All: Are there aspects of self-concept or identity that are unchangeable?

submitted by [deleted] from self.GCdebatesQT

What parts, if any, of a person's identity are truly permanent? It seems to be that the combination and interplay between our biology, our life experiences and our environment are what inform the people we become or see ourselves as. Beyond the unchangeable truths about our bodies or past experiences or the environments we're in, how much or how little is every other aspect of who we are and how we see ourselves changeable?

all 30 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

I think people constantly change. Life experience, loss, moving, growing older, etc all of the things we go through in life, even if we don’t endure major trauma or accomplish any huge scale feats, the longer someone lives the more they will change. The Sloane from 10 years ago wouldn’t recognize me today, I’ve changed so much and In so many different ways.

I think every aspect of who we are and how we see ourselves can be changed, but the reality of what we are can’t. Meaning, I could be broke, and see myself as poor, or see myself as “rich” because I have everything I need, my dream career, and a home and loving family- either way my bank account balance is the same. So I think our perspective can change, no matter the circumstances.

Idk if I interpreted your post correctly lol

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

No no, thank you! I'm sorry if I worded this too vaguely/poorly, but your answer is fantastic! I'd agree that we do constantly change, and in fact need to be able to in order to endure and overcome hardships and to evolve and grow throughout our lives. I mostly agree too that the reality of what we are can't change, with some exceptions, such as becoming disabled in some way, but the main truth of our bodies, experiences and environments can't be altered. Your example illustrates that well.

I wanted to write this long anecdote involving apples in response, but re-reading your example made me realize you actually already answered the question I was about to ask (I hope that makes sense!)

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You worded it well, I think I was just coming off of the other post and trying to tie this one into the “gender/sex debate” theme of the sub lol

This is a great post! I think it was a much needed change of pace, considering how tense things have been getting lately.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well thank you very much! Honestly, that's part of the reason why I made the post 😂 I mean I really had wanted to ask this question anyways though. And I wanted to ask something that I think everyone from all sides have experienced, but I really wanted to get more into the root of the idea and deeper meaning of identity rather than hyperfocus on "gender identity" or "sexual identity", I probably should have included something about that in the OP.

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Humans change enormously over our life spans. With those changes come lots of changes in how we think and feel about ourselves. But certain core facts about ourselves that most of us accept as true - such as our sex, place of birth, DOB, parentage, ethnicity and so on - are unchangeable. However, the extent to which individuals care about & focus on these unchangeable factors can & usually does vary greatly at different points & situations in our lives.

At the same time, many people find it challenging to integrate the reality of the various new roles we take on over the course of our lives. And coming to terms with our changing bodies and physical limitations as we age, experience illness and go through natural processes - such as pregnancy, maternity & menopause on the female side and premature balding and paunchiness on the male side - is hard for many people.

On the larger issue, I want to add a word of caution about confusing the term self-concept with identity, particularly in the way identity is used today.

A person's self-concept or self-image is the assemblage of all the beliefs and feelings each one of us has about ourselves in our heads and hearts and which we believe to be true of ourselves.

Used to be, we said the self-concept or self-image was "the reputation you have with yourself."

Some of the beliefs in our self-concepts are fact-based, specific and can be objectively confirmed by consulting with other people, checking documents, using various forms of testing or observing how we actually live our lives - sex, age/DOB, height, weight, race/ethnicity/relatives, country of origin, place of residence, citizenship, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation, IQ, level of education, professional qualifications, line of work, work accomplishments, salary, income, level of wealth, relationship or marital status, parental status, political affiliation, hobbies, interests, cholesterol level, state of health, and so on.

But many of the beliefs and feelings that go into - and are at the core of - our self-concepts are much more vague, global and subjective and have to do with the deep-seated sense we acquired during childhood of whether we are worthy or unworthy, lovable or unlovable, attractive or ugly, smart or stupid, competent or useless, a disappointment or a joy to our parents, just like the other kids or an oddball/misfit/outcast, and so on.

It's quite common for people's self-concepts to contain beliefs and feelings that are at odds with one another, and which are not reality-based.

Lots of people who intellectually know that by objective standards they are of normal body weight and have decent looks still feel they are fat and ugly, and they loathe their appearance or aspects of it. On the other hand, some people who know that by all objective standards they are unattractive nonetheless see themselves as a real catch. Lots of smart people consider themselves dumb or inept, whilst many people who aren't particularly bright see themselves as near-geniuses.

Traditionally, marked differences were seen in the self-concepts and self-assessments of the two sexes. Females tended to see ourselves as less attractive, less intelligent & less competent than we are, and to regard ourselves as far less deserving - or wholly unworthy - of respect & compassion than other people are. By contrast, males tended to see themselves as more attractive, intelligent & competent than they are, and to see themselves as entitled to respect & compassion even when they behave badly.

Today, "identity" as used in common parlance amongst young people seems to be much more about how individuals want the outer world to perceive them than about the inner dialogue/reputation they have with themselves.

Though we all get our ideas about ourselves from others (family, school, religions, media, etc) growing up, our self-concepts nevertheless basically consist of private thoughts and feelings we have inside our own heads and hearts. Traditionally the core issue in achieving self-esteem and peace with one's self was developing acceptance and love for ourselves as we actually are.

But "identity" as the term is used today seems to be about a having sense of self that's based largely on desired & chosen qualities that are imaginary or wholly illusory - and which people announce and perform in public in hopes that this will bring "validation" and likes from others. The belief seems to be that if your ideal self/chosen identity obtains enough external approval & validation from external sources, it will allay all the distress, emptiness, anxieties and feelings of inauthenticity gnawing inside.

In the old days, we used to make a distinction between the real self & the ideal self. The real self is who each of us believes and feels ourselves actually to be. The ideal self is who each of us thinks we should be, or we wish we could be. Is/ought.

Traditionally, having a big gap between your real self & your ideal/desired self meant you had low self-esteem and anxiety, personal issues for individuals to sort out in therapy. But today, having a big gap between your real self & your ideal/desired self is taken as a sign that you are oppressed, a political issue.

Nowadays, many people who are struggling with the dissonance between who they are in actuality versus who they wish they were have become convinced that the whole world is obliged to provide them with a) reassurance that their ideal/desired selves are real - aka "validation" - and b) all/any medical treatments & cosmetic procedures that can make them appear to come closer to their ideal/desired selves.

"Identity" as the term is used today seems to be all about adopting ready-made labels, making public pronouncements of your labels, performing roles and play-acting.

As I was writing this, I see Houseplant posted:

I remember in social work the identity thing was a big deal with my clients who lived with severe and treatment resistant personality disorders. They’re the only group of people I’ve ever seen think and talk about their identity as much as tra does.

This is my experience as well as someone who extensively studied & wrote about self-concept formation & how males & females develop and conceptualize their sense of self in the 1970s, 80s and 90s. The people who spoke of & focused on their "identity" were people with severe mental health problems.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Given your level of experience, I sincerely appreciate you sharing your perspective on this--thank you! I suppose I should have done a bit more research into the differentiation between definitions of "self-concept" and "identity"; I like language, but I miss a lot. But your first point about the immensity by which we change throughout our lives really rings true, like I said elsewhere about how we need to be able to change much about ourselves to overcome hardships and adapt and grow.

I like that idea that one's self-concept is the reputation one has with themselves, that just seems like a fantastic way to frame that. If that is sort of the way to best view the idea of self-concept, it would make sense that, as you say, some changes are more difficult to accept or reconcile than others. Perhaps if we like a particular way we view ourselves, that makes it all the more difficult to accept change regarding that facet. I hope I'm understanding you correctly, but what I'm putting together makes sense in my head.

"Identity" in its more contemporary usage really seems to be more about labels or a desire to be seen as fitting a specific label--performative, as you say. Do you think that it might be more helpful for everyone to divert attention away from the idea of identity and redirect it towards something like self-concept? Do you think people might have a more healthy vision of themselves? And do you think that obsession with identity that you and Houseplant have seen in people with severe mental illness might actually have better mental health if they could reduce or eliminate that fixation on themselves? I guess it makes me wonder whether an obsession over identity is solely a symptom, and perhaps it's part of a cause for mental illness.

I think it's Jung who wrote about the shadow self (correct me if I'm wrong though), and I wonder if the way "identity" is framed and treated today, as some idealized vision of oneself, is an attempt to bring that shadow self to life. Like, there are some concepts that Carlos Castaneda wrote about the idea of a "dreaming self" that I find interesting to this day (despite him being a creep, cult leader and passing off fiction as fact). I'm not sure exactly how these things might be related exactly, but I just have this intuition that they may be.

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you think that it might be more helpful for everyone to divert attention away from the idea of identity and redirect it towards something like self-concept? Do you think people might have a more healthy vision of themselves? And do you think that obsession with identity that you and Houseplant have seen in people with severe mental illness might actually have better mental health if they could reduce or eliminate that fixation on themselves?

Yes to all these questions.

[–]MarkTwainiac 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think it's Jung who wrote about the shadow self (correct me if I'm wrong though), and I wonder if the way "identity" is framed and treated today, as some idealized vision of oneself, is an attempt to bring that shadow self to life.

It's been many years since I read Jung, but my recollection is that the shadow self as he portrayed it is the part of our psyche were we shove and try to exile all the aspects of ourselves we have been taught to - or we naturally - deny, disown and try to stamp out. IIRC, the shadow self is pretty much the opposite of the ideal self. It's sort of the junk drawer or ghetto nabe of the self - the place we put all the aspects of ourselves we deem unpleasant and unacceptable in the hopes that once "out of sight, out of mind" they'll all just fade away in darkness. But one of Jung's points was that the more we try to hide and kill off these aspects of ourselves, the stronger and more powerful they become. So the more shadowy your shadow self, the larger it looms over your self in entirety.

As always, what constitutes the ideal self and the despised shadow self varies depending on sex. As children, many female people are taught to revile the parts of our personalities that are aggressive, loud, rude, selfish, coarse, rough, violent, cruel, sexually pleasure-seeking, gluttonous, domineering, bossy and so on - and those sorts of traits get shoved into our shadow selves. As children, many male people are taught to revile the parts of their personalities that are unaggressive, soft-spoken, shy, retiring, delicate, bashful, "soft," refined, artistic, kind, sensitive and so on.

So maybe for some males who develop genuine childhood gender dysphoria coz they were shamed into squelching and disowning personality traits of theirs that were deemed "unmanly" or "feminine," embracing an opposite-sex "gender identity" is a way of owning the shadow self. And the reverse for females who developed genuine GD in childhood.

However, it seems to me that the aggressive, entitled, misogynistic, violent male people who are jumping on the trans bandwagon and claiming to have an opposite sex or non-binary gender identity in order to lord it over, sexually subjugate, intimidate, silence and terrorize female people do not have enough of a shadow self. These guys seem wholly unashamed of, and not at all inclined to try to hide, all the aspects of their personalities that most people would find reprehensible or at least questionable. The selves they present to the world strike me as certainly nothin' to write home about or brag on social media about. And yet they go on.

Moreover, most of the girls and young women who today are claiming to be the opposite sex or neither sex did not have childhood dysphoria. Their issues with their sex and gender roles have arisen after the onset of puberty.

But back to the general convo: it seems to me that the way identity is being framed today has more in common with what in psychology used to be called the persona - which Oxford defines as

the the aspect of someone's character that is presented to or perceived by others

The persona in this sense is the opposite of anima, which in psych used to mean the self we each perceive privately and inwardly. Basically the self-concept, or the reputation you have with yourself.

However, in Jungian psych, the anima has a very different meaning: Jung used anima to describe the parts of a male's personality that are considered feminine. Whereas animus in Jung terminology means the aspects of a female's personality that are deemed masculine.

Speaking of which, I do think that Jung's concept of anima and animus are very useful in convos about gender identity. Just as most human beings have the capacity to be incredibly kind and loving as well as incredibly cruel and hateful, each one of us has personality traits that run the gamut of "masculine" and "feminine" both - depending on how our particular cultures define those terms.

Like, there are some concepts that Carlos Castaneda wrote about the idea of a "dreaming self"

I have hardly any recollections of what Castaneda said or wrote. When you brought up his name, what sprang to my mind was how in the 1960s he helped to popularize the use of peyote - and indirectly other hallucinogens of the era such as LSD, mescaline and ketamine. Drugs whose use I think can be highly beneficial for many people.

Which leads to another issue I often wonder about: what proportion of people with cross-sex gender identities, or who now identify as of no sex, have used hallucinogenics - and in doses sufficient for a full trip? My hunch is not many - or not enough.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you for clarifying about the shadow self, that makes more sense put that way.

As always, what constitutes the ideal self and the despised shadow self varies depending on sex. As children, many female people are taught to revile the parts of our personalities that are aggressive, loud, rude, selfish, coarse, rough, violent, cruel, sexually pleasure-seeking, gluttonous, domineering, bossy and so on - and those sorts of traits get shoved into our shadow selves. As children, many male people are taught to revile the parts of their personalities that are unaggressive, soft-spoken, shy, retiring, delicate, bashful, "soft," refined, artistic, kind, sensitive and so on.

So maybe for some males who develop genuine childhood gender dysphoria coz they were shamed into squelching and disowning personality traits of theirs that were deemed "unmanly" or "feminine," embracing an opposite-sex "gender identity" is a way of owning the shadow self. And the reverse for females who developed genuine GD in childhood.

That's a very, very interesting consideration. Do you think if one embraces or "owns" their shadow self, that he or she would then not have a shadow self? Or do other aspects that are rejected become new parts of the shadow self? In this conceptualization, it makes sense that TRAs who perhaps have no self-restraint and are more destructively uninhibited would have less of a shadow self, but it does make me wonder why if females and males who develop GD in childhood are embracing their shadow selves that they wouldn't necessarily become uninhibited like the people who didn't have enough of one to begin with.

Speaking of which, I do think that Jung's concept of anima and animus are very useful in convos about gender identity. Just as most human beings have the capacity to be incredibly kind and loving as well as incredibly cruel and hateful, each one of us has personality traits that run the gamut of "masculine" and "feminine" both - depending on how our particular cultures define those terms.

Those concepts intrigue me, I will have to read about those in depth! I've heard the words before, but I did not know what they meant exactly.

I have hardly any recollections of what Castaneda said or wrote. When you brought up his name, what sprang to my mind was how in the 1960s he helped to popularize the use of peyote - and indirectly other hallucinogens of the era such as LSD, mescaline and ketamine. Drugs whose use I think can be highly beneficial for many people.

Which leads to another issue I often wonder about: what proportion of people with cross-sex gender identities, or who now identify as of no sex, have used hallucinogenics - and in doses sufficient for a full trip? My hunch is not many - or not enough.

Castaneda's work was what piqued my interest in hallucinogens and their potential to change the mind. My dad read me "The Teachings of Don Juan" when I was little, so in my late teens I started using hallucinogens under the guidance of Castaneda's books to try to cure myself (I've read them all at least twice). It almost certainly would have been more beneficial to have worked with a therapist while doing this rather than on my own, but I did come to understand more about myself I feel and make a little more peace, though I wasn't able to cure my GD or transsexualism. It would be interesting to try that again now with a therapist not necessarily to try to cure myself of that, but just to better myself overall. But maybe it could provide some sort of relief or cure for some people. That's an interesting thought you bring up!

[–]Penultimate_Penance 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for explaining self concept. That makes a lot of sense!

[–]grixitperson 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I think some people invest too much significance in the concept of "identity".

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I remember in social work the identity thing was a big deal with my clients who lived with severe and treatment resistant personality disorders. They’re the only group of people I’ve ever seen think and talk about their identity as much as tra does.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That makes a lot of sense. Did those clients speak about identity the same way that trans people or TRAs do? I feel like the word is used mostly today to refer only to labels rather than ideas behind the labels.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

In some ways, yeah. It was very similar discussion. Lots of focus on finding and validating their identity, huge distress if the validation wasn’t found, and a fear likenive never seen of losing some part of themselves if it couldn’t be confirmed by others.

Something happened to them during the formative years, abuse or neglect or exposure to drugs and violence. They didn’t get the chance to learn themselves. They learned which masks appeased abusers, or scared off others, or got their needs met instead of developing according to the things they valued or cared about.

I don’t want to suggest that all transgender people have personality disorders. The people I worked with were really unwell, had survived some absolute horrors, and did not get the chances others get when it comes to healthy development. In my observations transgender people seem not to have such a pronounced splitting between their body and their concept of self. They appear to be aware of their bodies and very distressed, but not the sort of disconnect where you have to remind someone of their physical self being them, not an object they have.

I do think that some of that feeling of chronic emptiness and instability of self image is shared between the two groups of people however. Something essential feels missing and without extensive therapy it’s not something easy to name. Imo a lot of people fill that missing feeling with gender.

Much like some anorexics will obfuscate their issues by telling themselves it will be okay at some impossible weight and become lost in seeking the magic number. People may feel this chronic emptiness and, with no access to therapy and a culture chock full of gendered ideas, they seek their own physical transformation to cure psychological pain.

Of course this is all layman hypothesising and may very well be absolute nonsense.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Of course this is all layman hypothesising and may very well be absolute nonsense.

I wouldn't discount your firsthand experience, though, I think you'd be more informed than most people, and being an outside observer to it all merits serious consideration for what you're sharing.

This is really, really interesting. I've often wondered how much identity issues in personality disorders such as BPD mirror those of gender dysphoria. What you said here echoes my suspicions:

I do think that some of that feeling of chronic emptiness and instability of self image is shared between the two groups of people however. Something essential feels missing and without extensive therapy it’s not something easy to name. Imo a lot of people fill that missing feeling with gender.

I don't have experience working in any such setting or being around people with personality disorders that I was aware of, but I've often sensed this in trans people I've met, though even now I don't know how to explain the feeling. Like, for some there is an air of being fulfilled, others seem hollow still. But I suppose there are trans people who do have personality disorders, too, and maybe some of the identity issues overlap.

People may feel this chronic emptiness and, with no access to therapy and a culture chock full of gendered ideas, they seek their own physical transformation to cure psychological pain.

This worries me a lot. I wonder if a lot of these people de-transition... it seems like I've seen something like this mentioned in more than one de-transitioners' videos and writings.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Honestly personality disorders are so common I’d guarantee there are transgender people with bpd. I just don’t want to put too much stock into my own obs when I know I’m nowhere near educated enough to get into the nitty gritty of disordered psychology/psychiatry.

Still, very very interesting that you’ve observed a similar phenomenon in the transgender community. Wonder if it will ever be explored academically?

The detransitioner point is actually really interesting and would probably do well to be explored. It’s not a huge reach to imagine some may have tried to fill some void with gender via transition, especially when some detransitioned people have said as much about their own experience.

It’s really quite depressing to think that personality disorders may be being so wildly mistreated via quick transition when they could benefit so much from DBT and CBT.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I feel like I've seen some papers (well, abstracts) on the subject. I think it was brought up in one of the threads in the sub, though maybe not in the same way (I think we were talking about conditions being passed on from mothers/parents).

It seems like smarter people than I always beat me to looking into things, so I bet that will be something to be explored academically if it hasn't already, though maybe not until TRAs get a little less militant in trying to stop research into transgenderism, transsexualism and gender dysphoria.

I'd really like to have some long conversations with de-transitioners about this (and about other things), they really seem to offer a lot of insight into these sorts of things. It really is sad to know it probably has been the case for some to undergo something so drastic and dramatic like transitioning, when it likely would just cause more pain.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed! That word seems to have lost a lot of meaning in recent years due to its overuse and peoples' obsession with it, I was hesitant to use it which is why I tried to stress the term "self-concept". "Identity" has now been reduced to words and labels rather than complex views and conceptualizations: saying "I identify as someone who loves butterscotch pudding" puts emphasis on the identity rather than the subject of the love of eating butterscotch pudding, if that makes any sense.

I kind of regret using that word now... how do you feel about aspects of the self, or self-concept as a whole?

[–]Greensquidsphone 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

I also wonder how much "change" is something which has always been the same, and rather than different the change is just something new you've learned about yourselves. I grew up in a homophobic family, and never thought I'd like guys. Does the fact that I'm married to one now and find women completely unattractive mean I've changed, or I've simply grown to learn something about myself?

Obviously some things change. My politics were informed by my far-right parents until I moved away from them. I highly doubt I was destined to be a filthy lib, I just had a change of perspective.

I don't think it'd be possible to apply these characteristics to an entire group of people, they're probably much more on an individual basis.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ahh that's a really interesting way to think of that, like "change" is more something you uncover or learn about yourself? Looking at things that way, it seems like then there would in fact be facets of our self-conceptualization that could not actually change--am I understanding correctly? That's rather thought-provoking. So, in your case, would you say your sexual orientation really was/is unchangeable all along, you only learned that about yourself? In kind of the way Sloane put it, I view sexual orientation as more "what" you are than "who" you are, and truly unchangeable, but your self-concept and the way you see yourself in relation to it is what evolved (or you learned about yourself).

Do you think then every aspect of your self-concept or the way you see yourself is what can become different over time? I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth or misunderstanding you.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

I agree with Buddhism that the self is an illusion. So I guess the answer is no, I don’t think any aspects of what we experience as the self are unchangeable.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'm not a Buddhist, but I also agree with the perspective that the self (the "I") is an illusion that we create. Given that, would you say then that you would be able to change any part of yourself if you desired to do so, or maybe even just changed how you saw yourself if you tried?

I studied psychopathy for an art project years ago that took over a year, and one of the things I found fascinating was that psychopathic people are able to pass lie detector tests and fool experienced interviewers and interrogators. What researchers found is that rather than lying per se, psychopathic people can convince themselves of a false truth, so they will tell themselves a falsehood and believe it, so the reason they don't seem like they're lying is because in a way, they aren't. That insight really makes me wonder then that perhaps we really could change any way that we saw ourselves if we wanted.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

No, I don’t believe in free will so I think our capacity to change is limited by can actually happen. For instance most people won’t be able to rid themselves of emotion, or love someone on command, or instantly use their willpower to overcome bodily urges like addiction. So I think people have limitations on their ability to change even if we have no idea what an individuals actual limitations are. Everything that has already occurred MUST have occurred and the people in the past actually had no ability to choose to do things differently even though from their perspective it seems like they “chose” a course of of action from many different possible course of actions.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Hmm... The examples of what you believe people can't change (emotions, addiction, love) all seem like the direct byproducts of biological processes. What's been discussed in the other comments has been belief that some things rooted in reality may contribute to less changeable aspects of our self-concept, so that makes me wonder if the closer to physical reality an aspect of self-concept is, then the less changeable it is, which makes sense in my mind.

I appreciate your metaphysical and spiritual perspective in this, it's a different take than what others have talked about and it's a perspective I haven't examined this subject through the lens of. It's interesting, I have to get out of my own head a bit more to try to understand this more--thank you for the interesting thoughts on this!

[–]Penultimate_Penance 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I think there are some parts of people's personalities that are 'built in' that are part of their identity throughout their lives, but for the most part the brain is plastic. Who you are is what you do. Everything you do, every choice you make, every thing you learn changes you a little. That's why it is important to focus on things that really matter, that improve your life, you can create positive or negative feedback loops that can change your identity for the worse or the better.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The brain is definitely plastic; it's amazing to see the ways in which it will change and adapt. What do you think may be parts that are 'built in' to a person? Do you feel similarly to some of the other people here that maybe the things related to objective reality would likely inform and dictate the most unchangeable aspects of ourselves, or how we see or conceptualize ourselves rather?

I wholeheartedly agree with your last sentence. A couple sayings I absolutely love are "actions speak louder than words", and that quote "Watch your thoughts, they become your words; watch your words, they become your actions".

[–]Penultimate_Penance 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There is research coming out that indicates that people might have different internal clocks that they have to work around that have varying degrees of flexibility, so being a night owl or a morning bird might be built in. Sexual orientation is built in. Tastes seem to also be built in, I like black licorice, I don't know why, I just do. Tastes can change a bit over time especially as people get older, but some of them seem to be pretty consistent & unchangeable. Then there are personality traits like cautiousness, I can force myself to be less cautious, but it is always a battle while other personalities default to recklessness.

With positive feedback loops I can manage my over cautiousness to bring it back to a reasonable level, but it's still there. I think the biggest problem with many trans ideologues & a lot of trans culture is that they are actively encouraging negative feedback loops. Their philosophical outlook on life is extremely defeatist, which is one reason I consider it regressive, not progressive. Hyperfocusing on body dysphoria and feeding into it is not healthy. It creates a negative feedback loop that makes their dysphoria worse, not better.

Real life example: I had dysphoria about my breasts, I never wanted them and they hurt when I engaged in sports, but I didn't ruminate on the dysphoria, I found good bras that worked for me so I could run, jump etc. without pain and now after years of living with them I've pretty much gotten used them. Are they still annoying yes. Do I wish that I did not have them, also yes. Is it worth the cost, and health risks of breast removal to get rid of them for me? No. Do I even think about my breasts from day to day now, nope. The dysphoria is so minor now it might as well not even be there. That's what positive feedback loops can do for people. I don't enjoy menstruation either, but it's easy enough to learn how to manage it and I got used to it over time. I chose to use a form of birth control that stopped the bleeding part of my periods (but the monthly pain is still there, sarcastic yay!), but if I had to switch to having bloody periods again due to a lack access to birth control I wouldn't crumple into a ball of fragility. I have enough positive feedback loops in my life that accepting my body as is and making the best of it doesn't phase me. Even if I got into a tragic accident and became disabled I have enough of a positive outlook on life that I could still live a happy, meaningful and productive life making do with what I got.

If someone can't accept their own body as is and make the best of it that is a serious mental health issue and they really need to focus on implementing positive behavioral feedback loops in their life. I don't believe dysphoria is untreatable or completely built in like sexuality. Dysphoria is largely psychological and can be effectively managed by most people. I believe that dysphoria is a normal part of human life, our bodies change, we get older, things start to hurt that didn't used, sickness and injuries happen. Mentally healthy people fined effective ways to cope with these changes, mentally unhealthy people struggle with it. We'll need further research of course to know for sure, so I'm all for researching the phenomenon of sex dysphoria and comparing it to other types of dysphoria.

One belief system that I ascribe to is that intelligence/talent isn't necessarily 'fixed'. What separates people in academic, professional, athletic achievements in life is their sticktoitiveness and their belief in their ability to learn. Some people are naturally good at certain subjects, but often child geniuses fall behind over time, because they don't consistently put the work in throughout their lives and the students who consistently study hard surpass them despite their initial lack of natural 'talent'. You don't have to be a genius to be a rocket scientist, you just have to put the work in. This gives me a lot of confidence. I believe that I can learn and do anything I put my mind to. It just takes hard consistent, effort. My identity and confidence is rock solid, because I am always working on becoming a better person and I know I can put the work in to do awesome things. Because I've done it before, I know I can do it again. Every time I achieve one of my goals my confidence grows and gives me courage to try the next thing. Boom positive feedback loop. I don't need outside validation. I get to decide what kind of person I am and live my life accordingly. It is really freeing to not rely on outside validation.

That's why 'woman' isn't an identity to me. I am a human being with a female body. The word we have for that state of being is woman. Does having a female body profoundly affect my life? You bet. Does it dictate who I am, or what I can be in the future. Hell no! My identity is based on my principles and moral compass: being reliable, honest, trustworthy, forthright, strong, humorous, a good friend, a good partner, a good citizen, charitable and so on. My identity is also based on what I have accomplished in the past and what I am working on accomplishing in the future. I take pride in my work and it gives my life meaning. No one can 'invalidate' my identity, because my identity is not frivolous or superficial.

Woman gender identity is such a sad superficial sexist defeatist concept. I hate it.

To me moral/principle based identities are true progressiveness. Accepting your body as it is, and making the best of it. Your body is not your fate it is just one part of who you are. You are the captain of your own life and you can be and do awesome things if you are willing to put the work in.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1838571/

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

With positive feedback loops I can manage my over cautiousness to bring it back to a reasonable level, but it's still there. I think the biggest problem with many trans ideologues & a lot of trans culture is that they are actively encouraging negative feedback loops. Their philosophical outlook on life is extremely defeatist, which is one reason I consider it regressive, not progressive. Hyperfocusing on body dysphoria and feeding into it is not healthy. It creates a negative feedback loop that makes their dysphoria worse, not better

Based on this and the story you tell of your own experience with dysphoria, it seems like actively avoiding hyperfocusing is what may lead to a more changeable view of any aspect of oneself, one that could be applied to problems with gender dysphoria and maybe even relieve some of it enough to prevent transitioning possibly--am I understanding what you're sayin correctly?

MarkTwainiac brought up an interesting point about the use of hallucinogens in therapy: I did use hallucinogens for a few years specifically to try to cure my own illness (as I saw it) because I discovered ways of thinking and self-conceptualization I had never been able to before. When my focus changed, relief was provided, just because it was no longer at the forefront of my mind. I did find, however, that my behavior didn't necessarily change, just my level of distress. Labels were less important and more fluid or non-existent, but that gave me an illusion that I'd cured myself, only to find myself in a situation that would make me realize that some of those aspects of myself related to my cross-sex behavior and identification had never actually changed, just the way I thought about myself had. Hopefully that makes some sense.

That's why 'woman' isn't an identity to me. I am a human being with a female body. The word we have for that state of being is woman. Does having a female body profoundly affect my life? You bet. Does it dictate who I am, or what I can be in the future. Hell no! My identity is based on my principles and moral compass: being reliable, honest, trustworthy, forthright, strong, humorous, a good friend, a good partner, a good citizen, charitable and so on. My identity is also based on what I have accomplished in the past and what I am working on accomplishing in the future. I take pride in my work and it gives my life meaning. No one can 'invalidate' my identity, because my identity is not frivolous or superficial.

To me moral/principle based identities are true progressiveness. Accepting your body as it is, and making the best of it. Your body is not your fate it is just one part of who you are. You are the captain of your own life and you can be and do awesome things if you are willing to put the work in.

I like this and I agree with your perspective on it. Being a man or a woman is more of a byproduct of reality rather than an identity for most, it seems. Despite being trans, I view being a woman the way that I see myself as a woman not as an identity, but rather as a byproduct of reality--the difference perhaps being that the factors are not just related to biological sex or reproductive anatomy or physiology; the reality isn't as simple or uncomplicated/straightforward from my perspective. If it were more of an identity, I wonder if that would have been or would be easier to change how I view myself in that regard. The person who I am is likely informed partially by those realities though, but who I see myself being is based more on my actions and beliefs and aspirations, as it seems to be for you, too.

Woman gender identity is such a sad superficial sexist defeatist concept. I hate it.

I've kind of come to reject the idea of gender identity, or at least that it's some immutable, unchangeable characteristic. A gender identity seems limiting to one's personality, life and human spirit. It keeps people oppressed and repressed, and disallows us from expanding and growing in a certain regard. Like Houseplant and MarkTwainiac were saying, perhaps some people cling to it in desperation of filling some sort of void in their own lives, whatever the reason may be.

I like the paper you shared, thank you! The concept reminded me of the theory behind positive psychology, as well as the idea of manifestation. My self-defense instructor tells me to practice doing certain techniques by just envisioning myself doing them because science shows that we can actually learn and get better at things even by doing that--this seems to track with that idea!

[–]Penultimate_Penance 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Also thanks for asking these questions, by the way. Makes me think things through.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well thank you very much for sharing your thoughts on all of this; each person has a unique perspective and what you share makes me rethink things and ponder more, too!