Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
what-is-gender [2024/12/24 11:39] – [The Answer and/or Response] pittwhat-is-gender [2025/03/11 10:34] (current) – [Logical Fallacies] pitt
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== What is Gender? ====== ====== What is Gender? ======
- 
----- 
  
 ===== The argument and/or question ===== ===== The argument and/or question =====
Line 30: Line 28:
 So what is gender, or rather, how can we define gender in a non-circular way? So what is gender, or rather, how can we define gender in a non-circular way?
  
----- 
 ===== The Answer and/or Response ===== ===== The Answer and/or Response =====
  
Line 39: Line 36:
 This really shouldn't be that hard to grasp. We all have a body. That body has certain characteristics that relate to biological sex - genitals, chromosomes, hormones, etc. Gender is, in essence, the psychological and social reality we experience in relation to the physical markers of sex we possess. Gender does not equal genitals, nor does it equal “biological sex” [(FaustoSterling)] ← whatever that means.  This really shouldn't be that hard to grasp. We all have a body. That body has certain characteristics that relate to biological sex - genitals, chromosomes, hormones, etc. Gender is, in essence, the psychological and social reality we experience in relation to the physical markers of sex we possess. Gender does not equal genitals, nor does it equal “biological sex” [(FaustoSterling)] ← whatever that means. 
  
-----+===== Discussion =====
  
 From this experience we have within ourselves, socially, and with our bodies, we can then derive the three underpinnings of gender as a complex interplay of social, psychological, and biological characteristics that make up one’s gender.  From this experience we have within ourselves, socially, and with our bodies, we can then derive the three underpinnings of gender as a complex interplay of social, psychological, and biological characteristics that make up one’s gender. 
Line 53: Line 50:
 So there you have it - gender defined clearly and directly, without relying on the word itself or invoking sexist stereotypes. It's the internal, psychological experience of one's own sexual characteristics. Period. So there you have it - gender defined clearly and directly, without relying on the word itself or invoking sexist stereotypes. It's the internal, psychological experience of one's own sexual characteristics. Period.
  
-The real question is, why are anti-trans activists so obsessed with demanding we define gender to their arbitrary specifications? The answer is simple - it's a distraction tactic[(Serano)]. By setting up impossible hoops for trans people to jump through, they can pretend our failure to meet their absurd criteria somehow invalidates our identities. It opens the door for linguistic hair splitting as a basis to undermine the validity or utility of the word and the related concepts. It is an attempt to recenter the conversation away from the lived experiences of actual people, of the science and data that validates those experiences, and to invalidate the core concepts and dehumanize those who fall outside the ideology of the “gender critical” anti-trans/transmisic TERFs. +The real question is, why are anti-trans activists so obsessed with demanding we define gender to their arbitrary specifications? The answer is simple - it's a distraction tactic[(Serano)]. By setting up impossible hoops for trans people to jump through, they can pretend our failure to meet their absurd criteria somehow invalidates our identities. It opens the door for linguistic hair splitting as a basis to undermine the validity or utility of the word and the related concepts. It is an attempt to recenter the conversation away from the lived experiences of actual people, of the science and data that validates those experiences, and to invalidate the core concepts and dehumanize those who fall outside the ideology of the “gender critical” anti-trans/transmisic TERFs[(Bettcher)]. 
  
 But here's the inconvenient truth: we don't need the approval of TERFs, “gender critical” anti-trans ideologues, and transmisic people to know ourselves. Trans people understand gender on a deep, visceral level through our own lived experiences. We define gender every day through our courageous choice to live authentically. Trans people are painfully aware of their gender and their sex - there is no denial involved; in fact, it is that very acceptance of both those facts is what brings trans people out and seeking the help, support, and care they need to thrive! No amount of semantic games from TERF keyboard warriors can take that away from us. But here's the inconvenient truth: we don't need the approval of TERFs, “gender critical” anti-trans ideologues, and transmisic people to know ourselves. Trans people understand gender on a deep, visceral level through our own lived experiences. We define gender every day through our courageous choice to live authentically. Trans people are painfully aware of their gender and their sex - there is no denial involved; in fact, it is that very acceptance of both those facts is what brings trans people out and seeking the help, support, and care they need to thrive! No amount of semantic games from TERF keyboard warriors can take that away from us.
 +
 +===== Logical Fallacies =====
  
 Now to deconstruct some fallacies of TERFs who try to use these arguments, such as: Now to deconstruct some fallacies of TERFs who try to use these arguments, such as:
  
-False dilemma/bifurcation fallacy: Presenting gender as either identical to biological sex or a meaningless social construct, ignoring the complex biopsychosocial reality.+**False dilemma/bifurcation fallacy:** Presenting gender as either identical to biological sex or a meaningless social construct, ignoring the complex biopsychosocial reality. 
 + 
 +**Moving the goalposts:** Demanding that gender be defined without reference to related concepts like identity, roles, etc. and then claiming victory when those arbitrary criteria aren't met. 
 + 
 +**Equivocation:** Exploiting the ambiguity of terms like "gender" and "sex" to make specious arguments, e.g. conflating gender roles with gender identity.
  
-Moving the goalposts: Demanding that gender be defined without reference to related concepts like identity, roles, etc. and then claiming victory when those arbitrary criteria aren't met.+**Appeal to definition:** Insisting that dictionary definitions trump the lived experiences and self-understanding of trans people.
  
-Equivocation: Exploiting the ambiguity of terms like "gender" and "sex" to make specious arguments, e.g. conflating gender roles with gender identity.+**Strawman:** Misrepresenting the trans position as a denial of biological sex rather than an affirmation of gender diversity.
  
-Appeal to definition: Insisting that dictionary definitions trump the lived experiences and self-understanding of trans people.+===== Conclusion =====
  
-Strawman: Misrepresenting the trans position as a denial of biological sex rather than an affirmation of gender diversity.+So watch out for these in the first ask of “what is gender” or in their follow up points. Often if just means moving the goalposts. Typically it is expected to be a “gotcha” of some sort, so when you come with a well reasoned and concise definition, they will either move the goal posts, ignore it to some entirely different point, or attempt to pick it apart. Call them out on the first directly, address the new point only after you point out “well, since we have a definition that is acceptable…” to point out they concede their arguments re: gender, and for the last one, it almost always includes a need to split hairs, ask questions that provide false dilemmas, or are constructed in a way that presents a comparison that is not valid, such as “biological sex” vs “gender”. A common rebuttal is “this doesn’t make sense at all, because gender is based on your sex, not anything else” which is an example of a false equivocation, and is not longer about gender as a conceptual whole, but about //gender identity//. 
  
-So watch out for these in the first ask of “what is gender” or in their follow up points. Often if just means moving the goalposts. Typically it is expected to be a “gotcha” of some sort, so when you come with a well reasoned and concise definition, they will either move the goal posts, ignore it to some entirely different point, or attempt to pick it apart. Call them out on the first directly, address the new point only after you point out “well, since we have a definition that is acceptable…” to point out they concede their arguments re: gender, and for the last one, it almost always includes a need to split hairs, ask questions that provide false dilemmas, or are constructed in a way that presents a comparison that is not valid, such as “biological sex” vs “gender”. A common rebuttal is “this doesn’t make sense at all, because gender is based on your sex, not anything else” which is an example of a false equivocation, and is not longer about gender as a conceptual whole, but about gender identity. NB: In case you cannot access a specific article mentioned here let me know. Chances are I have a PDF I can email you. For books, please support the author(s).+NB: In case you cannot access a specific article mentioned here let me know. Chances are I have a PDF I can email you. For books, please support the author(s).
  
 [(Sevelius>Sevelius J. M. (2013). Gender Affirmation: A Framework for Conceptualizing Risk Behavior among Transgender Women of Color. Sex roles, 68(11-12), 675–689. [[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0216-5]].)] [(Sevelius>Sevelius J. M. (2013). Gender Affirmation: A Framework for Conceptualizing Risk Behavior among Transgender Women of Color. Sex roles, 68(11-12), 675–689. [[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0216-5]].)]
Line 81: Line 84:
 [(Serano> Serano, J. (2016). Whipping girl: A transsexual woman on sexism and the scapegoating of femininity. Seal Press.)] [(Serano> Serano, J. (2016). Whipping girl: A transsexual woman on sexism and the scapegoating of femininity. Seal Press.)]
  
-Bettcher, T. M. (2007). Evil deceivers and make‐believers: On transphobic violence and the politics of illusion. Hypatia, 22(3), 43-65.+[(Bettcher> Bettcher, T. M. (2007). Evil deceivers and make‐believers: On transphobic violence and the politics of illusion. Hypatia, 22(3), 43-65.)]

Trace:

Print/export
QR Code
QR Code what-is-gender (generated for current page)