Gregg,

I have been reflecting on this discussion union the past few days, and am
increasingly unsure of any one argument to try and 'defend.' I love framing
this issue using the I fluency matrix. It does allow for a much more clean
and nuanced understanding of the interplay of mental, biogical, and social
forces at play in this issue. One such aspect that I have noticed in my
clinical work with transgender individuals, that many here have mentioned,
is the role of social influence not only in pursuing gender identity (which
for cisgender individuals doesn't tend to be a point of reflection to begin
with - though obviously still is for many). I can count on one hand the
amount of times the person I have worked with was committed to a full
sex-change operation and going through hormone therapies. Most consider
it/are considering it, and many simply wish to retain their gender identity
and don't have plans to go through with surgeries and other treatments
(though this is also for several very different reasons).

My point here is exactly the one we have been making. The issue of gender
identity is not an issue of biology, it is not an issue of culture, I would
go as far as to say it is not an issue at all depending on the frame of
thought in which one camps. What is an issue is the unnecessary suffering
of individuals whom these debates are meant to reflect. That itself is the
camp I tend to traverse, and from working in this one area I have
apparently decided to throw out other areas of thought because of their
lack of nuance on this subject when taken alone. So if we are to advance
the discussion, be it to clarify the academic debate (power), to alleviate
suffering (love), or to aid our social institutions in policy-making around
gender (influence), we MUST adopt a metamodern sensibility. The discussion
here is highly reflective of the need for metamodernism and a general
acknowledgement of the failings of any one plane of complexity in being
explanatory of gender identity.

Not only can we almost instantly see that gender identity is not a
'problem' or an 'issue' but a process of a kind that again isn't purely
biogical or social when we hold multiple epistemogies at once, but we can
see it is readily explaining itself so long as we don't engender (sorry I
couldn't resist the word choice) it with our own preconceived notions about
what gender means in these different contexts. The answers are there, both
individual subjective differences, aggregates, and more or less
naturalistic facts, so long as we genuinely ask questions and seek to
describe, not prescribe (at least not until we've properly accounted for
our current precepts in the matter).

I laughed at myself the other night when I caught a thought about whether
gender had an answer and then found myself wondering what the actual
question was.

I have been writing a bit about the role of interpersonal, developmental,
complex, and other traumas as they mediate the identity-focused aspect of
the transgender journey for some. Although the direction I see that going
is in a very different direction than would metamodernism on the whole, and
is not meant to be (nor should it) a view on gender identity in such a
narrow regard. While I am happy to share these ideas, and I see the
alignment with IM as the perfect frame for that discussion in particular, I
am skeptical the ideas (of trauma in relation to gender) can be understood
through anything short of a metamodern lense without becoming dangerously
toxic to a more simplistic level of debate.

Regards,

Nicholas G. Lattanzio, Psy.D.

On Sun, May 23, 2021, 6:48 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Thanks for your reflections, Cory. I am in large agreement.
>
>
>
> One thing I would like to comment on and add regarding this issue is that
> we can use the ToK map of reality and science to show that just thinking in
> terms of “biological” and “social” sides of the equation is insufficient.
> The reason is that it overlooks mental evolution and the behavioral
> inclinations we have as primates. This is the psychological or mental
> behavioral level of analysis.
>
>
>
> This comes into high relief when we look at the masculine and feminine
> primate relational styles through lens of the Influence Matrix, as I point
> out in this blog:
>
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_201907_simple-2Dway-2Dunderstand-2Dthe-2Dorigin-2Dgender-2Droles&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ijY4gaR6F0rUoLtEvuzOc0gje2HYEbMID99KfJExChc&s=JFu6Clo3lBZG0mlWjemm25ZqefWm6X7Oj0Lb2s_3HFU&e= 
>
>
>
> It also speaks to Mike’s well argued points.
>
>
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <
> [log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *Cory David Barker
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 23, 2021 2:47 AM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: TOK Psychology Prof Removed From APA Discussion After
> Saying There Are Only 2 Genders (*Newsweek*)
>
>
>
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> See the below article and paper. I just remembered this from way back, and
> the article was still available online (to my surprise). This sort of
> neuroscience explains a lot.
>
>
>
> Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex >>>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.newscientist.com_article_dn14146-2Dgay-2Dbrains-2Dstructured-2Dlike-2Dthose-2Dof-2Dthe-2Dopposite-2Dsex_-23ixzz6vfTFoIHu&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=CG1KWhb4QO3gl1ZDrSE9wEXuzvPdry1ZzHs4yT-R__U&s=PXQub7k2o4CnC4N_LBT9l132XXjj6fuC6EbcwOsNRg0&e=>
>
>
>
> Savic, I., & Lindström, P. (2008). PET and MRI show differences in
> cerebral asymmetry and functional connectivity between homo-and
> heterosexual subjects
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.pnas.org_content_105_27_9403&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=CG1KWhb4QO3gl1ZDrSE9wEXuzvPdry1ZzHs4yT-R__U&s=6TKk1JnOb9qYSpexNijLyRmVC_3OAgD39umz0DKdNYQ&e=>. Proceedings
> of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(27), 9403-9408.
>
>
>
> C.
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1