we're just the ones trying to do something about it.

Cis people are not God lmao. What you're attributing to "us" is the result of millennia of evolution and survival of the fittest. The most optimal method to survive in existence that through trial and error was discovered, thanks to billions if not trillions of deaths. And even then, nobody actually chose it or came up with it intentionally at the time. It just organically emerged.

If you believe in evolution and natural selection, it's either that or there's just no humans. At this point this is just as innate as things such as snakes and the dark being instinctively scary to a lot of people.


Oh and those people who need to explain that they're a man regarding videos of cute cats are not upholding this stuff, they're actually super insecure and are being enslaved to it lol. I think they're pretty pathetic so I find it amusing to deem them as in control of anything at all, since they clearly can barely control their own emotions.

So by your logic, maybe trans people are just more evolved and superior.

 

[dyre]

Nice to see some familiar-looking avatars still arguing over the same tired topics. Though apparently the site has gone dramatically downhill since I last visited (2016), holy shit

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

We didnt create this crazy obstacle course of gender, sex, gender roles, and identity. But we're the ones constantly pushed through the hardest part of it.

I wish it easily made sense and could fit inside some easily understandable logic, but it doesnt and wont as long as people keep holding us to increasingly unfair definitions and standards that they never apply to themselves.

But then people still pretend gay romance is 'shoved down our throats' while ignoring how often straight romance is shoved down our throats and how important straight cis identity is important to themselves too.

My god, people still have to comment a million times on cute cat videos 'Wow, I am a man and even I went Aww'. Or men asking if it is too girly to cook or knit.

Everyone's gender identity is fucked up, not just ours, we're just the ones trying to do something about it.

Cis people are not God lmao. What you're attributing to "us" is the result of millennia of evolution and survival of the fittest. The most optimal method to survive in existence that through trial and error was discovered, thanks to billions if not trillions of deaths. And even then, nobody actually chose it or came up with it intentionally at the time. It just organically emerged.

If you believe in evolution and natural selection, it's either that or there's just no humans. At this point this is just as innate as things such as snakes and the dark being instinctively scary to a lot of people.


Oh and those people who need to explain that they're a man regarding videos of cute cats are not upholding this stuff, they're actually super insecure and are being enslaved to it lol. I think they're pretty pathetic so I find it amusing to deem them as in control of anything at all, since they clearly can barely control their own emotions.

So by your logic, maybe trans people are just more evolved and superior.

Could be. It might be a new mutation as a way of allowing someone with the feminine mind the force of the masculine physique and through that maybe achieve some unique form of innovation or adaptation or what have you. It's certainly possible. It'd be silly to say it's not.

 

[Silvanus]

That's not really biological determinism. They are determining things based on biology, sure, but biological determinism in a scientific sense that you were asking about is about the general "you turn out however you turn out based entirelly on your genes" notion. This is regarding everything so just because it's clearly untrue for everything you can't jump and call anything determined by biology "biological determinism". Observing only women can give birth is not the same as saying only the kids of the nobility can be smart.

It is most certainly biological determinism. To believe that genes solely determine your gender, gender identity and gender roles is to place biological determination above all else: environment, brain structure/ chemistry, self-identification, psychology.

Trying to muddy the waters by likening the two here is incorrect. The actual scientific movement was patently ridiculous because it implied that if a billionaire has twins and abandons one of them in a decrepit orphanage it has the same chances of growing up successful as the other kid which the billionaire is going to take care of. It's just ridiculous on its face. I think this stemmed from people wanting to feel special so they went on to misunderstand the fact that good upbringing makes for successful people to the success being a part of their genetics. The fact that most people would be unable to afford such an upbringing for their kids at the time also contributed there. People thought their ability to be able to afford such an upbringing was their innate trait and not something anyone could do if the circumstances allowed them the opportunity.

It's not "muddying the waters"-- "muddying the waters" would be characterising biological determinism solely by its most extreme, absurd examples (such as the billionaire's children above).