Non binary

"Mollies" was an insult. They didn't fuck women so they weren't dignified with the epithet "men"

Dandies? Beau Brummel was one. It was all about the Look. In the early 80swe had New Romantics and Poseurs. Could be either sex. Andcwere generally sure of their sex and sexuality. Not pretending to be the opposite sex. I loved it. All those pretty men in make up? David Sylvian and John Taylor? Yum

Go and look up a high school science level explanation of human reproduction. That should help. Meiosis vs mitosis.

@UndertheseaPineappleHouse, thank you for the explanation on that hypothetical idea. I understood about 75% of what you said so I appreciate your explanation!

Ah yes, @TheKeatingFive- of course. I'd forgotten that detail.

Definitely wouldn’t be a clone no.
Sperm and eggs only have half the genetic material needed to make a complete set of DNA. ´Has ovarian tissue’ does not necessarily mean ´produces eggs’ so I wouldn’t say there’s any evidence from this post that this person does. Then, even if one human did produce eggs and sperm, it doesn’t mean that putting those together would produce a viable embryo. You’d end up with around 50% of the pairs of genes being identical so the potential for a problem caused by 2 faulty recessive genes would be high. Also if there were Y chromosomes in half the eggs then a quarter of the fertilized eggs would have 2 Y chromosomes and probably be unviable.

It's trying to say you're neither sex, which is impossible. Unless you were born with no reproductive organs whatsoever. Even then you may have majority male or female physical traits.

I presume it is a trend that will subside. I wouldn't say I feel like I'm female. I just know I am because of the way I look, the way my body works and the way I've been treated since birth. That doesn't mean I'm not?!

So yeah, it's a bit of a head scratcher.
If I met someone who claimed they were I would just treat them like a regular person, and avoid using pronouns at all.

It wouldn't arise because even if it theoretically possible for a male to carry a baby he fathered in his highly unusual uterus, the conception would require a donor egg.

This man, by definition, hasn't produced one.

Ah yes but what about the AIDS?

Super interesting point.

Nor even understand it or care. You just make sure you are respectful of people who do care and leave them be.............

They are archaic words that used to be used for people who did not conform to binary sexuality or gender norms. Well documented historically.

I don't conform to outdated sexist gender stereotypes. I am a woman.

Claiming non-binary to be special?

https://www.recoveringanarchist.ca/p/why-i-stopped-using-they-them-pronouns

A good article

‘I am writing this for people like my younger self, for anyone on a precipice, who doesn’t quite fit in where they are supposed to, and may not yet realize that this anguish is the cost of being human. It is, to some degree, felt by everyone. So before reaching for a fix, consider the possibility that nothing in you is broken’.

You haven’t got the wrong idea OP, and neither is it complex. It may seem complex because it’s hard to explain. The reason it’s hard to explain is because it’s nonsense.

It is also unnecessary and insulting.

Anyone can be as feminine or as masculine as they like or as they feel. It’s an insult to everyone else who doesn’t adhere to sex stereotypes to make yourself out to be something special.

No it’s not. Non-binary does not exist in law (or in the minds of the sane).

I think that non-binary is a perfectly reasonable way to identify, if it explains the world to you in the way that makes sense. We don't all have the same perceptions of the world, after all.

I do think it's a bit easier all round if people stuck to pronouns for their genetic sex, bar those with intersex conditions, who can do as they please, they've got enough on their plate to live with.

Many people in the past would have said that about using titles Miss and Mrs. I railed against that because I really dislike having a title which is all about whether I’m married or not. We now expect people to hold on to the extra piece of information about our titles beyond saying ‘the class of women who are married’ or ‘unmarried’.

Hopefully it’s not actually possible as I don’t think it would be advisable. But out of interest I wonder if the child would be a clone of the parent. (I don’t understand genes very well so forgive me if this is a stupid thing to say).

I was a bit of a tomboy as a kid, always falling out of trees and off bikes. As an adult I rode motorbikes for years, did kick boxing and other rough sports.
Am I non binary now? There seems to be a lot of confusion in thr trans, non binary community as to what a woman is.
It seems to me they think a woman is an exaggerated Dolly Parton.

That would be a first, biological father and mother!

Names are for individuals. Pronouns are for classes. As are the words woman and man. You can’t just redefine them to include some stuff you want to include- it renders them meaningless.

I’m less bothered about non binary- it’s just a special name for normal. Most of us don’t need it, we just present however we want.

Go on whats the dictionary definition of 'cis'

TunipTheVegimal24

But I've seen so much metaphorical foaming at the mouth on here, where the mere suggestion of understanding something in concept, is taken as a personal insult (from both points of view).

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=y8nViKYmEhU

More importantly - pronouns don’t belong to individuals to change the meaning of when they feel like it. What you’ve said still plays along with the idea that “preferred pronouns” is a thing. It’s isn’t.

I have never even heard of those words, let alone have ever heard gay men being called it.

Basic biological language NEVER changes, nor should we throw up our hands and accept it. Not ever. And 'c1s' is a slur. The 'n' word also 'exists', that doesn't mean it should be used.

Good post, thanks. That’s helpful for me.

In answer to your question about compelled speech: we are all used to remembering individual names for people, and it’s very little effort changing the name label we attach to a person. It takes a bit of effort for sure, but it’s something we’re used to doing. Changing a pronoun is much harder because of the dissonance between what we see and what we’re allowed to say. We have to give a disproportionate amount of attention to that person so it’s not surprising that it comes across to us as attention-seeking behaviour.

Curiously I’ve known two people recently who have changed their pronouns - one from he to she, and one from she to they. I found the new ‘she’ much easier than the ‘they’. I think that’s because I’m used to using ‘she’, and although the person is clearly male I play along in their fantasy and pretend they’re female. The ‘they’ just feels weird. The person is female, they look female, women don’t all have long hair and wear make up etc etc. I do try but it feels like a bigger imposition.