| sundin13 said: It is people accepting who they are and living in the way which they would like to live... |
Hey, I have some questions about transgender theory, and since you seem to have taken up its banner, I hope you don't mind me inserting myself here and putting them to you:
I was assigned male at birth, presumably on the strength of my phenotypical characteristics. I present as "male," and so I was labelled "male," and raised as such, and told that I was, in fact, male. I would like to accept "who I am," probably as much as anyone else, and maybe more than some (as I am fairly invested in such philosophical questions). So, what is the process by which I can determine whether I am cisgendered or transgendered? How do I know that the original assignation was accurate? How can I tell?
I don't want to anticipate too much, but here's my initial concern:
I am an atheist. Many times over my life, I've been approached by people representing various religions as they have attempted some form of conversion. When pressed for evidence for their claims, I have often been met with the answer that I should conduct some form of introspection. That the truth of their religious claims should somehow reveal itself to me -- in the form of a deep sensation of knowing. Which is to say, a feeling.
But I am mistrustful that my feelings, however strong they might be, necessarily reflect truth. Thus, if I were to ask of myself (or "God," via contemplative prayer, though to assert either construction seems a form of question-begging), "Is the Book of Mormon true?" and I get back some sensation of "yes," howsoever strong, howsoever compelling, I still could not take that as meaning that the Book of Mormon is, in fact, true. Because it may be I feel that way for other reasons unrelated to the truth of the matter.
So I worry that your answer might be along the lines of, "If you consult yourself, you'll know whether you are male or not." And that this "knowing" will again, really, be a question of "feeling." Yet it doesn't seem to me that "feeling like a male" is sufficient for me to say that I am one. If there is any reality to "being male" in the first place -- if it refers to any actual thing -- then that must be more than just my feeling on the matter. (And if it does not refer to any actual thing -- if it's just a label devoid of all substance, an empty sound that can mean whatever I wish it to mean, with no more seriousness than for me to pronounce myself a "mome rath" -- then what are we really talking about, and why should anyone care? Surely someone who claims to be male, and who asks for recognition on that score, must believe that being "male" is meaningful, is real, and refers to something beyond the mere existence of that feeling.)
Besides which, I'm not sure I could identify what it feels like to "feel male," or recognize that my experiences are those of a male. After all, I only have my own feelings, my own experiences, and I have no direct basis for comparing them against anything or anyone else. I've never not been myself; I've never been anything other than me. Even if I were to try to imagine what it feels like to feel like someone else, I am bound to do so through my own understanding and experience, and thus I probably do not have a wholly accurate understanding. It will still, really, be a self-exploration.
Likewise, if I "felt female," I'm not certain how I could possibly know it. I can't even imagine what it would feel like to "feel female," as though that should be a different feeling than I have currently. I wouldn't know what to look for. I mean, really, suppose that's the case. Suppose my experiences are "female experiences," and that I'm just unaware of it -- how could I be brought around to the reality of my situation? How would I recognize it?
Perhaps I could ask other men and women how they "feel," and try to compare myself with them on that basis? There are certainly ways in which I typically differ from the reported experiences of other men -- and sometimes I find greater sympathy with women. But my experience of that has always been on a case-by-case basis: I identify with some men in some respects, and not others; and with some women in some respects and not others. I've never found any consistent thru-line of "this is how men feel" versus "this is how women feel" in what I've seen or heard from others. Rather, I've seen incredible variation, and so I've always been tempted to explain my experience as just being that of another varied individual -- essentially unique; I've always assumed that, if I am male (as I have always been told), even if I differ from other men in every other respect, such variation is obviously possible. I am proof that it is possible.
But is this wrong? If I am sufficiently different from other men in my experiences (insofar as I can tell such a thing), does this mean that I should finally conclude that I'm not actually a man at all? If so, what is the nature of the experience that tells a man that he is a man, and a woman that she is a woman, apart from their phenotypical characteristics?
Last edited by donathos - on 28 June 2020
