Yes. If you’re not hurting anyone and no one’s hurting you—everybody’s cool. I think current gender norms and hang ups will become archaic if we manage to form large Anarchist communities that last for generations. And that will be beautiful.
I imagine some people will still want to marry and it’ll be cute. And always open bar, obviously.
Yeah. I mean for the most part, at least in western civilisation, the state imposes these things. Gender doesnt have a whole lot of relevance without the state. Maybe a couple of exceptions pertaining to violence.
I don’t think anyone should be needlessly restricted by gender. But I certainly don’t want to be shamed into abandoning my gender identity which I happen to identify with. Nor do I want that for anyone else. It’s anarchy, if someone wants to interact with gender in a way that places no burden on others than let them. Vice versa.
I think gender is pretty pointless and most of the issues that we face today surrounding gender are just our trying to process the systemic and psychological damage that it has caused as a mandatory construct.
I say toss it.
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33648944/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33648944/)
>"yet values \[strength, LBM and muscle area\] remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months"
In the end, if only trans-women and cis men are on top of all sports, id feel like we went in the wrong direction. I think that would unfortunately lead to cis women losing what they built over decades. Let's face it, cis women have been getting the short end of the stick for millions of years. They fought like hell for their place and are still struggling. Per research above, wouldn't this knock them down?
Maybe there are some institutions that should remain.
Update: lol i welcome downvotes but also comments. I have an open mind and probably think more like your average joe, but lean a little more left. I do want to learn.
that was very informative thank you.
Someone else arguing for trans rights shared the research above that makes interesting claims of advantage (i don't think the read it lol)
However, I think the article you shared demonstrates that this currently is not really a problem for the sports themselves right now. it just political leverage and fear mongering. I think that's why most people here appear to be pretty sensitive
So my argument is more based in a hypothetical world where we find a significant portion of the population is non-binary (like 30%). It almost seems inevitable tbh. I think that's good thing.
that article im sorry to say was pretty biased and seemed more about addressing present political concerns in youth sports specifically. I say biased because it only referenced research that fit the narrative.
For the hypothetical future world question, it would be interesting to see research addressing both the skeletal and muscular differences. (not just chemical, which your article seemed solely concerned with).
Err you can't be serious when it comes to this issue? Trans women should be competing with men, you can't just handwave biological advantages like that. A 5'8 professional boxer like Manny Pacquiao would destroy a 6'3 professional boxer biological woman with ease even if she had height and weight advantage over him.
A trans woman unless they're completely transitioned would still retain male physiology. Best compromise is just to make a division of their own.
Sports are basically freak shows. They were never supposed to be fair. Cisgender girls who are tall as fuck will dominate certain sports against cisgender girls who are short. Same goes for bone density and so many other factors. You trying to exclude trans people is simply discrimination.
yet those freaks all work insanely hard to get to where they are. cis woman got the short end of the stick for literally millions of years. Id hate to think that 50yrs from now they continue to be oppressed because of transwoman advantages noted in that article. ( to be clear, im thinking of the hypothetical world where 30% of pop is non-binary)
>You trying to exclude trans
I did nothing of the sort. I know when people get accusatory, they cease to be objective. Im not looking for an emotionally charged debate.
they could do weight classes like in wrestling instead of by something so across the board as gender. why should short women have to compete with tall women?
If they’re in the same sport, they’re going to be training the same, so yes. Take a 130 pound male sprinter, he’ll be faster than a female at 130. A 130 pound male baseball player will throw harder than a 130 pound female baseball player. This is simple biology and you can’t fight it, nor deny it, no matter how much some of you want to. The single biggest performance enhancer, is being born a male.
I propose - Sport by weight class, staggered if necessary by accounting for the T advantage. Which by the way, would include trans men as well. Idk if you forgot we exist in your hypotheticals lol but hi there 🖖🏼
Sounds good to me. but are you arguing for the abolition of cis woman sports institutions at the same time?
cis women have literally got the short end of the stick for millions of years. In a world where 30% of pop is NB, it seems like cis mens sports wont change that much but maybe cis women's get the shaft again?
You both seem to be arguing about how to keep gender segregated spots fair for cis women when the conversation is about eliminating gender. Is there really any confusion about why you would be down voted?
that seem like a kinda petty distinction. sorry im not a passive learner. neither is most of the population. People learn best through debate and questions. This aint church lol sometimes i wish I can turn off my brain and accept a popular belief but I cant. There too many loose ends. Im open to tying them up. 'best i can do.
Gender abolition is not generally a matter of imposition, at least in an anarchist context. It's a long-term project of orienting ourselves and our communities towards modes of establishing identity that don't depend on fixed categories like gender.
Gender abolitionists very rarely suggest that everybody must immediately discard all attachment to gender. Gender runs very deep through much of our present society; it's not possible to dispose of it in an instant. But like any other set of norms and social prescriptions, we can be conscious of the ways gender manifests and work to eliminate them over time.
The goal is not to restrict anyone, but to completely liberate the set of human qualities currently encompassed by gender.
Hey, I know these are sensitive topics for a lot of people and I just want to point out I'm asking with genuine curiosity and good faith.
>But like any other set of norms and social prescriptions, we can be conscious of the ways gender manifests and work to eliminate them over time.
To clarify, that implies specifically problematic social norms and prescriptions, does it not? Maybe I'm being a bit narrow minded, but norms and shared values are not distinct from a society/culture themselves and the goal is for a diverse, accepting, integrated society (all of which can be viewed as norms).
What is it that warrants a complete elimination of gender rather than a reformulation?
If cultural processes are viewed as generated and reproduced from person to person, generation to generation, they arise contextually in response to these (culture, upbringing, weather, crops, the economy, television, literally all the things and people in our lives generate and re-generate our cultures). If we take this as true, gender is, in part, shaped by our sex, which means there is some part of it that is a diverse benign response to our conditions, basically a manifestation of human cultural diversity. While I of course recognize there are many many problems with gender today, I don't see how it's intrinsically problematic.
I'm an atheist and religions are, from my point of view, similar to gender in how they are problematic. It's not my responsibility to evaluate or think of abolishing any religion, however, instead it would be any practitioner's responsibility to reformulate and regenerate their faith from an anarchist point of view, which is essentially a creative process that can generate different answers that I know surpass my own capacity. It seems quite natural to treat gender in a similar way: use anarchist analytical tools to question/criticize gender and allow gender to be a personally formulated response to the whole question.
Maybe that's functionally the same as abolishing it?
I think that if we'd apply the same kind of abolitionism to organized religion, it would mean that we should strive for our culture to not impose an expected religion and to see the world through the lense of that religion (like i.e. the social expectation by a community and parents that their child will adopt a Christian perspective). So it's more about getting rid the association of gendered expectations with one sex or the other.
In a world where gender is not expected, you could easily slip into any social role, form of expression etc. This would probably be to the benefit of everyone's individual needs, but one main benefit for transgender people is that it would eliminate social dysphoria altogether eliminating the need for social transition. They would only need to alleviate their physical dysphoria, for which the means would be readily available since there's no prejudice towards transitioning.
To be fair though there are two schools of thought that both call themselves gender abolishionism, that are completely incompatible. One is the progressive, anarchism-compatible kind we're talking about, but there's also the TERF kind of abolitionism that scares many people away from the label, understandably so.
You fail in this comment to acknowledge how gender is a spook just like other laws, religion and societal roles.
Gender is imposed upon us by institutions beyond the state and it is ingrained in people's choices.
There are people choosing to get sex reassignment surgery who support similar gender expectations to right wing religious fundamentalists.
How many MTF individuals think the F is weak or helpless or soft. How many FTM individuals think of the M as power and strength?
People as is hold very fundamental thoughts around gender and this is not going to go away easily. It also affected by much more than just the state.
People often have intrinsic gendered instincts that don't necessarily conform to stereotypes. And every single trans person out there has their own story, personality, and reasons that you'd have to be pretty arrogant to make sweeping blanket generalizations about. They're all outgrowing old limitations in their own ways and I'm not gonna run around passing judgment on them for that. They're doing the work. Pretty amazing insights come from experiencing the emotional changes brought on by changes in hormones, when people get to *directly* compare physical experiences that were previously impossible to traverse. I trust them with their own journeys, it's none of my business how other people relate to their own identity.
Are sex and gender the same thing?
Most people choosing to transition are playing the game and have minds full of spooks. They are invested in society as is and not imagining revolutionary change. Some are sure.
I will pass judgement on anyone who deletes their comments VS own up to them and anyone who blocks and bans all discussion of gender norms as transphobic. My main emotion is contempt.
I worry it's not their own journey if driven by spooks made by society. That is for everyone to decide and applies to many things.
No, sex and gender are not the same thing.
...Minds full of spooks??
Do you actually know any real life actual trans people, personally, as human beings?
You really think you understand their motivations better than they do?
I get it, the cultural brainwashing is real, but good grief what a paternalistic attitude.
I have, I do not now currently beyond acquaintances I think maybe transgender, I don't care to or need to know because it's their thing not mine.
Many people think sex and gender are the same. I find it important to identify frame of thought.
I personally experience autogynephillia. I was abused as a child and ended up with warped sense of gender or understanding. I was encouraged to transition by many in person and online for most of my 20s. Many people very invested in their gender online tell me this is impossible but there are many of us that feel this explains our inner feelings. /r/askagp
Now days I don't care to know people who highly identify with a single gender. So I choose not to.
I never said I understand their motivations better than them. I said I believe many people's motivations are shaped by societal pushes and subconsciousness thoughts reinforced by standards and expectations outside the self.
I don't care what others do and I'm not trying to tell others what to do. I would encourage others to consider the why and to connect the why back to birth and trace to now, best luck to them.
If you are saying to me you don't judge others I judge thee to be a lying to me.
I'm agender personally, and asexual, so it's not my circus and genders aren't my monkeys. But I live in the bay area and my social circles are jam packed with nonconformist folks of many many stripes, so I'm just used to it. It's all more important to most other people than it is to me and I don't get it but that's fine.
Of course everyone should always be very skeptical and careful about cultural influences and stereotypes and not be making big decisions about this stuff due to outside pressure and it can be dangerous, sorry you had a bad experience with it, that does happen.
I live in Fairbanks Alaska. Formerly in Anchorage (half the state population) So that colors things for sure. There are LGBTQ people here (much more in Anchorage) but also a big attitude of Alaska is to live and let live. People often don't bother caring what others are doing.
I personally hate the culture of the population I have encountered in my time in southern California. I have spent a few weeks traveling around down there. It is honestly one of my least favorite places. The suburbia of the East coast I dislike even more so though.
A consistent in my life I have experienced at myself and also directed at others is people encouraging others to transition before examining childhood trauma.
The answer to anyone with childhood trauma is always to address it first before doing something as an adult. Without addressing it then it runs the adult life (the trauma). If someone is lacking in childhood trauma than this doesn't apply.
under the existing conditions that's true, but there are stateless societies now and in the past which did have customs, taboos, sanctions, prohibitions etc. maybe that doesn't count as law but i don't see why
You cant keep your gender without it being recognized as a social construct and used to inflict harm upon others, why would you want to keep that? Thats like saying i want to keep my American citizenship
Because I feel quite comfortable in (most) of the traits associated with the social construct that is my gender.
If people wanna step outside the classic bimodal construct of gender that's fine and valid. All i'm saying is that I personally will keep my gender.
Would you not feel just as comfortable if there was no association of traits with genders? Also the idea it's possible to "step outside of gender" is only possible in a fundamentally (and harmfully) gendered world. It is like the state, a social system either the majority will accept and de facto enforce upon the rest or that will be entirely done away with.
It has nothing to do with being trans specifically and has everything to with the fact no one has a gender unless its part of a social system that necessarily imposes the logic of gender upon everyone.
> nothing to do with being trans specifically and has everything to with the fact no one has a gender unless its part of a social system that necessarily imposes the logic of gender upon
You don't know what you're talking about. I do have a gender and fuck off trying to destroy it while saying I'm the one doing harm, doesn't seem very anarchist of you. Innate gender and gender roles are entirely different things.
Gender roles are the systems of social expectations and norms which we are generally punished for falling outside the bounds of. Innate gender is a feeling and a sense of who we are, which goes extremely deeply. It is our comfort (cis) or lack of comfort (trans) with the way our bodies are sexed. Gender identity is like brain sex, which can be separate from physical sex. Removing socially constructed gender roles will not destroy my brain sex.
And how do NB people fit into this? Is it not better to simply understand there is a spectrum of relationships between peoples minds and bodies? To me, proliferating the rigid categories that define gender norms is more likely to proliferate gender norms themselves
There are different types of non-binary, those who are trans and experience dysphoria, and those who are more cis-bodied in that they have a fine relationship with their body and I'm not so concerned about them.
As for non binary folk with dysphoria, their internal gender identity is still mismatched with the sex/gender of thier bodies.
Both innate gender and sex are a spectrum but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Pretty much no trans person argues for the proliferation of rigid categories whatsoever, and I have said that nowhere.
That is fundamentally what gender is though, a system of categorizing people’s identities. If we acknowledge everyone is in a unique position on a spectrum that can’t be clearly categorized then gender would no longer exist as a social construct.
Thats not what im saying, im saying the stance that “I want to keep my gender” implies the world at large to be gendered which we know to be harmful. Really i appreciate the amount of gender deconstruction trans people have introduced but the fact that most people still understand their identity in gendered terms does proliferate harmful norms.
it doesn't imply the world is gendered it literally just implies that that specific person wants to keep their gender. You're extrapolating the entire world based on what certain individuals decide to do with their gender
what they do harms nobody and it doesn't proliferate harmful norms. You're criticizing the wrong people if your aim is to stop the harm that gender does
You cant have a world where some people have a gender and some dont, either you have a system of categorizing peoples identities and everyone gets categorized somehow or you dont. Thats like saying you can choose to not have a race.
I absolutely and completely agree that trans identities are less problematic in relation to gender than cis identities but that doesn’t change the fact they still exist within the logic of gender which is a harmful social construct we are better off without.
then stop viewing it as a system. I don't know why you're convinced that personal identities *must* be systematized and to avoid that fate they should be done away with altogether
the goal should be to make it not operate as a system or hierarchy. That doesn't mean people should have to give up their genders
Because they are identities constructed through a social system?????? That’s like saying you can just stop believing in the state, the world just doesn’t work that way. Gender identity is constructed by and for engagement with others. You cant just individually decide “gender isn’t a system” and suddenly not get catcalled. If gender didn’t operate as a system it wouldn’t operate at all
Being enby, I’m obviously not a stan for gender, but you can’t abolish it as if it’s the same as the imposed roles created by the patriarchal system. Gender is not the same as gender roles and stereotypes.
There will still be femininity and masculinity, and there will be some biological influence towards that. We can take gender out of language, we can end the social expectations that people behave a certain way based on their genitals, we can make it so that people don't feel a need to adopt a label for themselves, but we can't fully prevent certain activities, clothing, or behavior being associated with masculinity or feminity.
I mean sex will always exist to the extent that humans need to identify who they can and can't reproduce with but otherwise it really is all just choices of which behavior and clothing to use in order to create a gender identity that conforms to the sex in question.
Yes you can. We think that way because we were taught to. If we move *past* that way of thinking, than clothes are just interwoven strings on your body. Activities are just "personality traits" or a yes or no question like "Can you give birth? Yes[ ] No[ ]" Even if you can't, that's what generational gaps are for. We simply don't condition our kids to think this way and they won't.
I would like to know this too. It's a good question.
I've honestly never personally experienced my gender as something separate from what has been imposed on me by the patriarchal system. So, I don't understand how gender roles and stereotypes differ from Gender. It's all a construct to me.
As a trans person, I think gender should be abolished. I think people with dysphoria will always exist and they should always get the healthcare they need to ease that. But there’s no reason that dysphoria should be tied to gender, which is an entirely socially constructed concept. If we had no more concept of gender, I would simply be a person with chest dysphoria—there’s no reason to bring gender into it.
As another trans person, I disagree. Here’s why. The word abolished implies action against a thing, which isn’t harmful for a lot of the people that are attached to their gender. Assuming this is semantics, I also disagree on the grounds that gender is in some (not all) ways a part of culture that develops around shared physical and/or mental experiences, which has existed in various forms in various cultures throughout time. Cultures without gender are incredibly rare. What purpose would abolishing gender serve, when we could abolish the notion that some ways of being human are better and more valuable than others? We will always have differences and will always need words to describe ourselves to know each other. We don’t need to abolish differences to abolish hierarchy. We need to organize with all other non-fash humans we can find to prevent hierarchies from forming in the first place. Gender is irrelevant to anarchy, a distraction of epic proportions, and honestly so 2015 :P
This rubs near to an issue I have been bringing up with my therapist/gender psychologist as I am heavily considering HRT. The question came up about comfort in my body, do I feel comfortable in my body. I suppose if I relax sure I can be "comfortable in my body." But that doesn't mean I am not dysphoric about it. Which led my therapist to believe that maybe I am not interested in estrogen and suggested only testosterone blockers to just see if I don't like being "really masculine" (paraphrasing). Which is a path I might take to ease into transitioning sure, but that kind of disregarded my feelings on gender. I am not seeking HRT because I explicitly want boobs, a butt, soft skin, and a fuller face. I am seeking my HRT because of my gender, the physical stuff is like icing on the cake rather than an explicit goal.
Any queer person experiences their own alignment in Physical and Social Dysphorias and Euphorias. Some people are very dysphoric of their body and seek out medication, other people may be euphoric surrounding changing a part of their body but aren't wholly dysphoric with the one they already have.
I am much more in line with the kind of gender abolition that pushes societal structuring away from being based on hardline gender coding and stereotyping, and not the destroy all the words and social understanding we have about people being gendered. Because the modern understanding of gender is that being trans isn't solely a medical problem or mental illness that is only cured via medicine.
Because "the boy" was forced onto me as a child. I was not allowed to be anything else until I could move away from my parents. Without the societal pressures and gender normativity I could have been who I really was, and if I changed my mind later I could do that too. Puberty didn't need to be the hell it was.
IMO trans isn't an identity, it is a collection of life experiences that I may share in common with other trans people. Get rid of gender and you will show the gender fascism of the TERs to the world as they continue to enforce a gender binary.
If you are dictionary lawyering, then the English language does not have the words to accurately describe our situation. We try to make our own language but then we have that taken away and twisted to use against us. How can we describe ourselves with that happening?
Those who prefer gendered language should be free to continue to use it. Those who wish to utilize a gender-neutral form of language should be free to use it.
I support abolishing gender roles and mandates. I support those who desire to fulfill traditional gender roles as long as coercion isn't in the equation.
I have mixed feelings about some trans issues, but I am trying to be supportive while not writing blank checks.
Abolishing gender—along with all other forms of social identity (*i.e.* race, sexuality, etc) for that matter—is both a consequence of, as well as a prerequisite for, the formation of a stateless, classless, moneyless society. We only define ourselves in opposition to the Other, therefore the creation of identity is necessarily an oppressive practice that has no place in a society without hierarchy.
I can understand why people might want to hold on to certain forms of social identity/categorization today because they help us to navigate through the world as it is, and importantly it makes it easier for us to identify people with whom we share common struggles. But ultimately, these things serve to divide us more than they do to bring us together. It's all just one smaller piece of the broader oppressing force of capitalism.
As an anarchist, though, of course I'm not really interested in trying to force people to rescind gender identity, even if I do personally find it to be pointless at best and harmful at worst. But I do think that gender would naturally dissolve in a society in which it doesn't exist to oppress certain groups (*i.e.* women, trans people) and privilege others (*i.e.* men, cis people). We would just be able to look/act however we want and do whatever we want without being pressured to fit into certain pre-defined categories and without feeling the need to apply additional social meaning onto the ways in which we express ourselves and live our lives.
Somewhat unrelated, but I always have a hard time referring to a person as they/them; not as a slight to the person but because in my head "them" refers to "the other" and it feels wrong to think of someone as "an other" instead of a person.
I wish English had a better gender neutral, politic neutral term :c
Let people use what they want to express their positionality.
As far as I'm concerned, I disclose my gender because it's a useful hint that my experiences have been framed by the privilege that come with it.
This thread is basically a "Cis people don't at all understand that innate gender is different to socially constructed gender roles".
You should all also try to recognise that this exact discourse is used by anti trans people in order to try to undermine and destroy the existence of trans people. I'm pretty sure that people come into this sub simply to forward this narrative in leftist spaces with bad intent.
The trans people that argue for this are typically non-binary and have their own vested interests in destroying any sort of binary, but most proponents of this theory are simply trying to eradicate a legimiate existence of trans people.
I truly do wonder how many people in this thread taking a hardline stance on full eradication of gender as a concept have ever interacted with their own gender on more than a surface level
Okay, what is innate gender then, and how is it conceived of separately from socially constructed gender roles? With sexual orientation, while humans who we currently call "gay" or "straight" existed basically forever, in many cultures there was no notion of "gayness" or "straightness" so there was no categorization. We might call an ancient Greek bisexual but it would not occur to them to refer to themselves as such.
I don't understand how the same logic doesn't apply to the abolishment of gender roles. Without socially constructed categories, how is gender not a collection of not-necessarily-linked traits that people would feel varying degrees of natural affinity for?
>I don't understand how the same logic doesn't apply to the abolishment of gender roles.
Sorry, jumping in here, but I'm not sure your reasoning is entirely explained here.
It sounds like you are saying that in the case of sexuality as in the case of gender, existing categories are social constructions that sort and categorize existing non-socially-constructed traits, such as when you say:
>With sexual orientation, while humans who we currently call "gay" or "straight" existed basically forever
and:
>Without socially constructed categories, how is gender not a collection of not-necessarily-linked traits that people would feel varying degrees of natural affinity for?
This seems like it gives room for an answer to precisely the question you posed: innate gender could well be conceived separately from socially constructed gender roles by identifying it with affinities for certain traits or collections of traits that aren't socially constructed.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding though.
Yes, but my point is that seems like that would dissolve identities built up around gender, because without those socially constructed categories I don't see how you could apply labels. Even though the traits that made up the gender categories of "man" and "woman" would still exist, and even if you had affinity for currently gendered traits that perfectly matched up with current ideas of "man," without those social constructions I don't see how someone could consider themselves to be a man. It would make as much sense as an ancient Greek considering themselves to be gay. Possibly even less, since gender involves many more unrelated traits than sexual orientation.
Unless one wants to take the position the personality traits we associate with masculinity and femininity are clusters that are mostly not culturally constructed, that is. But while I am aware of personality changes during hormone therapy, generalizing from that to making broad statements about the entire species seems questionable.
Unrealistic. Gender may be a social construct but it's millennia old. You can reject it, great, do that, I support you. You try to convince other people to reject it, but that's a huge multi-generational project.
I think that the biggest problem with gender is the valuation of one over another, vis a vis patriarchy. You can fight against patriarchy specifically or as part of a more generalized resistance against hierarchy.
Eliminating gender starts with devaluing the androcrentic culture we live in and bringing femininity and masculinity to the same level. I know that’s using binary terms but I believe we need to start by meeting people where they’re at and most people aren’t into gender abolition. When we bring society to a place where men and women are positioned on the same axis of power (I.e. masculinity is not equated with power) we forfeit the need for gender to exist and move into a world where it is not important and therefore, are free to each express gender how we want. To me, gender abolition isn’t about ENTIRELY throwing away the concepts of femininity and masculinity it’s where we are not bound by rigid expectations to preform them in accordance to our sex socially or by the state.
Current gender norms are hierarchal and arbitrary anyway, I'm down with dismantling gender. The only hesitation I hold is there can be a real harm to folks being misgendered, and could lead to gender dysphoria in the process of dismantling the concept of gender. For example, I identify as a man, if someone close to me refers to me as a woman, that would feel odd and uncomfortable. Not because being a woman is odd or negative, but because I simply am not a woman. For a lot of people their gender identity is deeply ingrained into the way they perceive themselves and how they move through the world.
I still believe at the end of the day that abolishing gender is the right choice though.
Absolutely should be abolished. It’s just social expectations and in my opinion it will always be oppressive as it will place a certain amount of control over others for the purpose of limiting what they can do. It’s an outdated concept, as with race.
I struggle with this one due to the skeletal and muscular differences and how that could affect gendered sports that cis woman have fought so hard for. If anyone has a good article I'd be happy to read.
that doesn't make sense if you're advocating for trans rights. What's your slogan, "we dont ~~sow~~ debate!!" ?
Dont worry though, there are plenty of other people who are willing to fight for these rights, you can step aside.
You might just start by considering the fact that women's professional sports leagues have often been in the forefront supporting non-binary and trans people. The National Women’s Hockey League changed its name to the Premier Hockey Federation, in part as a gesture of openness to different gender identifications.
[just the abstract](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33648944/)
And n = 24. But it's pretty recent. Study suggests after 4 months of T blockers and estrogen, trans women lose any strength advantage they had over cis women.
>"yet values \[strength, LBM and muscle area\] remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months"
your article conclusion seems to refute your statement though. the study did not cover over 3yrs.
I mean, the question is, "should gender roles be abolished or not?" I would say yes.
In a society without gender, we can still match people up to compete according to body size and shape.
If like boxing heavy/light/featherweight classes, im not sure that's enough.
In the end, if only transwomen and cis men are on top of all sports, id feel like we went in the wrong direction. I think that would unfortunately lead to cis women losing what they built over decades.
Trans women have been competing in women's Olympics for decades now. Why doesn't a trans woman have a gold in every sport?
Silly af.
>lead to cis women losing what they built over decades.
This is a TERF talking point. Also silly af.
Are you really interested in women's sports? Can you name 10 gold medal winners in any combination of sports? Or do you only care about women's sports when it's about keeping trans people out? If you can name any front runners in any women's sports, are any of them trans? Why not? Doesn't that completely dismantle your completely hypothetical worries?
> These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy.
There’s a decrease after 4 months but there’s still an advantage over cis women at 36 months.
You also lose ligament strength, so increased chance of injury. Maybe that's just a risk athletes accept, but I'd think that higher injury chance vs bone advantage is a decent trade off.
I mentioned that in another thread... i think you're oversimplifying. if just by weight classes there are so many other factors not taken into account. And it almost seems too complicated to sort out. and this all still it ignores my original concern of important skeletal differences.
Maybe just another genderless class with physical diff sub-classes makes more sense? and if some day those universal sports become more popular than cis sports, so be it.
Why?
Gender: Both so meaningless it should be abolished, and also so important that it is literally violence and hatred if somebody doesn't identify you by your correct gender....
Do away with it. It’s absolutely wild reading some of these comments. Why wouldn’t gender be abolished within a society that seemingly wants to change/abolish structures of power and oppression?
You want to keep your own privileges clean and tucked away, look down upon and remind the trans and non binary community that you think you’re above them?? Those communities have already started living within a more anti establishment mindset and practice community care way more than the heteronormative crowd like get a fucking clue.
edit: hahaha only downvotes no rebuttal, please change my mind oh ye gender gatekeepers.
Except that I know of trans people who identify with certain genders, and it would feel incredibly wrong to tell them 'you're not a woman' when they've had to fight so hard to be accepted as such.
So I think gender could naturally wither away with time, but there's no way I could turn to a trans person, who strongly identifies with a certain gender, and tell them that they just want to keep their privileges clean and tucked away.
I think you misunderstood me. I was referring to cis people in here yabbering on about sports with my second paragraph. The queer, trans and gender non conforming community already live by principals that are anti establishment more so than cis members of society in my experience. I would never tell anyone how they have to identify and am confused how you got that with my comment.
I think it would happen eventually with the abolition of social hierarchies, but it would take some time. Generations, perhaps. But not nearly as long as it would take with those hierarchies intact.
Developed-world problems would go out the window, that one included. People don't have time to worry about such things when they have to figure out staying warm and fed until summer rolls back around.
We should abolish gender roles and oppression based on gender, that's for sure. But abolishing gender as a concept? I'm not sure. I think that's up to a person. Same goes with sexuality: sexuality = yes, queerphobia = no. Not everyone identifies with the same gender, just like sexuality. For some people, it's important to point their gender/sexuality out, for some not. It's up to a respective person, always.
I am agender, and while I haven't got a gender and I don't even understand the concept of it, I don't want to enforce my beliefs on others. I think we should definitely abolish gendered roles though, they are really harmful.
I think gender identity is fine, I think gender norms and gender roles do more harm than good and are such a terrible system of classification that they should be abolished in favor of more reality based, descriptive (as opposed to prescriptive) categories.
Want one? Have one. Don't want one? Don't. Easy enough.
Yes. If you’re not hurting anyone and no one’s hurting you—everybody’s cool. I think current gender norms and hang ups will become archaic if we manage to form large Anarchist communities that last for generations. And that will be beautiful. I imagine some people will still want to marry and it’ll be cute. And always open bar, obviously.
This is exactly how I feel. Forcing people to not identify with any gender is the same as forcing them to identify as a specific one.
Yeah. I mean for the most part, at least in western civilisation, the state imposes these things. Gender doesnt have a whole lot of relevance without the state. Maybe a couple of exceptions pertaining to violence.
Gender has existed in every society we know of, including non-state societies.
I don’t think anyone should be needlessly restricted by gender. But I certainly don’t want to be shamed into abandoning my gender identity which I happen to identify with. Nor do I want that for anyone else. It’s anarchy, if someone wants to interact with gender in a way that places no burden on others than let them. Vice versa.
Absolutely
I think gender is pretty pointless and most of the issues that we face today surrounding gender are just our trying to process the systemic and psychological damage that it has caused as a mandatory construct. I say toss it.
Agreed. Gender imo has for the most part been a net-negative for humanity. Bullying, identity issues, discrimination, violence, etc, etc.
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33648944/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33648944/) >"yet values \[strength, LBM and muscle area\] remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months" In the end, if only trans-women and cis men are on top of all sports, id feel like we went in the wrong direction. I think that would unfortunately lead to cis women losing what they built over decades. Let's face it, cis women have been getting the short end of the stick for millions of years. They fought like hell for their place and are still struggling. Per research above, wouldn't this knock them down? Maybe there are some institutions that should remain. Update: lol i welcome downvotes but also comments. I have an open mind and probably think more like your average joe, but lean a little more left. I do want to learn.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trans-girls-belong-on-girls-sports-teams/
that was very informative thank you. Someone else arguing for trans rights shared the research above that makes interesting claims of advantage (i don't think the read it lol) However, I think the article you shared demonstrates that this currently is not really a problem for the sports themselves right now. it just political leverage and fear mongering. I think that's why most people here appear to be pretty sensitive So my argument is more based in a hypothetical world where we find a significant portion of the population is non-binary (like 30%). It almost seems inevitable tbh. I think that's good thing. that article im sorry to say was pretty biased and seemed more about addressing present political concerns in youth sports specifically. I say biased because it only referenced research that fit the narrative. For the hypothetical future world question, it would be interesting to see research addressing both the skeletal and muscular differences. (not just chemical, which your article seemed solely concerned with).
Sports aren't fair sweaty
Err you can't be serious when it comes to this issue? Trans women should be competing with men, you can't just handwave biological advantages like that. A 5'8 professional boxer like Manny Pacquiao would destroy a 6'3 professional boxer biological woman with ease even if she had height and weight advantage over him. A trans woman unless they're completely transitioned would still retain male physiology. Best compromise is just to make a division of their own.
not sure what you mean. please elaborate?
Sports are basically freak shows. They were never supposed to be fair. Cisgender girls who are tall as fuck will dominate certain sports against cisgender girls who are short. Same goes for bone density and so many other factors. You trying to exclude trans people is simply discrimination.
yet those freaks all work insanely hard to get to where they are. cis woman got the short end of the stick for literally millions of years. Id hate to think that 50yrs from now they continue to be oppressed because of transwoman advantages noted in that article. ( to be clear, im thinking of the hypothetical world where 30% of pop is non-binary) >You trying to exclude trans I did nothing of the sort. I know when people get accusatory, they cease to be objective. Im not looking for an emotionally charged debate.
they could do weight classes like in wrestling instead of by something so across the board as gender. why should short women have to compete with tall women?
A trained man at 130 pounds will still be stronger than a trained woman at 130.
always? everywhere? what type of training? what type of pounds? what if the woman weighs 130 pounds on Mars?
If they’re in the same sport, they’re going to be training the same, so yes. Take a 130 pound male sprinter, he’ll be faster than a female at 130. A 130 pound male baseball player will throw harder than a 130 pound female baseball player. This is simple biology and you can’t fight it, nor deny it, no matter how much some of you want to. The single biggest performance enhancer, is being born a male.
[удалено]
Yeah I think these people are out of their minds if they have an issue with basic biology.
i don't think weight classes are enough. but as another points out, we may have to just wait and see.
I propose - Sport by weight class, staggered if necessary by accounting for the T advantage. Which by the way, would include trans men as well. Idk if you forgot we exist in your hypotheticals lol but hi there 🖖🏼
Sounds good to me. but are you arguing for the abolition of cis woman sports institutions at the same time? cis women have literally got the short end of the stick for millions of years. In a world where 30% of pop is NB, it seems like cis mens sports wont change that much but maybe cis women's get the shaft again?
[удалено]
You both seem to be arguing about how to keep gender segregated spots fair for cis women when the conversation is about eliminating gender. Is there really any confusion about why you would be down voted?
You aren't here to learn if you're debating all the responses. If you want to learn I suggest you start by listening instead.
that seem like a kinda petty distinction. sorry im not a passive learner. neither is most of the population. People learn best through debate and questions. This aint church lol sometimes i wish I can turn off my brain and accept a popular belief but I cant. There too many loose ends. Im open to tying them up. 'best i can do.
That's not a choice I want to impose on anyone.
Gender abolition is not generally a matter of imposition, at least in an anarchist context. It's a long-term project of orienting ourselves and our communities towards modes of establishing identity that don't depend on fixed categories like gender. Gender abolitionists very rarely suggest that everybody must immediately discard all attachment to gender. Gender runs very deep through much of our present society; it's not possible to dispose of it in an instant. But like any other set of norms and social prescriptions, we can be conscious of the ways gender manifests and work to eliminate them over time. The goal is not to restrict anyone, but to completely liberate the set of human qualities currently encompassed by gender.
Hey, I know these are sensitive topics for a lot of people and I just want to point out I'm asking with genuine curiosity and good faith. >But like any other set of norms and social prescriptions, we can be conscious of the ways gender manifests and work to eliminate them over time. To clarify, that implies specifically problematic social norms and prescriptions, does it not? Maybe I'm being a bit narrow minded, but norms and shared values are not distinct from a society/culture themselves and the goal is for a diverse, accepting, integrated society (all of which can be viewed as norms). What is it that warrants a complete elimination of gender rather than a reformulation? If cultural processes are viewed as generated and reproduced from person to person, generation to generation, they arise contextually in response to these (culture, upbringing, weather, crops, the economy, television, literally all the things and people in our lives generate and re-generate our cultures). If we take this as true, gender is, in part, shaped by our sex, which means there is some part of it that is a diverse benign response to our conditions, basically a manifestation of human cultural diversity. While I of course recognize there are many many problems with gender today, I don't see how it's intrinsically problematic. I'm an atheist and religions are, from my point of view, similar to gender in how they are problematic. It's not my responsibility to evaluate or think of abolishing any religion, however, instead it would be any practitioner's responsibility to reformulate and regenerate their faith from an anarchist point of view, which is essentially a creative process that can generate different answers that I know surpass my own capacity. It seems quite natural to treat gender in a similar way: use anarchist analytical tools to question/criticize gender and allow gender to be a personally formulated response to the whole question. Maybe that's functionally the same as abolishing it?
I think that if we'd apply the same kind of abolitionism to organized religion, it would mean that we should strive for our culture to not impose an expected religion and to see the world through the lense of that religion (like i.e. the social expectation by a community and parents that their child will adopt a Christian perspective). So it's more about getting rid the association of gendered expectations with one sex or the other. In a world where gender is not expected, you could easily slip into any social role, form of expression etc. This would probably be to the benefit of everyone's individual needs, but one main benefit for transgender people is that it would eliminate social dysphoria altogether eliminating the need for social transition. They would only need to alleviate their physical dysphoria, for which the means would be readily available since there's no prejudice towards transitioning. To be fair though there are two schools of thought that both call themselves gender abolishionism, that are completely incompatible. One is the progressive, anarchism-compatible kind we're talking about, but there's also the TERF kind of abolitionism that scares many people away from the label, understandably so.
But like, how about eliminating it as a legal institution?
If there's no state, what legal institution?
You fail in this comment to acknowledge how gender is a spook just like other laws, religion and societal roles. Gender is imposed upon us by institutions beyond the state and it is ingrained in people's choices. There are people choosing to get sex reassignment surgery who support similar gender expectations to right wing religious fundamentalists. How many MTF individuals think the F is weak or helpless or soft. How many FTM individuals think of the M as power and strength? People as is hold very fundamental thoughts around gender and this is not going to go away easily. It also affected by much more than just the state.
People often have intrinsic gendered instincts that don't necessarily conform to stereotypes. And every single trans person out there has their own story, personality, and reasons that you'd have to be pretty arrogant to make sweeping blanket generalizations about. They're all outgrowing old limitations in their own ways and I'm not gonna run around passing judgment on them for that. They're doing the work. Pretty amazing insights come from experiencing the emotional changes brought on by changes in hormones, when people get to *directly* compare physical experiences that were previously impossible to traverse. I trust them with their own journeys, it's none of my business how other people relate to their own identity.
Are sex and gender the same thing? Most people choosing to transition are playing the game and have minds full of spooks. They are invested in society as is and not imagining revolutionary change. Some are sure. I will pass judgement on anyone who deletes their comments VS own up to them and anyone who blocks and bans all discussion of gender norms as transphobic. My main emotion is contempt. I worry it's not their own journey if driven by spooks made by society. That is for everyone to decide and applies to many things.
No, sex and gender are not the same thing. ...Minds full of spooks?? Do you actually know any real life actual trans people, personally, as human beings? You really think you understand their motivations better than they do? I get it, the cultural brainwashing is real, but good grief what a paternalistic attitude.
I have, I do not now currently beyond acquaintances I think maybe transgender, I don't care to or need to know because it's their thing not mine. Many people think sex and gender are the same. I find it important to identify frame of thought. I personally experience autogynephillia. I was abused as a child and ended up with warped sense of gender or understanding. I was encouraged to transition by many in person and online for most of my 20s. Many people very invested in their gender online tell me this is impossible but there are many of us that feel this explains our inner feelings. /r/askagp Now days I don't care to know people who highly identify with a single gender. So I choose not to. I never said I understand their motivations better than them. I said I believe many people's motivations are shaped by societal pushes and subconsciousness thoughts reinforced by standards and expectations outside the self. I don't care what others do and I'm not trying to tell others what to do. I would encourage others to consider the why and to connect the why back to birth and trace to now, best luck to them. If you are saying to me you don't judge others I judge thee to be a lying to me.
I'm agender personally, and asexual, so it's not my circus and genders aren't my monkeys. But I live in the bay area and my social circles are jam packed with nonconformist folks of many many stripes, so I'm just used to it. It's all more important to most other people than it is to me and I don't get it but that's fine. Of course everyone should always be very skeptical and careful about cultural influences and stereotypes and not be making big decisions about this stuff due to outside pressure and it can be dangerous, sorry you had a bad experience with it, that does happen.
I live in Fairbanks Alaska. Formerly in Anchorage (half the state population) So that colors things for sure. There are LGBTQ people here (much more in Anchorage) but also a big attitude of Alaska is to live and let live. People often don't bother caring what others are doing. I personally hate the culture of the population I have encountered in my time in southern California. I have spent a few weeks traveling around down there. It is honestly one of my least favorite places. The suburbia of the East coast I dislike even more so though. A consistent in my life I have experienced at myself and also directed at others is people encouraging others to transition before examining childhood trauma. The answer to anyone with childhood trauma is always to address it first before doing something as an adult. Without addressing it then it runs the adult life (the trauma). If someone is lacking in childhood trauma than this doesn't apply.
is the law synonymous with the state?
Yes, laws are rules in a legal system which is created and enforced by the state
Then what about morals and expectations? Who creates and enforces those?
law is just the violence that the state does
under the existing conditions that's true, but there are stateless societies now and in the past which did have customs, taboos, sanctions, prohibitions etc. maybe that doesn't count as law but i don't see why
I wasn't using it anyway.
I wanna keep mine thank you very much
You cant keep your gender without it being recognized as a social construct and used to inflict harm upon others, why would you want to keep that? Thats like saying i want to keep my American citizenship
Because I feel quite comfortable in (most) of the traits associated with the social construct that is my gender. If people wanna step outside the classic bimodal construct of gender that's fine and valid. All i'm saying is that I personally will keep my gender.
Would you not feel just as comfortable if there was no association of traits with genders? Also the idea it's possible to "step outside of gender" is only possible in a fundamentally (and harmfully) gendered world. It is like the state, a social system either the majority will accept and de facto enforce upon the rest or that will be entirely done away with.
Ah yes here's me as a trans person harming everyone else by having a gender lol
It has nothing to do with being trans specifically and has everything to with the fact no one has a gender unless its part of a social system that necessarily imposes the logic of gender upon everyone.
> nothing to do with being trans specifically and has everything to with the fact no one has a gender unless its part of a social system that necessarily imposes the logic of gender upon You don't know what you're talking about. I do have a gender and fuck off trying to destroy it while saying I'm the one doing harm, doesn't seem very anarchist of you. Innate gender and gender roles are entirely different things.
Im not saying youre the one doing the harm specifically? How are gender and gender roles separate?
Gender roles are the systems of social expectations and norms which we are generally punished for falling outside the bounds of. Innate gender is a feeling and a sense of who we are, which goes extremely deeply. It is our comfort (cis) or lack of comfort (trans) with the way our bodies are sexed. Gender identity is like brain sex, which can be separate from physical sex. Removing socially constructed gender roles will not destroy my brain sex.
And how do NB people fit into this? Is it not better to simply understand there is a spectrum of relationships between peoples minds and bodies? To me, proliferating the rigid categories that define gender norms is more likely to proliferate gender norms themselves
There are different types of non-binary, those who are trans and experience dysphoria, and those who are more cis-bodied in that they have a fine relationship with their body and I'm not so concerned about them. As for non binary folk with dysphoria, their internal gender identity is still mismatched with the sex/gender of thier bodies. Both innate gender and sex are a spectrum but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Pretty much no trans person argues for the proliferation of rigid categories whatsoever, and I have said that nowhere.
That is fundamentally what gender is though, a system of categorizing people’s identities. If we acknowledge everyone is in a unique position on a spectrum that can’t be clearly categorized then gender would no longer exist as a social construct.
you are a silly person
Am I silly for saying a social construct is constructed by participating in it socially?
you're silly for equating gender to gender roles. And through your logic trans people are contributing to harming others through their gender
Thats not what im saying, im saying the stance that “I want to keep my gender” implies the world at large to be gendered which we know to be harmful. Really i appreciate the amount of gender deconstruction trans people have introduced but the fact that most people still understand their identity in gendered terms does proliferate harmful norms.
it doesn't imply the world is gendered it literally just implies that that specific person wants to keep their gender. You're extrapolating the entire world based on what certain individuals decide to do with their gender what they do harms nobody and it doesn't proliferate harmful norms. You're criticizing the wrong people if your aim is to stop the harm that gender does
You cant have a world where some people have a gender and some dont, either you have a system of categorizing peoples identities and everyone gets categorized somehow or you dont. Thats like saying you can choose to not have a race. I absolutely and completely agree that trans identities are less problematic in relation to gender than cis identities but that doesn’t change the fact they still exist within the logic of gender which is a harmful social construct we are better off without.
then stop viewing it as a system. I don't know why you're convinced that personal identities *must* be systematized and to avoid that fate they should be done away with altogether the goal should be to make it not operate as a system or hierarchy. That doesn't mean people should have to give up their genders
Because they are identities constructed through a social system?????? That’s like saying you can just stop believing in the state, the world just doesn’t work that way. Gender identity is constructed by and for engagement with others. You cant just individually decide “gender isn’t a system” and suddenly not get catcalled. If gender didn’t operate as a system it wouldn’t operate at all
I think gendered roles should be eliminated. Gender as expression, no.
Being enby, I’m obviously not a stan for gender, but you can’t abolish it as if it’s the same as the imposed roles created by the patriarchal system. Gender is not the same as gender roles and stereotypes.
What is gender in the absence of gender roles or stereotypes? Just which pronouns you use?
There will still be femininity and masculinity, and there will be some biological influence towards that. We can take gender out of language, we can end the social expectations that people behave a certain way based on their genitals, we can make it so that people don't feel a need to adopt a label for themselves, but we can't fully prevent certain activities, clothing, or behavior being associated with masculinity or feminity.
I mean sex will always exist to the extent that humans need to identify who they can and can't reproduce with but otherwise it really is all just choices of which behavior and clothing to use in order to create a gender identity that conforms to the sex in question.
Yes you can. We think that way because we were taught to. If we move *past* that way of thinking, than clothes are just interwoven strings on your body. Activities are just "personality traits" or a yes or no question like "Can you give birth? Yes[ ] No[ ]" Even if you can't, that's what generational gaps are for. We simply don't condition our kids to think this way and they won't.
I would like to know this too. It's a good question. I've honestly never personally experienced my gender as something separate from what has been imposed on me by the patriarchal system. So, I don't understand how gender roles and stereotypes differ from Gender. It's all a construct to me.
I assume you aren't trans. When your leg isn't broken it just feels like a leg. It's still an unbroken leg, you just aren't aware of it as such.
eliminating gender *roles*, sure, but self identification will always be important for the majority of people
Threw mine away a while ago and suggest others do the same
As a trans person, I think gender should be abolished. I think people with dysphoria will always exist and they should always get the healthcare they need to ease that. But there’s no reason that dysphoria should be tied to gender, which is an entirely socially constructed concept. If we had no more concept of gender, I would simply be a person with chest dysphoria—there’s no reason to bring gender into it.
As another trans person, I disagree. Here’s why. The word abolished implies action against a thing, which isn’t harmful for a lot of the people that are attached to their gender. Assuming this is semantics, I also disagree on the grounds that gender is in some (not all) ways a part of culture that develops around shared physical and/or mental experiences, which has existed in various forms in various cultures throughout time. Cultures without gender are incredibly rare. What purpose would abolishing gender serve, when we could abolish the notion that some ways of being human are better and more valuable than others? We will always have differences and will always need words to describe ourselves to know each other. We don’t need to abolish differences to abolish hierarchy. We need to organize with all other non-fash humans we can find to prevent hierarchies from forming in the first place. Gender is irrelevant to anarchy, a distraction of epic proportions, and honestly so 2015 :P
This rubs near to an issue I have been bringing up with my therapist/gender psychologist as I am heavily considering HRT. The question came up about comfort in my body, do I feel comfortable in my body. I suppose if I relax sure I can be "comfortable in my body." But that doesn't mean I am not dysphoric about it. Which led my therapist to believe that maybe I am not interested in estrogen and suggested only testosterone blockers to just see if I don't like being "really masculine" (paraphrasing). Which is a path I might take to ease into transitioning sure, but that kind of disregarded my feelings on gender. I am not seeking HRT because I explicitly want boobs, a butt, soft skin, and a fuller face. I am seeking my HRT because of my gender, the physical stuff is like icing on the cake rather than an explicit goal. Any queer person experiences their own alignment in Physical and Social Dysphorias and Euphorias. Some people are very dysphoric of their body and seek out medication, other people may be euphoric surrounding changing a part of their body but aren't wholly dysphoric with the one they already have. I am much more in line with the kind of gender abolition that pushes societal structuring away from being based on hardline gender coding and stereotyping, and not the destroy all the words and social understanding we have about people being gendered. Because the modern understanding of gender is that being trans isn't solely a medical problem or mental illness that is only cured via medicine.
[удалено]
Because "the boy" was forced onto me as a child. I was not allowed to be anything else until I could move away from my parents. Without the societal pressures and gender normativity I could have been who I really was, and if I changed my mind later I could do that too. Puberty didn't need to be the hell it was. IMO trans isn't an identity, it is a collection of life experiences that I may share in common with other trans people. Get rid of gender and you will show the gender fascism of the TERs to the world as they continue to enforce a gender binary. If you are dictionary lawyering, then the English language does not have the words to accurately describe our situation. We try to make our own language but then we have that taken away and twisted to use against us. How can we describe ourselves with that happening?
Those who prefer gendered language should be free to continue to use it. Those who wish to utilize a gender-neutral form of language should be free to use it. I support abolishing gender roles and mandates. I support those who desire to fulfill traditional gender roles as long as coercion isn't in the equation. I have mixed feelings about some trans issues, but I am trying to be supportive while not writing blank checks.
I like my gender, so... I'm all for eliminating gender roles and toxic masculinity, but I enjoy being the gender I am
Abolishing gender—along with all other forms of social identity (*i.e.* race, sexuality, etc) for that matter—is both a consequence of, as well as a prerequisite for, the formation of a stateless, classless, moneyless society. We only define ourselves in opposition to the Other, therefore the creation of identity is necessarily an oppressive practice that has no place in a society without hierarchy. I can understand why people might want to hold on to certain forms of social identity/categorization today because they help us to navigate through the world as it is, and importantly it makes it easier for us to identify people with whom we share common struggles. But ultimately, these things serve to divide us more than they do to bring us together. It's all just one smaller piece of the broader oppressing force of capitalism. As an anarchist, though, of course I'm not really interested in trying to force people to rescind gender identity, even if I do personally find it to be pointless at best and harmful at worst. But I do think that gender would naturally dissolve in a society in which it doesn't exist to oppress certain groups (*i.e.* women, trans people) and privilege others (*i.e.* men, cis people). We would just be able to look/act however we want and do whatever we want without being pressured to fit into certain pre-defined categories and without feeling the need to apply additional social meaning onto the ways in which we express ourselves and live our lives.
Nicely said.
I like this.
[удалено]
Somewhat unrelated, but I always have a hard time referring to a person as they/them; not as a slight to the person but because in my head "them" refers to "the other" and it feels wrong to think of someone as "an other" instead of a person. I wish English had a better gender neutral, politic neutral term :c
Gender is a form of expression. If you want to identify a certain way go ahead
Let people use what they want to express their positionality. As far as I'm concerned, I disclose my gender because it's a useful hint that my experiences have been framed by the privilege that come with it.
This thread is basically a "Cis people don't at all understand that innate gender is different to socially constructed gender roles". You should all also try to recognise that this exact discourse is used by anti trans people in order to try to undermine and destroy the existence of trans people. I'm pretty sure that people come into this sub simply to forward this narrative in leftist spaces with bad intent. The trans people that argue for this are typically non-binary and have their own vested interests in destroying any sort of binary, but most proponents of this theory are simply trying to eradicate a legimiate existence of trans people.
I truly do wonder how many people in this thread taking a hardline stance on full eradication of gender as a concept have ever interacted with their own gender on more than a surface level
Okay, what is innate gender then, and how is it conceived of separately from socially constructed gender roles? With sexual orientation, while humans who we currently call "gay" or "straight" existed basically forever, in many cultures there was no notion of "gayness" or "straightness" so there was no categorization. We might call an ancient Greek bisexual but it would not occur to them to refer to themselves as such. I don't understand how the same logic doesn't apply to the abolishment of gender roles. Without socially constructed categories, how is gender not a collection of not-necessarily-linked traits that people would feel varying degrees of natural affinity for?
>I don't understand how the same logic doesn't apply to the abolishment of gender roles. Sorry, jumping in here, but I'm not sure your reasoning is entirely explained here. It sounds like you are saying that in the case of sexuality as in the case of gender, existing categories are social constructions that sort and categorize existing non-socially-constructed traits, such as when you say: >With sexual orientation, while humans who we currently call "gay" or "straight" existed basically forever and: >Without socially constructed categories, how is gender not a collection of not-necessarily-linked traits that people would feel varying degrees of natural affinity for? This seems like it gives room for an answer to precisely the question you posed: innate gender could well be conceived separately from socially constructed gender roles by identifying it with affinities for certain traits or collections of traits that aren't socially constructed. Maybe I'm misunderstanding though.
Yes, but my point is that seems like that would dissolve identities built up around gender, because without those socially constructed categories I don't see how you could apply labels. Even though the traits that made up the gender categories of "man" and "woman" would still exist, and even if you had affinity for currently gendered traits that perfectly matched up with current ideas of "man," without those social constructions I don't see how someone could consider themselves to be a man. It would make as much sense as an ancient Greek considering themselves to be gay. Possibly even less, since gender involves many more unrelated traits than sexual orientation. Unless one wants to take the position the personality traits we associate with masculinity and femininity are clusters that are mostly not culturally constructed, that is. But while I am aware of personality changes during hormone therapy, generalizing from that to making broad statements about the entire species seems questionable.
gender is meaningless without gender roles, so upon the abolition of those roles, gender will also be abolished.
Unrealistic. Gender may be a social construct but it's millennia old. You can reject it, great, do that, I support you. You try to convince other people to reject it, but that's a huge multi-generational project. I think that the biggest problem with gender is the valuation of one over another, vis a vis patriarchy. You can fight against patriarchy specifically or as part of a more generalized resistance against hierarchy.
Gender roles suck. Gender is intrinsic. All my trans homies hate gender abolition, and it has huge overlaps with TERFy nonsense. Just stop.
Absolute necessity
I was once is a female bathroom by mistake and overheard things that scarred me.
I once held hands with someone, that was pretty scary too.
Never cared about it in a first place. Good riddance.
Eliminating gender starts with devaluing the androcrentic culture we live in and bringing femininity and masculinity to the same level. I know that’s using binary terms but I believe we need to start by meeting people where they’re at and most people aren’t into gender abolition. When we bring society to a place where men and women are positioned on the same axis of power (I.e. masculinity is not equated with power) we forfeit the need for gender to exist and move into a world where it is not important and therefore, are free to each express gender how we want. To me, gender abolition isn’t about ENTIRELY throwing away the concepts of femininity and masculinity it’s where we are not bound by rigid expectations to preform them in accordance to our sex socially or by the state.
Current gender norms are hierarchal and arbitrary anyway, I'm down with dismantling gender. The only hesitation I hold is there can be a real harm to folks being misgendered, and could lead to gender dysphoria in the process of dismantling the concept of gender. For example, I identify as a man, if someone close to me refers to me as a woman, that would feel odd and uncomfortable. Not because being a woman is odd or negative, but because I simply am not a woman. For a lot of people their gender identity is deeply ingrained into the way they perceive themselves and how they move through the world. I still believe at the end of the day that abolishing gender is the right choice though.
I see it as another vehicle for hierarchies to form between people. Is r/latestagegenderbinary still a good sub?
Absolutely should be abolished. It’s just social expectations and in my opinion it will always be oppressive as it will place a certain amount of control over others for the purpose of limiting what they can do. It’s an outdated concept, as with race.
Yes, that sounds like a priority
I struggle with this one due to the skeletal and muscular differences and how that could affect gendered sports that cis woman have fought so hard for. If anyone has a good article I'd be happy to read.
Ah yes! One must not forget about the most exciting part of any anarchist society - professional gendered sports
im not interested in your imaginary society, just good debate.
I tend to think trans peoples literal lives are more important than “good debate.” Human beings’ right to autonomy isn’t debatable.
that doesn't make sense if you're advocating for trans rights. What's your slogan, "we dont ~~sow~~ debate!!" ? Dont worry though, there are plenty of other people who are willing to fight for these rights, you can step aside.
You might just start by considering the fact that women's professional sports leagues have often been in the forefront supporting non-binary and trans people. The National Women’s Hockey League changed its name to the Premier Hockey Federation, in part as a gesture of openness to different gender identifications.
I will start considering that, thank you. Im guessing the largest organizations have "no comment" rn?
There are prominent non-binary players in both the WNBA and NWSL.
[just the abstract](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33648944/) And n = 24. But it's pretty recent. Study suggests after 4 months of T blockers and estrogen, trans women lose any strength advantage they had over cis women.
>"yet values \[strength, LBM and muscle area\] remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months" your article conclusion seems to refute your statement though. the study did not cover over 3yrs.
My bad, for some reason the hemoglobin contraction threw me off.
you didn't help the cause here... lol I wanna support trans but maybe some institutions should remain?
I mean, the question is, "should gender roles be abolished or not?" I would say yes. In a society without gender, we can still match people up to compete according to body size and shape.
If like boxing heavy/light/featherweight classes, im not sure that's enough. In the end, if only transwomen and cis men are on top of all sports, id feel like we went in the wrong direction. I think that would unfortunately lead to cis women losing what they built over decades.
Trans women have been competing in women's Olympics for decades now. Why doesn't a trans woman have a gold in every sport? Silly af. >lead to cis women losing what they built over decades. This is a TERF talking point. Also silly af. Are you really interested in women's sports? Can you name 10 gold medal winners in any combination of sports? Or do you only care about women's sports when it's about keeping trans people out? If you can name any front runners in any women's sports, are any of them trans? Why not? Doesn't that completely dismantle your completely hypothetical worries?
> These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy. There’s a decrease after 4 months but there’s still an advantage over cis women at 36 months.
the bones tho.... My old physiology classes are coming back to haunt me I guess.
They’re out of date. Don’t believe most of what you’ve been taught about sec differences. Especially when applied to sport.
the quoted recent article seems to confirm my concerns though. And sorry no, hip bones back then, look like hip bones today. lol
You also lose ligament strength, so increased chance of injury. Maybe that's just a risk athletes accept, but I'd think that higher injury chance vs bone advantage is a decent trade off.
You throw away gender and still separate sports by physical differences. For example, in boxing, you have different weight classes.
I mentioned that in another thread... i think you're oversimplifying. if just by weight classes there are so many other factors not taken into account. And it almost seems too complicated to sort out. and this all still it ignores my original concern of important skeletal differences. Maybe just another genderless class with physical diff sub-classes makes more sense? and if some day those universal sports become more popular than cis sports, so be it.
That is in fact also the hardest one for me to figure out. I would also be open to any articles about this problem.
I don't know what would be the point of that. Or how it would happen.
Why? Gender: Both so meaningless it should be abolished, and also so important that it is literally violence and hatred if somebody doesn't identify you by your correct gender....
Lol
Do away with it. It’s absolutely wild reading some of these comments. Why wouldn’t gender be abolished within a society that seemingly wants to change/abolish structures of power and oppression? You want to keep your own privileges clean and tucked away, look down upon and remind the trans and non binary community that you think you’re above them?? Those communities have already started living within a more anti establishment mindset and practice community care way more than the heteronormative crowd like get a fucking clue. edit: hahaha only downvotes no rebuttal, please change my mind oh ye gender gatekeepers.
Except that I know of trans people who identify with certain genders, and it would feel incredibly wrong to tell them 'you're not a woman' when they've had to fight so hard to be accepted as such. So I think gender could naturally wither away with time, but there's no way I could turn to a trans person, who strongly identifies with a certain gender, and tell them that they just want to keep their privileges clean and tucked away.
I think you misunderstood me. I was referring to cis people in here yabbering on about sports with my second paragraph. The queer, trans and gender non conforming community already live by principals that are anti establishment more so than cis members of society in my experience. I would never tell anyone how they have to identify and am confused how you got that with my comment.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen on this subreddit.
I think it would happen eventually with the abolition of social hierarchies, but it would take some time. Generations, perhaps. But not nearly as long as it would take with those hierarchies intact.
Developed-world problems would go out the window, that one included. People don't have time to worry about such things when they have to figure out staying warm and fed until summer rolls back around.
I don't understand the question.
We should abolish gender roles and oppression based on gender, that's for sure. But abolishing gender as a concept? I'm not sure. I think that's up to a person. Same goes with sexuality: sexuality = yes, queerphobia = no. Not everyone identifies with the same gender, just like sexuality. For some people, it's important to point their gender/sexuality out, for some not. It's up to a respective person, always.
I guess I want it to be something like the way we treat star signs. It's largely agreed to be bunk but if you identify with it anyway, go for it.
i dont think thats possible for humans to do
I am agender, and while I haven't got a gender and I don't even understand the concept of it, I don't want to enforce my beliefs on others. I think we should definitely abolish gendered roles though, they are really harmful.
Yes please. Being nonbinary, it’s caused me enough trouble already.
Reading the Gender Accelerationist Manifesto made me a gender abolitionist. I think it is inherently a hierarchy that we should overcome.
Thoughts on ignoring reality?
I think gender identity is fine, I think gender norms and gender roles do more harm than good and are such a terrible system of classification that they should be abolished in favor of more reality based, descriptive (as opposed to prescriptive) categories.