Let’s see how many people I can piss off today…
A couple days ago, I went to look at an advertised page that looked interesting. I filled out the questionnaire until I got to the part about my gender. The choices were “male,” “female,” or “non-binary.” And that’s where I lost interest. And of course, I commented and told them so.
Someone responded this morning with, “OK boomer.” I laughed at their comment because, really? I did, however, resist the urge to correct it to “Okay, boomer.” But I digress…
If one has lady parts, so to speak, one is a female; if one has boy parts, one is a male. That’s it. Period. One may “feel” like either or neither, but feelings don’t count in biology—as an aside, these are often the same people who claim feelings have no part in science.
As another aside, I saw a meme recently that stated that archeologists only ever find or put together or extrapolate that ancient bodies are either male or female, not the new fad of “non-binary.”
Yes, I’m saying it’s a fad. A trend.
Look, I don’t care what gender you’re attracted to, I think all people are attracted to others in one way or another regardless of gender. Some embrace it, some reject it, some fight it, and some are just assholes about the whole issue.
Additionally, we are all the sum of our parts—simply because you might feel “manly” for a day because, perhaps, you’re doing traditionally “manly” things, it doesn’t mean you’re part male. Or vice versa. Heck, when I was a kid, I wanted Hot Wheels for Christmas; I also played with Barbies. Now, I do all kinds of things that often are considered male or female jobs. Still doesn’t make me non-binary, I’m still a female.
Biologically speaking, you’re one or the other, regardless of “feelings.” Feelings are fleeting and changeable and vary according to, well, one’s feelings. Someone once told me that there are four basic feelings: sad, mad, glad, and afraid. All the rest are more subtle words to describe those feelings, shades of gray.
Feelings don’t make the person, and they certainly don’t make the gender. If you’re mad one day, that doesn’t make you an angry person; if you’re sad one day it doesn’t mean you’re depressed.
And for heaven’s sake, stop using “they” as “your” pronoun. It sounds stupid. It IS stupid. “They” is plural, always has been, always will be. If you call yourself a “they,” I’m going to assume you were diagnosed with multiple personality disorder and that there are several of you running around inside your head.
Also, if you look like a female (or male), I’m going to refer to you as a girl or woman (or boy or man) and if you take offense at that, I’m sorry, but HOW, exactly, is anyone to know what you “prefer” to be called? Maybe you should wear a sign around your neck unless you prefer someone greet you with, “Hi, what are you?”
Do you all remember when most professional writing used the pronoun “he” to refer to unknown persons in an article or story? Then it all changed to “he or she,” which is awkward, or sometimes he/she. You know, because women are important too. I get that. Often, now, a writer will alternate the two, sometimes saying “he” and sometimes “she.” That can be confusing, but it’s much less awkward.
Now, many of you probably believe it’s because of PATRIARCHY, and while that may have had something to do with it a few centuries ago, as most writers were indeed men and women often had to use male pseudonyms in order to be taken seriously, it’s actually because the population is not divided equally. It’s something along the lines of 51% male and 49% female; hence, the use of “he.”
Oh, one more thing. You can call me a boomer. I don’t care, but just so you know, I was born in 1964 so I barely made the cut…
Amen, Sista! I agree.
Sorry, but you’re on the wrong side of this issue. You are looking at gender as a biologically determined, physiological state. That IS one way to look at it, but not the only way. Many leading social sciences and most current feminist theorists are using the terms as a social construct to describe normative behavior and social role expectations.
Your biological definition of gender is valid. However, negating the validity of the social construct use of this discussion is inherently flawed in that it belligerently refuses to acknowledge the serious social inequities in play that prompted the evolution of the terms being discussed in the first place.
The publication that I am starting will use the plural “they” as a default, and will use any preferred gender (when stated) of any person we quote.
Nope, but thanks for playing! Your social construct issue is wrong, along with the rest of your “edgy” suppositions. Super glad you know how to use a thesaurus, but all your collegiate posturing will come to an end one day. Much like the current fad of substituting an “x” at the end of Spanish words, like Latino or Latina, to attempt to further increase your feelings of superiority and mash all genders into one. Your so-called publication is probably not one I’d read anyway, since you insist on using improper grammar and asking individuals to interpret their “preferences.” Your response is ridiculous, in spite of your obvious effort to appear educated and trendy.
It has a lot to do with body parts, if you consider chromosomes as parts. X or Y? Which are you? 😀
Because body parts can be removed but each part will have chromosomes that match all the rest of the body.
Really, if “he” is the neuter pronoun, I cannot see why we all have such a problem with neutering all the “he’s”. Just sayin’.
I agree. And I still consider this way of thinking a fad at best.
LikeLiked by 1 person