[Closed] Non Binary...

Yeah, OK, now I'm with you. I suffer the same problem, I always assume people know when I'm kidding.

With names, oddly I've found the opposite. Most people prefer the full version over the shortened. Though that might just be confirmation bias on my part, I've not stopped and counted.

You can find out a persons sex from their DNA

Not exactly true. There is more to it than just having a Y chromosome.

Re clothing, I wish there were no such thing as gendered clothing. I would not wear women's clothes because most absolutely would not fit my body, although they do many men. But apart from skirts and dresses, everything else is available cut for a range of body types, boobs/hips or not, isn't it? It's just skirts, dresses and certain shoes that are reserved for women. How ridiculous is that? You can all wear the same stuff except these things, they're not for you. Unless you're Scottish maybe.

You do have a bit of a fixation on dresses as some sort of marker for non-binary.

I guess because the idea of wearing dresses is just some reinforcement of the binary classification?

It's not like there is anything intrinsically masculine or feminine about skirts or dresses, its just a recent Western construct.

If this whole gender identify was dealt with the same way as Kinsey assigned sexuality I think almost everyone would be in the 2-9 range and perhaps there would be a bit of a bi-modal aspect.

What I find a bit bizarre is just how far "society" clings to these stereotypes...
This is a bit tongue in cheek but really to illustrate what I mean.

If we take one of the most equal over the longest period societies (by a few measures from land ownership, equal votes, wearing trousers and killing people) in Sweden then one hot summer a few years ago some of the "male" ticket collectors/conductors started wearing skirts during a hot summer... as the dress code didn't let them wear shorts.

That bit isn't really amazing... what amazes me is the railway company gave in to some (perceived) public pressure and let them wear shorts... somehow it seems (at least to me) "The public" didn't feel comfortable with/approve of a big bearded bloke wearing a skirt when giving you a ticket.

[I'm sure perhaps the railway company just had a think and thought it was stupid making "men" wear long trousers... but it's just an example]

The whole idea of a binary split to me is just stupid... as is any sort of requirement that these get split into something that goes back to chromosomes.

Not everyone is empathetic though and that doesn’t make them a bad person. Empathy almost seems to be a STW must have for any debate. Epic levels of empathy 😀

Perhaps ironic ... isn't empathy considered a female trait ???

5plusn8

I am sure that most pro trans people do know and realise the difference between sex and gender but there could be plenty who don’t. I think I only consider that its ‘anti’ trans types who can’t tell the difference, so thank for pointing that out, I’ll remember that in future.

I think you missed the entire point... gender is simply a construct.

I don't see making new ones is productive because it doesn't matter how many there are there will never be enough and people will be pigeon holed into expectation of some social norm.

I think you missed the entire point… gender is simply a construct.

Yeah I don't think you've read any of my posts as I've clearly said that umpteen times.
Gender is still a word, with a meaning, even if it is a construct, we still needs to know the diff between sex and gender otherwise every time we comes across a non binary person our science head will say - but you can't change sex. If we know the diff, then we will realise that you can be non gender binary because it doesn't have an immutable physical characteristic.

Why do we even need gender at all?

Why do we even need gender at all?

Indeed, soon we won't I think.

(But then people will still be defined by sex, and some people won't like that)

Why do we even need gender at all?

Because otherwise people will insist on strict characterisation based purely on sex, which simply does not work for a minority of people.

Well this neatly comes back to strawman allegations about non-binary people wanting the “erasure of gender”… which simply isn’t the case. It is the anti-trans people that want people to stay in boxes defined at birth, rather than have a gender that might not match that once they are old enough to be self aware.

Well this neatly comes back to strawman allocations that non-binary people want to “destroy gender”…

I said they want to destroy sex, which you have acknowledged on previous pages, now you are trolling.
The word woman has been erase from many legal and organisational texts.

It is the anti-trans people that want people to stay in boxes defined at birth, rather than have a gender that might not match that once they are old enough to be self aware.

This is bordering on straightphobe, I thought the whole point was freedom of expression? Humans are frequently conformist learning machines, we follow others directions, binary gender based on sex is the norm, there is nothing objectionable to conforming to that.

You said…

The problem is that the erasure of gender is also leading to the erasure of women as a protected sexual characteristic….

The first isn’t happening. The second is a very difficult area that needs carefully addressing.

This is bordering on straightphobe

Ah. Well, enjoy your games.

binary gender based on sex is the norm, there is nothing objectionable to conforming to that

Of course not. Wanting everyone else to do the same is where it gets problematic.

The first isn’t happening.

Yes it is, gender is being erased and I personally support it. That does not mean there are not associated problems to solve. The second, the erasure of sex specifically with females, I agree, needs to be carefully addressed, because it should not happen.
Statistically men are arseholes to women, they need protection and equalising.

Of course not. Wanting everyone else to do the same is where it gets problematic.

100% agree.

kelvin

Because otherwise people will insist on strict characterisation based purely on sex, which simply does not work for a minority of people.

I don't think that is true... (the minority bit)

Well this neatly comes back to strawman allocations that non-binary people want to “destroy gender”… which simply isn’t the case. It is the anti-trans people that want people to stay in boxes defined at birth, rather than have a gender that might not match that once they are old enough to be self aware.

Again I strongly disagree.
I don't see why at 53 I would have to identify as non-binary just because I don't like many things society expects of me and like some things they expect me not to like.

Not that it's an issue in itself except by identifying as non binary I simply get a new set of expectations...

I would have to identify as non-binary

You will be pleased to hear that you don’t have to do any such thing.

I suppose, like a lot of things, gender definitions are from a different time and as a society we need to make a concerted effort to widen the definitions and possibly include more without getting carried away and ending up with 50. Either that or find a way to replace or completely do away with the idea.

I don’t think I’ve ever met anyone that completely falls in to your stereotypical gender as described when I was a kid. Basically your completely manly man archetype and the girly, girl for want of better terms. People tend to sit somewhere along the scale. I do find it sad if there are people out there that feel pressure or are forced by others to conform to them. I think the progression made in the last few years in knocking down the man/woman stereotypes has been great. We have a hell of a long way to go to level the playing field though and mistakes are made along the journey.

On a side note I look good in a dress. I once wore one of Mrs F’s to make her laugh, walked passed a full length mirror and was like “Damn, you look fine” really comfy too! I’m fat now though so wouldn’t be able to pull it off.

She is mentally unstable and its a good PR stunt.

Why do we even need gender at all?

Because most men are sexually attracted to women and vice versa ?

Can I still call the wife the wife?

I often use the phrases 'the Mrs' or 'the other half', mainly because we're not married and I hate the term 'partner', and when I say that at work I can almost feel the disdain of my young London based colleagues who think I'm a northern neanderthal mysoginist. Interestingly though surely 'the wife' is better than 'my wife' because it removes the implication of posession?

I don’t think I’ve ever met anyone that completely falls in to your stereotypical gender as described when I was a kid.

This. What I don't really understand is this need for some to identify with or label themselves as one, the other or none when none of these terms are entirely accurate. Or are we heading towards some describing themselves as non-tertiary? Do we need new pronouns for more labels?

If we lived in this wonderful world where people aren't referred to as him/her on a daily basis, a world where labels don't matter... then people wouldn't feel the need to make it clear where the labels that others put on them don't fit.

This is just the "I don't see colour" thing again... it's great if you don't, but that isn't the world that people of colour have to live in. And again, if gender seems irrelevant to you, that is also great, but that's not the world that non-binary people have to live in.

kelvin

If we lived in this wonderful world where people aren’t referred to as him/her on a daily basis, a world where labels don’t matter… then people wouldn’t feel the need to make it clear where the labels that others put on them don’t fit.

This is just the “I don’t see colour” thing again… it’s great if you don’t, but that isn’t the world that people of colour have to live in. And again, if gender seems irrelevant to you, that is also great, but that’s not the world that non-binary people have to live in.

and creating a third, or 23rd or 123rd gender helps because ?

Because most men are sexually attracted to women and vice versa ?

You're mixing up a whole bunch of things there in regards to definitions, and responses of; gender and sexuality.

Perhaps interestingly (or not) I'm reading Trumbach's very interesting book on the gender revolution in 18thC London (and it's effects on masculinity, and heterosexuality) He describes that folk at the time understood that what bits you've got are totally unconnected to what you might want to stick them in or rub them against They have no concept of what we would see as "gender" where it intersects with sexual attraction. They were a really weird bunch of folks though, at the same time both awful and horrific, and hugely enlightened and permissive, no wonder there was such a backlash in the following centuries (that we're still trying to crawl out from underneath)

Because most men are sexually attracted to women and vice versa ?

So what? We already know that many men are attracted to other men as well. So why do they need a label? Just be attracted to a person - it still works either way.

Lots of v interesting discussions and learning points here.

From a professional point of view, it's a real challenge that the medical profession hasn't quite figured out perfectly yet... but it IS important to us (medicine) because certain health conditions will affect different (oh gosh..what do I say..!) erm, sexes (?!), differently...

It would be really important for your GP etc to be aware of certain things, whatever your gender identity:
do you have a prostate
do you have a womb/cervix
do you have ovaries
were you born as a male (as higher risk of cardiovascular disease etc).

I guess our medical questioning will start to ask these as openly and non-expectant as we ask "did your parents have high cholesterol" and "have you ever worked with caged birds" etc etc...

I guess I can't just assume that because someone may appear phenotypically female, they aren't at risk of conditions that affect genotypical males.

Forgive me and my colleagues if we don't quite get this right.

DrP

So what? We already know that many men are attracted to other men as well. So why do they need a label? Just be attracted to a person – it still works either way.

Because its not just about the biological sex. Most men are attracted to the female gender/femininity as well as the female physical form. Hypothetically if the entire population turned into androgynous non binary people what do you think would happen?

Hypothetically if the entire population turned into androgynous non binary people what do you think would happen?

Again, check your understanding...you're mixing stuff up here that doesn't need mixing up. You only need read Boriselbrus' contributions...He identifies as fluid and non binary...he has a wife...

and creating a third, or 23rd or 123rd gender helps because ?

Top google result - https://www.lgbthero.org.uk/being-non-binary - gives the following categories 🙂

• Agender – having no gender or being genderless
• Androgyne – identifying somewhere in between man and woman
• Bigender – having two gender identities, either at the same time or interchangeably
• Demiboy – partially, but not completely, identifying as a man, boy, or masculine person
• Demigender – having partial connection with one gender (male, female, or other)
• Demigirl – partially, but not completely, identifying as a woman, girl, or feminine person
• Enby – a slang term to refer to a non-binary person, not all non-binary people identify with this term
• Genderfluid – moving between two or more gender identities at different times, in different circumstances, etc.
• Genderqueer – a non-normative or queer gender, having no exclusive connection to any gender
• Multigender – having more than one gender
• Neutrois – neutral or null gender, similar to agender
• Non-binary – an umbrella term to describe people whose gender is neither man or woman; can also be used as an individual gender identity for someone who is neither a woman nor a man, but does not identify further
• Pangender- having many or all genders within one’s culture
• Transfeminine or Transfem – a person assigned male at birth (AMAB) who identifies with a feminine gender, but does not necessarily identify as a woman
• Transmasculine or Transmasc – a person assigned female at birth (AFAB) who identifies with a masculine gender, but does not necessarily identify as a man

And the following pronouns in addition to he/her/them:

• Ze/hir
• Xe/xem
• Hy/hym
• Co/cos

I think a crib sheet we can carry with us at all times would be useful so we can avoid causing offence. 🙄

I think a crib sheet we can carry with us at all times would be useful so we can avoid causing offence.

Or polite enquiry and a little effort on our parts to remember for the next time...As opposed to getting out a check-list and a pencil... 😉

Again, check your understanding…you’re mixing stuff up here

I dont think i am mixing anything up. Sexual attraction consists of both physical (sexual) and non physical (gender traits). As i said, MOST men are attracted to the female form and feminine traits. MOST women are attracted to the male form AND male traits.

It is only a belief in the same way that I believe 1+1=2 and the earth revolves around the sun. It is a fact.

Often an issue is that people think they know about something, because they learned about it as school. The above quote contains a good example: "the Earth revolves around the Sun" is a simplistic understanding of what's actually happening and the reality is more complex.

See also: "chromosomes determine sex" and a whole host of other stuff.

Molgrips

So what? We already know that many men are attracted to other men as well. So why do they need a label? Just be attracted to a person – it still works either way.

I think it goes past that ... just because someone is attracted to members of the same or opposite sex shouldn't imply or set expectations that they like or dislike totally unconnected things...

(and the same for because of the sex anyone is born with)

Sexual attraction consists of both physical (sexual) and non physical (gender traits).

Sure the only difference here is that from time to time, gender fluid people may have both, or one going on in their heads, or perhaps none. It doesn't stop them having babies. Gay men and women still have children, as do people who's gender is not as firmly fixed as yours perhaps is. So in response to your query what would happen is everyone was gender fluid, The answer to that is; nothing really. As I pointed out earlier in the 18thC men and women had no concept of gender when it came to sexual attraction.  And yet; life carried on.

You’re mixing up a whole bunch of things there in regards to definitions, and responses of; gender and sexuality.

Sorry, i missed this post.

I am responding to the thread going in the direction of "why do we even need gender" and "why do we need gender specific clothes" etc.
I my view gender is important because for the majority of people gender forms a large part of sexual attraction. Its not just about who has what sexual organs, its about masculine and feminine traits and they are largely what makes up gender surely?

Sure the only difference here is that from time to time, gender fluid people may have both, or one going on in their heads, or perhaps none. It doesn’t stop them having babies. Gay men and women still have children, as do people who’s gender is not as firmly fixed as yours perhaps is. So in response to your query what would happen is everyone was gender fluid, The answer to that is; nothing really. As I pointed out earlier in the 18thC men and women had no concept of gender when it came to sexual attraction. And yet; life carried on.

Yeah, I'm not naïve enough to think that procreation would grind to a halt altogether. However it would be wise to remember in this debate that the vast majority of the population ARE as firmly fixed in their gender as I am.

I my view gender is important because for the majority of people gender forms a large part of sexual attraction. Its not just about who has what sexual organs, its about masculine and feminine traits and they are largely what makes up gender surely?

Is this attraction innate, or is it created by society?

However it would be wise to remember in this debate that the vast majority of the population ARE as firmly fixed in their gender as I am.

Except this is exactly the group we are not talking about....

And, yet we remove a label and these poor souls are going to be suddenly all confused?

Something doesn’t add up...

I my view gender is important because for the majority of people gender forms a large part of sexual attraction.

I'm confused. Surely gender is the least important, with physical appearance and sex probably being the primary factors in attraction? Honestly the more I think about it (and I try not to), the more it seems to come down to 'what gender stereotype do I most identify with', which I think is pretty silly. Surely the whole point should be to reject and dilute these stereotypes rather than inventing new ones? Happy to be corrected or further informed but I'm still not getting it.

think a crib sheet we can carry with us at all times would be useful so we can avoid causing offence. 🙄

DazH, the eye-rolling is particularly helpful. It gives me the impression that non-binary people are more likely to be perma-offended snowflakey-types than are CIS-gendered/binary-gendered peeps.

This view is also informed by plenty of similar online stereotypes and memes (either real, imaginary or made entirely of straw) which get massive exposure owing to the ongoing trans-trend/clickbait games/business model/gravytrain via social media/Patreon etc

Is this attraction innate, or is it created by society?

I think a mix of both.

Except this is exactly the group we are not talking about….

And, yet we remove a label and these poor souls are going to be suddenly all confused?

Something doesn’t add up…

My point is, gender non conformity effects a small (~1%) of the population. The other ~99% seem quite happy with the way things are. So why is it right to remove the gender identity of 99% of the population because 1% dont feel they fit into those binary roles?

So why is it right to remove the gender identity of 99% of the population because 1% dont feel they fit into those binary roles?

Who is removing their identity? Are you sure your as firm in your gender as you state as you seem to be confused?

How big a percentage does it need before it becomes important enough for you?

I mean child abuse only happens to a small percentage of people...

I’m confused. Surely gender is the least important, with physical appearance and sex probably being the primary factors in attraction?

But you cannot separate them out that easily. A biological woman who identifies as male and therefore, dresses as a male, wears their hair as a male, maybe even takes hormones to appear more male and have a deeper voice etc, is not sexually attractive to me just because they have breasts and a vagina.

Who is removing their identity? Are you sure your as firm in your gender as you state as you seem to be confused?

How big a percentage does it need before it becomes important enough for you?

I mean child abuse only happens to a small percentage of people…

No-one is saying people cannot be non-binary or gender fluid or whatever. The point i am making (possibly badly) is that this thread was moving towards "we should remove gender altogether and all wear non gender specific clothes". Why? because 1% dont feel they belong to a binary gender, thats crazy!

I mean child abuse only happens to a small percentage of people…

Oh, and that is just about the dumbest comment in this thread

this thread was moving towards “we should remove gender altogether and all wear non gender specific clothes”. Why? because 1% dont feel they belong to a binary gender, thats crazy!

ThOze crAzY traNsGendErz waNt TO FOrCe uS intO non-gEndEr-SpeCifIc ClOthEz!

😉

is not sexually attractive to me just because they have breasts and a vagina.

Still confused. So is a biological woman who identifies as male less attractive because of their gender identification or just the fact that they wear trousers and have short hair? Surely it's just down to appearance and character, and what sex organs they may or may not posess? Where does gender come into it?

ThOze crAzY traNsGendErz waNt TO FOrCe uS intO non-gEndEr-SpeCifIc ClOthEz!

Aaaand...... Im out

Surely it’s just down to appearance and character

But for the large part that IS gender

No-one is saying people cannot be non-binary or gender fluid or whatever. The point i am making (possibly badly) is that this thread was moving towards “we should remove gender altogether and all wear non gender specific clothes”. Why? because 1% dont feel they belong to a binary gender, thats crazy!

I’m not sure why you feel that, I certainly don’t read that.

No one is saying you can’t be binary or gender static. This is your problem.

ThOze crAzY traNsGendErz waNt TO FOrCe uS intO non-gEndEr-SpeCifIc ClOthEz!

As always Star Trek was decades ahead...

I’m not sure why you feel that, I certainly don’t read that.

Within the confines of this thread, yes they are saying that.

Why do we even need gender at all?

Indeed, soon we won’t I think.

And others about non gender specific clothing that i cant seem to find now....

we should remove gender altogether and all wear non gender specific clothes

I didn't say we don't need gender. I asked why we needed it. Big difference.

Within the confines of this thread, yes they are saying that.

I must be reading a different thread then.because they’re not.

Just because someone might want something different doesn’t mean EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO DO THE SAME. Funnily enough it’s not a binary choice.

I am good with saying we don't need gender. I think its oppresive, mostly to women.
It does not stop you from identifying as a particular gender.

I didn’t say we don’t need gender. I asked why we needed it. Big difference.

Yep, and i replied with why I think we do need it. Someone else has jumped in and tried to make out that I am saying that we shouldnt care about non binary people because there "isnt many of them".

we don’t need gender.

I think trailwagger does... apparently they would be all confused if we removed it... 🤣🤪

Someone else has jumped in and tried to make out that I am saying that we shouldnt care about non binary people because there “isnt many of them”

I thought you said 99% are happy so why change for 1%?

All I did was point out you saying this...

I cant see how we can remove it anyway.
People will always catergorise other people. Its convenient, if a little rude.

Ibam good with saying we don’t need gender. I think its oppresive, mostly to women.

Absolutely - let's do away with male / female sporting classes, let's run them all on the same field for the same 3 places. Let's do away with woman crisis centres/refuges, let's make all toilets unisex.

I'm sure women all over the country would rejoice at these oppressive things being repealed...

Tinky Winky is clearly trans. Tinky Winky (not sure about pronouns) is male but carries a handbag.

Absolutely – let’s do away with male / female sporting classes, let’s run them all on the same field for the same 3 places. Let’s do away with woman crisis centres/refuges, let’s make all toilets unisex.

I’m sure women all over the country would rejoice at these oppressive things being repealed…

I am talking about gender not sex.
If you read the thread you will understand the difference. I am the loudest voice here for the protection of sex categories for the precise reasons you state.
But sex is not gender.

trailwagger

My point is, gender non conformity effects a small (~1%) of the population. The other ~99% seem quite happy with the way things are. So why is it right to remove the gender identity of 99% of the population because 1% dont feel they fit into those binary roles?

I very much doubt 50% of people, let alone 99% of people are happy with their gender assignment.

A biological woman who identifies as male and therefore, dresses as a male, wears their hair as a male, maybe even takes hormones to appear more male and have a deeper voice etc, is not sexually attractive to me just because they have breasts and a vagina.

I'm not seeing why you are conflating gender and sexual preference ... in this context.

I don't think people should need to think about who they are or are not attracted to ...

I my view gender is important because for the majority of people gender forms a large part of sexual attraction. Its not just about who has what sexual organs, its about masculine and feminine traits and they are largely what makes up gender surely?

but those traits are mostly just constructs ... and to all intents self fulfilling
In deed this is the sort of BS pedalled by gay rights activists like Peter Tatchell

Contrary to the well-intentioned claim that gays are "just the same" as straights, there is a difference. What is more, the distinctive style of gay masculinity is of great social benefit. Wouldn't life be dull without the flair and imagination of queer fashion designers and interior decorators? How could the NHS cope with no gay nurses, or the education system with no gay teachers? Society should thank its lucky stars that not all men turn out straight, macho and insensitive.

The strong implication here is that for men to be a fashion designer, interior designer or nurse they must be gay... and "how would we cope". The flip side to that is of course many gay men most absolutely don't fit the gender assignment made by activists like Tatchell based on who they find attractive not to mention straight male nurses etc. expected to conform to the mix between gender and sexual attraction.

“we should remove gender altogether and all wear non gender specific clothes”.

One doesn't follow the other ... and as an observation from this thread that would upset those who specifically wish to dress in "gender specific clothes” be that of a gender that matches their biological sex or the opposite.

Absolutely – let’s do away with male / female sporting classes, let’s run them all on the same field for the same 3 places. Let’s do away with woman crisis centres/refuges, let’s make all toilets unisex.

On sport, absolutely! Use weight classes (or similar) instead. Would this help solve the issue of pay differences between sexes?

If the unisex toilets are all cubicles with sinks, etc inside and the area outside clearly visible to passers by, go for it. Would this solve the issue of there always being queues for the womens' loos while the guys all walk past?

Most crisis centres allow both ciswomen and transwomen to access, so there wouldn't be a change needed. Ideally, let's get rid of the need for those centres.

woman crisis centres/refuges

This is a bit of a complex area actually.

1) Surely vulnerable men and non-binary people also need help? Why is it just women?

2) What about trans women? There is a big kerfuffle about this currently, but how do you actually separate trans women from non? Are you going to do a physical inspection before you admit people?

I mean these are debating points, and of course I know why we have women's centres, but perhaps we should modify how we do things?

gender specific clothes

Apart from which way round the buttons fasten, I'm struggling to think what's gender-specific about what I'm currently wearing: a shirt, jeans, Vans.

Fifty years ago, these were probably gender-specific, but they're not now.

I very much doubt 50% of people, let alone 99% of people are happy with their gender assignment.

I based my figures on several published survey results, what are you basing yours on?

I’m not seeing why you are conflating gender and sexual preference … in this context.

Not sexual preference, sexual attraction. There is a difference. If my sexual preference as a biological male is females, then I am not just attracted to female form but also female traits, appearance etc. Gender cannot be just what you think you are, otherwise why do so many non conforming genders feel more comfortable in their preferred genders clothing or why do trans feel the need to transition to another gender if it is purely a social construct or just how you feel? It is also about how you project yourself and how you are seen by others.

but those traits are mostly just constructs … and to all intents self fulfilling

I agree some are socially constructed, but a lot are biological. Females are generally smaller than males, they talk differently, they have smaller noses and prettier eyes and fuller lips and they walk differently etc etc.... they are more empathic, and more agreeable, and less aggressive. All these traits both physical and biological make someone feminine and to be feminine is part of what makes you female gendered does it not?

they are more empathic, and more agreeable, and less aggressive

whoah whoah.

On AVERAGE this may (or may not) be true, BUT this is a dangerous thing to start waving around because people start to treat individuals as if they were average. We humans have a huge problem with doing this (it causes wars and oppression and all sorts) so when people say stuff like this it raises a big red flag for me. Whilst it may be technically true, it really should not be brought out and mis-used.

All these traits both physical and biological make someone feminine

Absolutely not - I am non-aggressive, highly empathetic and generally agreeable in real life (believe it or not) but I would not call myself feminine as I am very male in appearance for starters.

Making those generalisations is an absolute can of worms and very rarely leads to anything other than rows, accusations and disharmoy, so my advice is just don't.

Absolutely not – I am non-aggressive, highly empathetic and generally agreeable in real life (believe it or not) but I would not call myself feminine as I am very male in appearance for starters.

Making those generalisations is an absolute can of worms and very rarely leads to anything other than rows, accusations and disharmoy, so my advice is just don’t.

Well thats kind of my point, you have to be the whole package. I am not attracted to you if you are a biological male, wear male clothing (whatever that is), style yourself as a man but self identify as female gender.

On AVERAGE this may (or may not) be true,

Absolutely. I am not saying all females are empathic and agreeable. Its a scale and on AVERAGE women tend to be less aggressive. That is not the same as "only men are aggressive" because there are definitely aggressive women as there are empathic men. But on average those are female personality traits.

This is all getting lost in a muddle of posts.

The question was asked "why do we need gender"

I suggested we need it because it forms an important part of sexual attraction. If the majority of the population is heterosexual and binary gendered then getting rid of gender will adversely effect more people than it effects positively based on my assumption that people are attracted to gender as well as physical appearance.
But its just a suggestion and my own opinion, feel free to disagree or prove me wrong.

edit - this is also based on my opinion that gender is not just a label.

(Pops back into thread)

Well this is going well isn't it. Remember the "be kind" thing.

Just one thing though, I've never met any trans or non binary person who wants to eliminate gender, just gender stereotypes. It's all about choice, tolerance, respect and acceptance.

Right, carry on.
😁♥️

Not sexual preference, sexual attraction. There is a difference. If my sexual preference as a biological male is females, then I am not just attracted to female form but also female traits, appearance etc. Gender cannot be just what you think you are, otherwise why do so many non conforming genders feel more comfortable in their preferred genders clothing or why do trans feel the need to transition to another gender if it is purely a social construct or just how you feel? It is also about how you project yourself and how you are seen by others.

Hence why I firmly believe gender is nothing but a construct.

If my sexual preference as a biological male is females, then I am not just attracted to female form but also female traits, appearance etc.

Yes but clearly one set is sexual and the other is preference.

Females are generally smaller than males, they talk differently, they have smaller noses and prettier eyes and fuller lips and they walk differently etc etc

This is purely biological ...

they are more empathic, and more agreeable, and less aggressive

Nope, that is your/societies expectation ....
You might for example like blondes or brunettes .. or blue eyes or brown etc. or sailing close to the wind perhaps you might like large breasts or not... well proportioned or skinny etc.
As far as I'm concerned that's totally just your preference.

Gender cannot be just what you think you are, otherwise why do so many non conforming genders feel more comfortable in their preferred genders clothing

Because they have decided that somehow the clothing help define their gender ... albeit with the backdrop of society having decided clothing defines gender .. there is sod all reason why in the west women wear skits or dresses and men don't (excepting Scotland) ... its merely a convention ... not followed in the majority of the world or through the majority of history..

You only need a quick look at blackadder 3 to see men in tights, wigs and makeup...

But what seems more likely is that society expects certain behaviours or traits based on what clothes people wear...
Simplistically you could say a business suit (M/F) would give an expectation of certain behaviour that are different to someone wearing clothes for labouring.

Or we have different expectations of how we should react someone in a high vis vest etc.

To repeat the above quote:

What is more, the distinctive style of gay masculinity is of great social benefit. Wouldn’t life be dull without the flair and imagination of queer fashion designers and interior decorators? How could the NHS cope with no gay nurses, or the education system with no gay teachers? Society should thank its lucky stars that not all men turn out straight, macho and insensitive.

Again mixing sexuality and this thing called gender...
Many gay men just don't fit those expectations ... many straight men do... and that's presumably forgetting women can be fashion designers, interior decorators and nurses? (or bloody doctors and surgeons)

Just one thing though, I’ve never met any trans or non binary person who wants to eliminate gender, just gender stereotypes. It’s all about choice, tolerance, respect and acceptance.

That sums it up nicely. Everyone is on a scale somewhere between the two extreme stereotypes. The vast majority of people will have traits that have been assigned to the other gender at some point in history. Acceptance is key I think. Just let people crack on and live their lives.

Just out of curiosity and not looking to start an argument. How would dating apps work if everyone identifies as non binary? Or would it be a third option? Usually it's M seeking M, F seeking F, M seeking F, or F seeking M.

if everyone identifies as non binary?

Why would they? Everyone does get that people aren't being forced to be non-binary, don't they? The "99%" of us (still think it's probably fewer) can just keep on as we are, but not go about as if we make up "100%" of the population.

Just out of curiosity and not looking to start an argument. How would dating apps work if everyone identifies as non binary? Or would it be a third option? Usually it’s M seeking M, F seeking F, M seeking F, or F seeking M.

I've not looked, but there are almost certainly already NB dating sites/apps. Presumably, they match people up using different characteristics instead.

This thread started oddly, became interesting and informative with first hand accounts from @boriselbrus and a good discussion between them and @5plusn8 Then it went a little bit off-piste with lots of people arguing about how others might feel with no actual experience on either side themselves but has come back to form with another post from @boriselbrus. Think I'll end my following of the thread there on a good note.

Something occurred to me today. If I were to go out in a skirt, I'd no doubt get looks and people thinking 'zomg it's a bloke in a skirt'. UNLESS I were in Scotland and the skirt were tartan, then noone would bar an eyelid.

Madness, isn't it?

@molgrips - it doesn't even have to be tartan. I've long fancied a leather kilt.

Just out of curiosity and not looking to start an argument. How would dating apps work if everyone identifies as non binary? Or would it be a third option? Usually it’s M seeking M, F seeking F, M seeking F, or F seeking M

If those are sexual preferences then that's fine and they don't need to do with gender. If I was on a dating app looking for a partner/sexy times I'd be wanting to filter by biological sex. I guess there's a question of how fanciable a transwoman might be until I got to know her a bit better and I many guys might not be attracted to a very "butch" looking woman.

I was thinking more to prevent any surprises later on. For example if a male identified as non binary and looked female with a feminine name. On a dating site looking for a relationship (not just sex). Wouldn't things get confusing for others and vise versa?

You could talk to them and find out… radical I know.

Lesbians (same sex attracted biological females) I know are hacked off with the influx of 'lesbian' transwomen (i.e. heterosexual biological males with a feminine gender identity) on dating apps...

Why would they? Everyone does get that people aren’t being forced to be non-binary, don’t they? The “99%” of us (still think it’s probably fewer) can just keep on as we are, but not go about as if we make up “100%” of the population.

I still don't understand where you get the 99% from? (or even what list of masculine/feminine attributes to score against) or even for that matter what day/time of life etc to score.

I still think any half definitive list of these supposed masculine/feminine characteristics/traits most of us would end up significantly away from the ends.
(regardless of our biological sex or sexual preferences)

This is why statements li9ke that of

Imagine like a Myers Briggs test ... not only do few people get 20 in any of the 4 categories but those people change depending what day or what time of life etc.

Just to add to make sure you don't get this out of context.. that is completely and utterly different to someone who feels they are trapped in the wrong body (either always or sometimes)..or who someone fancies because what we are discussing is not some biological wiring but a view society has or doesn't about masculine/feminine... what I am describing are pre-conceived ideas of how someone should feel/behave etc. in a general way as a function of their biological sex or for that matter sexual preference.

I still don’t understand where you get the 99% from?

Trailwagger. It’s bobbins in my opinion.

Its because changing the whole pronoun structure which 99% of the population is happy with in order to suit the 1% who have a medical condition would be ridiculous.

Referring to people who’d rather not be labelled he or she.

I’ve already posted much the same as you, that many people will feel they have male and female elements to them, but are happy to go along with he or she, because they are predominately one more that the other. This thread is about the small number of people who that doesn’t work for. Is that 1%? Who knows. We can adapt for them though.