Non binary confused and sad

That is what this movement is about and why it has made such speedy progress. Men what to be able to behave in what were previously unacceptable ways without loss of status, power, influence and income. If they can simultaneously disempower women and return us to domestic and sexual servitude and breeding stock then so much the better from the point of view of far too many of them.

RedToothBrush bless you that is an excellent post.

Just as an aside there is so much overlap between autisn and 'gender' related issues, plus physical and mental issues and self harm. I don't know why it is not looked into more. (Well I do!)

I think it will be one day.

I believe presenting as neurotyipicsl does put a huge strain on young autistic females.

I think those who suspect autisn, or as it used to be called 'Aspergers', may find it liberating to understand more and make peace with those aspects of themselves

I speak as mum to a wonderful but very challenged autistic daughter.

And in case I am accused of confusing non-binary with being transgender there is a degree of cross over and some non-binary people will undergo surgery etc.

This documentary is not about about non-binary but does refer to the medicalisation of trans identified young females.

Shit show

It is indeed very sad. I agree with you OP. Hie many years before we can look back and say. What an utter shut show that decade was. I reckon another 2 years

Have you seen the Swedish documentary I think it's called something like Trans train about young females regretting transitioning?

I will leave you all now (at least for a while) for us all to consider fully what I've said. 

But what have you said?

There are sometimes reasons to classify people by sex. You haven't explained why it is necessary to classify anyone by gender. Well. Thanks everyone for your thoughts.

Just because that's what a lot of people are talking about and doing currently. I was just thinking of ways to steer the conversation leading into a more GC stance.

Anyway, I put my ideas there out for consideration and I think I've posted enough to make my position clear. I will leave you all now (at least for a while) for us all to consider fully what I've said. 

I spent my 20s trying to run away from things. I hated being female. I hated myself. I think back about the things i said at the time and my thoughts and actions and there is no way i wouldn't be non binary if i was 19 today.

It took me a long time to recognise that you can't hide or run away from yourself. I didn't fit in with others for various reasons, and I never will. I lacked maturity and emotional security. I got older and realised what all the angst about identity was. I still have massive social anxiety (possibly its aspergers but not sure going down the route of trying to get it formally recognised is particularly helpful).

This is exactly the same thing but asks others to participate and enable it.

Its directly related to lack of self confidence, depression and anxiety. Its related to frustrations about gender stereotypes and the way others treat you in a negative way.

Gender identity is gendered stereotypes and the reinforcement of them. Trans identities legitimise gender stereotypes and advocate hormones and surgery to 'corrrect' what is seen as a problem rather than acknowledging the problem is society's stereotypes. Non binary identities try to reject the stereotypes but fails to accept sex is a material reality that can not be avoided and instead tries to create a bubble of avoidance type behaviour around sex. Non-binary identities also legitimise and perpetuate body dysphoria without trying to resolve underlying issues.

Avoidance type behaviour should be identified not enabled.

Material reality is that sex exists and our bodies just are. We can hate them and we can self harm but we ultimately can't change what we are born because srx is real and exists and the problem is stereotypes not sex.

Thank you RedToothBrush for this post which made me cry! You've expressed how I felt and how I'm sure so many girls have felt in their teens. I worry about my preteen girl who also has some ASD traits and needs role models to help her.

Maybe it helps to have a good role models list? Mine at the moment are Eowyn, Brienne of Tarth, Victoria Wood, Sandi Toksvig and Jackie Weaver! I showed the Jackie Weaver video to my daughter and talked about sexism and how she handled it well.

My only worry is whether too much pushing of great female role models will affect my son negatively - I hope he can learn from great women as well as great men.

The boxes I am taking about are so expanded they have collapsed into each other.

So what is the point of having any box?

There are sometimes reasons to classify people by sex. You haven't explained why it is necessary to classify anyone by gender.

Nothing you have said provides any reason for categorising people in gender identity boxes.

The boxes I am taking about are so expanded they have collapsed into each other.

Yes, great to compare human beings being unhappy with their gender and changing it to RACISM. Excellent comparison.

The comparison is with the concept of gender.

Women have been denied the right to own property, vote, be recognised legally as people etc. etc. because of gender.

Why should women tiptoe around the fact that the concept of gender identity takes away their basic rights?

The concept of gender can also lead some people to experience extreme and debilitating dysphoria. It is completely possible to differentiate between victims of gender and advocates of gender ideology.

So the existing stereotypes and other multitudes of gender expression are each seen as appropriate and normative in terms of gender expression for either sex.

Women have been presenting and behaving as they wish regardless of expectations for a very, very long time. Only men seem to struggle with this, and I think the reason is fear of loss of status. It has nothing to do with some kind of gendered soul.

Gender is a cultural phenomenon and we, as part of society, can be as influential as anyone else in creating that phenomenon.

Just over 100 years ago gender meant that a woman couldn’t be a lawyer and was expected to always wear a skirt. Less than 100 years ago women couldn’t vote on the same terms as men.

It’s ridiculous to suggest that anyone should have to accept gender, or that there is any benefit to classifying people according to a range of gender identities.

Logic dictates
To claim you possess any given important, defining characteristic unique to the opposite sex, you must first demonstrate:
1. What the opposite sex IS, and what ARE these unique defining characteristics of that sex that distinguish it from the other.
2. That you possess one or more of these uniquely defining characteristics yourself as a member of the opposite sex.

The moment you prove 2, you've undermined and disproved 1.

The moment you find a characteristic exists in both sexes, you've discovered it's NOT a unique defining characteristic of sex after all.

This is a perfect breakdown 👏 thank you Barracker

Ditching 'gender' necessitates challenging patriarchy.

Yes, if you will. Redefine gender as personality. However, you need to be able to frame it so those used to referring to their gender will adopt this meaning and bridge the refinement of usage with the old usage.

There’s no need to “redefine gender as personality”. We already have a perfectly good word - personality - to describe someone’s characteristics and behaviours which is completely separate from their biological sex.

Ditching gender ideology means we have people’s sex, and their personality. There’s no need for another word that also means personality.

I'm another one who thinks it would be more obvious if pp used a worked example to demonstrate what she means.

10 people in a room.
5 are male, 5 are female.

2 of the ten are strong believers in something called 'gender identity'. 8 are not.
One male declares a female gender identity.
One female declares a male gender identity.

The 5 actual females all agree they have fundamentally different personalities. 4 reject they share any group or gender identity at all.
1 female claims to have the same group mental identity of the males.
Of the males, the same situation as the females. All 5 agree, no shared personality, no shared mental gender identity.
1 male insists he has the gender identity of females.

What we have here, is the impossible situation of a person claiming to share the mental/group/personality/gender identity type of a group of other people.
WHILST THOSE OTHER PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ANY TYPE TO BE SHARED.

You also have the nonsensical situation that the only person with an apparent female gender identity is male, and vice versa.

By no imaginable leap of logic can one conclude that an individual personality, found only in one male, is therefore 'the group female gender identity'.

Logic dictates
To claim you possess any given important, defining characteristic unique to the opposite sex, you must first demonstrate:

1. What the opposite sex IS, and what ARE these unique defining characteristics of that sex that distinguish it from the other.
2. That you possess one or more of these uniquely defining characteristics yourself as a member of the opposite sex.

The moment you prove 2, you've undermined and disproved 1.

The moment you find a characteristic exists in both sexes, you've discovered it's NOT a unique defining characteristic of sex after all.

I don’t think gender stereotypes are necessarily separate from sex though and I think it harms feminism to insist they are.
Some are obviously, women can be engineers or physicists or sports commentators but sometimes sex does matter particularly in terms of roles that need strength, size, etc where men will be better suited or roles that need smaller hands, dexterous fingers such as craftwork, sewing, etc. For me, it’s about recognising that roles that women are traditionally more suited to are equal to those that men are, not inferior as we are often told. So for example in a supermarket women on the till are equal in status and pay to the men in the warehouse. Or in a factory sewing and making clothes in a clothes factory is equally important as making Cars in a car factory.

You seem to be confusing what men or women might like with what kinds of jobs they can and should do - and the extra layer to this is where gender comes in and boys and girls are told what they should like and not like. Boys should, for example, be given equal encouragement with crafts as girls. Weren't Fairisle jumpers knitted by males? And, in a work sense, was tailoring not traditionally a male occupation? Maybe women will not be as good climbers or cable-tossers as men, but girls should be encouraged to try and if they like these activities to proceed with them.

Many of us grew up with the model of lesbian feminism as the model to aspire to; even if we were heterosexual. I certainly did. I used to wish I was a lesbian. That way I could be 'free' of the dynamics involved in male/female relationships. Heterosexual relationships were viewed as being bad for women; the source of their oppression.

I agree with your point. There are some traits that are linked to the reality of biology; although they can be over-ridden by strength of individual character; or accommodated within 'gender non conforming' roles and pastimes

These traits tend to be most strongly correlated with the realities of pregnancy and motherhood.

It doesn't manifest differently between the sexes. We need to redefine what gender actually means in reality to reflect this

You sound like you are looking for a 'truth' to gender - what (in social or behavioural terms women and men 'really are'). In fact, this is a social (patriarchal construct) - there is no 'truth'.

I've just read this thread and my brain is starting to explode.

It is for people themselves to decide their own gender identity. That demands that we see gender as a 'syndrome' a collection of traits / preferences found together which meets the definition of a gender identity such as gender fluid, and the 100 others you can choose from. You can do questionnaires to pinpoint which you are.
It's like astrology (but less scientific).
I don't care if people want to engage in defining their gender but it has no more significant place in our laws, culture etc than astrology.
Many human traits can be defined eg openness, introversion, I really can't see what is to be gained by carving out some and labelling them genders. Please someone define 'gender' without reference to sex stereotypes and explain why they warrant a special label.

The problems arise when certain traits are enforced or rigidly formulated, so that one can never step out of sex based role

I don’t think gender stereotypes are necessarily separate from sex though and I think it harms feminism to insist they are

I agree with your point. There are some traits that are linked to the reality of biology; although they can be over-ridden by strength of individual character; or accommodated within 'gender non conforming' roles and pastimes.

The problems arise when certain traits are enforced or rigidly formulated, so that one can never step out of them, or express other types of trait - based on sex alone.

I think that some of the modern trans narrative has arisen out of a denial of any natural differences between the sexes. The idea that all expressions or roles, as they relate to sex/gender, are socially constructed.