Great article! I would suggest that markers of gender are not entirely social or arbitrary. For example, a beard used to be a fairly reliable indicator of an adult male, even though rare endocrine conditions could create 'bearded ladies'. Today, some women deliberately create endocrine disorders in their own bodies in order to be validated as masculine.
Your example of a boy holding a doll was really interesting. These days, men are encouraged to hold their young children, and a young boy might see their father or another adult male doing exactly that. So why is a boy holding a doll still feminine-coded? Is it because some adults dislike masculinity and would rather that boy was raised to think of himself as feminine?
Thank you, Daniel. I agree that markers of gender aren’t entirely arbitrary; biology gives us the raw material, but culture does the coding. A beard, in your example, signals testosterone and maturity — biology — but the meaning attached to it (“manliness,” authority, power) is socially constructed and reinforced.
Your example of the boy holding a doll gets right to the heart of that social layer. What we call “feminine-coded” isn’t about the act itself, but about the interpretive frame imposed by adults observing it. That’s the psychological contract in motion — society assigns the meaning, the child internalizes the expectation, and dysphoria arises when those meanings clash.
The problem then, isn’t the beard, or the doll — it’s the coding system we project onto them.
I use tools for structure and research support the same way most writers use reference managers or editing software. Is there a Grammarly-Detector too?
Ideas, framing, and synthesis here come directly from my own research and lived work in psychological contract theory. I use AI to check the work and ideas, which, admittedly, is increasingly frustrating given the parameters that AI functions under and the lack of human nuance.
I find it interesting, though — we’ve reached a point, it seems, where clarity and coherence are treated as evidence of automation... Maybe that says more about what we’ve come to expect from human thought than about the writing itself.
I had a conversation with Google the other night, to challenge the whole affirmation bit. I've actually had productive conversations with ChatGPT. But I'm convinced that it's impossible to train the sycophancy out of Google. I asked a series of questions and challenged the assumptions of gender ideology and identitarianism. Google simply draws from a seemingly infinite well of academic drivel, apparently. Circular reasoning, gladhanding, ego stroking, credential inflation. IMHO.
Side note, my husband did an interesting project. He trained an AI with a Buddhist text called "The Words of My Perfect Teacher." What happens when you tell it to "enable Perfect Teacher Mode"? Maybe it works. It mostly gives responses that offer many reminders to self regulate through meditation, and it does apply critical thinking skills in a Buddhist manner, such as urging the user to let go of assumptions and judgment. !!
Similar social validation/pressure has probably driven a lot of teenage girls into the "transgender" religion. They live in an echo chamber in which all their friends are supporting/confirming/affirming their transgender craziness. Separate comment: If parental validation/support is what drives/pushes a lot of kids in the transgender direction, what are parents supposed to do when kids express gender dysphoria? I guess disapprove and try to push the kids back into the correct lane. Anything else?
As ambitious as this seems at first glance, the fundamental requirement of a contract is that all affected parties voluntarily enter it. Parental expectations are simply magical thinking.
Exactly. If kids had to negotiate these deals on paper, they would probably ask for better terms. The lack of consent, is the point. And this is psychological, not legal.
Um, with respect, the point is that in the absence of consent, it is not a contract. Regarding your final distinction, it is unironically illegal to enter children into a contract, which makes things like social security numbers illegal, too. Kids cannot negotiate deals on paper, ergo any contract with them is inherently non-binding.
This is not insignificant when you consider the terrible fate of a mother, for example, who’s been abandoned by her middle-aged son in her needy latter years. Mine, for example, is free to die alone in the street, hungry, cold and afraid. The same applies to my father, though he is less likely to meet an uncomfortable end. In fact, for all I know, they’ve already shuffled off.
Parents forget, at their peril, that familial success (i.e. legacy) is a long game. Since fulfillment matters, so does buy-in; thus voluntarism is a prerequisite for any contract. In the real world, adults are free to walk away from their parents. The “contract” was never signed.
Great article! I would suggest that markers of gender are not entirely social or arbitrary. For example, a beard used to be a fairly reliable indicator of an adult male, even though rare endocrine conditions could create 'bearded ladies'. Today, some women deliberately create endocrine disorders in their own bodies in order to be validated as masculine.
Your example of a boy holding a doll was really interesting. These days, men are encouraged to hold their young children, and a young boy might see their father or another adult male doing exactly that. So why is a boy holding a doll still feminine-coded? Is it because some adults dislike masculinity and would rather that boy was raised to think of himself as feminine?
Thank you, Daniel. I agree that markers of gender aren’t entirely arbitrary; biology gives us the raw material, but culture does the coding. A beard, in your example, signals testosterone and maturity — biology — but the meaning attached to it (“manliness,” authority, power) is socially constructed and reinforced.
Your example of the boy holding a doll gets right to the heart of that social layer. What we call “feminine-coded” isn’t about the act itself, but about the interpretive frame imposed by adults observing it. That’s the psychological contract in motion — society assigns the meaning, the child internalizes the expectation, and dysphoria arises when those meanings clash.
The problem then, isn’t the beard, or the doll — it’s the coding system we project onto them.
This is deep! Thank you for this.
This is a phenomenally insightful article, thank you.
I checked the post with ItsAI detector and it shows that it's 86% generated!
Hey Steven. Interesting!
I use tools for structure and research support the same way most writers use reference managers or editing software. Is there a Grammarly-Detector too?
Ideas, framing, and synthesis here come directly from my own research and lived work in psychological contract theory. I use AI to check the work and ideas, which, admittedly, is increasingly frustrating given the parameters that AI functions under and the lack of human nuance.
I find it interesting, though — we’ve reached a point, it seems, where clarity and coherence are treated as evidence of automation... Maybe that says more about what we’ve come to expect from human thought than about the writing itself.
I had a conversation with Google the other night, to challenge the whole affirmation bit. I've actually had productive conversations with ChatGPT. But I'm convinced that it's impossible to train the sycophancy out of Google. I asked a series of questions and challenged the assumptions of gender ideology and identitarianism. Google simply draws from a seemingly infinite well of academic drivel, apparently. Circular reasoning, gladhanding, ego stroking, credential inflation. IMHO.
Side note, my husband did an interesting project. He trained an AI with a Buddhist text called "The Words of My Perfect Teacher." What happens when you tell it to "enable Perfect Teacher Mode"? Maybe it works. It mostly gives responses that offer many reminders to self regulate through meditation, and it does apply critical thinking skills in a Buddhist manner, such as urging the user to let go of assumptions and judgment. !!
AI detectors have reported my own 100% human writing to be AI. Including things I wrote before I ever heard of ChatGPT, etc.
Should come with a “I’m not a robot” reCAPTCHA lol
The picture is definitely AI. I can't draw to save my life...
I checked your effort and your comment with ItsAI detector and it shows that it's 93% generated!
What does PCT stand for? Sorry if you stated it somewhere and I missed it.
Psychological Contract Theory.
Thank you.
Similar social validation/pressure has probably driven a lot of teenage girls into the "transgender" religion. They live in an echo chamber in which all their friends are supporting/confirming/affirming their transgender craziness. Separate comment: If parental validation/support is what drives/pushes a lot of kids in the transgender direction, what are parents supposed to do when kids express gender dysphoria? I guess disapprove and try to push the kids back into the correct lane. Anything else?
As ambitious as this seems at first glance, the fundamental requirement of a contract is that all affected parties voluntarily enter it. Parental expectations are simply magical thinking.
Exactly. If kids had to negotiate these deals on paper, they would probably ask for better terms. The lack of consent, is the point. And this is psychological, not legal.
Um, with respect, the point is that in the absence of consent, it is not a contract. Regarding your final distinction, it is unironically illegal to enter children into a contract, which makes things like social security numbers illegal, too. Kids cannot negotiate deals on paper, ergo any contract with them is inherently non-binding.
This is not insignificant when you consider the terrible fate of a mother, for example, who’s been abandoned by her middle-aged son in her needy latter years. Mine, for example, is free to die alone in the street, hungry, cold and afraid. The same applies to my father, though he is less likely to meet an uncomfortable end. In fact, for all I know, they’ve already shuffled off.
Parents forget, at their peril, that familial success (i.e. legacy) is a long game. Since fulfillment matters, so does buy-in; thus voluntarism is a prerequisite for any contract. In the real world, adults are free to walk away from their parents. The “contract” was never signed.
Cheers.