The Non-Binary Gender Thread, or "A Little from Column D, a Little from Column V"

I'm afraid I still don't quite understand, because I've always seen sex and gender both used to describe a person's biological form. Probably not the best example, but look at XenForo's "Gender" field on the postbit user info area.

A male can't try to be a female and a female can't try to be a male. If you look through the Sexual Preference thread, Makaze made the same statement.

 

I will admit that it's been the same for me. I always thought gender and sex were the same thing growing up. Still, I went to private schools that were very biased and very unaccepting of a person's decisions regarding gender or sexual preference. Point is, everything boils down to your personal views on the matter. The way I see it, nobody on the internet will know or judge you for being of the male sex and female gender, or vice versa, so that might be why it's labeled as "gender."

 

Like Nights said, Gender is more based on behavior styles and the like.

e.g. A more feminine inclination is to have few friends, but there's a high emphasis on emotional bonds. A more masculine inclination is to have a lot of friends just to shoot the shit with.

However, that doesn't mean just because you fit more female behaviors you have to change your gender to Female and so on. Gender is basically just another way of identifying yourself; it's like saying you like corn more than brocolli. There's a lot of ways to identify your gender, and that just depends on what yyou feel you identify most with.

And tbh, I think the whole problem with gender stems from this mentality. There is no way to act "female" or "male". While yeah, there are feminine/masculine inclinations in behavior, that doesn't mean you're acting one way or another; you're just doing you.

 

Plumsy summed it up pretty well ^^ Which was nice btw.

When I said I am pretty girly, I was referring to

Also, I disagree completely, Amaury. In the sense of interests and behaviorism's, then a male/female can try to act male/female or rather act that way. To be more accurate they would just be that way, not acting.

This^ It doesn't matter what happens, I'ma be me for the rest of my life. If that just so happens to mean acting girly, then I'm cool with that.

Honestly, this all comes from experiences in your life. There might have been one event in my childhood, that if I hadn't done/took part in, would have changed my entire personality. Because personality is simply our entire life experiences compounded into . . . let's say a biological operating system. All our likes and dislikes are based on past experiences, be it from any of the five senses.

So, to sum up, all my life experiences have brought me to the point of having more of a feminine attitude. That's all it is really. Now that I think about it, female and male are just words stemming from masculinity and femininity. So rather, I'm a boy who has a more feminine personality.

~Still a janegirl ^^

 

In all seriousness, and at the risk of sounding like a hick who shuns intelligent discussion, I think the whole philosophical "Are people 100% male or female?" debate is on the wrong side of the relevance line (same with gay/straight, note my absence in that thread). I could argue that there is indeed room for a large grey area, but I don't see a reason to try and untangle it. Is it truly necessary or important to toss all overly simplistic classifications overboard in favor of a more politically correct cesspool? I have my doubts.

I'm going to stick with male/female, yin/yang, life/death and other functional dualities that may not be entirely correct, but at least allow me to have a decent conversation without having to worry about offending a minority.

 

Never thought I'd see the day when Styx was concerned with offending someone... Though honestly, if that's what you're worried about, refusing to have the discussion at all is much more likely to offend. If people define themselves especially, they should be willing to say so; if they aren't, then they ought to understand the consequences and that people are going to call it like they see it.

I appreciate functional duality as much as the next attention-mongering blowhard, but... to put it one way, there are more colors in the world than just black and white.

 

I'm well aware that putting the discussion away to rot is far more offensive so no, I'm not worrying about kicking someone in the identity. What I meant, pardon the lack of clarity, is that I shouldn't have to worry about it altogether. If everyone were to throw a hissy fit every time someone classified them as something they're not for the sake of convenience, the world wouldn't be the most pleasant place to live in.

And here I'm saying that turning a blind eye to those other colours isn't always a bad thing. It may very well be the only way to be in control, or even to feel any kind of certainity on any subject whatsoever. Few things are ever black and white, but I don't see why this has to be spelled out every other second. I can imagine that there are fields where certain dualities need to be debunked, but I don't see why average Joe should necessarily see life as the amalgam it really is. Discussing gender in any context other than professional medicine or biology? I'd be more useful counting blades of grass in my backyard.

TL;DR: Correctness for the sake of correctness is moot.

 

Right. I thought that's what you meant, and that's fair. Like I said, nobody should expect their peers to be mind-readers; I will identify someone as whatever they please, as long as they tell me, but otherwise all I can do is hazard a guess. Or ask, if I'm feeling polite.

Well, part of the reason it's important to open this discourse is sociological context; at least in the U.S., the norm in many places is still "Your sex and gender are always the same," and if you don't conform to a strict set of guidelines for that sex, you're like to be bullied or made fun of, or some other nastiness like that. That alone goes well beyond correctness for its own sake; it becomes a matter of opening people's minds to the possibilities, and encouraging them to dispense with their assumptions and treat their fellows with respect.

Now, if that discourse is opened and one's conclusion is that male and female as terms simply need to be expanded, that's one thing. The problem I see there is that it doesn't make things clearer or give one additional control; it just forces one to ask, what do you mean by male? What does she mean by it? What do they mean by female? Essentially the problem is that, whether we like it or not, many different colors exist, and we are trying to describe them with only two. There are only so many shades and hues to be drawn upon before one throws up one's hands and gives up. In that light I'd say a smaller set of terms with more transitory definitions is more confusing in the long run.

At some point it may go too far, this much is true. But are we there yet? At the very least, two options may not be enough. Unfortunately "male and female" does not evoke the same imagery as "yin and yang," similar though they may be.

 

Just to clarify, I didn't mean to say that people should just conform to stereotypes or force stereotypes on other people. I'm not encouraging you to squeeze yourself into a definition ultil you fit. If you'd describe yourself as 70% male, 20% female and 10% amoeba, you shouldn't be expected to be the biggest tub of testosterone that has ever walked/creeped on the planet. You should, however, make peace with the likely event that people will refer to you as a male. It's not correct, but cut people some slack for convenience's sake.

I don't think this forces a question by any means, nor do I think that certain definitions should be expanded to cover more ground. One could make a case for professional jargon where the devil's in the details, but we don't need cookie-cutter descriptions for everything in casual conversation. People talk about love without having defined it, and still understand each other despite not being on the exact same wavelength. Male and female are equally well understood by all but the most context-blind. I for one am not keen on smearing their definitions into a blur for the sake of a few dumbasses that need to have everything spelled out to them.

This would take the discussion all the way to whether there really should be such a thing as a "gender" that stands apart from the biological sexes (which to my knowledge are finite and indeed quite limited in number). What significance does it have? Rather than giving more genders a name, would it really be such a loss if we abolished the concept altogether?

I don't acknowledge that there is a problem. I can express myself using only the outer ends of the spectrum the same way people know what I'm talking about when I say whether it's light or dark outside. Children need to have every loophole stuffed in order for them to be satisfied with an explanation. Adults interpret.

 

It's one thing to say this as a rule, but it's quite another for those who have to deal with it every single day of their lives. LGBTQs have cut people a lot of slack for a long time. It looks good on paper, but...

Of course not. No one's saying we do. But nobody ever talks about gender that way. You ask if there's harm in not talking about it; I ask, haven't we been doing that for a long time already? It shouldn't be a question that there is harm in it, hence the aforementioned bullying.

I could actually go strictly from this and rip this argument a new windhole, but to keep from digging too much into my personal life, let's just say I can think of quite a few examples where you're very, very wrong about that. It's a matter of how deeply it affects you; even the simplest topics can cause grave harm from a misunderstanding.

Well... uh, we don't really have a choice. I'm speaking from the perspective where those definitions are already as smeared as they can possibly get. I guess it depends on where you live?

There are two biological sexes. But what about intersex individuals? What do you tell them? Which way are they supposed to lean? Do they just pick arbitrarily?

Two choices may be enough for some, but not for all. The significance is in comfort over convenience. Abolishing the concept altogether would deny too many individuals basic comfort with themselves, their bodies, and their identities. Perhaps they are meant to find it in traditional gender roles, but that wouldn't be very convenient either.

This is kind of like if someone asks you whether you're religious or an atheist. They aren't the only two options. They cover broad swathes of people, yes, but a sizable number cannot answer that question as presented. Not to mention, it begins to assume the guise of a battle between peoples; you have to pick a side, and you're against the one you don't pick. That's what duality does when applied to people's identities.

If someone doesn't want to get into it, that's their business; they have every right not to, and the worst that will ever happen to them is they'll be addressed as whatever sex they appear to be. I wonder why the question here is "Why is it significant?" and not "Who is it hurting?"

You seem to assume this holds true for everyone.

 

Not gonna bother quoting everything. Shouldn't even be continuing this, but I wouldn't want to give you the false impression that moral superiority somehow silenced me.

If having a name tag slapped on your phenotype makes you "find comfort with your identity", then you are quite positively shallow. I have mentioned before that these finer distinctions should only matter on a professional level. You should get customized medical treatment if you'd benefit from it, and the law should probably mention that you can marry and fuck any of your own kind plus the traditional sexes. So yes, the distinction should be made on that level. What I don't see is why we, your friendly neighbourhood average people, should concern ourselves with learning the delicate nuances and transitional forms by heart in order to step on sensitive toes fewer times. Intersex individuals better put up with being handwaved into a sex, because those inquiries aren't gonna have more than two checkboxes anytime soon, nor should they.

And yes, this may lead to misunderstandings and inconveniences but damn, grow some balls (GET IT?). Yes, you are going to get slapped on the ass by pervs even though you're not technically a girl. No, there are no male / female / miscellaneous showers in the club room of the high school gym. We don't have Polish street signs either, even though we have as much as 1 Polish family in our town (THAT'S SIX INDIVIDUALS, PEOPLE! SIX!). Being a minority comes with feeling singled out, unless you expect the whole world and then some to revolve around you.

Note that I spoke of sexes and not of gender. I think the whole existence of gender identity is bullshit and abolishing it is probably the kindest thing we can do to anyone who has ever faced problems with it. Masculinity and femininity describe aspects of a person's personality, and they should be treated as such rather than being elevated into their own category and haphazardly linked to a biologically relevant duality. You are a dot on the male-female scale the same way you are a dot on the egocentrical-altruistic scale. I don't care if you don't feel 100% manly; pick a spot on the spectrum, call yourself part of the side you most relate to and stop yammering.

Spoiler

When debating with me, keep in mind that I'm often part of the "Shut up and suck it" school of thought, occasional hypocrisy notwithstanding. Arguments of the "But they feel sooooooooo misunderstood" nature hardly ever stick, and when they do, I'll still try to make you believe they don't. Anyway, I have to go get ready for a punk rock festival that lasts the weekend, so I'll check back on Tuesday if I haven't lost interest. Bye!

 

This^ sort of. Like I said earlier, I find myself acting for feminine than most males. So I wouldn't call myself a girl as a serious description. I'd say I was a male, if more details were pursued I would say I was a very feminine male. This conversation turned the words "Male" and "Female" into something different for me. Instead of an overall classification, now to me this just tells people what you're packing. Wasn't this whole topic about not feeling one hundred percent part of a "gender?" That would be more in your personality unless it was an actual physical anomaly. So, if this whole thing was about personality, the words "femininity" and "masculinity" should replace the words "female" and "male."

Spoiler

Tomboy: A female who likes being more masculine than other females.
Janegirl: A male who likes being more feminine than other males.

. . . I just want to say . . . Isn't "Punk" Rock an unnecessary classification? Couldn't we just simplify the entire thing and make all "Rock" into one general classification. Like you said,

Just pointing that out there.

 

Rather than being part of spectrum with a shitload of transitional forms, genres in music are rather grouped or hierarchically ranked. "Punk Rock" still clearly refers to its mother genres (though, granted, there are a lot of confusing genres and hybrids). I don't think the example is comparable to gender, but I guess you could call it unnecessary. If someone told me "I like rock bands like Bad Religion", I'm not going to step up and shout "They're a punk rock band you moron!" because a) they were not wrong and b) I wouldn't care enough about musical taxonomy to make myself sound like a dick.

 

This is a topic I've puzzled over for a while now, so I figured I'd reach out and try to find a more concrete answer.
So here's my thing.
What's with not being identified as a certain gender? Now, before I continue, I should make a few things clear:
If you believe your gender is whatever genitals and the like you have, okay, I can understand that. Similarly, if you believe being male or female is acting a certain way, then sure.
But a HUGE number of people in this category that I've encountered will, for example, identify as male, but wear pink frilly dresses and behave in a very stereotypical feminine way... and then get pissed when people call them a girl. They'll say just because they're a guy doesn't mean they have to be a certain way, and male and female are just titles... but... if you believe anything like that, why do you CARE what you're identified as? If the plumbing doesn't matter and genders are stereotypes, why do you care which pronouns a person is using to identify you?
Again, if you feel you should have been born with different hormones, or believe that acting a certain way makes you a certain gender, I can understand that
It's the "I act like a girl, dress like a girl, but heaven help me if you think I'm a girl... also girls don't have to act a certain way it's just a meaningless title" argument that baffles me

 

I don't care for the 'normal' gender specifications. I believe you are who you are. If by chance that involves wearing a pink frilly dress and acting feminine yet still considering yourself a guy, then fine. Basically, it's up to the individual to choose which gender they want to fall under. I'm a guy who has feminine tendencies. I talk, act, and even sometimes think like a female. However, I think of myself as a guy.

My full opinion on the matter can be read HERE.

~Janegirl FTW

 

Agreed, but when you say that there are no characteristics about a gender that are static, why does it matter what you are?

 

This could probably be merged with this, js. #nova don't backseat mod #especially not to promote your own threads

Put simply: because gender roles as they exist carry unseemly stereotypes and stigmas, and the process that will dissolve those stigmas will take longer than the span of a lifetime. The lifetime of someone who will continue to be mistook, misunderstood, or taken for granted as a result of using a conventional label. People deserve the right to be called what they prefer to be called; it's not even a difficult thing to do.

That stark duality has always been an illusion - one we permitted because it made sense due to the biological divide. But in the end it is reason attempting to dominate emotion, which rarely ever works. Those who identify as TQ are simply insisting on more accurate definitions as opposed to broader ones.

 

About the pronouns part misgendering is a big thing. If someone prefers you to call them by a certain pronoun it's respectful to call them that pronoun regardless of how they "act".

 

It matters what you are because it's who you want to be. I don't think it's right to go around calling someone who considers themself male or female the opposite gender. It's blatantly rude, actually. If a guy considers himself to be a guy, whether he's wearing a pink frilly dress or not, doesn't give you the right to call him a girl. A guy can be a guy even though he acts like a girl, me for instance. A girl can be a girl even though she acts like a guy. That gives no one any right to say otherwise. It's highly inappropriate. That would be like me calling you Mitch when your username says hatok.

It's a slightly different topic, actually. No need to merge. This is a specific question, not an open discussion.

 

Again, yes. But I'm not talking about the formality of it, I'm talking about the reasoning
If male and female and just inaccurate labels to you (and they are, IMO, I don't think a person should act a certain way because they're a certain gender) then why does it MATTER what you're called. If your physical body doesn't matter, and you think the stigmas that go with the word are meaningless... why does gender matter to you at all?
Like, at that point, what makes you male or female, or whatever? If those are your beliefs, those titles are completely meaningless, so how can you identify as one?
When a man is not defined by their actions or their body, what meaning does it have? What does it MEAN to be a man, if you don't think men need penises, or to act like a man? Why do you want that title, if it means nothing to you?