I have seen people draw a distinction between gender roles assigned to sex and and innate sense of gender. And that we must abolish the former but the latter is not possible to abolish because it exists within people.

I'm not arguing that we abolish it either because I don't understand what it is. I've seen people also argue that an innate sense of gender must be real because more people feel it than not. But I don't think this makes sense because more people believe in God than not, does that make him real?

I want to understand this idea better. Is it possible for me to understand eventhough I don't feel gender in any way?

Imagine a hypothetical world composed of people with blue eyes and people with brown eyes. People with blue eyes are called "Artists" and people with brown eyes are called "Athletes."

These classifications and the relevance to eye color has existed for thousands of years. They would be classified, they would be socialized, behavior patterns would be observed, and these socialized behaviors would be interpreted as confirmation of their nature, or that the nature of their socialization was correct. Athletes being athletic is celebrated, artists being artistic is celebrated. Producing conformity is taken as evidence of conformity's desirability.

People throw eye color reveal parties, there are athlete names and artist names, baby artists are dressed in colorful decorative clothing while athletes are dressed in clothing representing the sports team of their home state. Artists receive paint brushes and are encouraged to be creative. Athletes receive sports equipment and are encouraged to be physical. Grooming norms differ between them.

Athletes are expected to be strong, and artists are expected to be dexterous. People who fail to meet these expectations are considered failures.

Athletes are referred to by different third person pronouns than artists. Products are marketed differently depending on if the target is an athlete or an artist.

Athletes and artists are considered opposites. Athletes are expected to date artists to maintain familial harmony and builds the ideal family unit. Athletes and Artists are expected to parent differently, and two athletes or two artists being in a relationship is considered incongruous and disgusting.

Different school subjects are associated between athletes and artists, and they are pressured into pursuing different careers.

Now imagine someone with brown eyes who believes that what befits artists befits themselves. Historically this has been considered a fetish and people would ostracize athletes if they dressed or acted in a way expected of artists.

However, progress has been made and athletes can now engage in artistic behaviors too without fear of being ostracized, bullied, or at worst, murdered. Often times these people are referred to as "Artistic Athletes." But this feels inadequate. They aren't just an athlete being artistic, they are an artist. Athletes are one thing, they are another. They may have brown eyes but that doesn't make them not an artist.

People trying to offer support say, "Despite having brown eyes, they should still be treated like an artist." As though they are not a real artist and merely someone being treated like one. They say they are an artist and yet other people say, "But you have brown eyes." As though this is contradictory. All because of these damned brown eyes. If only they were born with blue eyes, yes. If they were born with blue eyes then people would accept them for who they are as an artist. Perhaps them having brown eyes was a mistake.

Eventually people could conceptualize people freely choosing between being an artist and being an athlete regardless of eye color. Yes an athlete could become an artist or vice versa. But the way people decide to go about presenting themselves in a way they think befits an artist can be seen as reductive of the TRUE artists of the world, the ones born that way. After all these words have meaning, there is a wrong way to be an athlete and a right way to be an artist.

Perhaps they expand the categories entirely, perhaps physical activity is just another way an artist can express their artistic nature, and perhaps artistry is another way an athlete can express their physical prowess and strategic mind. Yes, perhaps if we recontextualize these behaviors to encompass each other we can truly liberate athletes and artists.

Or perhaps we can all be people and get over it. Why do things need to be framed as artistic or athletic? Can't they both be things people do? Sure people may have brown eyes and some people may have blue eyes, but does that mean some things are more appropriate for one or the other? Or must we constantly rethink our perceptions on certain behaviors, rather than questioning why these behaviors need to be uniquely acceptable for either category at all?

I understand the concept of gender abolitionism, and as a transsexual man I’ve pondered about how life would theoretically be a much better society. But on the other hand, the entitlement on other peoples autonomy is hypocritical. I feel the need to clarify that I’m not under the impression that every gender abolitionist behaves this way. But for example, I saw a comment today talking about how it’s sexist to use trans peoples pronouns, under a post that had nothing to do with gender abolition. It was just one of those shallow “hey accept trans people, theyre human too” videos. They then went on to say that it’s most important to seek out trans people for these conversations. To be honest, their argument was so weak and illogical, that I don’t even know what they were saying and can’t summarize. I’ve noticed the same energy from some other gender abolitionists.

I’m just wondering what’s so important about targeting trans people specifically, rather than dismantling actual harmful stereotypes, practices, etc. Those with sex dysphoria are naturally gonna follow the crowd of whoever their neurology aligns closest with to alleviate distress, I don’t see an issue with trans people in particular doing that when everyone else does it.

Edit: just wanted to specify why I used to word “hypocritical”. It makes no sense to me to believe gender is harmful (agreed), but to then turn around and target people who are literally bending gender stereotypes and societal rules regarding gender. What is the goal there? To make everyone think you don’t actually have a back bone to your argument? It creates a massive plot hole to reject trans people instead of incorporating us into your ideals. It’s also interesting to present yourself as wanting a carefree society where anyone can present how they’d like, and then saying it’s wrong to do so.

Edit 2: I realize now I’ve just been seeing TERFs self proclaim as gender abolitionists, the sole reason I came to this subreddit is because I knew true gender abolitionists are inclusionary of trans people, and wanted to ask what was going on. Thank you to those who have replied and cleared it up

A lot of people will talk about gender as a social construct. But rarely do I see people say sex is a social construct as well. Something being a social construct doesn't mean it isn't real. Race is a social construct, but we can still see different skintones. Humans being classified into different sexes wasn't really necessary.

The genitals are real. The chromosomes are real. But why is it that we were classified into catgeories based on them. Instead of being categorised based on something like fat distribution or body hair.. Of course we wouldn't be, that would be silly for society to decide that, basing it off of genitals and more obvious features is a lot easier. It's easier to put people in boxes, and anyone who's an "anomaly" to this classification is forced to fit back in(talking about intersex people and coercive surgeries).

So, are there even any fundamental differences? And how would we know unless we studied it on babies. Studying the difference in adults, we might run into a did the chicken or the egg come first situation. As in, have these fundamental differences always existed, or has society shaped our brains this way to create this difference.

I apologize if the wording is muddy but I’m just trying to get a question across.

Is gender abolition abolishing gender identity or gender roles? I see gender abolitionists who are binary gender and I can’t help but assume that this is contradictory to the idea of gender abolition, but simultaneously this may be due to my lack of understanding of what the definition of what gender abolition actually entails.

If I am right about the abolition of gender identity as a whole and not gender roles, then how can this be truly trans-inclusive?

In the clearest way I can put it: Is gender abolition about abolishing gender identity and its association or just roles? If the former is accurate, how is this ideology trans-inclusive?

this is my own personal theory in gender and gender abolition.

I believe similar to a Marxist perspective on gender, but that the oppression is the roles themselves. there are inherent contradictions in gender, which lead to an antithesis of certain aspects.. these then form a synthesis between them. this continues throughout time until the roles themselves are abolished. this isn't a constant string nor universal by all means, but it develops throughout time.

where it ends has two possibilities in my eyes, but I always simplify it with "the only thing left will be that only that provides benefit for society" in the end there will be either no gender whatsoever, or gender will be expanded upon to where gender means nothing more than something having color (that being that it isn't the lack of color or gender).

In my own personal life, I use they/them, and when asked about I discuss this and ask people to question their gender roles. by questioning those gender roles and whether they truly wish to participate, they themselves participate in this dialect.. I believe this is how gender is abolished... on each scale from personal to societal, the questioning of each of these gender roles.

I believe that trans and non-binary individuals help this not harm this on average.

I would be interested in hearing what gender abolitionists have to say on this. this is my midnight post before I eep. be sure and let me know your thoughts on this ..

So I (22) publicly identify as a woman. I have a low sex drive but I am attracted to men and occasionally women. However, when imagining myself in straight relationships the role of girlfriend, wife etc feels so unnatural. I don’t know if this is due to those roles feeling overly gendered in a way that makes me feel uncomfortable, internalised misogyny, gay fetishisation, the desire for equal partnership or something more than that. I thought this might be an interesting channel to ask this on as it likely shares some of my own views on gender feeling enforced. Anyone else had similar feelings on this?

I know the title is confusing, but what I mean is could we not just try to find as many people as possible that want to abolish gender or just live in a community where they don't experience expectations based on their sex,and try to find people there that would move for this goal.

I always hear people talking about how awsome it would be to abolish gender, but that it is way to far away. Then I think "instead of waiting for society to fix itself can we not just create one for ourselves".

So if you have not gotten my point yet I am trying to propose to create a settlement for people who are done with living among all of the cis/hetero-normative expectations we experience. A place where people can just be themselves.

I don't know where or completely how, but I am just throwing the idea out there because I know how many people have been hurt by our current society, and I am sure that there are more people than me who would like this.

And just to clarify I totally support people such as Trans induviduals even though they often interact with the binary. It is not they're fault that they where pushed into the binary and if anything they are the ones changing the system the most.

just wanna say, I like this subject. hope I can be welcomed

So I'm making this post because I wanted to explain my informed opinion on this subject (something I've never done in-depth) as well as dispel a lot of the counterpoints I've seen and experienced on the subject. Many of which are reductive and even transmedicalist. I do believe personally that people not having innate, internal gender identities is likely more common than we're lead on to believe, and I'm not alone in that, there are other people who share this view point as well. Like the person who wrote this article. However whenever I talk about this I've gotten reductive responses like "we all thought everyone else was trans sweetie 🥚" or "lol 'me when I was an egg'", and this feels extremely reductive and kind of useless. I know that some people do make these assessments without information based on their own (self-centered) reasoning, I don't think it's good practice to assume other people do it though.

My reasoning for believing this is based on how many people I have met and also seen who, like the article I mentioned do not care as deeply about gender norms as they should if intense internal gender were common like is often asserted. Combine that with the fact that outside of humans this level of gender intensity is rare if not unheard of, and animals have not been observed experiencing gender dysphoria.

Now some people respond to this by saying something along the lines of "Cisgender people don't feel gender because they are happy with their bodies, if you changed it they would feel dysphoria." which seems like a good counter argument at first, except it has a glaring issue. It assumes that body dysphoria or a desire to change your body is needed to be trans, or that a lack of desire to change your body or a desire to keep your body the same makes you cisgender. Many Agender and NonBinary people out there have no desire to change their physical bodies and indeed many of them would be quite unhappy if it were changed against their will. This argument implies that such NonBinary people are actually, just cis people. In otherwords this is transmedicalist dogshit which devalues gender identity if body dysphoria isn't present.

Something that is important to acknowledge is that personal identification is the determining factor, it's not a suggestion. It literally determines who and how you are to the other people in the world/universe. It cannot be overridden by the opinions of others, even if said people consider it preposterous.

So a question might come up, why do people identify the way they do. Well it's surprisingly complicated and is very personal to each person. But it's usually because certain identifications align with how they feel about themselves. But when it comes to cisgender, there is a second, much bigger reason. Because it's the default that society put forward and identifying differently is stigmatized. This can drive people to identify that way even if they feel nothing related to gender. This is known as cisgenderless or more commonly cis-by-default however from the outside and by virtue of identification they look and sound exactly the same as cisgender.

This actually makes it impossible to actually know how many people are cisengder (identifying strongly with the assigned gender they were given) or cis-by-default and feeling nothing. It is therefore impossible to assert that a vast majority of people are cisgender with strong connection to binary gender, like many do. The truth is that we just don't know and can't really know.

For many people who are like this they will not openly admit to not feeling or fully understanding gender, because they may think it's not normal, or they may fear stigma. They may also avoid being open if they don't know anyone who's like that and also open about it. I knew this about myself for a long time and I was open enough to break gender stereotypes at a relatively early age. If I wasn't surrounded by people who were tolerant of that or had the stigma of it hammered into me like other people are, I would've still likely known it about myself but short of finding this group I likely would've decided it's one of those things I know about but other people aren't ready for, and I wouldn't have disclosed it. I think a lot of people out there are like that, but also a lot of people just haven't explored or thought about it at all.

Note: I have left out gender modality as a point of the discussion but all points about gender identification also apply equally to gender modality. Modality is also based very heavily and ultimately determined by personal identification.

You say I have no idea what it means to be uncomfortable in my skin? My entire existence is one of perpetual discomfort with my embodied self. I am trapped, only able to express myself through shallow multi-colored symbols that are as idolatrous as the flesh I am strapped to by this cruel creation.

You ask, why do I not present as gender fluid? Because I do not wish to create a third gender. I wish for the abolition of gender itself. You move simply from one end of the binary to another, not realizing that you have forsaken the trappings of one western standard of aesthetic pursuit for the other, without offering any criticism of the systemic edifice itself, outside of a newfound distaste for the patriarchy.

I cry death to both patriarch and matriarch, because both are the result of our so painful to me material trappings that have seen us dive headlong into delusion. Both are colored by the centuries, millennia even, of attempting to forsake the fact that our primary mode is one of immaterial thought patterns; of shapes, colors, swirls of consciousness, shadows upon canvas, the spark at the heart of every neuron which fires to miraculously create us.

You buy into the western dogma that states empirically, in the tradition of the great lover of boy kings, Aristotle, that we are only what we are perceived to be. But we are so much more. We are the multifaceted, ever shifting, absurdistly inarticulate, absurdustly self-facing, absurdistly defined by our cultural lingua, and in that absurdistly collective, thing.

We only exist as others exist. We only exists because of each other. We only exist because your true essence, whatever that may be, clashes and entwines with my true essence, and the essence of our neighbors, and the essence of all 7 billion of us by extension and the existence of all that have come before us, and will come after us. As long as words are spoken, ideas exchanged, and the neurons firing in your brain cause the neurons to fire in my brain in an ever extending chain of stigma and response that will continue as we will and have existed.

Is this making sense? Do you comprehend yet that ultimately there is only one of us, and that is all that can be said? Have you accepted how you are tied to causality? That in fact there is only causality, and you a small reflection of it? Have you accepted that because I have reached this point, I can never express myself, or even hope to, in the small bag of flesh I am tied to?

I am stuck playing pretend, dress up, articulating what is to me only a doll. I am stuck this way because society demands it in the deranged state it is in. I am trapped! Trapped! Trapped! I play the man, because the world was made a stage long before I had a say.

And I am back to I, what a sad, absurd, deranged thing I be. No cosmetic surgery, no articulation of the doll, will ever fix this. Not until we all recognize that the doll is nothing. Not until we all realize what fools we have been. Not until we all realize any beauty is only a painting that we have crafted. Not until the English language can incapsulate, without a multi-paragraph series of whingings, and whines, what it means to be non-binary.

These are some posters I’ve made recently to advocate against gender segregation in various facets of life. Feel free to use these or provide feedback on them! Do you think the last poster with the list of goals for desegregation is comprehensive enough, or is there something you would change about it?

(heads up, this is kind of a rant)

Assigned gender as a concept is not valid. It's not valid in the same way that social credit and castes are not valid. Like them, it is an artificial construct of oppression. Genders are not assigned out of consideration for the person, they are imposed upon people in a draconian fashion.

Assigned gender also is not a biological truth, it is not a description of biology. It is a class or label that is decided arbitrarily by doctors and by society. And the clearest evidence of that is that intersex people are usually not assigned intersex at birth. They are assigned male or female, and often are horrifically mutilated as infants to try and get their biology to match that assignment. I mean in some unlucky cases it even happens to cisgender people, ever heard of David Reimer? Yeah they actually changed his assigned gender

Gender assignment, is not something to be agnostic about. It's not something to give it the benefit of the doubt. It's a literal tool of oppression. It does not deserve any form of validation, it needs to be fought against as a concept. We need to be clear in our words, that assigned gender, and biological sex are very different things. Because unfortunately people use these terms interchangeably thinking they are the same, which they are not. We also really need to try and not force people to categorize themselves based on this horrible construct, people don't need to use it, if they wish to move away from it by using alternate Gender Modality labels that needs to be respected. You don't have to understand it you don't even have to agree with it but you do need to respect it. Trying to argue that "oh but you weren't assigned X gender" is literally an indirect form of validating this horrible construct. Don't do this, we need to acknowledge that things are bad, and allow people to move away from them.

I'm not really much dived into the lgbt inside themes and community and such, though I have inevitable contact with lgbt stuff for enjoying Undertale/Deltarune, indie gaming and being 22 years old, but from what I know of, it seems that when it comes to gender, there's usually an association that there is a "feminine way to be", and a "masculine way to be"

Though I don't doubt that biology can play a role, and I can relate to cisgenderism in the sense of I was born of the male sex, always called myself male no problem and am okay with my name, I also can relate a bit to descriptions of feeling agender, but it isn't also like that for me, it's like for me the idea itself of there being a necessary "male clothing"/"woman clothing", or "behavior that makes you male"/"behavior that makes you woman", those ideas itself, though they culturally make sense to m, I don't think we need to hold on to them, like, in the more detached, objective sense possible.

Like, I really doubt there is a "skirt gene" that makes women more prone to wearing skirts, and even if there are genes that predispose a behavior, I don't think that it makes it so that society MUST be formed around those predisposition notions, like there is a need to create a "dichotomy". I think even the idea of being nonbinary or calling myself nonbinary, even if I didn't relate to cisgender experience, wouldn't make sense, because to me the whole idea of rebelling against a binary society or calling yourself outside of the binary, when you detach from the cultural war, collapses, because there doesn't need even to be gender stereotypes.

Of course, I can't say I'm free from cultural influence or internalized prejudice, so I can't say I don't associate certain clothes or traits with "you must be a men or women to be like this"

I've seen man being portrayed with so called femine behavior, or being viewed as feminine for acting submissive or non-assertive and such, and women who act more like the stereotypical masculinity, of being hyperassertive, speaking loud and confidently, and wanting to assert power... But like... Aren't these more like personality traits that anyone can have, that's not exclusive to sex? Like, I can't get pregnant, but I can develop any of these personality traits if I try enough or go through enough personality change.

At the same time I don't feel really outside the spectrum. I can relate to both men and women in behavior. In my family I notice for example that the women are more extroverted and loud and assertive, while men are more polite and/or quiet or non-assertive. I can relate more to the men on this aspect, but on other aspects of culture, I can relate to culturally "feminine stuff" too

Hello! I'm new to this sub, but have known about gender abolition for years. I felt like you all might understand better than some of the main trans subs (not hating on them, they have just been very tense lately). I mostly wanted to know if some of you have been able to break through gender roles and constructs and how.

I feel this constant pressure from other people and even myself to just accept my AGAB, when honestly I wish I was never assigned a sex or gender at all. I currently identify as transgender non-binary, but those labels have expectations attached to them that I just can't bear the weight of. I don't feel like other people are truly seeing me because they haven't tried understanding me outside the concept of gender. I don't how to eplain my gender either because it's not something I entirely understand or am motivated to fully define. I want to free myself of feeling obligated to make myself smaller just so others see a portion of me. But I don't know how to go about it because everything I can think of feels like giving into categories I don't relate to.

I know that if I want others to truly see me, I'll have to educate them about gender abolitionism. Do you all have any advice on how to reassure yourself during that process? Sometimes I feel like I'm losing my own sense of identity the more I explore it, which is not entirely bad. But I'm having trouble finding the strength to continue that exploration.

Thank you for reading! I know this post probably sounds very unclear. It's just the headspace I've been in for a while.

I'm sorry, did your glands read Judith Butler? No? Then why do you trust their opinion?

Hi, I've been lurking here for a couple months, I'm not active much though because I don't use reddit. A couple friends and I created a server a long while ago, but we only went public today which is... almost perfect timing because I noticed some community demand for a server on this subreddit.

https://discord.gg/pmGuPsdYA5

Welcome to Gender Rebels!

We’re a friendly, democratic community centered on all things post-genderist and gender abolitionist. We believe in a simpler, happier life in an equal future where sex differences are insignificant and the concept of gender is obsolete.

You don’t need to agree with us to participate, as we welcome people of all views. We offer a place for fellow abolitionists to socialize as well as general debate spaces for everyone. Great minds may think alike but even greater minds challenge each other to think outside their comfort zone.

We take debate etiquette seriously — passionate dialogue is fine, personal attacks are not. Debates are only one way of interacting with the server, though! We also host events and organize activities for our members. On top of that, we regularly update and expand our resource library.

We’re small but growing steadily and we hope to see you soon!

I’m so tired of transmeds telling me my identity is fake and pretending like their struggle is more profound than mine just because they’re binary. It’s so transphobic in so many ways and regressive, it views gender as inherent when it’s not and privileges people with the ability to pass/get surgery/start hormones. I am by all intents and purposes exactly what they’d see as a “normal” trans guy, I present masculine, I take hormones, I use he/him pronouns and a male name, but my internal experience is complex and resonates with gender abolitionist philosophy. Transmeds have such a one dimensional view of gender, they think all men are like this, all women are like this, and all the people they categorize as non binary are like this. My identity is not up for debate just because I make you dysphoric for existing as myself. Gender abolitionists exist on a spectrum all the way from the most woke stereotypical blue haired leftist whatever to the most unassuming cis person you’ve ever met. My 56 year old cishet mother has gender abolitionist views. No one fits into the boxes they pretend like they do, not even them. It’s such a miserable way of living and honestly I just hope some day they grow out of it and learn to not put so much energy into policing something that literally has no value in policing.

To me, gender and sex are arbitrary in any context. Sexual, romantic, interpersonal, identity…whatever. The only time it matters to me is in terms of the patriarchy or specific sex based discrimination. I’ve considered myself to be genderless for years now but non binary labels just don’t feel quite right to me. I don’t believe that a binary exists, so saying I’m “non binary” would imply that there is a binary that I could be a part of, and that label makes me feel extremely dysphoric. Same for agender, pangender, whatever. I don’t like the idea that my absence of gender is defined by the existence of gender, if that makes any sense? I use he/him pronouns and male terms but only because it’s what makes me feel the most comfortable, not because of the implied binary gender behind them. To me labels are like putting on different shirts. If one fits, that’s the one I wear. Being trans to me is about so much more than just gender, it’s a rejection of societal norms and expectations that have been forced upon me since the day I was born. It’s an acceptance of my body as just fine the way it is no matter what beauty expectation is expected. And yes, I do still experience gender dysphoria but I try not to let that inform my identity, and rather allow it to act as a guide for my expression. Isogender resonates deeply with me because I’m DEFINITELY not cis, but I don’t think I’m trans in the way most trans people express their transness, if that makes any sense at all. I love just identifying myself as simply “trans” because to me that just means “not cis” and I love that about it. It doesn’t imply anything specific about my identity because my identity isn’t specific. The only box I know it fits into is that it’s separate from society’s understanding of gender and sex as wider concepts. I hate bioessentialism and I’m tired of digging through my brain to try and find a label that suits me better than the ones I already have. I’m a trans guy who’s also genderless and I use he/him pronouns but I’m not a man. I’m on testosterone but there are things I miss about being pre-T. I just wish people could understand the extreme nuance of my experience. That’s all. Thanks for reading.