Thank you for writing that, I do appreciate long posts. I have thought about where my confusion comes from.
Earlier I have found it difficult to understand what appears to me to be two incompatible claims. One that says that gender is completely a social construct, and one that says that being trans is something inherent in a person, i.e being the case regardless of external expectations and beliefs. People may say “I am trans”, in a way that goes beyond “I would like to wear a dress but people expect me not to.” Do you know what I mean?
It’s inherent only while the construct exists, I think is the answer.
Like, let’s draw a picture: each gender is a box, girls on the left, boys on the right, and at birth you can be placed in either one.
If you’re placed with the boys, you’ll grow up expected to show strength, swallow sadness, have broad shoulders, work hard, be a leader, yadda yadda.
If you’re placed with the girls, you’ll grow up expected to show kindness, hide ambition, have wide hips, be pretty, show empathy, you get the idea.
To be trans, you have to be placed in one, but identify with the other. You have to move from the right box to the left box, or vice versa.
But if we start without the boxes, you can’t really be placed in the wrong one because they don’t exist. You can’t transition because you’re already wherever you wanted to be. And the phrase “I am trans,” which as you say resounds from deep within a person’s soul, is instead “I am me.”
In effect, we are just doing away with expectations. It’s just that the expectations we’re doing away with serve mostly to restrict and bind people. The expectations are what cause the suffering. You want to be a mechanic, but mom says that isn’t what graceful ladies do. You want to be motherly, but dad says you should be tough instead so you can defend yourself.
The inherent qualities are whatever makes a person who they are. The gender categories tell people who they should be.
Thank you for writing that, I do appreciate long posts. I have thought about where my confusion comes from.
Earlier I have found it difficult to understand what appears to me to be two incompatible claims. One that says that gender is completely a social construct, and one that says that being trans is something inherent in a person, i.e being the case regardless of external expectations and beliefs. People may say “I am trans”, in a way that goes beyond “I would like to wear a dress but people expect me not to.” Do you know what I mean?
It’s inherent only while the construct exists, I think is the answer.
Like, let’s draw a picture: each gender is a box, girls on the left, boys on the right, and at birth you can be placed in either one.
If you’re placed with the boys, you’ll grow up expected to show strength, swallow sadness, have broad shoulders, work hard, be a leader, yadda yadda.
If you’re placed with the girls, you’ll grow up expected to show kindness, hide ambition, have wide hips, be pretty, show empathy, you get the idea.
To be trans, you have to be placed in one, but identify with the other. You have to move from the right box to the left box, or vice versa.
But if we start without the boxes, you can’t really be placed in the wrong one because they don’t exist. You can’t transition because you’re already wherever you wanted to be. And the phrase “I am trans,” which as you say resounds from deep within a person’s soul, is instead “I am me.”
In effect, we are just doing away with expectations. It’s just that the expectations we’re doing away with serve mostly to restrict and bind people. The expectations are what cause the suffering. You want to be a mechanic, but mom says that isn’t what graceful ladies do. You want to be motherly, but dad says you should be tough instead so you can defend yourself.
The inherent qualities are whatever makes a person who they are. The gender categories tell people who they should be.