Understanding Androgyny

[Metroland]

Hi All,

I have been struggling with gender identity for a while and I am trying to understand it.  A friend suggested a while back that I would consider androgyny but I felt that the word didn't really represent me.  I felt that androgyny is being genderless or having a little bit of "male" and "female".

I feel however that I do have a gender identity and it is unique to me. I don't identify as female and I don't identify as male. I identify as a gender that is a mix of characteristics that people call masculine and feminine. And this put together creates my gender identity.

Maybe I felt that I didn't identify as androgynous because I didn't feel that the label fits me. In this new categorization I feel that there is the male on one side and the female on the other and whatever in between is a mix of the two, so essentially it is still binary.

It feels to me that a person who is for instance 30% female and 70% male and a person who is 70% female and 30% male are both androgynous, and thus maybe considered the same gender, yet I believe that it would be better if each person can identify as their own gender.

Am I understanding androgyny correctly? Can a person identify as a separate gender? Would this person be considered androgynous?

Thanks for your input.

[mimpi]

Interesting question. Perhaps we all have separate genders but feel the need to be classified either by ourselves or under the pressure of societal norms.

The way I understand it Androgyne itself isn't a rigid category but one that also includes a variety of identities regarding gender and gender expression not to mention sex and sexual orientation.

Probably wrong as usual so don't take my opinion as being necessarily correct.

[caseyy]

I'm comfortable with the idea of androgyne being an umbrella identity, to encompass a lot of non-binary identities. I don't identify as either male or female, nor do I identify as a combo.

[Shana A]

I don't identify as either gender; male or female, I am somewhere on the continuum in-between or outside the binary.

Z

[ativan]

Maybe I felt that I didn't identify as androgynous because I didn't feel that the label fits me. In this new categorization I feel that there is the male on one side and the female on the other and whatever in between is a mix of the two, so essentially it is still binary.

Just as water and alcohol mix to make a 'drink', a mix of the binaries is also Androgyn. In the case of having neither binary genders, it is the same, Androgyn.

Androgynous is expression, not an identity.
Androgyn is the identitiy, the gender. Androgynous is one of many ways an Androgyne can express's one's identity.
Just as anybody can have an expression that is androgynous, they don't have to be an Androgyn.

Some without any gender are under the Androygne (the umbrella) term. But they don't have to identify as that, they can identify as something else. It's on the boards here as a place to reside (the Anrogyne Forest), just as it is for any combination of the two binary genders.

Ativan

[Taka]

i don't see anything wrong about identifying yourself outside the concepts of "male" and "female". to be an androgyne around here all that's needed is to not be exclusively in either binary, though other places this may be defined differently

i can't say that i'm either male or female, and i feel a strong aversion to identifying as either (or both or none). maybe i'll present as one or the other, even take on the gender role from time to time. but my identity is probably a very different gender from the binaries, and what others might think is gender expression more like an expression of my different personality traits

[foosnark]

Terms get pretty fuzzy.

Generally when people refer to binary gender, they don't mean a one dimensional axis spannng from 0-100% female and 100-0% male; they mean either 100% female or 100% male.  As in, all the information about that person's gender identity can be summed up with one binary digit.  (Although some bigender people consider themselves binary; they just happen to flip that bit often.)

So anyone that's not 100% male or 100% female in gender identity is androgyne, if they want to call themselves such, regardless of whether they're on or off a theoretical male/female axis or have no gender at all.

[Pica Pica]

I like the conception of androgyne we play around with here that has evolved and grown under the name of 'unicorn forest'. The gist is that androgyne is a conceptual space to be explored and inhabited as wished. I almost see it as a story.

The story is this...

There are two settlements, the settlement of male and the settlement of female. Between these settlements lays a large, mostly uncharted land called 'The Unicorn Forest'. Some people say that the forest is owned by one city part of the way and the other for the other part, some say that the forest is a way between the two cities and some say that the forest is a place in itself.

There are some people who have made their home in the forest, they live in the trees and caves, sometimes sneaking into the cities and smuggling things out. They explore the highways of the forest, scale the trees and commune with the animals. Some of them set up permanent homes in the forest, some use the forest as a way to escape the cities, some wander around the forest - these are the androgynes.

One of them is Pica Pica, they have a treehouse deep in the forest in the shape of a pirate ship where they sit above the canopy, listen to the rush of leaves and imagines they are on the waves. They are settled comfortably in the forest and can't understand why people would live in the cities or why people would come from the cities, pick all the berries off the bushes and take them back...that's me of course.

- Wow, I do believe I have lost it, hey ho.

[Metroland]

So anyone that's not 100% male or 100% female in gender identity is androgyne, if they want to call themselves such, regardless of whether they're on or off a theoretical male/female axis or have no gender at all.

Hi,
Thanks everyone for your input.

Foosnark: I just don't think that someone who identifies as 90 % female and another who identifies as 90% male has the same gender ie androgyn. So someone is more androgyn than the other? Simply it is changed from a binary system to a 3 option system?

My gender identity if I present more female than male is the same as a person who presents more male than female?

[ativan]

They wouldn't be the same gender, but those genders still fall under the term Androgyn.
It isn't a third gender in a three option world. It merely represents all of the genders that are non-binary as a whole.

If your gender identity is more female than male it is not the same as a person who's identity is more male than female.

To identify any gender as to be better than another would be similar to racism.
But, you may certainly prefer one more than another as your personal choice.

As Pica said, it is conceptual. All gender identities are conceptual. The boundaries may be blurred to some.

Ativan (I have a tree fort and a rope swing that can hold more than one person)

[Padma]

The cities are nice places to visit (mostly because they have some really nice people living in them)... but I wouldn't want to live there .

I'm fascinated to realise how enormously, enormously different my experience of myself (as a female with a fairly androgyne sense of self - currently wriggling my way out of a male anatomy) is from that of, for example, some post-op women's gender identity. People are just so different from each other, even when there are apparent similarities - and sometimes the apparent similarities are just that they've historically had the same label applied to them.

So, for example, I went to a meeting for bisexuals last summer, and found I had pretty much nothing in common with those particular people. And not surprising: when "bisexual" really just means "anyone who's not totally gay or straight" that's a vast range of diverse experience to try and cover with one word (the sexuality forest is as huge as the gender one). "Androgyne" feels to me similar - it'll have to do as shorthand, but it's a poor substitute for a mutual exchange of detailed personal explanations of how we experience ourselves. They're just soundbites, these labels, and they're never going to do the job very well.

(ooh, this was my post number 1999 - cue theme music and Commander Koenig... )

[domine!domine!]

It feels to me that a person who is for instance 30% female and 70% male and a person who is 70% female and 30% male are both androgynous, and thus maybe considered the same gender, yet I believe that it would be better if each person can identify as their own gender.

I find the concept of being "x% male, y% female" (which seems to be your trouble) quite a peculiar one to use: how could these ratios be known, or guessed at?  If one rejects for oneself the parameters of the binary, then how is it useful to recategorise oneself so stringently using (and thus accepting for oneself) the terms of the binary - and how can one know if certain elements of oneself are (e.g.) "male" or just a sort of masculine "female"?  Categorising parts of the self in this way would also clash with the view widely held by transsexuals of traits being male or female because they belong to a male or a female, not because of anything about the trait itself.

Generally, it doesn't imply a very holistically-developed personality (as it indicates a split) and doesn't seem to me a very useful way to understand androgyny.  So, I would be inclined to sod wondering about what percentages make what type of androgyne, and understand androgyny more as just a place for anyone who doesn't feel that they fit into a rigid binary gender, and is not a rigid gender in itself.  Then, I'd just relax in Pica Pica's forest for a bit, maybe have a nap by a little river, see where that got me.  Probably nowhere, but a well-rested nowhere.

[foosnark]

The terms are fuzzy, the numbers are fuzzy and the unicorns are fuzzy...

I would still say this hypothetical 90% female should decide for themselves whether they are androgyne or maybe a slight tomboyish girl.  If the numbers were more than just a vague guesstimate, Where's the cutoff point?  I know a couple of women who consider themselves mentally as much or more male than female, don't believe in the gender binary, totally support me in the androgyne gender identity, but still identify as female themselves.  One of them is even nicknamed George by her husband.

There's this psychology test called the Bem Sex Role Inventory.  (Should have been "gender" there, but the test is 40 some years old.)  It gives results in terms of percentages of male, female, and androgyn(ous) as if the graph space were a triangle rather than a line.  It's the same combination of useful and meaningless as any test of its kind, but the model shows there are many valid ways of thinking about gender.  That hypothetical 90% female might only be 20% female if you add the other dimension, or might still be 90%.

[Metroland]

I would still say this hypothetical 90% female should decide for themselves whether they are androgyne or maybe a slight tomboyish girl.

Why wouldn't this hypothetical female just be happy with a gender that she expresses without being androgyne or a girl?  I am not sure why if someone doesn't identify with the gender binary they are lumped together as androgyne.  They still have unique ways of expressing their gender.

If the numbers were more than just a vague guesstimate, Where's the cutoff point?

I agree with you, it is all hypothetical and it varies from a person to a person.  How much "feminity" does someone has to have to be considered female?

[ativan]

It's not so much as 'lumped together', as it is a place for those with unique identities to express themselves.

Each person has to determine the cutoff point for themselves. There are no hardfast rules when it comes to genders, not even in the binary world.

[Metroland]

Thanks @ivan.  I just don't like the fact that there is this "perfect" gender out there, male or female, and we don't have the space to say my gender is "perfect" for me.

[foosnark]

I think my post was misunderstood.  It seems to be so misunderstood that I'm actually confused about how to fix it, so instead I'll just say this jambalaya is tasty.

The point of an umbrella isn't to force people under it, it's to let them gather there if they like.  There is no "how androgyne are you?" test to be allowed into the unicorn forest, and there isn't a rewcruitment or forced registration program either.  "Hey you, you're only 84.9% male, you have to wear this badge!"  Uh-uh.  Which is why I said it's up to the individual to decide what labels fit them.

[Metroland]

I understand.  Maybe each one can express their individuality as they will.

[Taka]

this is a nice place for individuality. the unicorn forest really is just a huge place with more than enough room for those who don't feel comfortable in male city or female city, and no one dictates where you can or can't live here. i myself would like to build myself a castle on a mountaintop with secret underground tunnels leading to the two big cities so i can visit them whenever i want. i like being in the city as long as i can leave when i want to

[mimpi]

The terms are fuzzy, the numbers are fuzzy and the unicorns are fuzzy...

I would still say this hypothetical 90% female should decide for themselves whether they are androgyne or maybe a slight tomboyish girl.  If the numbers were more than just a vague guesstimate, Where's the cutoff point?  I know a couple of women who consider themselves mentally as much or more male than female, don't believe in the gender binary, totally support me in the androgyne gender identity, but still identify as female themselves.  One of them is even nicknamed George by her husband.

There's this psychology test called the Bem Sex Role Inventory.  (Should have been "gender" there, but the test is 40 some years old.)  It gives results in terms of percentages of male, female, and androgyn(ous) as if the graph space were a triangle rather than a line.  It's the same combination of useful and meaningless as any test of its kind, but the model shows there are many valid ways of thinking about gender.  That hypothetical 90% female might only be 20% female if you add the other dimension, or might still be 90%.

Thank you all for building this place, some of us can't be anywhere else wherever our true souls may be. You guys/girls/whatever you may be, probably saved my life. Thank you.