If you're non-binary...

[danyellspanyell]

What does it mean? What does it mean to you?

I'm not looking for GC responses to this - the GC take is obvious. I genuinely want to understand what this means.

This came up on my Instagram and the comments were full of people saying they have the same struggle and I honestly can't get my head round what it actually means to be non-binary, particularly if you're happy 'presenting' as a woman (which you biologically are).

What material impact does this non-binary-ness have on your life?

What term, or phrasing, would you prefer?

I'd prefer it didnt need one, personally. I appreciate that's optimistic.

I don't think you are being "policed" so much as held to account and sometimes challenged. Unless we are all clear about used terms and assigned meanings then we'll not get very far.

I dont mind being challenged but as I've said from the beginning of this thread, there is one rule for one and one for another.

Did you actually read my post? Did you notice where I am talking in general terms about how weak the concept is which is why people are saying to you that they find your explanations 'incoherent'?

Just because you believe that you have found a coherent description of non-binary from your discussions and readings, doesn't actually mean that you HAVE found a coherent description that you can then put into words for others. I and others who have similarly commented have not found your description coherent.

Should we not tell you this?

And again. Please indicate where I have 'spoken for all'? Please be specific.

'Should' carries the weight of a moral imperative.

I appreciate your anecdote comment but if you've decided that most of these people are attention seeking I'm not sure why I'm expected to provide data.

Did I ask you to provide data? It's my personal view, based on my own experience. It's not just a handful of idiots.

Okay hello.
You're right I'm wrong, you know everything, I know nothing. Well done.

I'd prefer it didnt need one, personally. I appreciate that's optimistic.

Not optimistic, unrealistic.

You said anecdotes didnt make data and dismissed my views based on that.

So yes.

I did go down a bit of a rabbit hole on this previously, looking up on some charity sites for definition of these terms - NB, agender, gender fluid - and none of them could define any of the terms in anyway definitively, there weren’t a few choices, there were many. These terms mean all things to all people. And god forbid you would define a word and exclude someone.

it is therefore impossible to have a meaningful conversation about NB cos these words have so many meanings they mean nothing.

Doesnt it.
But since it was @Helleofabore who said that, who can use them but nobody else can, your point is moot.

NB etc

You said anecdotes didnt make data and dismissed my views based on that.

So yes.

Well yes, I don't give your views, based on your experience, primacy over mine, based on my own. That wouldn't be particularly rational, would it.

So, do you think people SHOULD be shamed for not using people's chosen pronouns? Yes or no?

Your claimed experience based on your own perception I should say.

I've already answered that question. No.
I believe they should, but I wouldnt shame anyone. Hope that fits to your standards.

Because language is about power, and about who or what gets to determine reality or to name it. Queer Theory and other post modernist theories put language at the front and centre.

QT suggests that there is no reality apart from the reality of the individual and the meanings they create - so in challenging certain uses of language, and therfore meaning, they can revolutionise society.

WTAF?

You mean exactly like yours is? And everyone on these boards?

Why are you dismissing my experiences and beliefs and holding your experiences superior?

Thank you RebelliousCow.

Because language is about power, and about who or what gets to determine reality or to name it. Queer Theory and other post modernist theories put language at the front and centre.

QT suggests that there is no reality apart from the reality of the individual and the meanings they create - so in challenging certain uses of language, and therfore meaning, they can revolutionise society.

Exactly this.

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'

Great. So we agree? YAY!

Why are you dismissing my experiences and beliefs and holding your experiences superior?

Because that's what people do. They trust their own perception. Rightly or wrongly. But you haven't managed to come up with any arguments which convince me that I'm wrong.

I think this centering of the feelings of individuals is where the main divergence is arising. Society is not organised around people's feelings.

Plus, feelings are not always reliable; they come and go; chop and change. They are often not the best guide for action.