I still don't understand. Anyone here identify as that?
Binary refers to two states, so I've always assumed it as a broad terms referring to non-male or female.
To my understanding its someone who doesn't identify as male or female
[QUOTE=T-hunter;51821964]To my understanding its someone who doesn't identify as male or female[/QUOTE]
You mean man or woman
So what's the difference between non-binary and genderless?
[QUOTE=RobL;51822121]You mean man or woman
So what's the difference between non-binary and genderless?[/QUOTE]
Non-binary is actually a gender that does not exist on the binary spectrum of man and woman. "Non-binary" in and of itself is the gender and is typically something in between man/woman.
Genderless implies that they see themselves as having no concept of gender, whether on or off the binary spectrum.
Little complicated but I've met a lot more non-binary people than I've met genderless people. I imagine genderless and agender are also separate terms for the same thing.
[QUOTE=Pascall;51822139]Non-binary is actually a gender that does not exist on the binary spectrum of man and woman. "Non-binary" in and of itself is the gender and is typically something in between man/woman.
Genderless implies that they see themselves as having no concept of gender, whether on or off the binary spectrum.
Little complicated but I've met a lot more non-binary people than I've met genderless people. I imagine genderless and agender are also separate terms for the same thing.[/QUOTE]
Aren't we all non-binary if that's the case though? No one has 100% adherence to either masculine or feminine norms
[QUOTE=RobL;51822209]Aren't we all non-binary if that's the case though? No one has 100% adherence to either masculine or feminine norms[/QUOTE]
It's not about how well you fit the definition of a term, it's whether you identify yourself with it
What would your answer to the question "are you male or female" be?
[QUOTE=The golden;51822260]You are whatever you identify as. Do currently identify as male while born/assigned as a male? Or as female while born/assigned as a female? That makes you cisgender.
Are you biologically female/male but identify as the opposite? That's binary transgender
Do you identify as both female and male at the same time or maybe even move between them some days? That's bi-gender. (both at once) Or maybe you move between many genders day to day? That's genderfluid.
Do you feel like you are not even male or female at all and like you are your own unique entity entirely? That's non-binary. If this is you then it means you probably don't see the appeal, attraction, or interest in anything traditionally "male" or "female".[/QUOTE]
What is the point of all this? It's just all superfluous nebulous nonsense. Gender was useful to dispel traditional notions that it was natural for males to behave this way and females that way, and that these expections are socially constructed, but now it's got to the point where it's an unnecessarily normative (and hence authoritive force) that gets in the way of free individualism. As long as there are concepts of 'man' and 'woman', there are societal and personal pressures that push one to fitting these. Why do people still need outdated concepts derived from biological sex to define their personhood?
Also you're confusing the argument by using the terms male and female instead of man and woman.
Sorry for the rant.
[QUOTE=RobL;51822340]What is the point of all this? It's just all superfluous nebulous nonsense. Gender was useful to dispel traditional notions that it was natural for males to behave this way and females that way, and that these expections are socially constructed, but now it's got to the point where it's an unnecessarily normative (and hence authoritive force) that gets in the way of free individualism. As long as there are concepts of 'man' and 'woman', there are societal and personal pressures that push one to fitting these. Why do people still need outdated concepts derived from biological sex to define their personhood?
Also you're confusing the argument by using the terms male and female instead of man and woman.
Sorry for the rant.[/QUOTE]
Makes people feel okay about themselves and more comfortable and doesn't really affect anyone else in any way.
It's hard to understand if you've always been secure in your gender and your confidence in your chosen gender role specifics. Some people don't feel like male or female maybe they just feel like something in the middle or something that encapsulates neither. Also handy tool for intersex people who aren't sure where they fit on the spectrum and want to identify as something that is better fitting for them.
[editline]14th February 2017[/editline]
As long as gender is still rife with societal "norms" and stigmas, it's understandable for people of different genders to try to find a place to feel okay about themselves.
[QUOTE=RobL;51822340]What is the point of all this? It's just all superfluous nebulous nonsense. Gender was useful to dispel traditional notions that it was natural for males to behave this way and females that way, and that these expections are socially constructed, but now it's got to the point where it's an unnecessarily normative (and hence authoritive force) that gets in the way of free individualism. As long as there are concepts of 'man' and 'woman', there are societal and personal pressures that push one to fitting these. Why do people still need outdated concepts derived from biological sex to define their personhood?
Also you're confusing the argument by using the terms male and female instead of man and woman.
Sorry for the rant.[/QUOTE]
No one is disputing biological terms here: man and woman are going nowhere. Gender is just how you perceive yourself mentally against traditional man to male and woman to female translations. I agree that some of the farther-out gender terms used to describe things like sexual drive or attraction bias is a bit superfluous when they can just as easily be described with a few extra words, but the general concept is separating the physical body from mental identification.
[QUOTE=RobL;51822340]Gender was useful to dispel traditional notions that it was natural for males to behave this way and females that way, and that these expections are socially constructed, but now it's got to the point where it's an unnecessarily normative (and hence authoritive force) that gets in the way of free individualism.[/QUOTE]
Social concepts like gender, or for example national identity are not inherently authoritative or restrictive.
Of course, they can be when taken to an extreme, as history shows. But as it stands, in modern western cultures, they are not. Just because some people are overly conservative doesn't mean we abolish gender, or national identity or traditions. Just stop taking them so seriously and accept that norms can change. Women can still be women and men be men and Slavs be Slavs, we can just stop tolerating people opposing on others what it means to be a woman or a Norwegian. We don't have to throw the entire concept of gender or national identity into the bin.
That said, I'm not opposed to having non-binary gender as a new concept. I just don't see a reason for the existing concept of binary gender to change or make way for it. I'm used to being referred to as a man and refer to others by their gender. If they want to be referred to as someone who is not a man or a woman, cool. But I'll keep referring to people who are used to the existing concept of gender by their binary gender, because not doing so is actually unnatural to them, just as it might be unnatural for a non-binary person to be referred to as having a binary gender.
[QUOTE=Drury;51822556]Social concepts like gender, or for example national identity are not inherently authoritative or restrictive.
Of course, they can be when taken to an extreme, as history shows. But as it stands, in modern western cultures, they are not. Just because some people are overly conservative doesn't mean we abolish gender, or national identity or traditions. Just stop taking them so seriously and accept that norms can change. Women can still be women and men be men and Slavs be Slavs, we can just stop tolerating people opposing on others what it means to be a woman or a Norwegian. We don't have to throw the entire concept of gender or national identity into the bin.[/QUOTE]
I think you're absolutely wrong in saying that overly conservative people are the only ones who perpetuate restrictive social norms. The concepts of masculinity and femininity are so deeply ingrained into most cultures that plenty of biases are still commonplace.
Yes, this next part is anecdotal, and you're free to call me out on that if you want. But in pretty much every place I've been too, there's no shortage of arbitrary gender roles. Have you never seen a guy being called 'fruity' for wearing a pink shirt? Tight clothes? Being meticulous about his appearance in general? Hell, I've been mocked myself just for wearing a scarf.
What about skirts? Why is this slightly differently designed piece of cloth still mostly exclusive to women? What's the logic, what practical purpose does this serve? What about toys - do you think boys are naturally attracted to monster trucks? What's the monster truck gene called?
Look, I don't want to do away with gender roles entirely. In fact, I think that'd be pretty much impossible. If some alien force were to shoot a comically large laser down to earth that removes [I]all[/I] gender roles, I think some new ones would form anyway. No matter how free of societal biases we are, there are still natural differences between man and woman that'd show themselves in some way, at some point. What I think is that these differences have been exacerbated a LOT more than they need to be, and this has lead to people who deviate from them being ostracized for no logical reason at all.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51823000]I think you're absolutely wrong in saying that overly conservative people are the only ones who perpetuate restrictive social norms. The concepts of masculinity and femininity are so deeply ingrained into most cultures that plenty of biases are still commonplace.
Yes, this next part is anecdotal, and you're free to call me out on that if you want. But in pretty much every place I've been too, there's no shortage of arbitrary gender roles. Have you never seen a guy being called 'fruity' for wearing a pink shirt? Tight clothes? Being meticulous about his appearance in general? Hell, I've been mocked myself just for wearing a scarf.
What about skirts? Why is this slightly differently designed piece of cloth still mostly exclusive to women? What's the logic, what practical purpose does this serve? What about toys - do you think boys are naturally attracted to monster trucks? What's the monster truck gene called?
Look, I don't want to do away with gender roles entirely. In fact, I think that'd be pretty much impossible. If some alien force were to shoot a comically large laser down to earth that removes [I]all[/I] gender roles, I think some new ones would form anyway. No matter how free of societal biases we are, there are still natural differences between man and woman that'd show themselves in some way, at some point. What I think is that these differences have been exacerbated a LOT more than they need to be, and this has lead to people who deviate from them being ostracized for no logical reason at all.[/QUOTE]
I pretty much agree 100%, but just to clarify I'm not talking about ingrained gender roles, just the man/woman labels. I think they're worth keeping because, as you said, if they went away (which is realistically not happening) people would just invent new ones and start giving them alternate meanings from which new pre-established roles would stem. It's inevitable.
Best we can do is preach open-mindedness.
[QUOTE=Pascall;51822359]Makes people feel okay about themselves and more comfortable and doesn't really affect anyone else in any way.
[/QUOTE]
I disagree, it effects everyone.
People define their personhood by gender identity, or at the very least, many people see their gender identity as a source of positive value.
Since having a gender identity is desirable, people will seek to place themselves into one, and also put pressure on others to do the same.
For the concept of gender to be at all meaningful, a specific gender has to be defined by a common characteristic, set of characteristics, or resemblance to a set of characteristics.
People will pressure themselves and others into displaying specific sets of characteristics.
There will be societal forces at work which pressure people into constructed categories of gender (as not identifying as one is undesirable)
Getting rid of gender as a concept would get rid of much (unnecessary) societal pressures (furthermore, non-binary gender can be seen as a state which falls outside of specific gender, but when categories such as man and woman are removed, there are no specific genders, so to define gender at all becomes futile and therefore non-binary identities become meaningless. People would just identify as individuals)
However, people would now be left in the undersireable state of not identifying as a gender. To remedy this, people should not seek define their personhood by gender. There is no reason that to do so is necessary. So basically a revolution in conceptions of identity
Some quotes relating to what I'm trying to say: (cba with with sources/referencing rn) [quote][in their attempt to fix feminism's subject matter, feminists unwittingly defined the term ‘woman’ in a way that implies there is some correct way to be gendered a woman]
[That the definition of the term ‘woman’ is fixed supposedly “operates as a policing force which generates and legitimizes certain practices, experiences, etc., and curtails and delegitimizes others”]
[Butler's view is that ‘woman’ can never be defined in a way that does not prescribe some “unspoken normative requirements” (like having a feminine personality) that women should conform to]
[Social forces in general deem individuals who exhibit incoherent gender sequences (like lesbians) to be doing their gender ‘wrong’ and they actively discourage such sequencing of traits, for instance, via name-calling and overt homophobic discrimination.][/quote]
The LGBT movement is inadvertedly reinforcing the societal pressures and biases their whole goal is to dissolve. Their goal instead should be to abolish gender altogether- this might be a controversial viewpoint but that's what I think.
I'm certain that most masculine/feminine traits are biological, and that deviations are just part of the chaos of sexual reproduction; shit happens and there's little to do about it.
But it's not really harmful to other people, so there's no sense getting upset about it.
It does annoy me how control-freak people can get over it. It's a really rare thing, and a vocal minority want to throw their values down throats. I can see why people get control-freak over it, on both sides, but the mountains they make out of mole-hills tend to get into other stuff. I'm pretty sure trump would've done a little worse, enough to loose, if SJW's were less in the limelight and associated with liberals and the right had less (figurative) ammo to rally with. I strongly believe sexual acceptance stances shouldn't be, and are wrongly, tied to any political ideology.
Pansexual is this thing that's like Bisexual but you're making a statement that you're attracted to non-binary people. I'm not entirely sure about the honesty of the statement, since you're still [I]probably [/I]going to be into the people that've transitioned more completely, at which state you might as well declare bi or straight. (and the people I know who've declared pan are the type to make false statements for attention) but, orientation and interest is a weird thing and I wouldn't be surprised if there were genuine Pansexual people.
[QUOTE=RobL;51822209]Aren't we all non-binary if that's the case though? No one has 100% adherence to either masculine or feminine norms[/QUOTE]
Social norms and such have no bearing on what people actually identify as, they just help others classify them without asking, as inaccurate as those classifications may be. You don't have to be manly and masculine to know and identify yourself as a male.
[editline]a[/editline]
I mean they could influence how a person sees themselves, but there's not like a list of requirements you have to have to be one or the other.
And, really, I don't think you're getting rid of gender entirely. It's not a 100% artificial thing as transgender people show for example.
But the boundaries of things and whatnot are pretty damn fluid, and we see this by looking at many historical societies, which is where I get my viewpoint on non-binary people; I don't care. With how individualistic our society is and with how people are enjoying greater freedom away from things like organized religion it just makes sense that a lot of people are seeing our old social norms as silly and unnecessary.
Though exotic pronouns probably should stop, they've been attempted for... literally over 100 years (thon was first IIRC) and have never caught on. Singular they is already subconsciously used at times by just about everybody and is a very natural direction to turn to, and has lots of historical precedence in English.
[QUOTE=gk99;51824142]Social norms and such have no bearing on what people actually identify as[/QUOTE]
Social norms are entirely what defines gender, it being a social construct. Gender having no bearing on what gender people identify as is obviously nonsense.
[editline]15th February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=The Jack;51823959]I'm certain that most masculine/feminine traits are biological.[/QUOTE]
Anything that's biological is sex by definition, and not gender
I don't really understand it ethier or why people do it, but I choose to call people what they indentify as (i.e calling a guy a she if they are trans) purely because I don't want to upset them.
As The Golden said, most LGBT goyims are fine even if its one of my most disliked movements, purely because they encourage everyone to be what they want.
[QUOTE=RobL;51826161]Social norms are entirely what defines gender, it being a social construct. Gender having no bearing on what gender people identify as is obviously nonsense. [/quote]
This is wrong. Gender isn't 'entirely' social norms.
Don't try to pass your biases of as facts.
[QUOTE=The Jack;51832405]This is wrong. Gender isn't 'entirely' social norms.
Don't try to pass your biases of as facts.[/QUOTE]
You tend to go into threads and do the same thing. So please, explain your point before calling someone else out on theirs.
[QUOTE=Pascall;51832419]You tend to go into threads and do the same thing. So please, explain your point before calling someone else out on theirs.[/QUOTE]
It is perhaps erroneous to say gender is ENTIRELY rooted in social norms. But that's really just a nitpick as I see it, since vast amounts of what gender means are still defined by social norms and changing material conditions.
More bothered me that he referred to what is generally an accepted concept as "biases" lol.
I'd say that inherent gender-specific traits are very few and even then, they're fluid and can be changed.
[QUOTE=RobL;51821895]I still don't understand. Anyone here identify as that?[/QUOTE]
androgyny
[QUOTE=KOManiacJim;51832951]There are only two genders, male & female. Those "Non-Binary" genders are a load of garbage.[/QUOTE]
care to defend this statement? Because biologically we have more than two 'sexes' (intersex, XO, XXY, etc.) so what then should those people identify as?
Its an idea that part of political correctness. Its designed to turn a society that based on objectivity to a subjectivity. The reason the latter is preferred is because a personal n can claim any offense and crime without needing evidence to back it up.
Which then generates " a walking on egg shells feeling " within the society thus creating a hostile and adversal social environment.
[QUOTE=Rudevinny;51833268]I find this topic too confusing to be honest.
Maybe I'm just trying to overthink it, but since time immemorial my concept of sex and gender identity has been "I have balls and dicks and I'm pretty comfy with them, so I'm male". The idea that social norms and such have any part in it just feels alien as fuck to me.[/QUOTE]
Some things should not be defined, cannot be definee or turned into a source of identity due to the problems they create or the in ability to be objective about them.
I could say I am a female in a male body, how the fuck is that going be proved? It can't.
I dont give a shit if you dont use the proper pronouns or not. I care more how a person treats me or acts.
[QUOTE=Pascall;51822139]Non-binary is actually a gender that does not exist on the binary spectrum of man and woman. "Non-binary" in and of itself is the gender and is typically something in between man/woman.
Genderless implies that they see themselves as having no concept of gender, whether on or off the binary spectrum.
Little complicated but I've met a lot more non-binary people than I've met genderless people. I imagine genderless and agender are also separate terms for the same thing.[/QUOTE]
What about pansexual and all those other terms?
Some stuff just sounds silly, but then again, I don't quite understand it, so I shouldn't judge in any way.
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;51833355]What about pansexual and all those other terms?
Some stuff just sounds silly, but then again, I don't quite understand it, so I shouldn't judge in any way.[/QUOTE]
Sexuality is different from gender. I'd say there are a good few sexualities out there. Some are definitely silly but it's not my place to dictate how one chooses to label their sexuality.
Pansexual is when you have the capacity to be attracted to anyone regardless of gender identity or sexuality. Asexual is when you lack sexual attraction in general. There are a few others that I think are worth exploring but ultimately, the attractions that can be labeled will be. People like having labels of what they enjoy or what they're into. People label each other by their hobbies, their culture, their interests. I don't see this as any different. I don't go out and start referring to people as "this is Gay Dan" or "this is Bisexual Linda", so sexuality should be nothing more than another aspect of oneself.
This thread feels less like RobL asking a genuine question and more like RobL awkwardly trying to start an argument without actually starting it himself
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.