Hello, If people believe that gender is a social construct, then how do these same people believe that non-binary is real? Why I'm pretty sure they're contradicting themselves: If gender (male and female) is a social construct, then it is created by people and has no measurable validity, and thus non-binary gender is also a social construct. However, these people believe there is measurable validity to non-binary and it just hasn't been found yet. Thank-you.
I've heard there's two different ways to look at this dilemma / thought process: 1. There are those who believe that because we've found physical evidence in brain scan differences between male and female gender (aka, a trans woman's brain map is more similar to a cis woman's than a man's) then nonbinary individuals should equally have some proof as well. And 2. Despite quantifiable results mentioned above, there are too many variables to prove that we're more similar / different from each other anyway (an outlier example: sex is not just determined by genitalia, but also chromosomes, hormone levels, all which can be left out of these types of tests and are highly variable and overlapping, especially when you mix in hormone disorders, intersex, etc; another example: one study shows autistic woman have brain maps more similar to allistic men than allistic women, so perhaps there could be ever further differing results when intersectioned with other mental illnesses and disorders, etc) and therefore all experiences of gender are not quantifiable, therefore nonbinary genders are exactly the same way. One theory supporting the secondary example is the fact that many sociologists have agreed that if it were true that gender was truly just inherently biological and not socially influenced in any way, then it would present itself identically across all of humanity and cultures throughout the world. However, this has not proven to be the case over millennia. What we might consider masculine or feminine today was not the case thousands of years ago (take the Romans considering men to be more beautiful than women; how fashion has evolved across Europe when it used to be common day for men to wear long, gown-like clothing) nor is it the case from culture to culture. What is considered customarily women's or men's work in America is usually not the case in Italy, or Japan. In India, the Hijra (transgender) have been accepted as a 3rd gender class in society for hundreds of years before it was accepted in western culture. Many Native American tribes accepted up as many as 5 genders in their cultures, and some Polynesian cultures have already accepted a third gender as well (Fa'afafine: exhibiting both masculine and feminine traits together). What is typically accepted by both scientists and psychologists today is cultures form the basis of gender off of many quantifiable, sex-based traits that are shared... but also in combination with unquantifiable social structures and created gender roles, so gender is both somewhat inherent but also maliable by the culture. I don't believe nonbinary people contradict themselves, you may think this because we are often seen as "reinforcing the gender binary / gender roles" by saying that because we aren't masculine or feminine we aren't boys or girls. I do not believe gender roles are the same as gender itself. Men can be masculine, feminine, anything, just as women can.... and I can be masculine, feminine, or anything, but I know in my brain that I do not feel strongly like a man or a woman just because of these social things. I don't believe I'm "not a girl" just because I like to dress like a boy, even though I was born "female". It's the same reason I don't believe I'm a trans boy because I still like to wear women's clothes. We understand the difference between gender roles and identity, you don't have to quantify something 100% of the time in my mind in order for it to be a true feeling, that's how much of psychology works. It's a balance and combination of things, and it is both intuitive, innate, and equally maliable.
Kipp's reply sums it all up pretty well. Basically, gender is partly a social construct and partly innate. As Kipp has already explained the facts, I'd like to add a more personal note: I identify as nonbinary, leaning slightly more to the male than the female side, but quite close to the middle of the spectrum. However, I am currently more comfortable with society's expectations towards women than towards men, because I can get away much easier with breaking these expectations. My interests are a wild mixture of what is perceived as masculine and feminine by society and I can do both without getting into much trouble. E.g. I am glad my friends and I can hug etc. without people assuming romantic feelings are involved. I imagine this to be more difficult if I was perceived as male by society. These expectations towards gender are socially constructed, as is the binary, clear-cut distinction between male and female. So in terms of gender roles, I profit of the fact that I am afab. However, that conflicts with my inner sense of my gender. I think that this inner part is not socially constructed. Therefore I am constantly left wondering if I want to present in a way such that I get read as a man more often, or if I am more comfortable with the advantages that come from getting read as a masculine woman. Summing that up, I think that expectations towards gender are constructed, whereas gender identity is not. What is constructed is the fact that everybody has to be either male or female. While these categories apply to a large percentage of the population, they certainly don't match all of us.
