by jamest wrote:
To be clear, I have no problem with people identifying themselves however they like as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. I only joined the discussion because I am of the opinion that however one feels about one's identity, the claim that it is intrinsic to their being (innate) is highly problematical from my rational perspective.
However, I do acknowledge that we are born with specific innate qualities (including perhaps a base personality which will determine how we will think about and emotionalize our lives wrt the external world) and that some of these qualities may indeed contribute to how one eventually feels about its identity. However, I do think that a specific outcome to that process is not inevitable and probably highly contingent upon the society and interactions that one will experience. Indeed, the quality of one's experiences may perhaps be sufficient enough to change one's 'base personality'. I'm thinking about abused kids or war, for instance. In such instances, how one identifies oneself may lead to an entirely different outcome.
The bottom-line, imo, is that any identity gleaned and then 'felt' relative to things within experience cannot be labelled as intrinsic or innate. Though I do accept that the issue is indeed complex and multifaceted.
Aye. The social component of identity is a significant factor, and the Western tradition of two exclusive genders, though common, is not the only social model that is or has been applied.
See Third Gender (wikipedia), or Gender identity in other cultures (identiversity.org).
