No, since few culturally pressured into being Straight. But Straight, Gay, and bisexual are all sexualities that can be left for another, and some can even go back. So. If gender is a psychological state because it can change, then Gay and Straight would be psychological states as well. Of course, none of them are.

So sex is defined and we all agree but gender is trickier.

Gender is a social construct of gender (sex) identity. Gender identity means identifying as a [gender]. Now we have to define gender to understand that and we notice we are in a loop of circular reasoning. This is because in the past identifying as a male for example could be defined through sex.

Now we have made a distinction between the concepts of sex and gender, which leaves gender with no definition.

All non-cis-gender people have that in common that they define themselves through masculine and feminine gender roles, but all cis-gender people don't.

What we can conclude from this is that we can't define the experience of identifying as some gender, unless we deny the person's right to identify as male/female while breaking the gender roles.

This is because when we realized that gender roles are artificial we should have admitted we should get rid of them, not classify people based on them.

Well many are rejecting the traditional binary sexual or gender identity categories. On facebook one has the following options.
The following are the 58 gender options identified by ABC News:

Agender
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender
Cis Female
Cis Male
Cis Man
Cis Woman
Cisgender Female
Cisgender Male
Cisgender Man
Cisgender Woman
Female to Male
FTM
Gender Fluid
Gender Nonconforming
Gender Questioning
Gender Variant
Genderqueer
Intersex
Male to Female
MTF
Neither
Neutrois
Non-binary
Other
Pangender
Trans
Trans*
Trans Female
Trans* Female
Trans Male
Trans* Male
Trans Man
Trans* Man
Trans Person
Trans* Person
Trans Woman
Trans* Woman
Transfeminine
Transgender
Transgender Female
Transgender Male
Transgender Man
Transgender Person
Transgender Woman
Transmasculine
Transsexual
Transsexual Female
Transsexual Male
Transsexual Man
Transsexual Person
Transsexual Woman
Two-Spirit — prothero

With caution and trepidation (heated reactions out there) may I mildly suggest that 58 gender options is bullshit.

This multiplication of categories represents nothing but self-absorbed snow-flakery. "I am so very unique and singularly unusual--and I speak for the community of [blank] like me..." It's a very recent phenomena and I don't think there is any rational reason to accept it at face value. I doubt very much whether 99.9% of the people claiming to be transsexual women, as opposed to transsexual females, as opposed to a trans women as opposed to trans females... blah blah blah, can coherently explain the difference. Then there are terms like Neither, Neutrois, pangender, and so on.

I rest my objections on the understanding that physically we are not unlike the rest of the animal kingdom. We are either male or female, or there is something abnormal. We can not transcend biology very far. An xy male can pretend to be an xx female; he/she can take hormones, have surgery to add or subtract parts, change his/her gait, his/her habits, his/her hair, his/her weight, and so on, but he has not become a female. He is a man acting as if he were a woman.

And, by the way, I don't object to his/her doing that. If it makes someone happy, great. But I don't have to believe their sex has actually changed.

What I am willing to accept is that there is a

straight, bisexual, and gay male and female sexual template.
There are people who have (quite possibly irrational but deeply held) beliefs that they exist outside the straight/bisexual/gay male and female template.

Within the template, there are many ways that people can find sexual fulfillment. It isn't any sort of a straitjacket.

Aside from sexual specific behavior, men and women can take on each other's socially defined roles and perform them satisfactorily: men can fix cars, feed babies with a bottle, be a soldier and kill people, be a nurse and take care of people, (and so on and so forth) and so can women. They may not like doing the opposite gender's job, and they don't have to like it.

There are a small number of people who have chromosomal abnormalities whose bodies have not developed normally. The fact of abnormality should not be taken as a mark of inferiority. People who are born deaf, for example, are abnormal -- they aren't inferior.

What I am willing to accept is that there is a

straight, bisexual, and gay male and female sexual template. — Bitter Crank

I disagree about sexual orientation. Asexuality and pansexuality at least exist. Whether attraction towards trans people is a sexual orientation or a fetish is arguable.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that John Harris thinks of psychological states as things like being happy or sad or excited, whereas prothero thinks of psychological states as including things like being an introvert or a fan of football.

Do you think being Gay or Straight is a psychological state? — John Harris

Well it isn't a physiological state, so I suppose it must be a psychological state.

But there seems to be a conflation in the thread of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender. Which is par for the course, particularly when an all male discussion is happening. And that is because the male identity is so closely bound up with a strong concern about what one does and wishes to do with one's sexual organs. So much so, that it is still somewhat controversial to claim that gay men are real men. And the controversy illuminates the difference between sex and gender, which is roughly that one is physiological condition, and the other is a role, associated with that condition.

Do you think being Gay or Straight is a psychological state?
— John Harris

Well it isn't a physiological state, so I suppose it must be a psychological state.

Of course it's a physiological state; it's deeply tied to one's body and physical brain.

Which is par for the course, particularly when an all male discussion is happening. And that is because the male identity is so closely bound up with a strong concern about what one does and wishes to do with one's sexual organs

I never limited it to this once.

So much so, that it is still somewhat controversial to claim that gay men are real men. And the controversy illuminates the difference between sex and gender, which is roughly that one is physiological condition, and the other is a role, associated with that condition.

No, there is no controversy. Gay men are real men; only deluded and/or hateful homophobes think otherwise.

John Harris ↪prothero

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that John Harris thinks of psychological states as things like being happy or sad or excited, whereas prothero thinks of psychological states as including things like being an introvert or a fan of football

You're wrong. Prothero also erroneously thinks of physiological states, such as gender, as psychological states.

Of course it's a physiological state; it's deeply tied to one's body and physical brain. — John Harris

Once you add body to brain, every state is physiological, and the distinction between physiological and psychological collapses. Which makes both your question and your answer meaningless.

Of course it's a physiological state; it's deeply tied to one's body and physical brain.
— John Harris

Once you add body to brain, every state is physiological, and the distinction between physiological and psychological collapses. Which makes both your question and your answer meaningless.

No, your answer was meaningless and nonsensical, since you can't establish being Gay or Straight doesnt' come from one's body, so either has to be physiological. My adding the brain, part of the body, to that doesnt' change that, even in the traditionally physiological sense.

Well perhaps you can elucidate what it means for something to psychological as distinct from physiological, where physiological is a body and/or brain state. An example would be useful. Is a preference for milk chocolate over plain physiological?

Sorry, you're the one who argued the distinction by erroneously claiming Gay and Straight are psychological, not me. So, you're the one who needs to explain that distinction, not me.

Well you put the question, and I gave it the best meaning I could. Since I have erroneously mistaken your meaning of the term 'psychological' to be opposed to 'physiological', I'd be grateful if you could educate me as to what it does mean, and the sort of thing it could apply to.

So you have no idea what you mean when you say being Gay or Straight is psychological. At least you're getting somewhere.

Sorry, you're the one who argued the distinction by erroneously claiming Gay and Straight are psychological, not me. — John Harris

If you're saying that they're physiological, not psychological, then you're also drawing a distinction between physiology and psychology.

Or if you want to say that psychology is a subset of physiology then if something is psychological then it's also physiological.

in a bracketed sense, yes, but that doesn't exclude the majority of states that are both. And I was addressing unenlighhteneds particular claim, so you're muddying the waters.

So is sexual orientation both physiological and psychological, or just physiological? Obviously it has something to do with the body, but does it have something to do with the part of the body that is the mind?

Anyone who doesn't say both has an uphill argument ahead of them.

So you have no idea what you mean when you say being Gay or Straight is psychological. At least you're getting somewhere. — John Harris

No, I know what I mean quite well; what I want to find out is what you mean when you say being Gay or straight is not psychological. You claim to disagree with the distinction I made and which side of it the phenomena fall, and that is rather confusing.

You obviously don't know since you keep showing you can't say what you mean or say why being Gay or Straight is psychological.

Anyone who doesn't say both has an uphill argument ahead of them. — John Harris

Well, you did claim that unenlightened "erroneously claim[ed] Gay and Straight are psychological, not me.". So you seem to be saying that you disagree with this claim that it's psychological. I guess that means you have an uphill argument ahead of you.

No, I don't, since I made it clear that I see it as both, not just psychological like Unenlightened. You really read my posts poorly.

Sorry, you're the one who argued the distinction by erroneously claiming Gay and Straight are psychological, not me. So, you're the one who needs to explain that distinction, not me. — John Harris

I've read your posts:

Gender isn't a psychological "state.' it's an identity of each person they have 24/7 unless it changes. That's like saying being Gay or Straight are psychological states. They're not. — John Harris

No, since few culturally pressured into being Straight. But Straight, Gay, and bisexual are all sexualities that can be left for another, and some can even go back. So. If gender is a psychological state because it can change, then Gay and Straight would be psychological states as well. Of course, none of them are. — John Harris

Sorry, you're the one who argued the distinction by erroneously claiming Gay and Straight are psychological, not me. So, you're the one who needs to explain that distinction, not me. — John Harris

Prothero also erroneously thinks of physiological states, such as gender, as psychological states. — John Harris

Yes, and as I said, poorly.

Gender isn't a psychological "state.' it's an identity of each person they have 24/7 unless it changes. That's like saying being Gay or Straight are psychological states. They're not.
— John Harris

Yes, they're not just psychological states. As I said, they're both psychological and physiological. That's one you read poorly.

No, since few culturally pressured into being Straight. But Straight, Gay, and bisexual are all sexualities that can be left for another, and some can even go back. So. If gender is a psychological state because it can change, then Gay and Straight would be psychological states as well. Of course, none of them are. — John Harris

Again, not just psychological states. As I said, they're both. That's two you read poorly.

Sorry, you're the one who argued the distinction by erroneously claiming Gay and Straight are psychological, not me. So, you're the one who needs to explain that distinction, not me.
— John Harris

And that's the third you read poorly. You really don't get the difference between a psychological state and a psychological and physiological state, do you?

Yes, they're not just psychological states. As I said, they're both psychological and physiological. That's one you read poorly. — John Harris

You didn't say that it isn't just a psychological state. You said it isn't a psychological state. My reading was accurate. If anything, your writing was poor, as you missed out an essential word.

Again, not just psychological states. As I said, they're both. That's two you read poorly.

As above.

And that's the third you read poorly.

As above.

You really don't get the difference between a psychological state and a psychological and physiological state, do you?

If something is both psychological and physiological then it's psychological. Just as if someone is both British and a man then he is British.

But I'm curious; what sort of thing is psychological but not physiological?

Yes, they're not just psychological states. As I said, they're both psychological and physiological. That's one you read poorly.
— John Harris

You didn't say that it isn't just a psychological state. You said it wasn't a psychological state. My reading was accurate. If anything, your writing was poor, as you missed out an essential word.

Oh my. When someone says something is a psychological state, they are saying it's just that. And that's what I said it wasn't. So, again you read all my posts poorly.

And it's clear you're just trolling me now because I (rightly) left our last discussion, and that's not a good thing for a moderator to do. So, again, you and I are done. Try to read my posts better next time.

Try to read my posts better next time. — John Harris

Try to write your posts better next time. Or stop with the back-tracking and just admit to making a mistake. One of the two.

Oh my. When someone says something is a psychological state, they are saying it's just that. And that's what I said it wasn't. — John Harris

If someone erroneously claims that triangles aren't shapes, and wants to say that something is a triangle but not a shape, then it wouldn't make sense to respond with "it isn't a triangle, it's a shape". The correct response is "triangles are shapes".

So if someone erroneously claims that the psychological isn't physiological, and wants to say that something is psychological but not physiological, then it wouldn't make sense to respond with "it isn't psychological, it's physiological". The correct response is "the psychological is physiological".

You obviously don't know since you keep showing you can't say what you mean or why being Gay or Straight is psychological. — John Harris

I would say that preferences are generally psychological rather than physiological, which is to say that they are states of mind. Sexual orientation is rather similar to preferences for chocolate - which you did not respond to earlier. For example, some lovers of milk-chocolate would never touch plain, whereas others will 'make do' with plain if milk is unavailable. Similarly, some heterosexuals will make do with homosexual relationships in sexually segregated prison, whereas others will not. In both cases, a change of circumstances changes orientation, where a change of physiology is unlikely to be happening. But this is on the understanding that changes of brain state at a certain level of subtlety below gross trauma are called 'psychological'.

But it is you who cannot (or will not) say what your question or your answer mean.

You obviously don't know since you keep showing you can't say what you mean or why being Gay or Straight is psychological.
— John Harris

I would say that preferences are generally psychological rather than physiological, which is to say that they are states of mind. Sexual orientation is rather similar to preferences for chocolate - which you did not respond to earlier.

And that's your biased opinion with no backup for that. Firstly, that means you, if you are Straight, could turn gay at any time if someone was able to plant that thought in your mind, and nobody changes their sexuality that way. Secondly, your use of chocolate undercuts your argument since all of our sense preferences are partially physiological since our bodies particular taste buds, noses, eyes et al shape our preferences. So, you've just argued that our sexual preferences are psychological and physiological.

Similarly, some heterosexuals will make do with homosexual relationships in sexually segregated prison, whereas others will not.In both cases, a change of circumstances changes orientation, where a change of physiology is unlikely to be happening

Sorry, these prisoners don't become Gay, they just take the best sexual option they can get, just like masturbating doesn't turn one--at least most--into manosexuals. And you have no idea if a physiological change happens when people do change sexualities. It's as if you have no idea that changes in the physical brain and body can affect things without people picking up the connection

And it is proper to include physical changes or effect-causing elements in the brain as part of physiology, since that is different than discussing psychological thought. I'm surprised you didn't know that.

But this is on the understanding that changes of brain state at a certain level of subtlety below gross trauma are called 'psychological'.

This isn't true at all. Where exactly did you learn this?

But it is you who cannot (or will not) say what your question or your answer mean.

No, I've said many times since I've made it clear that sexuality is both psychological and physiological.

There are the physical features and/or reproductive organs one has which is not always binary (true hermaphrodites, psuedo-hermaphrodites and other variations of nature for example). — prothero

These are abnormalities, not the norm. The same can be said about being gay or trans. We can always find exceptions to the norm in pretty much everything, but this doesn't take away from the fact that there are norms and that we owe our specie's continued existence to the norm. These conditions don't mean that they should be categorized as a separate sex or gender. They are simply mutations that crop up as a result of faulty gene copying and one's upbringing. We don't categorize other people as normal based on them missing toes or fingers, being born conjoined, or any other abnormality that one can be born with, and we even attempt to fix people born with abnormalities. What makes one's sex/gender abnormality different?