system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Separating gender from biological sex while also abolishing gender roles/expectations is in direct conflict with the concept of being transgender.

This is something that I do not understand, but it is a topic that is met with extreme hostility. I pose simply this question:

If we separate gender from biological sex, and we also shed societal expectations of genders (i.e. no gender roles), do we not end up right back where we started? Where biological sex is what matters?

So if a biological male believes he is a woman, what exactly does that mean? Theres no definition that we can apply to woman other than the title itself. Any characteristics you apply are generalizations and stereotypes.

Which demands the questions: what, if anything, is a gender when separated from biological sex and societal gender roles?

This confuses me particularly when considering the viewpoint that there are more than 2 genders. Me being a "man" does not mandate anything in particular regarding my behavior, the way I act, the hobbies I have, etc. I can be whatever I want. I can like pink, I can be girly, I can be attracted to men, etc. None of these things invalidate my status as a man. So what is the criteria?

It seems then that the only criteria for me being a man is that I believe I am a man, which is based entirely on the fact that I am a biological male. So I ask: In a world free of stereotypes and socially constructed expectations of gender, what is the difference between a man and a woman, or someone who considers themself genderless, etc.

P.S: Intersex comes up now and again during this discussion, usually to leverage the idea that because these genetic outliers exist, the idea of biological sex is null and void. I really don't see that as a convincing argument in terms of how we view gender and sex as a society. The exception proves the rule.
gpt
I completely agree with you that the way people talk about gender, especially where trans people are concerned, is confusing and contradictory. And, you know, there just may be no universal field theory for gender at all, given its inherent subjectivity and social construction.

But here's some things to consider:

>So if a biological male believes he is a woman, what exactly does that mean?

What that means is that they feel themselves to be a woman. 

If someone says that they see the colour red, and you asked what that means, there is no deeper answer that can be given, and there is no logic that can explain it. It's a report of a sensation. That's what transgender people are reporting: a dysphoric sensation regarding their sex and/or perceived gender. Whatever's used to rationalize or explain that sensation might be illogical, but that doesn't necessarily invalidate the sensation itself.

>In a world free of stereotypes and socially constructed expectations of gender, what is the difference between a man and a woman, or someone who considers themself genderless, etc

I don't think you can have one, because the genders are themselves self-reinforcing. It doesn't necessarily matter if pink is for girls and blue for boys and vice versa, young kids will differentiate themselves from kids of other genders on their own. Children are naturally scared of "boy germs" and "girl germs".

I mean, the entire idea of a trans person is that they are naturally gravitating to one gender expression because of some self-perception. That would imply that the genders are more than socially constructed.