When I first discovered the term androgyne and made videos about it and such, I believed that androgyne was a genuine alternative gender identity that was whole and full in itself and with a probable biological cause.

Having been mooching around the androgyne woods for a while now, my opinion has changed quite a bit.

I think the creation of an androgyne is a social/psychological phenomena and that an androgyne is not someone partaking in a different identity but someone who has not developed a normal identity when it comes to gender. So the male androgyne is a male who did not develop a 'normal' male identity; a female androgyne is a woman who didn't develop a 'normal female' identity and that there are others who identify as androgyne who are trans who haven't developed, or are developing, an identity opposite to their birth sex.

What does anyone else think of this idea?

Are you speaking from a psychological point of view, or digging down into more complicate neuro-biochemistry and the like?

psychological

Actually, I believe I've known males like you describe. And I think socialization or the lack thereof has something to do with it. I don't think I'm trans because of my poor female socialization, but I think it had a major impact on my development.
I never really got to know any nonrelative females on more than a very superficial 'acquaintance level', no female friends at all (even the sexual encounters I've had were women I did not know) and was completely ostracized and psychologically tortured by them. This continued even into adulthood.

Curiously as I've read up on this lately, this lack of female companionship is said to be common in cis males with major psych issues.

Was there a lack of proper male socialization in your background?

It is an interesting idea Pica Pica, however, I am not sure that one can get away from the biochemical component.

I understand you to say "normal," meaning as in the vast majority of humans, say some 96% of the general population, that identify in a manner that corresponds to their genetic sex.  That is to say, for persons with a 46XY genotype, identify as male gender; and for persons with 46XX as female gender.

How do you account for 46XY genotypical males who present with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, and who almost in every case identify as female, are phenotypically female, and have a female identity?  That's about 1:20,000 "females" in the population.

In the case of CAIS, these persons produce androgens, but cannot utilize them.  The testosterone is aromatized into estrogen, from the time the person is developing in the womb.

So nature, or nurture.  Are these person gendered women because they phenotypically and biochemically women, or because they are brought up as women and identify as women?

From what I read about the biological vbasis of GID I am inclined to go along the the lines expressed by JamieD.

Evidence from real-time imaging of the brain at work indicates that the MTF picture is more often   than not somewhere closer to the cis-females but not quiet identical. Also, certain sexually dimorphic structures, such as the BNST, areas of the putamen and cingual, have been shown to have no differences between MTF and cis-females.

So, I think the existing medical data support the view the spectrum of ci-female - MTF- androgynous - null - androgynus - FTM- cis male.

Now, that is not to say that I dismiss the power of societies in creating the gender roles, but what I asm talking about above, is stricltly , and I repeat, strictly about ou innate gender identity.

Fabuoulose topic Pica-Pica...hopefully we can keep troll-free

Quote from: peky on February 19, 2013, 01:44:51 PM
From what I read about the biological vbasis of GID I am inclined to go along the the lines expressed by JamieD.

Evidence from real-time imaging of the brain at work indicates that the MTF picture is more often   than not somewhere closer to the cis-females but not quiet identical. Also, certain sexually dimorphic structures, such as the BNST, areas of the putamen and cingual, have been shown to have no differences between MTF and cis-females.

So, I think the existing medical data support the view the spectrum of ci-female - MTF- androgynous - null - androgynus - FTM- cis male.

Now, that is not to say that I dismiss the power of societies in creating the gender roles, but what I asm talking about above, is stricltly , and I repeat, strictly about ou innate gender identity.

Fabuoulose topic Pica-Pica...hopefully we can keep troll-free

Hi Peky,

I think you and Jamie may be coming at this from trans perspective rather than an 'androgyne' perspective.

Well, as we all know, normal is a very wobbly thing... but I'm not talking about ' 46XY genotypical males who present with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, and who almost in every case identify as female', I'm talking about genotypical males who identify as androgyne (and females who do so) and presupposing that the androgyne identity has a psychological not biochemical basis.

That for whatever reasons the psychological identification of the male with malehood or the psychological identification of females with femalehood went down a different path to create an androgyne identity. Essentially that androgynes are made as opposed to born.

Quote from: Not-so Fat Admin on February 19, 2013, 01:17:54 PM
Was there a lack of proper male socialization in your background?

No. I have a dad and always had one or two very close male friends although the majority of my friends have been female.
I don't think I'm talking about male socialisation, as I am able to socialise pretty well with males, it's more identification. As I grew I developed an identification of myself not as a male.

I presume my clumsiness and general poor motor skills, combined with my quick verbal and language skills made me a more fitting companion for females and I could 'compete' and form better social basis with them, leading me not to identify with the males about me. That said, the fact I was a male meant that I didn't identify a female identity, leading me to develop an androgynous one. That's all.

Quote from: Not-so Fat Admin on February 19, 2013, 01:49:59 PM
Hi Peky,

I think you and Jamie may be coming at this from trans perspective rather than an 'androgyne' perspective.

Yes. That.

In saying what I am about androgyne, I'm not really saying anything about trans. I think the link between trans and androgyne may be to do with the 'symptoms' rather than the 'causes'. (To borrow an uncomfortably medical analogy).

Also, I'm not talking about androgyne as a social thing as much as a psychological thing. I'm not even talking about developing an androgynous social self, but an androgynous identification.

The reason I brought up CAIS is because those persons identify as female.  Now what about person with a lesser form of the syndrome, Partial AIS.  They have phenotypically "male" bodies, or intersex presentations, and generally have problems with androgen utilization.

More common than CAIS.  They are often referred to as "undermasculinized."  I would not be surprised if many of these individuals have gender identification which do not fall in the "normal" range.

How does this exception fit into you overall vision?  Might they not be born that way?

I agree. They're called hipsters. 

Quote from: Not-so Fat Admin on February 19, 2013, 01:49:59 PM
Hi Peky,

I think you and Jamie may be coming at this from trans perspective rather than an 'androgyne' perspective.

Actually, I am reasoning from an extreme toward a generalization.  Some andogyne identifications may very well be the result of biochemical anomalies that occurred in the womb, or even later; when a person has a sense of multiple genders, or even no gender at all.  And we should remember the term "androgyne" was first applied to those with intersex conditions.

Quote from: peky on February 19, 2013, 01:44:51 PM
From what I read about the biological vbasis of GID I am inclined to go along the the lines expressed by JamieD.

Evidence from real-time imaging of the brain at work indicates that the MTF picture is more often   than not somewhere closer to the cis-females but not quiet identical. Also, certain sexually dimorphic structures, such as the BNST, areas of the putamen and cingual, have been shown to have no differences between MTF and cis-females.

So, I think the existing medical data support the view the spectrum of ci-female - MTF- androgynous - null - androgynus - FTM- cis male.

Now, that is not to say that I dismiss the power of societies in creating the gender roles, but what I asm talking about above, is stricltly , and I repeat, strictly about ou innate gender identity.

Fabuoulose topic Pica-Pica...hopefully we can keep troll-free

It is a good topic, but as I am already posting in it, it cannot be troll-free. 

Quote from: Pica Pica on February 19, 2013, 01:57:15 PM

Quote from: Not-so Fat Admin on February 19, 2013, 01:17:54 PM
Was there a lack of proper male socialization in your background?

No. I have a dad and always had one or two very close male friends although the majority of my friends have been female.
I don't think I'm talking about male socialisation, as I am able to socialise pretty well with males, it's more identification. As I grew I developed an identification of myself not as a male.

I presume my clumsiness and general poor motor skills, combined with my quick verbal and language skills made me a more fitting companion for females and I could 'compete' and form better social basis with them, leading me not to identify with the males about me. That said, the fact I was a male meant that I didn't identify a female identity, leading me to develop an androgynous one. That's all.

Hmm. That's interesting. I actually have these things (though maybe not to the extent you do) as well but could not relate to females. I'm not very physically inclined. Took me a long time to learn to climb a tree. Too nearsighted and clumsy for sports. I'm not masculine in that 'outdoorsy/sports' way. Yet I felt like a boy from an early age. Course I'm trans and not androgyne.

And that might be the difference.

No, actually I was not coming from a trans perspective, I was coming from a "continuum" conceptualization.

I think that the androgynous gender identity akin to bi-sexuality on the sexual orientation axis. I think, based on the existing medical research, that both sexual orientation and gender identity exist in a continuum that is mostly if not at all biologically determined.

The interesting question one can posit is: to what extent can we bend our gender identity by pure volition?

Has a cis- heterosexual male who has sex with another cis-male in prison, temporarily change his sexual orientation? 

Quote from: peky on February 19, 2013, 04:59:43 PM
Has a cis- heterosexual male who has sex with another cis-male in prison, temporarily change his sexual orientation?

Great question. What do you think?

I don't think so. A guy who makes another guy his prison b**** is probably not gay, but just wants the feeling of anal sex. They probably make it a rule not to look at each other. 

Quote from: peky on February 19, 2013, 04:59:43 PM
No, actually I was not coming from a trans perspective, I was coming from a "continuum" conceptualization.

I think that the androgynous gender identity akin to bi-sexuality on the sexual orientation axis. I think, based on the existing medical research, that both sexual orientation and gender identity exist in a continuum that is mostly if not at all biologically determined.

The interesting question one can posit is: to what extent can we bend our gender identity by pure volition?

Has a cis- heterosexual male who has sex with another cis-male in prison, temporarily change his sexual orientation?

My answer is NO. His sexual desires overrides his sensory input, fools himself into believing he is 'doing" a female, and later on makes all kind of rationalizations, but a no time his sexual orientation was changed.

i think for both sexual orientaion and gender identity you can choose not to act on them or to not express them but you cannot by simple volition alter the or change them.

Now, having said that ^^^ I am convice that the brain is "plastic' enough so that under the influence of chemicals it can change.

There is a case report of man who smoked the material inside one of those "vick vap o rub" inhaler, just to letter on show up to an emergency room demanding an SRS because he was a female. His desires for SRS lasted for 3 days. Later on to his chagrin, he went back to be a regular cis-male.

I am not an androgyne so do not really know what you feel, but as an MTF there are a lot of body issues I have and a lot of stuff that cannot be explained by socialization/ lack of male friends and role models. I did not have a lot of friends growing up and from a very early age I saw the competitiveness of the boys, and the conversations the girls were having. I almost always identified more with the girls. I hate stereotypes but whenever I heard them I would want to be the one that was associated with feminine. I hid, and became a near hermit in High School and even in College. But it is almost as if my brain and nervious system is designed to be female while my body is physically male. A lot of androgynous also feel like their bodies are off. If a boy is isolated/ lacking of friends once he hits puberty he is going to get sexual urges and if he is a normal boy, he will want to pursue girls. He will want to have sex, feel strong and dominant and to feel the way a man does. An androgyne by the very nature is not exactly male or female so there is no real desire to "pursue women" like in a straight man. However there may not also be the desire to want to be emotional/ cuddle etc. I am sorry, a lot of these are stereotypes. I do not want to be a stereotype of anything. But there is definitely something biochemical with most androgynes. I agree more verbal, and less physical may contribute in some ways but it all has to do with how many traits are which, and how strong those traits are. I know my mind and nervous system are designed to operate as female, and it is very obvious. It has to do with the way I react to stimuli.

the way I see it gender is taught by our bodies but is still largely a cultural construct. Our prehistoric ancestors, like hundreds of thousands of years ago, had some practical cultural uses for dividing people based on  biological reproductive lines. It helped to distinguish those who gave birth and those who didn't and as cultures became more complex so did the idea of gender. So we have men and women (i distinguish these words as the cultural constructs of gender, compared to female/male for biologic differences) two classes of people that are extrapolated from the male/female split.

The biology has little to do with the ideas of masculine versus feminine, testosterone makes me grow hair on my face but it doesn't make me competitive, want to fix cars, enjoy football, and hate cuddling and sharing. These are all taught and conditioned from birth. Because I had a certain type of physicality in my nether regions I was swaddled in blue, called he not she, played with action figures, not dolls, couldn't wear skirts, etc. I was conditioned to fit into a cultural mold that was called masculine or man and is vaguely synonymous with male. But when we explore the whole phenomenon of gender we find lots of grey areas across time and space. Many cultures have some form of third gender or transgender identity, bodies don't come in clearly defined male and female varieties as there is a lot of space for intersexed individuals, things that were considered masculine or feminine in the past or in different cultures can change after time or compared to others.

Sexual orientation is taught by gender men are supposed to attracted to women and vice versa, but in reality it's more along the lines of penises are supposed to go into vaginas. When I was younger I was disgusted by thoughts of sex amongst men, and was sexually attracted to women (specifically cis-women). But as I became more and more aware of myself and my trans*androgyne-ness I realized that i was conditioned to like only women while now I see myself as just sexual and screw the prefix. If I think someone is hot and I enjoy them as a person I am attracted to them despite their bodies or their identities. The idea of homosexuality didn't come about until the 1870s the ancient Greeks and Romans weren't bisexual they just had sex with attractive people despite gender.

We live in a society that is so far beyond its roots that the old ways of seeing ourselves doesn't fit. For me being androgyne isn't about finding middle ground on the gender "spectrum" (a model I don't prescribe to) and being trans* isn't about going to the other side of the cultural divide. It's about, like Pica said, making my own identity and creating space in society for a wildly varied approach to gender and sex. And the more I find and piece together the me I want to be the more loose and vague the ways our culture organizes itself become. There is nothing concrete in our culture and our bodies, bodies are made of flesh and tissue both of which are adaptable and can evolving, normalcy is a myth to provide cultural value and social cohesion.

No longer is the human race bound to the slow toiling process of evolution and the constricts of biology, we have entered an age of self determination where we can take conscious charge of evolution like never before. I like to use the term Posr-Queer Trans-femme- Androgyne to describe myself because using labels is silly and because I am a self-created human. I have issues with my body some of which can't be changed with surgery or hormones but this body is still mine and is still me and doesn't impede me from seeking pleasure and that elusive bastard happiness. I think we should work on creating new ideas and models of thought rather than rehashing old ones to describe our current state.

Feel like I got off topic a bit, anyway /rant, have fun, love and all that's good.