QT, if gender is innate to identity

submitted by HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex[S] 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

Do most people who perform gender after being indoctrinated in the system since birth really desire performing it? I don’t think so.

I don’t agree with the idea that people generally desire to perform gender, let alone desire to do whatever gender roles indicate they are supposed to do or like.

How does this gel with the narrative many trans people have that follows along the track of ‘I liked pink when told to like blue, therefore I’m a woman inside’ or vice versa?

Do you think the average ‘gender conforming’ (ridiculous notion since nobody is properly conforming to all norms assigned) person truly wants to do it, or simply feels they must due to societal expectations?

Why do we need a flexible gender system? Why do we need gender at all?

It’s not innate imo, and all cultures have it because all cultures recognise the sexed differences and have found it useful to apply restrictions to behaviour.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 7 fun -  (19 children)

Do most people who perform gender after being indoctrinated in the system since birth really desire performing it? I don’t think so.

You're saying most people actively want to be gender non conforming?

I don’t agree with the idea that people generally desire to perform gender, let alone desire to do whatever gender roles indicate they are supposed to do or like.

What do you think they want?

How does this gel with the narrative many trans people have that follows along the track of ‘I liked pink when told to like blue, therefore I’m a woman inside’ or vice versa?

I think masculinity and femininity are sexuality.

EDIT I think masculinity and femininity are deeply naturally connected to sexuality.

Attraction to men is a natural desire that commonly appears in women. Attraction to women is a desire that commonly appears in men. Masculinity and femininity follow the same pattern.

So expressing either of these desires commonly feels like confirmation to those trans people. Even though they are both only indirectly related.

Do you think the average ‘gender conforming’ (ridiculous notion since nobody is properly conforming to all norms assigned) person truly wants to do it, or simply feels they must due to societal expectations?

I think saying gender conformity is a ridiculous notion is evasive. Most people are gender conforming and don't feel anxiety over it. They are often oblivious because it feels so natural. I would think because it is natural.

They may not like some aspects of "it" but they only want that aspect changed. They are not gender non conforming.

A background issue here is masculine non conformity and feminine non conformity do not express themselves the same way. The "genders" are not perfect mirrors.

Why do we need a flexible gender system? Why do we need gender at all?

It's emergent from human nature so you can't abolish it.

Gender non conforming people have not escaped gender.

We can have higher tolerance of minorities who are non conforming but a general population will never be indifferent to it.

[–]Juniperius 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

Oh! After all these years I think I get what you're saying. You think that masculinity and femininity are exhibitionism. And you think that all humans are exhibitionists. You think that practically all things that humans do, all the time, we do for sexual reasons. And not even in a way that I would sort of recognize, like "I do this to attract a partner so I can have sex," but more like, "showing myself to people in this outfit is sex." I knew you were preoccupied with your particular kink, but it just clicked for me that you think everyone is, all the time. How Freudian! I think it must be kind of exhausting to live that way.

Do you recognize the existence of non-sexual drives? Do we do anything, want anything, enjoy anything, that doesn't have a sexual thrill at the bottom of it? A drive to learn new things, to accomplish something difficult? Non-sexual relationships with family members and friends? A desire to be in nature, to commune with something larger than the self?

Are all displays sexual, in your eyes? In the context where I live it's very politically divided, and the culture wars are kind of everything. I'd say people are more interested in displays of tribalism than gender. If you only go by someone's clothes, cars with bumper stickers, wander through the house and see what they show on the walls and bookshelves, everything but the physical body in other words, you might have an easier time knowing whether they were "blue team" or "red team" so to speak than which sex they were. It could be different where you are, but your theory is no good if it has to pretend that your little corner of the world represents the whole of human nature.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (17 children)

Oh! After all these years I think I get what you're saying. You think that masculinity and femininity are exhibitionism.

I do think sexual display are strong parts of masculinity and femininity.

It appears all societies link masculinity and femininity

Why wouldn't humans have sexual display? Humans especially of all animals would have a sexuality deeply meshed with culture which is seemingly a major human feature.

And you think that all humans are exhibitionists.

Sexual exhibitionism seems like a description of an excessive form.

But certainly human sexuality does work without sexual display. It's part of courtship.

In humans men and women both perform sexual selection. So it would be natural for them to perform sexual display. A super common thing in the animal world.

You think that practically all things that humans do, all the time, we do for sexual reasons.

Nope not at all. I do think we are natural animals and cannot escape natural desires.

We are not completely conscious of our desires. Even if we can learn them or consciously manage them we cannot choose our desires.

A sexual display is not always a conscious display.

And not even in a way that I would sort of recognize, like "I do this to attract a partner so I can have sex," but more like, "showing myself to people in this outfit is sex." I knew you were preoccupied with your particular kink, but it just clicked for me that you think everyone is, all the time. How Freudian! I think it must be kind of exhausting to live that way.

I'm not a Freudian, I don't think it's good science. Even if some ideas progressed into good ideas.

I don't think "everyone is like me" but I don't think I'm absolutely different from all other humans.

Do you recognize the existence of non-sexual drives?

Of course.

Do we do anything, want anything, enjoy anything, that doesn't have a sexual thrill at the bottom of it?

Of course.

A drive to learn new things, to accomplish something difficult? Non-sexual relationships with family members and friends? A desire to be in nature, to commune with something larger than the self?

Why are you thinking I think everything is about sex?

I do think humans are natural animals driven by unconscious uncontrollable desires.

Free will acts on those desires.

Are all displays sexual, in your eyes?

No but that depends on where in the chain you are stopping.

A display of loyalty can be natural but not strictly sexual.

In the context where I live it's very politically divided, and the culture wars are kind of everything. I'd say people are more interested in displays of tribalism than gender. If you only go by someone's clothes, cars with bumper stickers, wander through the house and see what they show on the walls and bookshelves, everything but the physical body in other words, you might have an easier time knowing whether they were "blue team" or "red team" so to speak than which sex they were. It could be different where you are, but your theory is no good if it has to pretend that your little corner of the world represents the whole of human nature.

I would think "tribalism" is another natural behaviour humans are prone to.

[–]BiologyIsReal 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Why wouldn't humans have sexual display?

You're missing the point again. She is not saying that humans don't have sexual display, but that humans are driven for other things besides sex. You were the one who claimed that feminity and masculinity were sexuality, so why are you surprised that others think you view everything through sexual lens? And I think Juniperious is right: you seem to be extrapolating your own particular experiences to everyone else. You may not claim to be a woman, but you surely like to act as if you were an expert on women and you try to shield your views under the excuse of "evolution".

And before you ask, no, I don't believe in the blank slate theory. I think differences between women and men are due to both nature and nurture.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (12 children)

You're missing the point again. She is not saying that humans don't have sexual display, but that humans are driven for other things besides sex.

Of course.

You were the one who claimed that feminity and masculinity were sexuality,

I meant to write "Masculinity and femininity are deeply naturally connected to sexuality."

It is not all of it but they are connected.

so why are you surprised that others think you view everything through sexual lens? And I think Juniperious is right: you seem to be extrapolating your own particular experiences to everyone else. You may not claim to be a woman, but you surely like to act as if you were an expert on women and you try to shield your views under the excuse of "evolution".

I don't think it is my experience alone that see masculinity and femininity as being deeply connected to the sex lives of humans.

That does not mean all of it is sexual.

And before you ask, no, I don't believe in the blank slate theory. I think differences between women and men are due to both nature and nurture.

Well I agree then. That would be my starting point and those differences are often connected to sexual behaviour.

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

No, I don't think we agree at all. You strongly lean on atributing (nearly) all sex differences to nature and assigning a sexual motive to (almost) everything. You often miss what we told you here because you refuse to analyse the power dynamics present in what society expect from each sex unless you're getting off of it, that is. Sex roles and stereotypes vary through time and culture, but always men are at the top of the hierarchy. Men who are perceived as not "manly" enough for whatever reason are looked down by other men, but women lose not matter wheter they conform to social norms or not. But you refuse to recognise this because you get off on viewing yourself as a sumissive woman and women being naturally sumissive. And when you're challenged here for your sexist views, you twist what we say to suit your own ideas of women and men.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (10 children)

But I don't enjoy submissive women. Why would I want that all to be true? And I don't ID as a woman.

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

You call yourself a straight cross-dresser, so even if you don't ID as a woman, you still get sexually aroused by the idea of being a woman, don't you? You also has described yourself as sumissive in the bedroom and you link sumission with women (i.e. yu think we are naturally sumissive and naturally attracted to dominant men). That is what I meant.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (8 children)

Do I get the politically problematic connection of that? Of course. It is very much in my mind.

But my desires came before my understanding. Right? You don't think I actively chose to be a crossdresser with a love of dominant women?

I can think well this is just me. Nothing to do with the rest of society or people. But I have to reason out what I see in the rest of the world.

A problem is the straight erotic world is overwhelmed with those gender norms.

Straight women do have a preference for dominant masculine men. The pattern is so strong I assume there is some natural pattern to that.

It's absolutely not in my interest to believe that. I can think of plenty of alternative models that would be.

[–]Juniperius 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I do think sexual display are strong parts of masculinity and femininity.

I think it says something that I've been listening to you talk about this for like, four years and It only just hit me that you mean that you think most people get sexual pleasure from conforming to masculinity or femininity. You might consider that bare fact to be a counter argument on its own - the fact that it was such an unfamiliar and unimaginably weird idea to me, with no reflection in my own experience or anyone else I've ever talked to in my life.

Look, here's a metaphor for you. People generally like to eat, right? We have a biological drive to eat, and it is pleasurable.

Some people like to cook as well. It can be a sort of hobby. You can enjoy the anticipation, or the thought of sharing food with someone you care about, impressing someone, whatever. It's pretty common to enjoy cooking, but not as common as enjoying the actual eating, which after all has direct sensory pleasure rewarding fulfilment of a biological drive.

Not many people really enjoy grocery shopping. I do. I love wandering around the store, checking out the half price shelves, reading ingredient labels, smelling the melons. I'm aware that this makes me a bit of a weirdo. For most people grocery shopping is at best utilitarian, despite the association with food and the and the anticipation of a meal later on. At worst it's an awful chore. A lot of people I know absolutely hate it.

Sex is great. Biological drive, physical pleasure. The lead-up to sex, going on a date, or flirting with someone and getting a number or going home together, okay, there can be anticipation and so forth, but not everyone likes that part so much. Getting dressed up, that part I think is like grocery shopping. Like, you might have to do it if you want to cook and then eat a meal, but most people aren't finding it pleasurable in itself, it's just something instrumental that you've got to do if you want to get to the good part.

The entire idea of putting on a "sexual display," as you call it is actually incredibly repellent and stressful to me. I think many people are more casual about it than I am. Like most people can go into the store and say, well look, there are some good avocados today, while a few people are just getting stressed out by the whole experience. But I think it's rare to really enjoy that part, and it connects only tenuously through multiple steps of abstract connection to anything intrinsically enjoyable. I think this holds whether people are going along with the expression template that they've been handed, or the one associated with the other sex, or one that they're trying to make up as they go along.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

I think it says something that I've been listening to you talk about this for like, four years and It only just hit me that you mean that you think most people get sexual pleasure from conforming to masculinity or femininity.

I wouldn't necessarily say most. I think it's mostly a pleasure in others expression.

The thing is I do thing food is often used as a great metaphor for sex. People are forever find erotic play in food. I think that's because there are indirect comparisons.

The sensual display of food is huge part of the pleasure of food. People fuss over the source, the story, the presentation, the ripeness, the colours, the textures. It is a given that the visual pleasure, a story of where they came from, aromas, presentation of food adds to the enjoyment of the flavour. It's a literal display that adds to the pleasure.

The entire idea of putting on a "sexual display," as you call it is actually incredibly repellent and stressful to me.

But that's what men and women do all the time.

What's the food equivalent of finding display repellent? ​Wanting it all ​mixed together in a paste? Completely utilitarian? Nice cutlery, a candle, beautiful plates would be too stressful. I mean I'm joking here but you seem my point.

[–]Juniperius 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Seeing, smelling, food is certainly part of the pleasure. Hard to do that while it's still in the package, though.

I think the food equivalent of what I'm talking about, finding display repellent, is not wanting to be on the plate.