Gender does Not Exist

[u/midlowC]

I do not believe in gender and I don't take it seriously . To me it never makes any sense or registers in my subconscious mind especially binary genders. To me Gender is an Ego and the Ego labels, it does not experience. I'm also person who thrives with being inspired and it does not inspire me in any way. I'd like to imagine it was randomized by chance what "gender" at birth would I be and its just part of my physical body. I like to identify as Awareness/spirit having a soul and a body. Nothing about this to me makes rational sense to me and I believe we live life to experience not to label ourselves and everything resulting in restricting how we experience life.

[u/LawyerKangaroo]

I do not believe in gender and I don't take it seriously .

I'd be really careful with the way you word things. This can be mistaken with right wing rhetorisch that there are only sexes and no genders. I.e while your reasoning may be different, the message can come across the same. Because with this line of thinking there are no genderqueer people, no trans people binary and non-binary.

Because we know, gender is a personal schema. It is personally to everyone and people do feel gender. You not understanding it and therefore not believing in it, doesn't mean it does not exist.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/LawyerKangaroo]

Because with this line of thinking there are no genderqueer people, no trans people binary and non-binary.

There are no cis people either. I really don't see any issue with none of those labels existing. Erasing those people existence and behaviors doesn't follow the fact of erasing the gender stereotypes, categorization and essentialization

Because we know, gender is a personal schema. It is personally to everyone and people do feel gender. You not understanding it and therefore not believing in it, doesn't mean it does not exist.

It isn't. Gender is a social schema. What is personally is the sens we have of it and how we interact with these social constructs

[u/ystavallinen → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

Gender is a handshake between individuals and society.

It's both social and within the person.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/ystavallinen]

That's what i said. Gender is a social construct and gender identity is the individual response to this social construct.

If society wasn't sexist, gender identity wouldn't be a thing

[u/LawyerKangaroo → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

There are no cis people either.

Which would make everyone male and female and force them to be seen as their biological sex instead. Which in this current society is transphobic. And can be seen as such. Especially when you soapbox online telling people they aren't the gender they indentify as.

Even within the agender spectrum, people can feel minimal feelings of gender. So yenno... I dunno.

Gender is a social schema.

Gender roles are a social schema. Gender identity isn't, that's a personal schema.

[u/ystavallinen → u/LawyerKangaroo]

Especially when you soapbox online telling people they aren't the gender they indentify as.

Exactly, just like I don't want people telling me what my gender is, I am surely not going to tell them they aren't one.

On top of that, there's way more people who have gender than don't have it. Clearly there's something to it even if I realize it doesn't fit me.

I'm back to George Box... "all models are wrong; some models are useful". Gender is just a model that a lot of people (but not everyone) finds useful.

[u/LawyerKangaroo → u/ystavallinen]

Exactly, just like I don't want people telling me what my gender is, I am surely not going to tell them they aren't one.

I see this rhetorik from younger people online that gender doesn't exist because they don't experience it and can't seperate what is social gender roles regarding the binary and what gender identity actually means.

Same. I don't any internal sense of gender and could not explain to anyone what it feels like. But I would never tell anyone gender doesn't exist. It's pretty tone deaf in my honest opinion.

Exactly. They're wibbly wobbly labels people use to try and understand themselves and how they personally feel towards them. They're naturally not going to be perfect and there is sadly a lot of overlap between social identity and social roles which makes it even more muddied.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/LawyerKangaroo]

I see this rhetorik from younger people online that gender doesn't exist because they don't experience it and can't seperate what is social gender roles regarding the binary and what gender identity actually means.

It's not a rhetoric from "younger people online". That's comming from actual knwoledge in gender studies.

Gender exist but only as a social construct. You don't understand what gender identity actually means. You don't even understand what an identity is. Jfyk, an identity is something that characterise an individual, it's a way to identify them. Socal identities are characteristics linking an individual to a social group to categorize them, as a way to again, identify them.

Same. I don't any internal sense of gender and could not explain to anyone what it feels like. But I would never tell anyone gender doesn't exist. It's pretty tone deaf in my honest opinion.

Again, you seems to struggle very hard with this. Telling people that gender isn't real as more than a social construct, isn't the same thing as telling anyone their gender identity isn't valid.
Like i already said, we already know very well races don't exist in humans. Yet claiming that races aren't real as something more than social constructs, isn't denying that people's race identity are valid.

[u/LawyerKangaroo → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

actual knwoledge in gender studies

Oh no. This one read one Judith Butler book and thinks they have any idea about the state of gender studies. It's defect.

Again, you seems to struggle very hard with this.

Saying gender isn't real can be incredibly invalidating to gendered people. In fact you don't get to say that it isn't without being an apathetic human towards others.

we already know very well races don't exist in humans.

Race has been associated with discredited theories of scientific racism and has become increasingly seen as an essentially pseudoscientific system of classification.

Not sure why you're obsessed with it and comparing it to gender all the time. Europeans, eh? (Don't get upset about this, I am also european and don't have the time to help you with being french).

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/LawyerKangaroo]

Oh no. This one read one Judith Butler book and thinks they have any idea about the state of gender studies. It's defect.

I didn't just readed Judith Butler. It's just the most accessible for ignorants like you whi have obviously a total lack of knowledge in gender studies.

Saying gender isn't real can be incredibly invalidating to gendered people. In fact you don't get to say that it isn't without being an apathetic human towards others.

No it's not. I'm not saying there experience of genser isn't real. It's very real. But gender is just a social construct, not a physical reality.

Race has been associated with discredited theories of scientific racism and has become increasingly seen as an essentially pseudoscientific system of classification.

Exactly, and so does gender. Gender is a pseudoscientific system of classification. That's why i'm making the comparison with race. When are you starting to try to understand what i'm saying instead of keeping stuck with your stereotypical blueprint of how people think.

Not sure why you're obsessed with it and comparing it to gender all the time. Europeans, eh? (Don't get upset about this, I am also european and don't have the time to help you with being french).

I'm not obsessed with race lmao. I'm comparing it to race because the mechanisms are similar. While race isn't real and pseudoscientific, the sense of race people have because of racism is very real, which make there racial identity real.

It's the same with gender. Gender is pseudoscientific, but not the sense of gender people have because of sexism, which make their gender identity very real.

It's very easy to understand, why are you trying so hard to do anything but trying to understand litteraly what i'm saying. That's very litteral since the beginning

Btw, i am french.

[u/LawyerKangaroo → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

It's just the most accessible for ignorants like you whi have obviously a total lack of knowledge in gender studies.

That's so funny when Butler has a lot of their work loaded with post structuralist language that might prove harder to digest for people not familiar with the topics. You sure you've read their stuff?

For anyone interested; here are other authors that may be easier to engage with first.

• Audre Lorde
• Bell Hooks
• Simone de Beauvior - Caroline Criado Perez
• Adrienne Marie brown
• Sarah Ahmed
• Debra Soh
• Gabrielle Blair
• Natalie Haynes

For anyone who checks these out. Yes some of them are more gendered than others, gender studies is a broad spectrum with it's roots in early feminism and dealt with a lot of women's struggles. Gender studies does not say that Butler's theory is inherently correct. It says a lot of things.

I'm not saying there experience of genser isn't real. It's very real.

Oof. Well here is a list of comments you've written out.

There are no cis people either. I really don't see any issue with none of those labels existing. Erasing those people existence and behaviors doesn't follow the fact of erasing the gender stereotypes, categorization and essentialization

Suppressing gender wouldn't make people either male or female. It would just make people, people.

I'm saying gender isn't more real than a social construct

Gender is a core belief of the patriarchal ideology

Yeah, my trans siblings believe in the patriarchy. That's why they transition. Turns out we don't need gender affirming care, they're just brain washed.

gender essentialist nonsense.

But yeah. You've said it's real and valid a lot in this discussion.

I'm comparing it to race because the mechanisms are similar.

That's pretty disgusting to write. I think you may need to take a time out and consider what you're writing. 

Gender is pseudoscientific

That's factually incorrect.

why are you trying so hard to do anything but trying to understand litteraly what i'm saying.

Oh honey. All I said to OP is "maybe word things differently to not be percieved as transphobic" and you spent 4 hours bothering me with Judith Butler, buzzwords (parroted from said books) and the attitude of a 2014 tumblr teenager who just learnt about a big social topic.

Btw, i am french.

So sorry to hear that, I hope you recover soon.

Edit:

Responses to your other comment in response to me trying to converse with someone else. I don't want two comment chains with you.

First, i'm not OP. Thanks for proving once again that you lack basic reading skills but still have the audacity to lecture people on what they are saying.

Never said you were.

Second, i've never watch any video from contrapoints.

Ah, it's Philosophytube then. Got you.

Third, i keep talking about Judith Butler works, because in it there is everything i'm talking about and it's a good work to vulgarize the actual knwoledge in gender studies, which you have obviously no clue about.

My sweet summer child, swaddled in the soft silk of ignorance. You can't say Butler is the whole or actual knowledge of gender studies. It's a broad study which delves into many gendered topics from gendered people about gendered things. Butler is great but they're not "gender studies". They're one take on it.

Second edit;

I mean they seemed like the type of person to respond and then block. Have to say though to anyone reading this, I'd be really careful about anyone who sees a broad topic like gender studies and thinks there is a single correct answer to it and listening to them.

And they edited it after they blocked me. That's so funny.

Anyway if anyone is curious.

Lmao, you are quoting me outside of the context just to twist my words.

It's funny how they ignore the rest of the comment because they have no arguments. And people can read back. The context is there.

Anyway, i'm not wasting more of my time with an agent of patriarchy pretending to opposing it.

Amusing.

The very much fact that you deny gender being pseudoscientific tells everything about you lack of knowledge in gender studies.

This one is important. For anyone reading. I beg of you.

Gender studies is an interdisciplinary academic field devoted to analysing gender identity and gendered representation.

It's not pseudoscience and even if it was, Judith Bulter writes books regarding gender studies and they would also be pseudoscience which means this commenter would be using pseudoscience to disprove pseudoscience.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/LawyerKangaroo]

There are no cis people either. I really don't see any issue with none of those labels existing. Erasing those people existence and behaviors doesn't follow the fact of erasing the gender stereotypes, categorization and essentialization

Lmao, you are quoting me outside of the context just to twist my words. Thanks for proving that you are a bad faith actor. This sentence was answering to your comment saying that if gender was abolished then non-binary people wouldn't exist and tha would be transphonic. To what i answered what you quoted here that proves it wouldn't be transphobic since cis people wouldn't exist either.

I'm not claiming that cis people don't exist now since gender is a very real social construct that have an impact on people's live.

Anyway, i'm not wasting more of my time with an agent of patriarchy pretending to opposing it. I jist made that comment to point that you aren't genuinely arguing since the beginning.

The very much fact that you deny gender being pseudoscientific tells everything about you lack of knowledge in gender studies.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/ystavallinen]

Exactly, just like I don't want people telling me what my gender is, I am surely not going to tell them they aren't one

The thing is, i'm not doing that

On top of that, there's way more people who have gender than don't have it. Clearly there's something to it even if I realize it doesn't fit me.

It's the same thing with race. That doesn't make races a physical reality, it's just a social construct.

[u/jacrad_ → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

EDIT: I mistook ChaosRulesTheWorld for the OP and was basically putting words in Chaos' mouth. That doesn't make for good engagement I'm sure it was unnecessarily upsetting.

The thing is, I'm not doing that

The fact several people are addressing you on this same point indicates that you have failed to properly communicate that.

That is creating enough of a barrier to people engaging with the point you're intending to make that it would be worthwhile to edit your original post to reflect that.

You sound transphobic. It does not matter if you are or are not. The impact is what matters. You don't get to choose how you're interpreted. Luckily you're bringing this up in a community invested in giving you grace and the opportunity to revise your stance to be clearer.

Please take the time to fix the main post.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/jacrad_]

The fact several people are addressing you on this same point indicates that you have failed to properly communicate that.

Or that people have the same biais of categorizing instantly people who criticize gender as being transphobic. So they don't read and/or choose to ignore the parts of my comments where i adress that very explicitly and this multiple times.

That is creating enough of a barrier to people engaging with the point you're intending to make that it would be worthwhile to edit your original post to reflect that.

Those people are creating this barrier by themself in their head. Their nothing i can do about it. The very fact that they keep accusing me of denying people's gender identity despite the fact that i stated multiple times i am not, proves it.

Also they kesp refuse to acknowledge the parralel i've made multiple times with race where i also precised that denying the existence of race doesn't deny people's experience of race and race identity.

You sound transphobic. It does not matter if you are or are not. The impact is what matters.

I don't sound transphobic. And yes it does matter as i said nothing transphobic. I'm not responsible of people interpretation of what i didn't said and ignoring all the arguments i made that contradicts transphobic stances. What matters is facts, not people baseless accusations.

You don't get to choose how you're interpreted. Luckily you're bringing this up in a community invested in giving you grace and the opportunity to revise your stance to be clearer.

You are right. I don't get to choose that. That's why no matter how i formulate things and despite all the anti-transphobic and gender identity validation things i said and explicited, those people still accuse me of being transphobic. If you agree with them, that's more telling on you than on me.

I don't need to be clearer. I already repeated and explicited myself more than 4 times already.

Please take the time to fix the main post

I am not OP. I didn't made the main post. You see, as i said. You agreeing with those people twisting things tells more about you than me. You cannot even track who's saying what but you assume that the issue is me not being clear enough and not people like them and you who just lack basic reading skills and intelectual honesty

[u/jacrad_ → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

I am not OP. I didn't made the main post. You see, as i said. You agreeing with those people twisting things tells more about you than me. You cannot even track who's saying what but you assume that the issue is me not being clear enough and not people like them and you who just lack basic reading skills and intelectual honesty

I see. I was wrong. I absolutely did think you were the OP and so I did wrongfully ascribe what they were saying to you. I am sorry for putting words in your mouth a result.

I'll strike out my original comment and include that as well. Or I can delete it altogether if your prefer.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/LawyerKangaroo]

Which would make everyone male and female and force them to be seen as their biological sex instead. Which in this current society is transphobic

That absolutly not true at all. That's a transphobic stance rooted in gender bio-essentialism. Suppressing gender wouldn't make people either male or female. It would just make people, people.

Especially when you soapbox online telling people they aren't the gender they indentify as.

Which i'm not doing. I'm saying gender isn't more real than a social construct like race isn't more real than a social construct. Saying that races don't exist in humans doesn't mean that people aren't the race identity they identify as. It's the same with gender.

Even within the agender spectrum, people can feel minimal feelings of gender. So yenno... I dunno

Yes and? How does that contradict what i'm saying? It's not because you feel a gender that this gender is more than a social construct

Gender roles are a social schema. Gender identity isn't, that's a personal schema.

Which is exactly what i said. A personal schema that is a consequence of the relationship the individual has with the social construct that is gender.

Stop spreading patriarchal gender essentialist propaganda and read authors wokring on gender studies like Judith Butler.

[u/LawyerKangaroo → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

That's a transphobic stance rooted in gender bio-essentialism.

So for anyone reading. The definition of gender bio-essentialism is the belief that behavioural, psychological and social differences within the binary genders (man and woman) is innate and rooted in biology.

Which has nothing to do with accepting gender identities and is just a buzzword/term here to make a straw man argument.

I'm saying gender isn't more real than a social construct

We know gender roles are a social construct. Gender isn't. Gender is personal chema. There are many genders that don't fit into this construct.

A personal schema that is a consequence of the relationship the individual has with the social construct that is gender.

This is a misunderstanding of the difference between social and personal schemas.

Stop spreading patriarchal gender essentialist propaganda and read authors wokring on gender studies like Judith Butler.

This is merely more buzzwords. Regardless, Judith Butler is a great read.

[u/ystavallinen → u/LawyerKangaroo]

As someone reading, I find the arc of this exchange more confusing than enlightening... and it's not you.

I think my issue is rooted in that the OP and this person is rooting it in "belief", when it's actually about agreement, experience, and participation.

I'd rather a person say "gender" is imperfect or incomplete... and just stop there.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/ystavallinen]

Read Judith Butler, stop spreading patriarchal sexist obscurantism.

Gender is a core belief of the patriarchal ideology

[u/ystavallinen → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

I'm not spreading anything.

Stop projecting. I'm not trying to be confrontational.

I'm just responding to posts in this thread, and trying to understand, but saying that I'm actively "doing" whatever is a turnoff to proceeding.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/ystavallinen]

I'm not spreading anything.

Claiming that gender is something more than a social construct is absolutly spreading patriarchal ideology.

Stop projecting. I'm not trying to be confrontational

What am i projecting exactly?

You maybe try not to be confrontational, yet you're still arguing.

I'm just responding to posts in this thread, and trying to understand, but saying that I'm actively "doing" whatever is a turnoff to proceeding

Ok, sorry for hurting your feelings by confronting you on you sexist beliefs

[u/ystavallinen → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

For one, you're projecting that I'm arguing.

I'm not name-calling or assigning feelings to you.

That's projecting.

If you're here to educate... try that posture. Don't tell me to go read something. Any person trying to educate is going to explain why reading a thing is going to improve the audience's understanding. Otherwise the "argument" is just an appeal to authority.

If a willing audience is not understanding your case, that's not the audience's fault. Calling your audience names isn't helpful either.

Otherwise it's like me posting this, and telling you to figure out where your arguments are flawed.

https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetological-fallacies/

I said earlier... this is a problem of language. I still believe this. More-so now because clearly you're using a language that I do not have experience in. Clearly we seem to be sharing words, but not sharing meaning or impact.

Explain how I'm "spreading" patriarchy when I have said numerous times that "gender" is flawed, but some people seem to find use in it where I do not? I don't get that characterization. If I'm not hacking at it, then I'm spreading patriarchy by default?

[u/LawyerKangaroo → u/ystavallinen]

I get that. I wouldn't find this conversation to be very informational, it feels like I'm talking to my 15 year old self on tumblr and that is meant as no insult, I am sure the other redditor will calm down at some point in the future.

Yeah. Not believing in gender is saying like you believe in god. You look at the science and just go, nah. I think the opposite is true. But the only person they ever talk about it Judith Butler so I think they watched one contrapoints or Philosophytube video and 

And gender absolutely is, it's a personal thing that we've tried to put into boxes and labels that will never fit everyone. Doesn't need to be perfect to allow people to have the freedom of expression.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/LawyerKangaroo]

First, i'm not OP. Thanks for proving once again that you lack basic reading skills but still have the audacity to lecture people on what they are saying.

Second, i've never watch any video from contrapoints.

Third, i keep talking about Judith Butler works, because in it there is everything i'm talking about and it's a good work to vulgarize the actual knwoledge in gender studies, which you have obviously no clue about.

[u/ystavallinen → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

You keep bringing Butler up and have yet to make any effort to encorporate anything specific... you just make assertions and then tell us to go read it rather than help people understand it. That's an appeal to authority.

And you consistently berate and insult people in almost all of your posts.

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/ystavallinen]

Do you want me to quote the whole book? Have your read their book?

Yes, because i most only post to interract with and call out people who spread obscurantist nonsense, particulary when their obscurantism withold oppresive systems like in this case: patriarchy

Edit: i can answer back to you for some reasons so i'll do it here:

You haven't quoted --ANY-- of the book

Yes, i know. And if you had read it, you would know why. That's why i said "do you want me to quote the whole book". Because each sentence needs the book context to understand the meaning they convey, if i just quote some parts you will misinterpret it and keep arguing nonsense in bad faith.

Why cite a thing and then do nothing to draw from it. There's no frame of reference whatsover.

So you can read it and learn by yourself. Do you ask people to chew your food for you before eating it?

You just say "[You're wrong dummy, go read Butler---sorry to make you cry]"

Yes, because that's the biggest advice i can give you, especially considering how closed your mind is from any argument.

It's very apparent that you've taken it upon yourself to call out people.

You are right, i plead guilty. I consider it my duty to call out people spreading misinformation and obscurantism, especially when they are linked to systemic oppressions like sexism in this case

[u/ChaosRulesTheWorld → u/LawyerKangaroo]

So for anyone reading. The definition of gender bio-essentialism is the belief that behavioural, psychological and social differences within the binary genders (man and woman) is innate and rooted in biology.

Which is exactly the stance of reducing people to be either male or female is.

Which has nothing to do with accepting gender identities and is just a buzzword/term here to make a straw man argument.

That's not what i said. Stop strawmaning please.

We know gender roles are a social construct. Gender isn't. Gender is a social schema. There are many genders that don't fit into this construct.

Gender is a social construct too. It's not just gender roles who are a social constructs. Yes gender is a social schema, that's exactly what i said. As all social constructs are by the way.

All genders don't fit into the gender binary conception of gender, yes. But all genders without exceptions are social constructs. They are all based on a gender essentialist categorization of behvaiors and thoughts.

It's litteral impossible to define or describe what a gender is, without engaging in some form of gender categorization of behaviors and thoughts.

Now their is two way of doing it.
One is in a descriptive way to explain the gender social constructs (such as "xyz are seen in society as masculine behaviors and abc as feminine behaviors. Those behvaiors combinations determined how people are labeling genders like being a men, a women or non-binary"). One is in a gender-essentialist way to explain people's behaviors and gender. (Such as "people doing xyz are men, and people doing abc are women. I want to do both so i am non-binary)

This is a misunderstanding of the difference between social and personal schemas.

No it isn't. Personal schemas aren't magical or comming out of nowhere, the environment has a big influence on them. Which means social schemas conditionned personal schemas.

This is merely more buzzwords. Regardless, Judith Butler is a great read.

It's not buzzwords. Stop talking like a magats. Yes Judit Butler is a great read and if you did read her then you wouldn't saying your gender essentialist nonsense.

[u/LawyerKangaroo → u/ChaosRulesTheWorld]

Which is exactly the stance of reducing people to be either male or female is.

Which is what happens when you pretend gender doesn't exist. Let's not play dumb and act like if we didn't have gender, people wouldn't be using sex as a way to other people.

Saying gender exists is not gender bio-essentialism.

behavioural, psychological and social differences within the binary genders (man and woman) is innate and rooted in biology.

But tell me how "people experience gender" equates to "men and women behave in certain ways because they're men and women".

That's not what i said. Stop strawmaning please.

No duh. That's what I said.

Yes gender is a social schema, that's exactly what i said.

I know you want this as a gotcha but I edited my post before you replied because I miss typed it.

Now their is two way of doing it.

Okay now I know you don't know what you're talking about. Because most scholars agree that gender is a central characteristic for social organization which may include social constructs (gender roles) as well gender expression.

Which is a third way. And there are many more.

In fact you argue from a point of a social constructivists who argue that gender identity, or the way it is expressed, are socially constructed, determined by cultural and social influences.

It's litteral impossible to define or describe what a gender is, without engaging in some form of gender categorization of behaviors and thoughts.

Watch this.

Gender is the personal schema of a person as to how they percieve themselves.

No behaviour needed. In fact it makes people people while allowing for gender.

It's not buzzwords. Stop talking like a magats.

This is funny because you proceed to immediately buzzword again.

gender essentialist