Hello Mr. President, I'm Non-Binary!
- Thread starter Neutral
- Start date
Also, I think that's a bloody confusing article. It really should explain somewhere that the word 'transgender' is often used as an umbrella term that refers to various things including non-binary people.
@harms Was that what was confusing you?
@harms Was that what was confusing you?
I'm not actually sure they were making any point specifically about non-binary rights.
Didn't they mention that non-binary folk are not covered by the discrimination act i.e. if they were refused a job on the basis of being unable to identify their gender on an application then they would have no recourse?
Admittedly I was only half listening to them (bit of a waffler).
Not sure... Only read it, as my internet won't load videos at the moment. Stonewall mentioned the equality act but she may have as well.
The world is becoming a more complex place. I'm finding it a bit hard to get my wrapped around just the names/terms...
Classification based on Gender Identity:
Male
Female
Transexual - Someone who is born physically of one sex but identifies themselves as the other
Non Binary - Identifies themselves in common with both sexes at same time
Classes of sexual Orientation:
Heterosexual
Homosexual
Bisexual
Asexual
Does this cover it or did I miss any?
Classification based on Gender Identity:
Male
Female
Transexual - Someone who is born physically of one sex but identifies themselves as the other
Non Binary - Identifies themselves in common with both sexes at same time
Classes of sexual Orientation:
Heterosexual
Homosexual
Bisexual
Asexual
Does this cover it or did I miss any?
Homonationalism will be one people are talking about more in the coming years.
Transsexual generally means someone who has had sex reassignment surgery (and increasingly isn't used because people aren't overly fond of telling everyone what's in their underwear). Transgender fits your description.
Non-binary includes people who feel they have no gender.
Most people I know who would previously have been described as bisexual call themselves pansexual these days. Which just means they are attracted to males, females and non-binary people.
Honestly, I'm prepared to accept that what follows may be deemed controversial - I'm open to anybody commenting on my opinion and it's entirely possible to change my view. I'm happy to engage in conversation with anybody who wants to discuss things seriously.
I see myself as a liberal but I find the idea of somebody identifying as "non-binary" kind of hard to swallow. Sexuality (and gender) is a spectrum, as far as I can tell. Sex is allocated at birth (though we live in an age where we can choose to alter it if we so desire); everybody conforms or non-conforms to their birth-sex in varying degrees. I have a hard time recognising that there is a particular point on that spectrum whereby it becomes necessary to legislate differently.
I identify as a heterosexual male but I can't change a car tyre, I'm useless at DIY and I cry sometimes. On top of that I'm very in touch with my feelings, I occasionally bitch about my friends and sometimes I drink wine. I'm awful at arm wrestling and you probably shouldn't back me in a fight. I also recognise that some blokes are more attractive than others - I could probably put a line-up of 5 blokes into "general attractiveness order."
What I'm getting at is that I think labels are a waste of time and, actually. are problematic when combined with the legal system. I've experienced it first hand. I lost my job last year and as a white, british, young, single, male there was nothing in the law to protect me... however, due to the fact I am able to identify as disabled I was able to tackle my dismissal successfully though a tribunal.
Personally I think everybody should be protected equally by the law and I genuinely think there are minority groups who exploit their status in order to get preferential treatment. We need to move more towards the idea that a human being should be protected by the law because they are a human beings and further away from perceived minorities looking for compensation for their hardships.
Show me the non-binary fighting for the rights of men, women, children and non-binary persons and I'll lend them my full support.
I see myself as a liberal but I find the idea of somebody identifying as "non-binary" kind of hard to swallow. Sexuality (and gender) is a spectrum, as far as I can tell. Sex is allocated at birth (though we live in an age where we can choose to alter it if we so desire); everybody conforms or non-conforms to their birth-sex in varying degrees. I have a hard time recognising that there is a particular point on that spectrum whereby it becomes necessary to legislate differently.
I identify as a heterosexual male but I can't change a car tyre, I'm useless at DIY and I cry sometimes. On top of that I'm very in touch with my feelings, I occasionally bitch about my friends and sometimes I drink wine. I'm awful at arm wrestling and you probably shouldn't back me in a fight. I also recognise that some blokes are more attractive than others - I could probably put a line-up of 5 blokes into "general attractiveness order."
What I'm getting at is that I think labels are a waste of time and, actually. are problematic when combined with the legal system. I've experienced it first hand. I lost my job last year and as a white, british, young, single, male there was nothing in the law to protect me... however, due to the fact I am able to identify as disabled I was able to tackle my dismissal successfully though a tribunal.
Personally I think everybody should be protected equally by the law and I genuinely think there are minority groups who exploit their status in order to get preferential treatment. We need to move more towards the idea that a human being should be protected by the law because they are a human beings and further away from perceived minorities looking for compensation for their hardships.
Show me the non-binary fighting for the rights of men, women, children and non-binary persons and I'll lend them my full support.
People will now sometimes identify their romantic orientation as well so you could be bisexual hetroromantic, meaning that whilst you can have sexual relationships with the same sex you only have romantic relationships with the opposite sex.
Honestly, I don't find it complicated at all and am surprised others do.
How do you refer to a non binary individual in the third person?
'They' or 'them' is grammatically correct as far as I can tell as both are acceptable when you are unsure of gender.
I could fully see people getting offended at that next.
Surely you'd refer to them by name, you must know it by the time you know they are non-binary as I can't imagine anybody introduces themselves by their gender/sexual orientation before letting you know their name.
So you can't envision a time or place in life that you use gendered pronouns to refer to a person?
That's true, but I was referring more to what @Classical Mechanic is saying in the post above.
I think its almost universally derided as being grammatically incorrect in anything approaching formal writing (unless you're referring to someone non-determine)- if you read DOTA's post on the previous page where he uses it its very difficult to tell if he's referring to a single person or a group.
But my god if it isn't a better solution than Zhe/Xhe or the made up pronouns.
I definitely can but it's not something I think anyone would or should get overly upset if a stranger mistakes a third party's gender and has to be corrected, especially in the third person. In the first person if you're in doubt you'd just use "you" or open a dialogue with "hi, hello, excuse me" etc without the need to formalise it by adding a miss, mr, ms or mx (which I wouldn't even know how to pronounce). It's not like we don't make such gender mistakes all the time anyway although it's more common with babies and young children with haircuts that could be worn by a male or female. Hell, in my student days I was once approached by a beggar in France who tapped me on the shoulder and greeted me with an "excuse moi mademoiselle" because he'd mistaken my gender due to my long hair, I wasn't upset but did jokingly tell him he'd blown his 50/50 chance of me giving him any money.
It is generally in the absence of the individual or in written English when gendered pronouns are used most often. I would be interested to know what the correct way to refer to a non-binary person in those situations would be. You can't always use their name, especially in written English.
I was once mistaken for a woman in a supermarket in my long hair days 'hen' was the term used!
It's always treacherous in writing but that's equally the case with male/female only confusion either due to an unfamiliar name or a unisex one like Chris or Jamie. I learnt my lesson with our HR person from Belgium where my e-mails prior to our first meeting used he and him several times referring to our correspondence and upcoming meeting only to find Joke is a female name in Belgium and not some Flemish version of Jack or Jake. If you've never met, people really shouldn't be taking offence at innocent errors in archaic written formality but if anything I'm sure women would have more to complain about in terms of things like Dear Sir letter openings when the writer could be accused of assuming an executive is more likely to be male in the absence of other clues.
What is this world coming too.
Non-binary? I'm not even going to post my thoughts out of fear of offending someone, which in itself is ridiculous I have to do so.
Non-binary? I'm not even going to post my thoughts out of fear of offending someone, which in itself is ridiculous I have to do so.
It is a pain at times but for the most part I find it no different to how we'd refer to anyone whose gender we didn't know. Someone tells you their friend Alex is joining you at the pub and unless you know anything about Alex you refer to them as 'they' until someone refers to them as he/she or you decide to be a nosey bugger and ask.
I've always been fine with either he/she, and only with close friends have ever even had a preference between them, so I can't say I can totally understand the importance of it, but it really does seem to be hugely appreciated by some people when you make the effort, so I do try.
I think seeing it as a spectrum is the right way of approaching it. I would make a comparison to the kinsey scale of sexuality, where at one end you have people who have no attraction to the same gender and at the other you have people who are exclusively attracted to people of the same gender. Most humans have at least an incidental attraction to the same gender but to call them bisexual would be rather misleading, as it means little more than they 'could probably put a line-up of 5 people of their own gender into general attractiveness order'. In the same way it would be rather misleading to label you as non-binary just because you're not the stereotypical blokey bloke. Then there are people who have a genuine sexual interest in their own sex but a considerable preference for the other (sorts who describe themselves as 'curious', have a tendency to kiss friends of the same gender when drunk and may have seen some same-sex porn and found it arousing. Some people would consider such bisexuality and some wouldn't. Whereas when you get to the people who have serious relationships with people both of their own gender and the opposite gender, to call them either straight or gay would be entirely inaccurate. I admit, it's not a perfect analogy, because of the socially constructed nature of gender. It is rather easier to define heterosexual/homosexual feelings and acts than it is to define male/female feelings and acts. But, even as society is moving towards gender becoming less rigidly defined, there remains a huge array of standard assumptions that we make, based upon gender (a few of which you mention in pointing out that you don't conform to them all). For as long as assumptions will be made, it's useful to have a term for individuals who find either end of the spectrum to be hugely unrepresentative of the person they are.
I agree with you. It's useful as a descriptive term, I just think legislation gets messy when we start to break down gender identity.
I sypathise with your analogy - I wanted to make a similar one but, like you, recognised the pitfalls of it. I get the impression, though, that we have similar views on the subject - even if my angle comes across as opposition.
Yeah, I think we do.
I really don't know about legislation. It's the concept and its usefulness that I'm interested in trying to explain and when I saw your comment I felt it could help.
Tbh, I don't see the implications of that at all. From a legal standpoint the sex of self and spouse/partner is what matters. Why do we need to classify the romantic orientation? What am I missing here?
I don't think label is the major concern here. There are practical implications on how best to interact on a social terms common examples being bathrooms, airport security etc. The social norms in interaction between male/female is relatively well defined (or better put...has lots of commonly accepted social norms). Maybe we need to define them before acceptance.
I don't think he was suggesting we would, legally. Just culturally, they are useful terms. Like if you're on a dating website it's a quick way of letting people know you they only have a chance of a relationship with you if you are a particular gender but if not they may be interesting in you sexually.
Both of those norms you mention have their basis in an assumption of heterosexuality. I don't see why non-binary would be of any threat to them when homosexuality isn't.
I just mention them because they are most common. Even in case of homosexuality, the social norms are not that widely recognized esp if you move out of the US/Euro regions.
I genuinely don't get it. I'm a loony lefty liberal and I accept that sexuality is a spectrum, but gender? There's males and there's females. There's also a tiny minority born with both male and female genitalia. But this seems to be people deciding that they're neither male nor female (or are both) just because they say they are? The 'person' who spoke to Obama was quite clearly a girl in my eyes. I just don't understand what the problem is.
If it's any consolation, DOTA, I always thought you were a female poster.
If it's any consolation, DOTA, I always thought you were a female poster.
I don't get it, but I don't have to get it to treat everyone with respect and dignity, regardless of how they may identify gender or sexual orientation wise.
What's to get? Psychologically some people feel neither exclusively male or female, it is now termed as 'non-binary' as binary means one or the other in this context. The human mind is hugely complex so it really doesn't seem strange at all to me.
We're discussing it, I'm not trying to upset anyone. It's a totally revolutionary idea to me. You might be worldly wise and think this is all passe, but it will be strange to the vast majority of people on the planet.
I hadn't heard about it until the Obama story. Where has it come from? Why's it an issue? Who's being treated unfairly? What's happening to them that is upsetting them?
I hadn't heard about it until the Obama story. Where has it come from? Why's it an issue? Who's being treated unfairly? What's happening to them that is upsetting them?
If you can't find neatly into society or 'normalcy', for whatever reason, then that provides significant challenges for an individual. People of non-linear sexuality or gender have been discriminated against for thousands of years, even though it is natural. I think having nomenclature for all the different permutations relating to sexuality and gender is great. One for normalising people of different orientation in society so they are not discriminated against and two because I like precision and accuracy in communication.
You ever read the Left Hand of Darkness, @DiseaseOfTheAge ?
I ask because I think it was trying to address these kind of issues/difficulties in understanding in it, and it was written decades back.
I ask because I think it was trying to address these kind of issues/difficulties in understanding in it, and it was written decades back.
For me, it has some of the usual things one associates with 'trans'. I do often feel rather like a 'woman trapped in a man's body'. If I put on a bra and knickers and look in the mirror I feel an emotional connection to my reflection that I don't usually get. I feminise my body, by removing body hair. I feminise my appearance with a handbag and women's jewellery - increasingly with my girlfriend's clothes (with her permission, I add!). Put me in a social situation with mixed genders and I will inevitably gravitate towards the women. Not because I'm trying to get in to their knickers (in either way) but because I feel an affinity and an understanding that I don't when talking to men.
There's always a feeling of masculinity along with it though, to varying degrees. Sometimes to the extent I'll be down the pub, watching football and chatting with some random blokes and feel like one of them. Not as a football fan but as a man. Or when I'm talking to my dad, and he'll say something that just makes me realise that as I get older I get more and more like him (admittedly, more like my mum, but still). My only sibling has just given birth to her first child and when I found out it was male I felt an affinity to it because of that. I like the idea of being his uncle and being a male role model in his life.
It's fecking confusing, for me, to be honest. So I can't fault anyone for finding it hard to understand.
There's always a feeling of masculinity along with it though, to varying degrees. Sometimes to the extent I'll be down the pub, watching football and chatting with some random blokes and feel like one of them. Not as a football fan but as a man. Or when I'm talking to my dad, and he'll say something that just makes me realise that as I get older I get more and more like him (admittedly, more like my mum, but still). My only sibling has just given birth to her first child and when I found out it was male I felt an affinity to it because of that. I like the idea of being his uncle and being a male role model in his life.
It's fecking confusing, for me, to be honest. So I can't fault anyone for finding it hard to understand.
I haven't. I am intrigued.
It's really good. Though as a warning, there are aliens.
Great posts in the thread by the way.
One of the biggest mistakes a person can do is to try and rationalize their feelings. Even simple things like liking or disliking an object (food/movie etc) may be complex far less trying to understand feelings and emotions. I don't see having a rational/logical explanation enhances or diminishes emotions.