Dialogos on gender w/ Rachel Hayden and Gregg Henriques.

This is a careful collective reflection on gender, transitioning, ontology and normativity that entered into dialogos.
Rachel has been on Voices with Vervaeke two times before:
• Transition and Transfo...
• Rachel Hayden Art and ...
Gregg and I have partnered in many projects.

[@akosludvig]

Thanks Rachel, Gregg and John! This conversation was like a gentle breeze after days spent in a stuffy room. It is very refreshing to see a discussion that tries to understand the topic on a deeper level.

[@sheilaeisele8490]

I am deeply appreciative of this topic and the care-full-ness with which you three explored it. Namaste.

[@MrCman321]

Greatest conversation on gender I've ever heard. You all took into account the care needed to handle this topic with sensitivity and respect. There was a clear line of rational logic from the ontological roots to the applied perspective. Nothing else to say but bravo and I hope you do this again in the future!

[@elektrotehnik94]

I really hope it happens again

[@MrCman321]

@@elektrotehnik94 Exactly! There is so much fear and anger towards this topic in the general public any constructive conversation can't be had. We have to be honest, put our cards on the table, and be willing to accept where others are at.

[@elektrotehnik94]

@@MrCman321 There is a pronounced lack of people able to provide vocalized nuance to this debate, in the way this video discussion was able to excel at it. It is an amazing discussion

[@franzspringmann3024]

Never imagined I’d watch an hour long episode of people talking, but when I watched you and your friends, John… I could sit for days absorbing your wisdom and knowledge. What a delicate and important topic. This dialogos is simply phenomenal. Thank you all!

[@Charlies_Little_Corner]

...if you want to stay true to the ontology of personhood, you have to keep the tension between the finite and the transcendent... What a massive gold nugget of wisdom to meditate on.

[@genkestrel7254]

Meditate away my friend. What does he mean?

[@franzspringmann3024]

John, you have revitalized a love of philosophy for me. Simply excellent.

[@mcapello8836]

Really enjoyed this discussion and found the care and patience within it to be exemplary. I also feel really good about where your collective priorities seemed to find their resting-place: an acknowledgement of a participatory tonos with an imperative to reduce suffering. Opponent processing almost requires pain, whether it's on an individual or a social scale, but pain that's being generated by fear/lack of courage or carelessness/lack of wisdom is very different from the necessary tension or stress required for learning. It's really wonderful to see the three of you reaching for that optimal grip together.

[@sheilaeisele8490]

Well said.

[@ericarzt9128]

As a person who is oriented in a very traditionally masculine way and who is cis male, like Greg described himself. I have always struggled to understand and have never been able to have explained how people can feel that gender is a social construct while simultaneously believing that they were born the wrong gender. I have been searching for a framework of this kind for so long so that I could relate to and understand trans people and non cis gender people. I cannot thank all three of you enough for being bold enough and careful enough to have this conversation.

[@rachelhayden2586]

💗🙏

[@Naughtynutoo]

Thanks for this John, Gregg and Rachel. This was a fascinating discussion and really helped me to clarify my own thinking on Gender. I am a gay man, who experiences myself as much more feminine in my sense of self and in how I experience my salience landscape. I really recognise myself in this idea that a female perspective leans more towards the relational context of problem solving. I have suspected for quite awhile now that my neurology is probably gender atypical. I really appreciate the explanation of levels of ontology here too. My difficulty with the subject has been around being caught between “It’s all cultural”, which has never rang true to me or “it’s all rigid biology and there’s no variation or nuance outside of male/female” which also never felt like the whole story. I’m also intrigued by the discussion around development and rites of passage. Some years ago I took part in a men’s initiation retreat to help myself confront my confusion around my sense of gender. My work since then in men’s groups has really helped me access and embody my masculine aspects and develop in a more integrated way. Thanks so much for this breath of fresh air!

[@leedufour]

Thanks Rachel, Gregg and John!

[@johnvervaeke]

Thanks Lee

[@constace2012]

That may be the most helpful discussion of gender that I’ve seen to date. Where I get sideways with activist is the point where they tell me I need to ignore biology. The fact that you lead with the idea that we “can’t ignore sex when it comes to gender,” helped me to be open to everything else you all say. Thank you.

[@Charlies_Little_Corner]

your conversation is a very thought provoking first step towards transformation in thinking about gender with care, love and humility. it's the first time I feel that I can really move forward in working on this issue in a positive manner transcending the vitriolic polarity of the current political discussion.

[@michaelchan9874]

Some spontaneous thoughts: Whew, that's a lot of jargon for someone coming in cold, but I think I get it. The "tonos" (not sure if I'm spelling this correctly) process, as in the tension between individuation and participation, I think is an apt point. I associate it with identifying with the process of growth rather than any specific growth outcomes (failures and successes). Camus' point on tension also come to mind. As I'm listening, I do think the discussion is somewhat based on wobbly grounds, as the primary reasonable critique of gender ideology in my view challenge the fundamental idea that the realm of "gender" is not the appropriate battleground on which this fight should be waged. Rather than the vague term "gender", it is much more precise and accurate (and hence functional) to speak about the topic using psychometric constructs (snapshots in time of traits, tendencies, preferences, anticipations of specific event/perceptual patterns). It does seem to me these constructs are in every way superior to the next-to-meaningless construct of "gender(s)" (as something divorced from sex as often defined by gender ideologues), and as someone looking for good tools for good work, I see no point in picking the "gender" tool over better non-sex-specific psychometric constructs. The archetypal images of the "masculine" and "feminine" likewise can be described with these constructs to a much higher degree of resolution without the added conflation of sex which use the exact same terms (boy/girl/man/woman) and continues to cause confusion. As for "he's just a boy in a man's body," I don't think that is a statement about gender, rather about the stages of lifespan development; maturity. The point about having an archetype to emulate I think is important. As far as I know, there is no universal "trans" archetype as the fact of being trans does not in any way have a reliably identifiable set of observable facts (e.g., a "tomgirl" or "trans"? a lesbian or man in woman's body?). It is the same problem I have with the vacuous term "non-binary", which only has a "not-something" as its identity, which is pathetically shallow and impossible to actually identify with any degree of reliability. Back to trans archetypes, perhaps someone can inform me in a comment of a universal example. I currently do not know of any besides very localised characters. I see the masculine and feminine archetypes as extremely powerful and necessary, which provides a "spirit" to emulate to move forward in life and develop spiritually. One needs appreciation and understanding of these two archetypes before attempting to distill from them a "middle way", or "jack of both trades". It is from this reasoning that I see people who identify as "non-binary" as terribly confused in their dismissal (based on shallow understanding or straight-up misunderstanding) of both primary archetypes while providing no alternative and no "middle way" (not to mention the whole debacle about pronouns). Open to everyone's thoughts.

[@BcClarity]

So, John, when will you have Robert Sapolsky? Thank you ALL for making this effort. I feel encouraged Dr. V., by your Wisdom. There's so much suffering. We need Sophia now more than ever.

[@nickpharo5300]

Saposky is a rigid materialist.. not exactly mustard for conversation here.

[@Nestoras_Zogopoulos]

@@nickpharo5300 that's exactly why the conversation needs to happen

[@BcClarity]

@@nickpharo5300 Are We seeking confirmation or expansion of gnosis? I think his primate studies are beyond Cartesian rigidity. Would you invite St. Francis of Assisi or would he be too provincial? behaviorism is extinct I take it?

[@820monster]

This discussion is so important. The more, let's say conservative reasoning isn't even really a gender theory. It's more along the lines of that's too obvious to concern ourselves with. It's basically 1+1=2, (no pun intended.) And they have very visceral and physical examples to point to and fair enough. But it essentially makes the more extreme feminist gender theories have the monopoly on this issue. And they lean heavily into postmodern critical theories which I suspect is why people are so at arms against transgenderism. It's more so the postmodern argumentation that's been used that cuts a bit too deep. It comes off as more of a declaration of war as opposed to a constructive dialogue.

[@mcnallyaar]

I'm so stoked for this! I often am thinking about gender when I consider Ecologies of Practice and the Religion that is not a Religion.

[@DanielVoisin]

I liked how the topic of trans as strategy to make sense of the world was touched on near the end. I have two nieces (twins) with a history of early childhood neglect (first two years) that are latching on to it after entering high school and finding themsleves mostly excluded. Outside of school it's very clear they're feminine, almost stereotypically so, but at school they feel pressured to identify as not girls, because it gives them a way to fit and sees them lavished with attention (for example getting to leave class to attend pride activities). What's concerning is teachers were affirming their new identities without letting their parents know or knowing they have complex histories. The impact has been nothing but negative and one was even hospitalized for suicidal ideation. She said the biggest problem is she feels intense pressure to choose something to identify herself as and the source she's using is the gender wiki where you find hundreds of gender identities (along with pronouns and flags) to describe every possible wrinkle or nuance of identity. It's just too much for them. Yet it's near impossible to talk about the concerns without getting accused of being transphobic or wanting them to fit some rigid traditional role. But we need to talk about it because this will end up hurting both legitimately trans people and already vulnerable youth that are just in a state of confusion.

[@antekszeptycki2030]

Can we have any links to the studies mentioned at 8:20, about the trans brains looking like brains of genders the person identifies with?

[@markjohnperkins]

I'm also trying to find this. lots of research out there on a google search and I have no idea which studies Rachel Hayden us referring to. any one have this information to share? edit: based on a comment that Hayden made on the James Madison University forum, I think she is referring to work done by Sapolsky and Bevins. Sapolsky has a video here on youtube called "Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender"

[@rachelhayden2586]

@@markjohnperkins The Sapolsky video is a good one, and Frans de Waal's interview on Mindscape, "Culture and Gender in Primates," is also a good one. Steven Novella at Science-Based Medicine did a blog about "The Science of Biological Sex," although I am not so sure of some of his conclusions regarding sex itself.

[@markjohnperkins]

@@rachelhayden2586 thats wonderful, thanks for replying and providing those resources. I'm following up on them now. all the best to you :D

[@brittybee6615]

They are sex-typical after controlling for sexual orientation. See: Structural connections in the brain in relation to gender identity and sexual orientation

[@tuckeroliver8300]

So excited for this. Y’all are amazing people!

[@givemorephilosophy]

Gender is a natural phenomenon and complement each other. Instead of fantasy and imaginative idiotic rhetoric we need to just think of sexual act with a purpose to procreate and nothing giving pleasure. Understanding this is going to be possible by humanity in the coming years 🙂🙂🙂🙂

[@JiminiCrikkit]

I've been hoping this conversation would come here about and I welcome it profoundly. Best Wishes to all.

[@MrMadalien]

Fantastic discussion.

[@arquilli1]

Found a lot of value out of the “animal-mental” and “tonas” discussion. What is the difference/overlap between gender and personality here? I find that there’s still so much confusion in what’s being conveyed or implied with certain terms. Man, woman, gender, cis, trans seem to end up reifying the stereotypes that we’re saying are a problem here.

[@OddBunsen]

45:05 I’m getting some Whitman vibes from the constellation of tonos, especially with the idea outlined earlier about identity as the door-slab between the self and collective. “Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself, (I am large, I contain multitudes.) I concentrate toward them that are nigh, I wait on the door-slab.”

[@franksatya5680]

Thanks Rachel, Gregg and John. Its interesting for me to contemplate Identity in terms of relevance realisation ... I've been thinking of relevance realisation as outward looking ... what is salient to me ... so sex attraction (heterosexual or homosexual) is obviously relevance realisation at work, but Identity seems to be about how I wish to be perceived by others. Which, also makes me wonder about Gregg's layers - living being, minded animal, culture. I think the step within the minded animal of self consciousness (theory of mind) is a crucial aspect to focus on, because this is possibly the moment where the relevance realisation mechanics somehow get turned inward? Dunno? It's all very stimulating though that's for sure.

[@_ARCATEC_]

Thanks for your help 💓

[@matthewheadland7307]

Is there a prep course for this talk?

[@mattgumbley1317]

Good luck.

[@hollysmith9995]

It brings to mind the Quadrants in Integral theory ~ any one familiar? The quadrants are the good the true and the beautiful along with systems ~ beginning together ~ the inner and outer of the individual and the collective each coarising ~ so culture would not go on the top of biological in my understanding ~ 💜🙏🏼

[@KR-jq3mj]

I like so many others have learned so much from JV and enjoyed hours of learning. I was surprised to be a little disappointed at the lack of depth, perhaps even concerned given the consequences of getting this wrong. Seemed 😔 the absent issues, and lack of participation of obvious voices and the over protection preventing a greater celebration of similarity and difference. Given the very high stakes of getting this wrong the lack of rigor worried me, maybe its just a relational reaction?

[@yoananda9]

Rachel seems a really nice person and I appreciate that she/he put an emphasis on respecting cis-identity as a trans-person. John, I'm so grateful, you teach me so much, but I would like to respectfully push back against Rachel argument, on the social component of this gender-issue. It's a thought experience. "I am self-transcending to a plant. I lie on my bed and don't move anymore. The society has to provide me extensions to my roots (digestive system) with a drip because society has to be compassionate, let me be whatever I want. I also need a self-conscious suppressor, basically to be kept sleeping. " What am I deriving from this thought experiment ? 1/ it's not SELF-transcendence we are talking, but techno-social-transcendence. I think, like you do, that labelling is important. 2/ obviously we cannot go too far on that path because it cannot be differentiated with madness. Hence, if somebody wants to self-transcend into a sheep for example, maybe one day technology will allow us to change its DNA and become a sheep ... but then what ? 3/ maybe self-transcendence the Bouddha, Taoist or Yogi way is a bit rigid, but, we must be careful of one thing : they try to become a better, more mature version of themselves. Do we want, for example, to let people social-transcend their identity to child, because they feel they are children inside themselves ? What would be the point to regress to childhood ? Because being adult is too hard ? So that was my attempt to make some relevance realization in the context of this discussion. I'm well aware that this is a very difficult subject. I'm well aware that there are many other aspects to be taken in account. I'm aware that my positioning is very simplistic, but I wanted to say : there is a limit, there has to be (at least for a society). Do we really want to go and see what there is beyond this limit ? What do we do if we find it was a mistake ? But either way, intersex people have to be respected. There is no debate on this matter.

[@MrCman321]

At 45:00 ish John talks about the "tonas" or tension of our identity, and how we cannot believe we can just transcend our embodied physical boundaries into whatever we say we are, BUT, we also can't say "we are physically just the way we are and there is nothing we can change about our identity" because if we did that, humans would never grow and develop. We are not "biologically" wired to be typing on computers right now, or biologically programmed to identify with many of the ways we identify people in modern society. If someone says "I am a bus driver" it would be odd to challenge this. Humans are the identity transforming creatures, but the point of the tonas is to keep us connected enough to reality while still aspiring for greater being. So first, there seems to be neurophysiological evidence for trans individuals having a brain that resembles that of the opposite sex they were born. If that is the case, and they have psychological drives towards living and identifying as the opposite gender, it would seem tortourous to not allow them to do this because of a slippery slope argument. I think the point is that either side is the wrong side, and we have to resist it, but thinking that trans individuals are pushing past the limit seems to be puritanical rather than rational. Rather than taking the plant person at face value, we would have to explore their psychological state. Why do they identify as a plant? What do they they think they will get?

[@premetheusmaximus6347]

"intersex" is a misnomer as no one is "in-between" male or female. you can respect them by not using that outdated term. these are males and females with disorders that impact their reproductive anatomy. medical conditions known as disorders of sexual development. they are not freaks, no matter how much certain "gender" woo clown want the to be.

[@yoananda9]

@@MrCman321 I agree to this part of the debate (about trans identity and feeling and biology). But I still think we can go too far, and we have to be cautious. Rachel do not want to deconstruct gender for those whom it's still important (the cis-people). Th'at's great. That's an important limit. We can be trans, we can be cis. There are people that want to push past this limit because cis is bad for them (no joke).

[@evanblackie7510]

Need to carefully consider the framing problem and avoid question begging.

[@weltraumaffe4155]

I am glad John had the balz to bring up rigor/rigidity and the idea of "getting it wrong". Though he did not address this to the transgender experience specifically, it is IMO important to do so if (and that's a big if) the transgender "community" aspires to integrate into society at large. I believe there needs to be room for transgender people beyond a ghettoized community in society at large. But for that to happen the community needs to mature to the point where it can accept the idea that it is possible that some may be "getting it wrong" and to be strong enough to listen, even from voices outside the community. John was carefully treding on thin ice scattered with a layer of broken glass when he mentioned histrionics and narcissism in the context of things going wrong as it relates to doing gender writ large. Had he even gotten close to associating histrionics and narcissism in the context of transgender doing gender wrong, he most likely would have found himself in deep shit with the community. I know that I myself would be canceled out of existence. It's time to put on the big boy/girl pants.

[@CharlieBrown-zr9wk]

Sorry I can’t watch this episode,for obvious reason🤮