Gender is a term that implies that masculine-ness and feminine-ness which have existed but as ideas for centuries, are part of some THING that exists prior to our society inventing these ideas. This shows that ‘gender’ is a linguistic scam. Because they are implying rather than stating. And hoping people will think gender’s existence as a prior-to-society thing is an unquestionable, established fact. And it shows that the concepts of masculine and feminine are metaphysical. (Things that are held to be things and not feelings or ideas are either ’empirical’ or ‘metaphysical’. No time here to go into why, sorry.) Therefore science and science-based things like medicine not only need not, but cannot take notice of them.
Masculine and feminine are also social categories. A thing that sociologists do is look at the ideas that organize things in our society. Masculine and feminine exist at the level of ideas. And via that as places in society. In the sense of ‘know your place’. There is a hierarchy. And each of these places, the male and the female, have rules about what is and is not OK for people in them to do and also to be. ‘Be’ in the internal psychological sense. You may ask ‘How can you have rules about what it’s OK for a person to psychologically be?’ This is exactly the kind of thing that happens when you have metaphysical notions viz things that are beyond questioning. And no it does not make sense. And these rules, for what is masculine and what is feminine, have been different in different eras. Why is that important? Because it shows that the concepts have no empirical basis. And shows that they are in fact rules not an inner psychological something.
This is all settled science by the way. And for transgender activists to treat it like it’s the same as content on a radio call-in show is intellectually dishonest. Tangent: when feminists in the 70s argued for legal measures to promote women’s equality they believed that all of the claims they were making were empirically true. They didn’t just make stuff up.
So women were and still are told you shouldn’t feel that because that‘s contrary to women’s nature. You may well ask ‘If women feel that then how is it not part of women’s nature?’ And the answer is women have to make themselves conform to the characteristics of women’s nature. And you might respond with ‘OK that’s contradictory. Either women’s nature is what women really actually are like. So super diverse and all over the place. OR it’s a set of rules about how women have to act and apparently feel. It can’t be both.’ Exactly. It can’t be both, it’s contradictory, it’s a giant mess. Women have been told for centuries it’s your nature to remake yourself into this other kind of person. That isn’t you. This is the reality of not ‘gender’ but of femininity, social roles, and the persecution and subordination of women.
So about gender: when things have no empirical basis, are highly changeable societal rules, and are based on metaphysical ideas that is a thing that in every other context is barred from the medical world. There are no other metaphysically based societal rules that are used as the basis for deciding what surgical operations to do or how to diagnose which people would get them. This is a huge exception to how things are normally done in our society. That deserves significant scrutiny.
There is not a “female gender” or a “male gender” that is a factual thing. These are just ideas. When the transgender movement claims that this person has a female brain, or a female nature they are expressing an opinion. They are not stating a fact. Nor a thing that could ever be a fact. That institutions outside of the transgender subculture are taking notice of this is a mistake. It’s a mistake on the part of law and it’s a mistake on the part of education and it’s especially mistakes on the part of psychology and medicine. None of this is actually allowed. This is a perfect example of something being posited with no evidence that is then treated as a fact because it fits with the scientifically-baseless, stereotyped thinking of lots and lots of people.
So the real answer about what is gender or how should we think of gender or what does gender have to do with the alleged legitimacy of the demands being made by the transgender movement is gender is not a thing that really exists, it cannot be the basis for any claim on anything that any institution in society does. And it is fully known that gender refers to sex roles which are socially created rules (that’s what “social construct” means). They have nothing to do with people’s inner natures. Without the transgender claim that their members have inner natures of a sexed sort, male or female, there is no basis for the demands that they’re making. And gender is not about people’s inner natures therefore their members do not have sexed inner natures nor does anyone else. And there is no basis for their demands.
None of this should surprise anyone who is aware of the origin of this whole phenomenon, both the sex change thing and the transgender movement as a movement, in transvestite sexual fetishism. (‘Virginia’ Prince, a part-time cross-dresser started the push for characterizing people like him as women entitled to particular things that he fetishistically wanted under the rubric of “equal rights” in the 1990s. It’s in Gender Hurts, don’t know the page number.) These transvestic people attempt to live their lives in a state of fantasy. That they would lie is hardly surprising. That they would even be able to convince themselves, if indeed they have, that they aren’t lying is also not surprising. In other words this whole edifice of gender-ideology can be built on any basis they like. Because it is all lies. Yes, they have lured people into the trans subculture who feel distressed about something and then been convinced to think of it as about “gender”. But the actual architects of this ideology were fetishists, being untruthful about that who thus had a free hand in inventing a basis for their “political” demands. And indeed it shows when you look at the trans ideology closely. There’s no empirical basis for it. Their claims are circular or mutually contradictory. All of this needs to be treated as the kind of information that it is. Garbled opinion. The fact that medical people, and it’s only a very tiny minority who are also really fanatical about it, are willing to ratify this garbled opinion should not convince anybody that it’s real. Medicine makes mistakes all the time. And as I said most of medicine wouldn’t touch these ‘treatments’ with a 10 foot pole.
Which is how we get to the point of realizing that people are being abused. They are being drawn into this subculture and inculcated with body rejection psychological problems if they did not already have them. This is wrong. This must be stopped.
None of this is bigotry. Bigotry is about a group that actually exists and is different from the majority and who the bigots enjoy hating. Bigotry is not rejecting the claims of some weird subculture and political outgroup. If it were then the pedophile rights organizations would be right when they claim that our disgust with them is bigotry. And we know they are not. In other words we all know that bigots are bigots and critics are not. People who criticize the Catholic Church about the pedophile priest scandal are called bigots by some. They are not.