Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Jack Monroe on being non-gender binary

209 replies

IShouldBeSoLurky · 20/10/2015 23:30

www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2015/10/being-non-binary-i-m-not-girl-called-jack-any-more-i-m-not-boy-either

I've got a lot of time for Jack and Jack's brave stance on poverty and honest approach to discussing it. I also think the the taunting Jack came in for when the Daily Mail took agin Jack was appalling (but then the DM treats everyone appallingly if they thing it's going to get them clicks).

But this article... I don't know. It seems to me it would all be SO much simpler if one were able to say, "I was born a girl and given a girl's name which I later changed. I'm a lesbian and a mother and proud of both those things. And I don't feel it's necessary for me to perform gender, because I think the things I enjoy like pushing weights and wearing high heeled shoes sometimes shouldn't be gendered things."

Instead we have this tortuous charade of writing copy that's confusing because individuals want to be referred to by a plural pronoun, and the massive shenanigans about deadnaming (of course it's offensive, but no more so than calling a woman by her husband's surname when she hasn't actually changed her name) - some of it might be bigotry but some might just be confusion. And some of it, like referring to the Olympic medalist as Bruce, not Caitlyn, Jenner, is just factually accurate.

I was talking to DP about it earlier and saying that almost all languages (all, maybe? I don't know) have been structured with gender as pretty fundamental, because when language was developing, a person's biological sex WAS significant in a way it perhaps isn't, or shouldn't be, now. What if language just wasn't gendered at all (eg if the phrase "Ladies and gentlemen..." were never used), and it was only necessary to refer to a person's biological sex when it was fundamental to the subject (eg pregnancy and childbirth)? What if we were all they/zhe/something else?

I'm sure this has all been gone over multiple times on here, but I find it so difficult. Part of me wants to give Jack the respect Jack deserves, and part of me is like, "Look, lots of us aren't comfortable with gender roles. Stop making out that you're some special snowflake who gets misgendered at every turn." And then I think maybe I'm just as out of touch and carmudgeonly as people who insist it's fine to call gay people "queers".

What do others think about all this?

OP posts:
TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 21/10/2015 02:07

From the article it sounds like Jack's trans identity stems from more than just hating feminine stereotypes and involves some kind of physical dysphoria - wanting top surgery and wearing binders is a different kettle of fish from just not wanting to wear high heels, isn't it?

VimFuego101 · 21/10/2015 01:52

So how should we refer to Jack now? As 'they'? (Sorry to sound ignorant).

TendonQueen · 21/10/2015 01:29

The 'non-binary' thing to me is annoying because it seems to assume that the vast majority of people are 'binary' and living out their lives as some kind of masculine or feminine stereotype, when actually surely we're almost all non-binary to some degree? It seems to be a term that enables people to feel pleased about their difference from all us boring binary types, whereas perhaps we should be embracing the capacity everyone has to do and like all sorts of things regardless of how they're gendered.

Original poster
IShouldBeSoLurky · 21/10/2015 00:34

Thinking about it a bit more, I have a real problem with the idea of deadnaming. It's like suggesting that Kate Middleton was born the Duchess of Cambridge Confused. Okay, it isn't really. But it seems almost gratuitously entitled and cruel to one's family (assuming they weren't gratuitously cruel to you) to spit, "Don't you deadname me!" when auntie Hilda calls you Angelina instead of Arthur by mistake. And the rewriting of history just doesn't make sense.

OP posts:
cigarsofthepharaoh · 21/10/2015 00:32

I've been in a relationship with "non-binary" people, so I can kinda see it from both sides. XP was very traditionally female, lipstick and dresses etc. She also played and fanatically followed rugby. During our relationship she started becoming more butch and dropped the lipstick and the other stereotypical signs of femininity. All of a sudden the rugby and anything else 'masculine' were signs of a more masculine identity. It drove me crazy, listening to this totally progressive feminist describing rugby and mud as things for men, and lipstick and dresses as things for women. It felt like she was denigrating my own gender - I'm certainly not the most feminine but I still consider myself a woman.

It just feels slightly regressive.

But equally, I saw how happy she was to have a label to describe herself by. She felt validated I think.

DriverSurpriseMe · 21/10/2015 00:26

but I don't get how anyone can "feel" female (or male, or neither, or both)

Totally agree with this. Although I respect and support any trans person when they say they wish to be known as another gender, I'll never understand "feeling like a wo/man" because I don't think such feelings can be defined.

Having said that, Jack's decision is interesting because it's a new definition of transgender, in a way. Most trans people wish to be unequivocally known as their chosen gender, and yet Jack is saying that Jack is neither? Or is this the first tentative step into coming out as a trans man?

Also, I'd never heard the term "deadname" before, so that was interesting.

Gobbolinothewitchscat · 21/10/2015 00:16

You've both managed to write down what I've been thinking but wasn't sure how to express

Firstly - just because I'm a pedant - I hate all the they/their stuff. I do believe very much in live and let live but, on the other hand, if I like (stereotyping here) cars isn't that just part of my personality rather than meaning I'm non-binary transgender?

I do follow Jack on Twitter and I agree with some of her stances but I feel they (uuurghhh!) are veering towards losing the ear of people who had previously supported them (uuurghhh x 2) because this just seems yet another "label" where surely the best thing is just to "be"? Wear a chest binder or don't or high heels or whatever you want to on whatever day. Does everything have to be labelled nowadays?

Original poster
IShouldBeSoLurky · 21/10/2015 00:09

I am finding it hard to see past the winning combo of Wine and Cake emwith and I'll provide some Flowers for you also.

OP posts:
emwithme · 21/10/2015 00:06

I was thinking about this earlier. I am (present as?) a cis, straight ish female. My choice of pronoun is she/her. Growing up I was a "tomboy", had lots of boy friends (as opposed to boyfriends) because the similarly-aged-children of my mum's friends happened to be boys. I think that if I had been a teenager now I would've been very confused about the whole "identity" thing (especially when I fancied a girl).

I really don't care about anyone's genitalia (except for my own and that of DH), but I don't get how anyone can "feel" female (or male, or neither, or both). I don't feel particularly female, I don't do "feminine" things (it is very rare that I wear a dress/skirt, or make-up, I can go to the loo on my own, and change a plug (and pre-disability could change a tyre) etc. I HATE with the passion of a thousand suns the "pinkification" of girls these days I'm sure it was far more rainbow-coloured in the 80s and the fact that there are "girl" and "boy" toys.

If it makes you an out of touch curmudgeon, then so am I. Bodge up on the bench, I've got Biscuit and Wine (or Cake and Brew if you would prefer)

Swipe left for the next trending thread