From the perspective of the Triadic Modes of Integration Theory (TMIT)—which integrates Freud, Berne, Rand, and Peikoff—the phenomenon of some biological boys identifying as women arises from a complex interplay of psychological, epistemological, and cultural dynamics across the three modes (DAM, RIM, IDM). The documents indicate that this occurs due to a combination of biological predispositions, developmental experiences, sociocultural contexts, and evolving identity scripts that gain particular expression in certain historical and geographical settings [1][4].
1. Psychological Dimension (Freud + Berne):
Freud’s framework would interpret gender identity formation as the product of early psychosexual development—particularly during the phallic stage where identification with parental figures shapes one’s sense of self. Some biological boys may over-identify with the maternal figure due to emotional attachment or lack of paternal modeling, internalizing feminine qualities as core to their ego-ideal (a superego-derived standard of “who I should be”). In Berne’s terms, this can become a Parent-to-Child script—a directive internalized early (“You are gentle, caring, like mother”)—that shapes life decisions later through nonconscious replay of approval-seeking behavior [1][3].
2. Cognitive and Epistemological Dimension (Rand + Peikoff):
From an epistemological view, identity conflicts in gender often arise where the Rational Integration Mode (RIM)—which aligns thought and perception—is overshadowed by Impulsive Disintegration (IDM) or Dogmatic Authority (DAM) influences. In IDM-dominant contexts (e.g. postmodern or subjectivist cultures), individuals are encouraged to treat feelings as determinant of reality (“if I feel female, I am female”), reflecting emotional primacy over factual integration [3]. In contrast, DAM societies impose rigid gender norms from intrinsicist or religious authority (“male and female are absolute categories”), potentially producing psychological repression or guilt when personal experience conflicts with dogma [5]. Thus, gender identification shifts often occur in D1/D2 or post-DAM transitions—periods where strict definitions collapse, and subjectivist redefinitions replace intrinsicist moral norms.
3. Cultural-Historical Dimension:
Historically, such identification phenomena cluster during RIM declines and IDM ascents, especially in societies transitioning from fixed identity systems to relativistic frameworks. For instance, since the mid-20th century Western cultures—particularly in urban and academic centers—have provided linguistic and social infrastructure (e.g. gender theory discourse, legal recognition) that enable subjective redefinitions of sex and gender [2]. This process occurs most prominently in liberal democracies where Pluralistic D1 cultures dominate public life, making self-definition by inner feeling a socially accepted epistemic mode [4].
4. Temporal and Processual Aspects (“When, Where, How”):
- When: Most often, this identification solidifies during adolescence or early adulthood—a developmental window where the ego/Adult seeks self-coherence within competing social and internal messages.
- Where: It is most visible in Western or Western-influenced societies, particularly after the cultural revolutions of the 1960s when authority structures (DAM) gave way to expressive individualism (IDM/D1).
- How: Psychologically, the process follows emotional introspection, exploration in online or peer communities, and gradual social reinforcement through recognition and validation cycles. Cognitive-emotionally, the person begins treating felt identity as perceptual fact, prioritizing subjective continuity over biological or objective reference [1][4].
5. Integrative Interpretation via TMIT:
In TMIT terms, gender self-identification phenomena represent a cultural expression of Impulsive Disintegration Mode (IDM) and its hybrids (D1)—emphasizing emotion-derived identity construction detached from objective integration. However, the healthiest resolution occurs when the Rational Integration Mode (RIM) mediates between instinctual feelings (IDM/id/Child) and moral-social constraints (DAM/superego/Parent), allowing an individual to achieve psychological coherence and behavioral authenticity that respects both self and reality.
In sum, some biological boys identify as women due to the dynamic interaction of emotional identification patterns, parental scripting, subjectivist cultural epistemologies, and broader historical shifts from dogmatic (DAM) to pluralistic (D1/IDM) societies where identity is redefined experientially rather than biologically [2][5].
No comments:
Post a Comment