you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

Identity forms in roughly the same way as sexual orientation does but for identity instead of attraction. Certain physical features cause an infant to in some way mentally bond and begin to form a individualized group identity with the organisms who posses the same features. I’d imagine part of the evolutionary reason for this is part of the same reason that chimps and bonobos form sex-trait linked groups.

This is of course an averaged model. Just as there are people who have little to no sexual attraction there are presumably people with little to no physical trait group identification.

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

Source? Also, could you explain how not all the people who feels they don't fit in with people of their own sex identify as "trans"?

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Because "trans" like all concepts are subjective constructs. Not all people relate to subjective concepts in the same way

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

If everything is subjective, then how could anyone know if they are trans or not? Why should it matter how someone "identify as"?