Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Steersman's avatar

Looks interesting, although I wonder how you define "gender identity".

Your previous post -- "Navigating Ideological Currents" -- asserts that "gender identity [is] a nebulous concept for which there is, as yet, no evidence." Yet your "Gender Framework" document asserts that: "‘Gender identity’: An internal sense of one’s own gender, which may or may not be at odds with one’s biological sex."

https://stellaomalley.substack.com/p/navigating-ideological-currents-why

https://genspect.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/The-Gender-Framework-Draft-One.pdf

I think you need to be consistent, that you need to call a spade an effen shovel. If you're "hunting the snark" then you're not likely to find it if you can't even say what it looks like, if you have contradictory definitions for the critter.

As I had mentioned before, I think you have to SAY what you mean by the term, and that the most rational and logically coherent definition is analogous to what the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [SEP] more or less DEFINES "personal identity" to be. Paraphrasing them to offer a definition for "gender identity":

SEP [paraphrased]: "Outside of philosophy, [gender identity’] usually refers to [sexually dimorphic personality traits] to which we feel a special sense of attachment or ownership. Someone’s [gender identity] in this sense consists of those [feminine and masculine personality traits] she takes to 'define her as a person' or 'make her the person she is', and which distinguish her from others."

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-personal/#ProPerIde

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts