@Vgal #142396
More specifically: There’s gender (who you are), gender identity (who you would openly exist as, given any choice in the matter), gender presentation (how you dress/act relative to your culture’s gender norms), gender role (how you participate in family/culture/society relative to gender norms). Though the first two and last two are often conflated, and traditional conservatives conflate all four as one and the same.
Gender norms aren’t actually bad, per se. While they’re ultimately arbitrary, some people do function better when given a clear “default” template to build on or change if needed, rather than to figure themselves out from scratch. The problem is when you censor and punish alternatives. Of course, being arbitrary, there’s no reason why we should allow tradcons to bake gender supremacy into it. Or for that matter, there’s no reason beyond bioessentialism and/or gender supremacy why there has to be only two sets of norms.
(Yeah, I know that they’re going to claim that bioessentialism and gender supremacy are God’s will. I assume that most or all of us here live in secular societies where that’s not a useful argument.)