[MissC]

I think MissC discussed this concept several times.

Indeed. I'm just glad someone noticed.

I have some honest-to-goodness Amerindian friends who fall into this category, and are happy to welcome me into their club, so to speak.

Then I've also run across some young SJW types on Tumblr (Social Justice Warriors -- it sounds a bit sarcastic to me) who are quite adamant that as a white person I can't be a two-spirit, but I am only allowed to be a Western "transgender" and all the crap that entails. Bah.

I pointed out that the phrase "two-spirit" is in English, and I'll call myself whatever I please, thank you so much. I can see where they're coming from as regards "appropriation", but that was a bit extreme!

Strangely, I've even been a little frustrated with our cultural definition of transgender. It seems like it's just a purgatory of sorts while we move from one gender to the other, whichever way we happen to be going but it's not a place you can reside in for very long. The two spirit view fits me a lot better and it requires no movement in either direction.

(Emphasis mine)

That's what I've been saying all along here. "Trans" implies motion, thus the very opposite of settling down, for one thing. The sociological implication is that one must not remain something outside of male or female, but must quickly make one's way from one to the other with minimal disruption. One must not rock the H.M.S. Gender Binary!

"Two-spirit", conversely, connotes something in-between that one can be, and remain so. It's a concept utterly lacking in the Western culture -- which, because it has no concept for this thing which is normal, must then pathologize it.

When I say "normal", I don't mean common... but I think we all know at this point that some gender variance is an everyday part of humanity. "Two-spirit" accepts this; "transgender" makes it a disease. This is why I am so adamant that our (Western) way of looking at this is deeply, horribly flawed.

My only criticism is that there are a few references to homosexuality which some (most actually) lump in with transgender or vise versa. I personally think sexual identity and gender identity are two VERY different aspects of a person, ...but that's just me.

Oh, I don't think that's just you, but it is a very Western reductionist mode of thinking; one that's hard to escape in our society. We don't look at a human like a whole person, but as a sack of meat organized by electrical impulses.

Everything is broken down to component parts and compartmentalized, because we need neat little answers wrapped in bows: a + b must always equal c; they must not equal zebra sometimes.

But the world doesn't work that way. Reductionism is the opposite of holism... and it does not account for wholes being more than the sum of their parts (or emergent behavior). That's why we have this idea that boys who play with dolls need SRS: it's an easy answer, and it's monetizable.

I find that sexual preference and gender identity are intertwined -- not in the same way for everyone, mind you -- but they are not separable. They are parts of you like your eye color and your height and the shape of your jaw... you can't take one away and be the same whole person.

Finally, while I'm in no way suggesting this is your case, I have seen plenty of evidence that much gender identity questioning arises from (unfounded) fear that one harbors at least some degree of same-sex physical attraction. Even if there is no attraction, the fear can still be there.

Hey, I've been there myself... it was awful when I was young and religious. Fortunately, my generation seems more willing to tolerate experimentation, so it hasn't been a big deal. But like I said, that may not be you... just tossing it out there.

[ElainMoria]

I personally think sexual identity and gender identity are two VERY different aspects of a person, ...but that's just me.

I am a transgender person. I identify as female, am attracted ONLY to females, and am currently stuck with male anatomy (no that does not make me a straight male). In effect, I am a lesbian currently trapped within male anatomy.

For me coming to terms with what my Gender Identity was, and what my Sexual Identity was, was the most difficult part of accepting myself. For 50 years I struggled with this. How could I be female inside, and be attracted to women, that MUST mean I was a straight male with normal sexual urges...

The only problem with that was while I had those sexual urges towards women.. WHAT they were, was not male. At all. I hated, and still hate the physical act of intercourse using my male genitalia. The greatest pleasure I get during sex isn't when I climax, it is when I bring my partner to orgasm by pleasuring her... without my penis being involved at all.

My Gender Identity does not set my Sexual Identity. And my anaotomy does not set my Gender Identity. I am a woman in a male body, that loves women. Simply put.

~Elain

[spacecat]

Oh, I don't think that's just you, but it is a very Western reductionist mode of thinking; one that's hard to escape in our society. We don't look at a human like a whole person, but as a sack of meat organized by electrical impulses.

Everything is broken down to component parts and compartmentalized, because we need neat little answers wrapped in bows: a + b must always equal c; they must not equal zebra sometimes.

But the world doesn't work that way. Reductionism is the opposite of holism... and it does not account for wholes being more than the sum of their parts (or emergent behavior). That's why we have this idea that boys who play with dolls need SRS: it's an easy answer, and it's monetizable.

I find that sexual preference and gender identity are intertwined -- not in the same way for everyone, mind you -- but they are not separable. They are parts of you like your eye color and your height and the shape of your jaw... you can't take one away and be the same whole person.

I believe that there needs to be a place similar to the native american 'two-spirit' that is available to white people and white cultures, without the race-based baggage and political correctness self-censorship. (as it is with the term 'two spirit' itself, which in spite of being rendered in english, has very heavy overtones of being necessarily of native american origin, and people who don't look the part, are going to be seen as cultural appropriators and other sorts of unsavory fakers.)

Unfortunately, the nearest acceptable/ tolerated rig-up available to white euro-americans is the lgb-T-I subcultures, which is forced to self-pathologize in order to get access to any medical care beyond what a 'normal' cis-person would need in any given situation.

I also believe that this core element of reductionism and otherwise necessary pathologization of any variant behaviors, marks white/american culture as distinctly incomplete, and not very functional unless operating within very very specific society parameters. This latter component, along with recorded (constant) historical conflicts and the need to dominate and colonise other more local (read; native) cultures, suggests to me that white anglo-euro-american culture is both artificial, and rigorously based and framed in militarism and authoritarianism.

[MrEricka]

going to be seen as cultural appropriators and other sorts of unsavory fakers.

This, with no insult intended or meant to anyone.