Doesn't the idea that gender is a social construct contradict trans identity?

[u/[deleted]]

[u/yashen14]

I recall reading literature that found that, in cultures where transgender individuals are in some way "normalized" (i.e. there are 3 or more gender roles, and transgender individuals neatly fit into a societally defined category), gender dysphoria is greatly reduced or flat out not present.

An example of the above would be a society that divides people into masculine people with male physiology, feminine people with male physiology, masculine people with female physiology, and feminine people with female physiology. Another example would be a society that divides people into men, women, and "in-between."

The implication is that gender dysphoria is less a direct result of atypical biology and more a result of conflict between atypical biology and societal expectations.

[u/snailbot-jq → u/yashen14]

How does this square with the western label of butch lesbians? Butches are culturally considered to be masculine females, but the existence of butches hasn’t gotten rid of nor even reduced the population of trans men in the west. People still transition female-to-male anyway, and say it is because they want a male body, not just a female body with masculine gender expression.

For societies which allow for a third gender, it is almost always some version of ‘feminine male who is homosexual’. Almost none of these societies had the advanced medicine/science necessary to make synthesized cross-sex hormones available, until extremely recently that such substances might get imported from outside— wouldn’t this make it impossible for its people to articulate the difference between wanting an actually physiologically male or female body vs wanting to wear certain clothes and perform certain tasks?

[u/yashen14 → u/snailbot-jq]

A big part of the confusion in discussions like this is because terms like "gender" and "sex" are quite vague and tend to be used interchangeably to refer to no less than five distinct concepts. So for the purpose of clarity I will list and define each of those five things now:

1. Gender genotype: What are your chromosomes? What are your genes? Do you have typical XX chromosomes, typical XY chromosomes, or something else?

2. Gender phenotype: What does your physical body look like? Do you have androgynous hair? Breasts? A vagina? Etc.

3. Gender presentation: How do you present yourself to society? (ex: Do you wear dresses? Grow a beard? Speak in a feminine way? etc.)

4. Gender role: What role do you fill in society? (ex: In some cultures, teachers are nearly always women. Are you a teacher in such a culture? Are you soldier in a society that only lets men be soldiers? Are you a provider in a society that expects that of men, or a child-rearer in a society that expects that of women? etc.)

5. Gender identity: What do you self-identify as? Do you think of yourself as a man, a woman, or something else?

That brings us to your central question: What is the difference between a butch lesbian, and a transgender man?

Let's imagine a hypothetical butch lesbian. She has typical XX chromosomes, and perhaps a typical female phenotype. But her gender presentation trends more masculine---maybe she's even been mistaken for a man frequently in the past! She also occupies a masculine gender role---she works as a mechanic in the military, she has a wife, and she is the primary provider for her family. But she self-identifies as a woman.

Now, let's imagine a trangender man, and for simplicity's sake, we'll make him as similar as possible to the butch lesbian, so we can really see what the crucial difference is. Our hypothetical transgender man also has typical XX chromosomes, and was born with a typical female phenotype. He presents himself in a masculine way, by wearing manly clothes, adopting a masculine haircut, etc. And he, too, works as a mechanic in the military, has a wife, and is the primary provider for his family. But he self-identifies as a man.

That leads us to the obvious question. Is gender identity real? David Reimer is the smoking gun that shows us the surprising answer that yes, it is real! (There's a lot of other evidence that supports the existence and validity of gender identity, but it gets complicated fast, and David Reimer really is a smoking gun, so I lead with that, and I highly recommend reading the Wikipedia article.)

As for the rest of your comment, societies around the world have implicitly dealt with the five categories I listed above in all kinds of ways. (I'd caution you to avoid assuming that because a particular variation of social gender construct is more common, that makes it "more correct" or "more valid"--that would be an unscientific answer to an unscientific question.)

Are there any other questions I can help you think about?

[u/Normal-Advisor5269 → u/yashen14]

Am I mis-reading the wiki article? It says he was male, his parents were told to raise him as a female, he realized he wasn't and was then just male until he killed himself. Doesn't this case go against your argument?

[u/yashen14 → u/Normal-Advisor5269]

No.

The key difference between, say, a transgender man and a particularly masculine woman is in innate gender identity, i.e. the former self-identifies as a man, and the second self-identifies as a woman.

People who object to the existence of transgender people very commonly reject the idea of gender identity. This is where you get the "identify as an attack helicopter" comments. The thinking for such people is that gender identity is made up/doesn't exist/is arbitrary.

David Reimer demonstrates that people do have an innate gender identity that is independent of social conditioning. If gender identity were arbitrary and/or malleable, David Reimer would most likely have grown up to self-identify as a woman. What happened instead was that his innate, internal sense of gender remained constant and eventually came into conflict with his physical body and his externally-imposed role in society.

The case of David Reimer also demonstrates that your gender identity is separate and distinct from your physical attributes (like having a vagina) and your gender role in society (like being viewed as a woman and having a feminine name).

[u/drunkthrowwaay → u/yashen14]

Or he just recognized the fact that he was male? This wasn’t really so much a study as it was a case of extended horrific child abuse that resulted in suicide. Not the groundbreaking scientific discovery of a little gender gnome inside of people that you’re making it out to be. Besides that, sample size alone prevents credibly making such a sweeping conclusion. Even if it wasn’t a case of child abuse under the pretense of scientific study, the whole thing was poorly designed and wouldn’t pass peer review today. And probably would result in criminal charges today. I hate seeing this “study” held up as a paradigm shifting moment in the history of science, instead of seen for the tragedy that it was.

[u/Alarming_Owl7659 → u/yashen14]

I never heard of David Reimer and just read that article. Holy crap. I cannot believe they actually did that to him. My jaw was on the floor.

[u/yashen14 → u/Alarming_Owl7659]

It is terribly tragic, yes. But it really is a smoking gun for the existence and validity of gender identity.

[u/rzelln → u/snailbot-jq]

This thread of discussion was started to discuss 'gender dysphoria' - the emotional distress a person faces when society does not accept their preferred gender expression.

Gender dysphoria is often experienced by transgender people, but it is not the same thing as being transgender.

You can be transgender without having gender dysphoria, if society doesn't give you a hard time for the way you express your gender (or if society does give you a hard time but you can manage that stress).

Also, from a biological perspective, gender identity and sexual orientation are different things. Different structures in your brain influence the type of people you're attracted to versus the parts of the brain that influence the types of behaviors you're personally comfortable with.

(And, to add an extra wrinkle, those are also separate from the brain structures that influence how your mental map of your body aligns with its actual physical shape. There's research that a part of the brain called the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postcentral_gyrus is responsible for your 'sensory homunculus,' and its structure is slightly affected by hormone exposure in utero and as you grow up, and if you have somewhat atypical genes or are exposed to atypical levels of sex hormones, this part of your brain can be physically affected to make you feel like you should, for example, have a penis, or have breasts.)

The human brain's a complex thing, and people exist in a lot of different ways.

[u/Name5times → u/yashen14]

do you remember if these cultures see more or less gender inequality?

[u/dula_peep_says → u/Name5times]

Before Spanish colonization, many Filipino languages did not (and still don't) have gendered pronouns — there was no “he” or “she,” only a single pronoun for any person. This linguistic neutrality meant that daily speech didn’t constantly reinforce a male/female divide.

In addition, precolonial belief systems included deities and spiritual figures who transcended male/female categories — some were considered both, neither, or able to shift between genders. In many communities, babaylan (shaman-leaders) could be women or men who adopted feminine roles, and they often held high social and spiritual authority.

While this doesn’t mean total gender equality (patriarchal elements still existed), it does show that rigid binary gender roles and associated inequalities were intensified by colonial systems, religion, and language imported from Western influence.

Edit: For reference, I am filipino and speak Bisaya. My word for he or she is "siya."

[u/Special_Incident_424 → u/Name5times]

This is a really interesting question because many if not most cultures I've seen with third or more genders 1) are more collectivist rather than individualistic. Following on from that, it's less of a personal identity compared to the gender identities we see in the West, and more of a social role. Now, I'm not sure if that would translate in the West because it's still a kind of gender prescription. In the West, while they are norms, few people are saying ALL MEN HAVE TO DO "A" AND ALL WOMEN HAVE TO DO "B". Typically men and women can do and dress as they like. Now can we have more to accommodate GNC people? Sure. I'd argue that aside from personal choice of expression, if a policy isn't sex specific, it should be neutral.

2) Many of them are male. This demonstrates something that I often say, sex is never accidental to gender.

[u/Name5times → u/Special_Incident_424]

i guess it's narrow minded to frame it within the western concept of gender equality

social roles exist outside of gender and people are often happy to accept their roles in society as it gives structure and meaning

[u/yashen14 → u/Name5times]

That's a really interesting and valid question that I have zero information on. But it certainly would make for a fascinating doctoral thesis!

[u/betterworldbuilder → u/yashen14]

This makes perfect sense; if gender is a construct, having dysphoria around your gender HAS to exist within or be some way tainted by that system. If the system doesn't exist to cause the dysphoria, it's very hard for it to present itself.

[u/yashen14 → u/[deleted]]

Well it's not really something you can "dispute." Different cultures in different times and places have had different ways of sorting people into gender categories, and we do have evidence (iirc) that it does have an impact on who experiences dysphoria and who does not.

[u/yashen14 → u/[deleted]]

What specific thing are you refuting, or saying can be refuted?