Non Binary / Gender Neutral

[MissBax]

Okay so I know this may spark some serious debate. I just want to say that I really don't want to offend ANYONE, however AIBU to say that the whole non Binary trend (for want of a better word) is getting abit out of hand??
If someone was born a man and chooses to transition to a woman or vice versa I understand that, but to say you don't identify as having a gender... I just don't understand it?! I am female but have never been girly - I didn't have dolls, I despise pink, and I always played football with the guys, climbed trees and was very sporty. But I'm still a girl. I know boys who didn't necessarily like "boyish" things but they're still boys. Any girl or boy can like anything they like.
Now we have "non binary" people who SAY they don't identify as one gender or the other, yet some of them are born female, wear make up and dresses. So following typically "girly" or "feminine" characteristics. Or those who have a sex change and THEN say they're non binary?! So then why have the sex change?!
AIBU to think this is just another way to ruffle people's feathers and possibly attention seeking?
(I wait in anticipation for being called ignorant and a biggot etc...)

Today 17:56 SoupDragon

I wonder why it would be so important to someone to hide what sex they are?^

I do agree but it has made me think: why is it so important for someone to know what sex another person is? If there is no pressing reason to know, why does it matter

I find this exceptionally interesting. I was confronted by somebody whose sex I could not immediately ascertain. I found it very uncomfortable.

Because I didn't know how to treat them.

All my social markers were gone. I couldn't filter everything they said through the goggles of my preconceived notion of sex.

I didn't like it.

In terms of dating, I completely agree the person's sex is very important. To me, it's a bit of a must. I'm not wasting my time with someone whose sex I am not oriented towards. And I am not interested in trying to overcome my orientation.

But socially, I'm uncomfortable with not knowing.

I'm assuming that this slightly goes against the grain of feminism.

I could only hope that, given I would want to know the person's sex, it would mean I might treat them differently, but equally.

It must be something to do with being a member of your own sex. As it were. I find I have a shorthand with women that I do not have with men. Certain things are just known. Assumed. An eye roll is worth a thousand words, etc.

You need to know whether the manly looking woman is trans (so actually a man) so you can complain that she's in the women's bathroom/changing room/brownie unit, if we just let people live their lives and responded to actual problems rather than potential for problems, 9 times out of 10 everything would be fine.

Loops, do you understand that male violence is an actual thing?

people would be a lot better off if we just treated others as 'another person' but the predominant argument seems to be that you need to know, so that you can treat them differently. You need to know whether the manly looking woman is trans (so actually a man) so you can complain that she's in the women's bathroom/changing room/brownie unit, if we just let people live their lives and responded to actual problems rather than potential for problems, 9 times out of 10 everything would be fine

That's lovely and something to aim for, unfortunately all around the world sex and biology does matter, especially to females. Do you honestly think -worldwide - that women and girls can really afford to adopt that attitude?

Have you seen the huge response from women to Kelly Oxford's experience of sexual assault?

I'm assuming that this slightly goes against the grain of feminism.

Ha, you're right, I was reading your post and tripping over apparent contradictions but there's a kind of level playing field thing going on which I think explains why we feel we need to know.

sylvia thanks, no I didn't know, funnily enough we never learnt about it when looking at feminism, now I know so thank you :)

pencils what is unconvincing about "fed is best" it's not an ideology, it's about making sure all babies are fed and don't get brain damage or die from dehydration. That seems like a pretty reasonable goal. For example, hypernatremic dehydration can occur in infants who lose 7% of their birthweight, which is around half of exclusively breastfed newborns. In the UK babies won't be 'treated' until they lose 10% of their birthweight, which is going to be a lot worse for babies already experiencing negative effects at a 7% weight loss. Fed is best doesn't care HOW a baby is fed, just that they are fed enough.

BFing is great, but it isn't actually free, although if the government make more cuts to benefits (including healthy start) then it may be a lot more important than it currently is (infant formula being free for low income families).

The discordant sibling study (above) shows that socioeconomic status is a much higher predictor for differences in health and future success than breastfeeding.

UNICEF work in many countries where breastfeeding is much much more important than it is in the UK in 2017. Unless they were actually talking about the UK.

Breastfeeding does save the NHS money, which is good, although it would be interesting to look at readmission rates for breastfed newborns (for weight loss, jaundice etc...) and whether they are included in the cost/benefit analysis.

'But socially, I'm uncomfortable with not knowing.

I'm assuming that this slightly goes against the grain of feminism.'

I don't think so. If it is not obvious to me that someone is male or female, I'm going to put them into the male box in terms of their risk to me.

In terms of this flat, the women in the flat opted to be in a mixed flat (single sex was an available choice), and there are no shared bathrooms. It's a very different situation to removing women's spaces.

I agree sylvia.

I don't mind admitting that I will act differently with men and women.
I often smile and have women smile at me in public, being of a "certain " age, and feel an affinity.
I am often less guarded with women strangers, more inclined to touch them, to be warmer, offer a little more closeness, smile and laugh more, make a knowing off the cuff comment than I do with men.
The majority of men in my experience are more likely to interpret these signals of closeness in a sexual way or a come on.

pencils Of course, but I don't assume that every man I see is going to be a perpetrator of it, so I don't assume that the trans woman going into the bathroom to pee is there to attack women. I use judgement, social cues, situational judgement, to keep myself as safe as possible. That judgement doesn't mean I am anxious about a trans woman in a bathroom, or a trans woman being a guide leader. I do understand that someone may be uncomfortable with a trans woman in a bathroom, due to their own experiences with male violence, that's awful, but I don't think it's a reason to not allow trans women to use bathroom.

Isn't it statistically more likely for a woman to be attacked by someone she knows than a stranger? Or is that something I'm making up in my head (it may be, just seeing what other people think)

judgement, social cues, situational judgement, to keep myself as safe as possible.

So it's up to us to keep our wits about us to avoid attack?

Wouldn't it be easier just to keep men out of women's spaces like toilets and women's prisons?

I don't think it's entirely a woman's responsibility (and of course an assault or attack is not a woman's fault or failing) but to negate any self-awareness on the part of woman isn't great either. Am I unusual to not regard every male person I come across as a potential threat? Should I be more concerned about my male friends?

There are men in women's prisons, like male staff or male prison guards, the power dynamic there is more concerning than the potential risk from a small number of trans women. Unless you think trans women are statistically more of a risk than cis men.

I wouldn't have a problem with all bathrooms being a single room (or row of single rooms) that anyone can use, with a toilet, urinal, baby changing table, and sink all in there. But again, I might be alone in wanting that.

From the link I posted previously:

The "fed is best" organization supports the idea that babies should be fed formula during their first days if waiting for their mother's milk takes too long. This is motivated by the fact that being under fed can cause hypoglycemia and jaundice which can, in turn, lead to brain injury. However, what is unclear is the line between the normal 3-4 day waiting period for the mother's milk to come in and dangerous dehydration - which is incredibly difficult to diagnose in a newborn.

The practice of supplementing with formula in the first few days of life is in direct contrast with people who support exclusive breastfeeding. Breastfeeding advocates warn that offering formula to a newborn will make breastfeeding more difficult in the future. This is because the mother may not make adequate amounts of breastmilk if their breasts are not being emptied and also because the baby may prefer formula and refuse breastmilk.

Fed is best was started by Dr. del Castillo Hegyi, who lays out her motivation very clearly in an open letter on the website. Her own child suffered dehydration in the first few days of life and subsequently, has been diagnosed with multiple developmental challenges including autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and ADHD. Dr. del Castillo Hegyi has said that an early lack of feeding insult may be be linked to autism. (1) With respect to the link between a delay in feeding and ASD, there's no evidence for that. Delayed feeding has adverse consequences but labeling it a cause of autism is not supported by peer reviewed publications.

Meanwhile, hypernatremic dehydration affects 2.5 / 10,000 babies - that's 0.025%, and few experience long term damage. Good article here which points out most of these cases could be avoided with decent BF support which we don't currently have.

Infant formula may be free but bottles are not, sterilising equipment is not, a working kitchen is not, fuel to boil the kettle is not. Have you read any of the food bank threads on here? The very reasons BF is much safer in developing countries are becoming alarmingly prevalent in the UK.

Breastfeeding does save the NHS money, which is good, although it would be interesting to look at readmission rates for breastfed newborns (for weight loss, jaundice etc...) and whether they are included in the cost/benefit analysis.

Of course they will be included! If nothing else, NICE are hard-nosed number-crunchers.

We get it, you don't think BF is important. You don't think maternity rights are important. With that in mind I'm not sure I can be bothered to pick through any more of your notions about gender.

This is a massive derail and so I won't post about BF again on this thread.

Unless you think trans women are statistically more of a risk than cis men

In the context of a women's prison, they may well be if they were imprisoned for an offence of violence or of a sexual nature.

And certainly more of a risk than prison staff!!

They would be there as convicts.

Isn't it statistically more likely for a woman to be attacked by someone she knows than a stranger?

It's statistically drastically more likely for a woman to be attacked by a biological male.

Which is why we have always had sex segregated spaces.

Loops are you in favour of just letting all men into women's spaces then? After all, most of them are lovely and if we just use our 'judgement, social cues, situational judgement, to keep ourselves as safe as possible' what could go wrong?

.

I don't think it's entirely a woman's responsibility (and of course an assault or attack is not a woman's fault or failing) but to negate any self-awareness on the part of woman isn't great either.

This is why we have women-only spaces, and why I don't want to hear your complaints.

Loop's illogical arguments and views, peppered with lols and rising inflections and 'basicallys', reveal well why women are being thrown under the bus by trans ideology.

Loops. This isn't about bring scared we are going to be attacked by TW in public loos. It's rapists and violent male prisoners bring sent to women's prisons. Having their often violent and sexually violent crimes reported as being committed by women. TW competing and winning in women's sports etc. It's about males getting to redifine what being a "woman" is - this actually really pisses me off. I've seen women thrown out of women's/feminist groups for daring to question or even discuss this as the TW join in in the insults of said women.

And many if us were totally pro trans like you until recently, until we started to think and question as more and more unbelievable demands and claims were being made.

Just keep an open mind and try not totally immerse yourself in an echo chamber.

For someone who studied midwifery you have an alarming lack of interest in the damage to women's bodies caused by birth. I nearly died, twice. That's why there is a biological component to maternity leave.

And i've been sexually assaulted and threatened many times by strangers though i understand many women know their rapists.

I'm not particularly bothered about sharing a bathroom with a transwoman. I am very bothered about it becoming obligatory to allow any man who says they are a woman access to the women's toilets. Because of course it would not only be genuinely transgender people who made use of this opportunity.

That's why there is a biological component to maternity leave.

Very true. PND is something that huge numbers of women suffer from, too. Debilitating them for months or years in some cases. Men don't get PND.

I'm on another thread at the moment where someone is questioning some of the statistics over transgender crime. A poster has linked to a study on transwomen prisoners.

They are represented at the same percentage as men. But it would appear that they are significantly more likely to have committed sexual crime as opposed to any crime, and they are very much significantly higher in terms of mental health issues.

So yeah, they do actually pose more of a threat than men in general.

Anyone who has spent five minutes talking to a transactivist will not be surprised.

And I'm very glad I'm not going headlong against the feminist grain in wanting to know the sex of someone I'm talking to. Quite apart from the safety issue, I just do. No apologies.

Gender is a recent social construct. There are 2 sexes male and female. A very very small minority of people are intersex or have ambiguous genitalia. The rest is sexual stereotyping bullshit of the I'm really a woman because I like pink sparkly stuff and hate football" variety.

Is it though Rebecca? And how recent?

All higher primates display gendered behaviour.

Is gender always a negative thing?

The pink sparkly/football is vastly over simplifying things.