Am I a man or a woman?

[henry quirk]

"I cannot be located, yet I am the source of every location."

Speaking only for me: I can always be located as I'm always only in one place (the place changes but I'm always only in one at any time).

And: I'm the source of a whole whack of things, but my location ain't one of 'em.

[Walker]

At some point I remember thinking, this is a woman.

But I don't recall the details.

About whom did you have this thought?

The tone of your words.

[Walker]

"I cannot be located, yet I am the source of every location."

Speaking only for me: I can always be located as I'm always only in one place (the place changes but I'm always only in one at any time).

And: I'm the source of a whole whack of things, but my location ain't one of 'em.

This is precisely why Sri Ramana Maharshi stayed on Arunachala all his life, although people saw him elsewhere.

[ken]

"The human body can be male or female but that does not mean that 'I' am also."

When Joe sez 'I' he self-refers.

If Betty sez 'I' she self-refers.

Seems obvious: 'I' is ALWAYS gendered.


And if a guy looks down, sees his johnson, and claims to be anything other than a guy, it's not that his gender (or the gender of his 'I') is in question: he's just a loon.

What is the I actually? What is It made up of?

[Skip]

So, which one is it? Does the I have an identity, or, is the I an identity? There is a huge difference.

I don't think so. My I doesn't think so, either. It is, we are, I am both, just as the inside of a house looks different from the outside, while being the same house, equally valid and necessary to its existence.

You start off with the 'My' word so that means the I has an identity.

It means only that English sentence construction makes any other designation grammatically awkward.
As: That complex of sensations, emotions, memories, ideas, desires, knowledge, perceptions, actions, reactions and relationships to which this unique personality experiencing this unique moment in this universe is currently attempting to identify to another, largely unknown, complex of.... etc, etc.
"My identity" seems a bit more efficient and less Dontaskmeesque.

.. BUT who/what is the I, which has an identity, is the issue. What is the identity of the I Itself?

WHY is that an issue? I agree that it seems to occupy an inordinate amount of philosophy forum space. But why does it so preoccupy so many otherwise healthy and productive individuals who know the "issue" is infinitely self-reflexive (A Strange Loop) https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/123 ... range_Loop and thus unresolvable.

I propose the Identity Known as I does not have a gender.

You can propose that as an intellectual concept, but no conscious vertebrate can experience it as a reality.

[S - From the outside, every newly-encountered other I is a cypher - unknown: potentially any sex, gender, age, ethnicity or species.]
All just labels used to separate persons into separate groups.

No, that's a description - though not a comprehensive one, of what you don't know about them.
Strangers do wear identifying markers: clothing, hair, etc; have voices, accents and physical attributes that give you clues as to their classification, yes. But you can't always see the people you encounter: on the telephone, their labels are fewer and less obvious; on the printed page, even fewer and sometimes deliberately disguised. You can't even be sure they're all from this same planet.
Sorting into groups - or classifying - is essential: the more groups and types you separate out, the closer you get to identifying the unique individual whom you may, at some later date, be called upon to pick out of a police lineup.

[Dontaskme]

"I cannot be located, yet I am the source of every location."

Speaking only for me: I can always be located as I'm always only in one place (the place changes but I'm always only in one at any time).

And: I'm the source of a whole whack of things, but my location ain't one of 'em.

The source fulfils itself in the receiving of it's own giving. It doesn't need or want a ''thing'' because it is all ''things''

It's nowhere because it's everywhere. It cannot be seen, it is what's seeing.........it cannot be found because it was never lost.

[Dontaskme]

The male represents the giver, the female represents the receiver. Both male and female are two aspects positive and negative of the one infinite energy....seemingly poles apart, yet each responsible for the others existence. Both sexes are offspring, or children of the mother which is infinite energy known as the expression of creation as manifest. While the source of all energy manifest is the Father and is beyond all comprehension, but has to be, for it is he who gives and sustains everything.

[Harbal]

The male represents the giver, the female represents the receiver. Both male and female are two aspects positive and negative of the one infinite energy....seemingly poles apart, yet each responsible for the others existence. Both sexes are offspring, or children of the mother which is infinite energy known as the expression of creation as manifest. While the source of all energy manifest is the Father and is beyond all comprehension, but has to be, for it is he who gives and sustains everything.

You should be careful who you tell this to, you wouldn't want people thinking you're crackers, would you?

[Dontaskme]

The male represents the giver, the female represents the receiver. Both male and female are two aspects positive and negative of the one infinite energy....seemingly poles apart, yet each responsible for the others existence. Both sexes are offspring, or children of the mother which is infinite energy known as the expression of creation as manifest. While the source of all energy manifest is the Father and is beyond all comprehension, but has to be, for it is he who gives and sustains everything.

From this, we can see that to say there is no God is like saying you have no Father.

Sorry disbelievers in God, but God has to be because you are being.

But you are not God you are God's attributes and desires.

For that which is responsible for what is seen is invisible. That which is responsible for what is experienced is not an experience.

That is God.

[Dontaskme]

You should be careful who you tell this to, you wouldn't want people thinking you're crackers, would you?

Couldn't care less what others think of me. I know myself.

Also I don't mind being crackers, because cheese would just have absolutely no meaning without me.

[Skip]

Cheese is complete and perfect without a meaning. I like it with apple. Or croissant.
Some dimension of the physical manifestation of I is hungry. Genderlessly but definitively.

[ForCruxSake]

To me, you are all a series of black marks on a white background on a screen. I don't know what you look like and that's maybe for the best because the reality tends to be such a disappointment

Anyway ... these black marks, by convention, represent approximate representations of ideas bubbling in a human mind that said human hopes to share. It tends to be about as thankless a task as housework, but we do it anyway. Probably something to do with a general impulse of life to spread its influence any way it can etc.

For the record, FCS, I found your U/N witty and, I suppose, "masculine" in the sense that some humans are usually expected to be more refined and demure than other humans. It's all rather silly when you stand back and think about it.

I'm a barcode!

[ForCruxSake]

At some point I remember thinking, this is a woman.

But I don't recall the details.

About whom did you have this thought?

The tone of your words.

Interesting.

When I wrote the original post it was my intention to reveal my sex (-'gender' is the less distinct thing, which I find comes in shades of grey...) but I'm now wondering whether I should? I'm still wondering how far words convey sex/gender?

(I have to admit to something here... Since arriving, I've been trying to keep my identity secret from another forum member, here. But I've just found out that that person knows exactly who I am. Bah!)

[ForCruxSake]

Cheese is complete and perfect without a meaning. I like it with apple. Or croissant.
Some dimension of the physical manifestation of I is hungry. Genderlessly but definitively.

[Harbal]

I know myself.

If anyone else had said that you would have said something stupid like "there is no I, there is only what is known but the known cannot know what it knows for the knowing is nowhere, even though the known is everywhere".