Oh come on, if someone is not cis but hasn't come out yet, and they're therefore uncomfortable with the gender they publicly identify as, there can definitely be signs. That is what I mean. That kind of discomfort with indentity is also a gaydar thing, which is why I brought that up.
Also, in the ideal case gender identity and presentation aren't connected at all (and I obviously have a lot of personal experience with that struggle) but in practise it often is.
By saying you can tell most people don't mean that they can literally be sure (unless you're Hawk)

Yeah but the point of moving away from/abolishing the gender binary is acknowledging that gender identity is internal and not reflective of outward appearance. You could look at someone and assume they are genderqueer or gendernonconforming, or masculine of center, etc. etc. based on the way they present, but you can't look at someone and tell they're trans, because it's so much deeper than appearance. Trying to guess at someone's "real" gender vs what they're trying to pass as perpetuates "passing" culture which only reinforces the harm that comes from adhering to the binary.

I'm not making this up out of nowhere. Maybe it's a regional thing, but here (and on the internet?) it is considered not only pointless but harmful to guess at peoples' identities. Because when you look at a person and decide you "can tell" or go on to deem them trans, you're guessing at 1) how they identify internally, 2) what genitalia they possess and 3) what gender they were assigned at birth. Surely you can see why those things are weird and creepy to do, and why it's no one's business but their own.

Thinking you are able to "tell" whether or not people are trans before they come out is just weird and creepy arrogance. Do you see where I'm coming from?

It's like trying to guess someone's race. Sure, sometimes you might guess right. But why are you guessing in the first place?

I'm a beautiful white man.

But I do hate it when people assume I'm not beautiful.

Of course I see what you mean, I know and I agree. I've found out the truth of what you're saying long ago, the hard way.
I know it's mostly on me for phrasing things clumsily, but you have to take the 'I can tell' way less strongly than I think you do. I generally don't go around guessing these things about people, I never wondered whether Elliot Page might be trans, but when I hear such things often in hindsight it makes sense and I realise I had a subconscious feeling. In my personal case, it means picking up that someone seems to be struggling with something similar to me.
Also, sometimes the guessing is not entirely pointless for that reason. It can be about trying to find people who relate to your struggles.

but race is a social construct based on outward appearance...

The confusing thing about the whole gender question to me is that if you completely divorce gender from any specific characteristics you render it functionally meaningless

Like if I say I identify as a woman but that changes nothing about my appearance, personality, presentation, etc then what does me identifying as a woman even mean? It seems like it means nothing at all.

It becomes VERY abstract at least.
This is related to why gender should be abolished altogether. I've talked about this before, but having such a thing as gender at all is perpetuating harmful notions.

It's not even just abstract, it's essentially meaningless as far as I can tell even on the abstract level.

Like you can say it's internal but even then, internally there must be some characteristics you associate with being a woman in order for you to make that internal distinction. Otherwise it just comes down to whether you like the word "woman" more than "man."

I don't think it can be abolished in the sense that people will always associate characteristics with different categories and percieve those categorical distinctions intrinsically. I think that's why gender exists to a large extent. Somewhat similar to why race exists.

True. And I agree it can probably never be abolished, which is why I consider it a compromise.
Still it is true that even if gender has certain characteristics, you can't just know for sure from the outside.

I have no conception of being able to tell unless there's outward indicators. If you're a trans woman who doesn't quite pass or still has a slightly masculine voice or other characteristics, I can probably tell. If you pass then obviously I can't tell. If you are one of those ambiguous gender queer types I probably just assume you're just a chick with a punk rock haircut.

As far as being able to spot a trans person before they transition.. nah that's out of my realm.

I can spot gays and bis pretty well though whether closeted or not. Like I'm fairly convinced Obama might be bi tbh.

Well like I said, the only way in which I think I have a feeling for someone not being cis is unconsciously picking up a sense of gender struggle or something. It's not something definite so I can't explain very well. I would never openly speculate, or just claim to know that someone is trans.

Yes to everything Marie said.
JWB is right too - the whole point is that gender IS meaningless when you break it down, and that's why we need to untrain ourselves to view people in these x or y categories. Some would argue that their identity makes up a big part of who they are, but tbh if your gender identity is your entire personality you're probably a pretty boring person.

Oh and swap "race" for "heritage" then, if it's tripping you up. Have you ever taken that Smithsonian (I think) test where you guess the race of people? There's another version where you are shown two pictures of different people and it prompts you with a word like "intelligent" or "bad-tempered" and you associate it with one of the two pictures, which then is analyzed and presented as "here are your internal biases" kind of thing. Like people typically will categorize darker skinned black people as more violent, less trustworthy, unattractive, etc., whereas lighter skinned black people are assigned more of the positive traits. Idk if it's still up I took them in college years ago, but it was interesting.

It's only meaningless if you insist there are no characteristics associated with said gender. The association of certain characteristics with a certain gender is what makes gender a thing in the first place.

no. I've seen the inherent bias one though but I think the methodology on that was rather dubious.

I'll bet Wyoming is one of those states where everyone is running around claiming to be 1/16th Cherokee and Steph still does on the down low.

I know what you mean, it's like tuning in to a shared experience or insecurity or something. Seeing someone struggle with their identity doesn't always automatically mean TRANS or NB but there are definitely gut feelings like "I see you trying on these different costumes and masks, good for you, can't wait until you figure out which one is you" kind of thing.

With Elliot Page, he'd already been an outspoken queer figure, so I can understand why it doesn't take any stretch of the imagination for one to accept that he is genderqueer as well. It's just weird to say "it's not surprising" because who exactly IS surprised? Who has a stake in his identity to the point where this is surprising news? Is it surprising when someone comes out as gay? I don't think so, it just *is.* Like by saying you're not surprised are you trying to show that you're that much more accepting of it? Or that you somehow predicted it? Or that your thumb weighs so heavily on the pulse of queer culture that you have some kind of extra sense that makes you privy to this information? Just a weird thing to say imo.

That's exactly what's being rejected - there is no certain characteristic that is inherently "male" or "female." There are no real gender roles, we put them upon ourselves. Getting rid of the binary = getting rid of gender = unlearning male v female traits/characteristics/interests/etc.

Lol nah. The whites are proud to be white. I was told growing up that my great grandmother was from the Blackfoot tribe but that turned out to be bull****. I took a DNA test and I am 100% the whitest of whites. No melanin mixed in the bloodline anywhere. I'm all Irish/Scottish and Scandinavian. My family tree pre-mormonism is all Søren Sørensens and Jøren Jørensens.

I'm rejecting the rejection.

You can't will power your way out of categorizing people intuitively.

Sure you can, lizard brain.

I'd be surprised of Joe Rogan came out as trans.

you don't even do it in practice

If gender was actually meaningless there would be no reason for trans.

Joe Rogan's personality and career is entirely based on his physique and maintenance of his masculinity. It does not have the same "stretch of the imagination" quality as the example I gave in Elliott.

Boo, bad form.

I know, I alluded to that.
It's a topic of multitudes, there's no clear cut answer.
I'm just presenting the argument as it has been presented to me.

I think you are avoiding the inherent paradox in your ideology. The reality is trans people are maintaining the gender distinction, not abolishing it.

Whether it's weird depends on the reason. In my case it simply means that I'm surprised they had these issues similar to mine, because I didn't pick up on it. I don't think that's weird at all.
Well, with a celebrity it is a bit weird, of course. But still it can matter all the world whether a celebrity comes out as gay, it's not always something that just *is*. People need representation and role models; I cannot begin to explain what seeing Jodie Foster as a closeted teen meant to me.

I'll show you bad form, ya bimbo!

That's a good point, representation is so important. The element of having a public reputation and career dependent upon it as such does give it a certain weight - by saying it just *is* I don't mean to say it isn't important.

what exactly do you mean then?

Social construct is such an ambiguous term though

Species is a social construct. Life is a social construct. Etc

Well yeah but that’s just bc of how force gender roles have been enforced due to white colonialism. Also dysphoria is a thing.

Gender predates white colonialism by such a wide margin lol

It's like you guys just say **** you think sounds woke for the sake of it

Bottom line is if you divorce gender from any associated characteristics it loses its meaning by definition. Dysphoria would be similarly meaningless without this association.

Yeah some of this sounds like AI-generated wokeness posts

Life is a social construct.

Social construct in itself isn't necessarily ambiguous but the way it's used can be misleading. Like saying gender isn't meaningless but it's a social construct. What is your point?

try
reading the posts I'm responding to for a clue on what my point is.

Why do we poop sitting on a toilet instead of over a toilet?

Sometimes I really just insist on saying some stupid ****, don't I?

I don't want to create another evolutionary rabbit hole discussion but we don't see things the same. I think some attributes are more cultural than others. The more ubiquitous an attribute is across cultures the less it appears to strictly be arbitrarily learned behavior to me.

As for gender abolition... I think people intuitively categorize the world around them as pattern seeking creatures, and so long as there is a spectrum of attributes that people have, these categories will exist conceptually.

So if you and many other people happen to have more masculine tendencies, that will manifest itself as a conceptual category regardless of whether you use the word "man" to describe it. If we all became uniformly androgynous then gender would actually be abolished by having no conceptual or useful meaning. I don't see that as a likely direction we're headed in.

I agree with you in that humans will always categorize themselves and others, there's no switching that off, it's how our brain processes inormation, and so, even with the absence of language we will see groupings of similar behaviors or outward presentation. I wonder if these "identity" categories that have become such an important part of the Larger Conversation are simply just an overcorrection - exploring gender identity and sexuality has never been something valued in our society, so by asserting your identity and your alternative pronouns and knowing the definitions of all the new jargon and setting unreasonable expectations for everyone outside of your group to adhere to these new rules, you're taking back some of that power and reclaiming space and refusing to live the "DADT," "I don't mind it I just dont want to see it in public stop shoving it down our throats" lives that so many before have. It would be going backward to resign to letting the System remain in tact.

I think that's how it works yeah, that's a good explanation. And jwb's comments about gender abolition not being possible are exactly why we need the gender expansion compromise

People HATE having grey areas.