Totally twisting a quote to help your argument.

I do acknowledge your point of view though and think you are an amazing writer. I enjoy reading your stuff most of the time. This article just irritates me.
Each to their own I guess.

This having been said, I enjoyed the article and think there were some good points, very eloquently made.

May I also suggest that you present your opinions in a less aggressive way. Most writers like to get feedback on their articles, however when they contain personal insults it is very unlikely they will be taken as valid comments to be responded to.

As an example, terms like “crossdresser” and “drag queen” have different sexuality implications (heterosexual, and homosexual), though those norms often don’t hold up in practice. As people begin to understand gender is not sexuality, I imagine it’ll be less necessary to create new language, for, say, a gay crossdresser, a bisexual drag queen, whatever. When people understand gender is not gender presentation, the existence of trans-man drag queens won’t be “strange” or “complex” or “hard to understand”.

If no one pushed those boundaries, I doubt “LGBT” would be a term people would understand. One of my older friends said “dyke” in her youth pretty much meant non-human. Sometimes new words are necessary for understanding to evolve.

I hear you on some fronts. I “appropriate myself” by using language I don’t identify with, so others can understand. But, I disagree with your premise that people need to choose language that the mainstream “can understand”. Using one’s own language [so long as in good faith -- not calling yourself something you're not] for one’s gender/sexuality/romantic self is everyone’s prerogative.

As far as “LGBTQQIA2″ (plus-or-minus poly, kink, fetish) being a mouthful, there’s the term GRSMs — gender, romatic, and sexual minorities. It’s inclusive. I highly recommend it . From another angle, your characterization of including more minorities than LGBT as “absurd” sounds small-minded to me.

As far as gender-neutral pronouns never “taking off” … I hope you’re wrong. I’m going to try it, someday.

Both concepts are based on the notion that an essential biological binary exists to differentiate human beings into two camps, in this case: male and female. However, this perspective is based in the false belief that there are two overwhelmingly common combinations of: a) genital size and shape b) reproductive organ functionality and c) hormones. That’s simply not true.

Though it is quite difficult for some to think about sex as anything other than “fact”, this view isn’t useful in terms of trying to undo binary thinking with regards to gender. The definitions above keep coming back to the idea of a spectrum, and of fitting somewhere between the poles of “man” and “woman”. The notion of a circle might be more useful, but I think a deeply embedded faith in the binary of “sex” really gets in the way of this more creative–and arguably more realistic–way of thinking about gender (and of course, sex).

“Intersex” does not need to be regarded as between male and female. Intersex people are, and can be, defined as of a completely different, new “sex”, without reference to these two terms and medical standards we’ve created. Despite what the title of this article claims, there aren’t enough labels (the possible but still limited categories of “asex”, “bisex”, “transsex”, “sexqueer” and “sexfuck” are all collapsed into the singular “Intersex” here), but then lables aren’t always necessary or useful.

Dismantling gender and sex norms and normativity might be easier if we start by questioning existing frameworks (which is really difficult! But potentially revolutionary!)

Thanks!

Basically what she’s saying, if I understand it, is that once ‘anything goes’ in regards to ‘labels’. It gets over the top, confusing, and impossible for others to take the person and their cause seriously.

As an example is the GLBT acronym, which is getting out of hand since they keep adding more letters to it. Or they are reversing which letters go where(LGBT vs GLBT) and people in the community get up in arms over the ‘right’ order to use the acronym. I’ve always looked at the LBT part as similar to BLT, thus reminding me of a hamburger. “Would you like a BLT?”. It flows well and is easy to remember in that case.

Meanwhile LGBT takes away the LBT part and sounds awkward and their are no words that go together with GBT that I can think of that would flow well, compared to BLT/LBT. Anyway that’s my humorous way of looking at the GLBT order vs LGBT.

The added letters to the acronym are IQA, and their may be more by now. But those stand for Intersex, Queer, Ally, and Q also stands for Questioning, so sometimes QQ is added, or one Q stands for both words. Either way the acronym now looks like this LBTGAQQIU(U=undecided/unknown). It’s becoming absurd by this point, and the general public is not going to care about this stuff, since it’s more complicated than it needs to be.

Likewise, gender pronouns are becoming absurd as well with this ‘anything goes’ approach. Some people now want to be referred to as “Zi”, “Hir” and other strange made up words to be ‘gender neutral’. But outside of a college campus living in a bubble of like minded people waxing philosophical about gender ‘norms’ and ‘terms’. No one in the real word cares, and these terms will never take off, and everyone will be confused and laugh it off, rather than take it seriously.

So do these new made up words and phrases help or hurt the cause? That’s a good question, and something that should be discussed. But most people in the community would prefer to play victim and ‘whoa is me’ and expect everyone to not question new terms/phrases, and get offended when everyday people aren’t aware of the terms, and or very confused by them, and can’t grasp the vernacular. So in other words, it’s alienating which is never good.

I’m still a bit wary of the term ‘cis-gender’, since again the majority of people don’t know the term, and I hadn’t heard of it until a couple years ago. I’d just simply say ‘non-tg’ or ‘non-trangender’ if referring to a person that was not transgender. Most people could understand that, it’s simple. But ‘cis’ still sounds strange to me. Though I admit, I am getting used to people using the phrase now in my trans support and individual therapy sessions. However, it’s still not in my regular vocabulary(though who knows if one day it’ll slip into my daily language when discussing these things?).

So again, look at the list of endless gender terms the author posted. And you can see what a minefield it is and why it may do more harm than good. It’s just as exhausting as trying to read ‘PC’ versions describing trans-issues/information and they keep writing “if you would like more information about your Transgender, and non-gender binary, non-gender conforming, queer, questioning, intersex, androgynous, ambiguous,gender queer, gender fuck, gender variant,gender fluid, bi-gender, self identifying male to female, or self identifying female to male, transsexual,cross-dresser, transvestite, drag queen, un-cis-gender child/family member/significant other/partner,husband,wife,girlfriend,boyfriend then this pamphlet is for you, or if you are “Transgender, and non-gender binary, non-gender conforming, queer, questioning, intersex, androgynous, ambiguous,gender queer, gender fuck, gender variant,gender fluid, bi-gender, self identifying male to female, or self identifying female to male, transsexual,cross-dresser, transvestite, drag queen, un-cis-gender, then you will also love this pamphlet.

That’s a mouthful and I’ve seem some trans info websites and family ‘info’ packets starting to write in such a manner be to ‘inclusive’, and it’s just a huge confusing mouthful that’s tough to take in, especially for ‘regular’ people wanting simple information on this material.

I tried to have my mom read a tg info pamphlet found online that my therapist recommended, and it had a similar phrasing of every ‘gender-whatever’, and I had to tell my mom to just skip over every time they write ‘gender…(every term known to man). She was able to then find the non-excessively alienating wordy ‘inclusive’ paragraphs informative and easier to understand. But if she tried reading the above long winded phrases. She’d easily stop reading and caring for the material, since it’s not approachable in the least.

Thankfully, just me being myself is making her more accepting of myself than excessively wordy all ‘inclusive’ attempts to explain every gender variant term/aspect known to man. And when she tells someone about myself, she keeps it simple(and I never told her to phrase it this way, but it’s perfect)…”So in so is more comfortable being a woman” and people ‘get it’. It’s made coming out much simpler than the long winded wordy responses and endless terms and phrases people keep spewing with no end in sight.

So, while not everyone will like what I wrote. It’s always best to look at things from another perspective, in this case a person who is not-tg(etc, etc). Since far to often, we, the glbt community at large never consider how others view us and how to explain things to them, and instead act in offense and defensively at every little thing.

Just being down to earth, approachable is the best way to win people over. That’s what I’ve experienced so far in my life. Though I’m aware some people will never change, but oh well, that’s life.

Um. Excuse me? If someone identifies as “genderfuck”, that is just like identifying as “genderqueer”. However anyone identifies is their own self-actualization in this world that trains us to be one or another. To self-actualize in any other non-binary way is vulnerable, scary and courageous. There is only one way to properly respond to this: RESPECT. And that includes upholding one’s preferred pronouns, whatever they may be.

I find your opinions on this important matter greatly uninformed and disrespectful.

Further, while political identities are usually less personal than the multifaceted “gender identity” concept (which sometimes involves the body more than social roles, depending on who you talk to), I think they are also part of a person which should be respected. For example, you might say I’m a vegetarian partly for political reasons (saving the environment), but I would consider it disrespectful if you created an argument that my vegetarianism is not “useful” (perhaps, not effective at saving the environment — which here is mostly wrong, but you can pretend it isn’t so) and that I should change.

Where I agree with you is that people (mostly the commentators here) may be overstepping it in responding in a political, attacking manner to an argument that wasn’t so bellicose. We all have misconceptions, and if someone is clearly willing to be respectful (as the author mentioned, willing to respect others’ preferred pronouns), I think it’s unproductive to try and score political points on where they were wrong. Calling someone out is good, but not to the point where they are discouraged from speaking at all … if us genderqueers want more of the public to understand, or even acknowledge us more, I think we have to accept them talking about us, and sometimes not “getting it”.

What do you think people are supposed to do in a healthy debate when they disagree with something if not … say that they disagree?

Not sure where you’re getting the idea that she’s only talking to non-binary people who are “sticking two fingers up at society” – it reads to me like she thinks all non-binary people are doing that? Could you quote the bit where you think she’s distinguishing between people who are just minding their own business identifying as non-binary and people who are doing it to be oppositional?

Never have I had a bingo card fill up so quickly! “Choosing to be offended” (as though one cannot be offensive), “objectively” (as though emotions invalidates arguments; as though you yourself are not being emotional), “freeze peach” (as though we are in any way legally censoring this person; as though we’re in the US), and misuse of “then it’s not about you” (as though the bulk of non-binary folk are political-only and we’re just statistical outliers). Well done! *golf clap*

Also what happened to free speech? Can we not have a healthy debate about this? This is Not a ‘hate’ article! It merely poses some important questions that can be debated! I get that not binary people, and that includes myself,feel they are an easy target and clearly a minority, but can we drop the ‘poor me attitude’ and be allowed to ‘debate’ this!?

and the fact that Milly Shaw is not professional enough to back her writers who are expressing a valid opinion, in a constructive article…..don’t get me started!

But just because I wear a lot of male clothes and essentially have taken over the “male role” in my own (straight, mind you) relationship does not make me any less of a woman, and I’d really appreciate it if this whole gender=gender roles thing bit the dust already.

Firstly, biologically, it’s hard to insist there are two very distinct sexes with no in-between, when depending on how you define it around 0.1 to 1.7% of children are born intersex. (to be clear I know this isn’t the same thing as a non-binary identity).

Secondly, while specific identities don’t map well to other cultures, there are a huge variety of both historic and current examples of societies and cultures around the world which have systems other than the two binary fixed genders that are prevalent in our society. Terms such as bissu (Indonesian), Fa’afafine (Samoan), nádleehí (Najavo), Ashtime (Maale) (I could list about 100….) all describe a variety of genders that probably wouldn’t fit a Western binary system. We could talk about ancient Metsopotamian creation myths referencing people who are not men or women, or look at the various complicated ways eunuchs were thought of in Roman society. All this evidence suggests our way of understanding gender is only one of many options.

Thirdly, gender roles and associations are hardly fixed and have changed drastically over time – for example the association of pink as a girls colour is relatively recent. The huge advances that feminism has made in changing attitudes mean that things that would once have been considered outrageous wouldn’t even be considered a political statement today. When was the last time you heard someone say “oh you’re a woman going to university, you must be making a political statement ”, for example. Yet the women of the 1880′s who wanted to attend university primarily to get an education had to make a political statement in order to do so because the understanding of gender roles in their society was so messed up.

In a similar way, I primarily want to live my life and contribute to my society, as a person who happens to be genderqueer, but because my culture believes such an unhelpful narrative about gender that I can’t, for example, apply for a bank account with my correct title, be referred to by the pronouns I feel comfortable with at work, or describe my gender accurately on my passport, I have to make a political statement to do so.
I’ll be delighted when I no longer have to. I’ll also STILL be genderqueer – my gender identity is based on what I feel in my heart and my head. I’m genderqueer because that’s who I am.

“Are we supposed to…accommodate all gender-related identities?” Pretty much. It is not an unreasonable thing to ask that your gender be respected in the language they use, such as use of correct pronouns. If a cis woman was cross that people kept calling her ‘he’ and ‘sir’ it would not be considered strange; of course she’s upset about it! Anyone would be! Unless, of course, you’re non binary. Then it’s folly to ask that people don’t misgender you, because you’re just too weird to be given the same courtesy that others take for granted.

“I would certainly be offended if someone asked whether I wanted to be referred to as he or she…because I would consider my appearance such that there is no question.” People consider my appearance such that there is no question, but that doesn’t make them right. You mention people who may appear ambiguously gendered, but in reality that is a standard most nonbinary people can’t wholly meet, whether because of lack of funds for desired surgery, or just not fitting the ‘standard model’ for androgyny: white, thin, short hair and masculine dress.

I am very disappointed (but not surprised, alas) that yet another person appears to have completely misunderstood nonbinary genders.

I’m not sure how you can speak to the dangers of stereotypes emerging for various non-binary labels when within the first few sentences of this article you, indeed, stereotype all non-binary persons as “putting two fingers up to society” and being an inherent political statement. The myriad of experiences in the comments section are proof that’s not true. If those in activist circles cannot be trusted to veer away from creating stereotypes, who can?

Further, as a cis female, I’d be perfectly fine with someone asking my preferred pronouns. Condemning those who ask is backwards-thinking and puts your personal inconvenience over the acceptance and well-being of an entire spectrum of people.

I do endeavour, at great stress to myself, to ‘fit in’ with a binary gender – I don’t demand or even ask that others use pronouns other that the one that can be assumed from my appearance outside of certain queer spaces where it is acceptable to do so. I am not even ‘out’ to most people and this article makes it less likely that I ever will be. I don’t think there is a solution or that society will ever accept me for who I really am. All I ask is a small space where I can be myself – a space that you and those who think like you would take away from me. You are not content with nearly the whole world, you would have everything, and would prefer, no doubt, that I simply not exist.

> rigid gender rules are the problem; they are prescriptive when they needn’t be … women (and men) have been challenging the rules for centuries without these labels

Sure. But if you haven’t experienced being perceived as a different gender, expressed identification with a gender other than what was assigned to you at birth, or experienced having people being unsure, confused, or uncomfortable about your gender, don’t speak for those who have. It’s a different thing than being a stay-at-home dad or working mom. Having and using language for different gender experiences and identities it is appropriate.

> So do we then only ask for preferred pronouns when we feel that we can’t confidently assume male or female? This doesn’t seem right either because we don’t want non-binary gendered people to feel that they are only being asked for their preferred pronoun simply because they don’t fit in with our idea of “male” and “female”; this serves to exclude them more.

I’ve heard a diversity of experiences in the genderqueer community; some people would like to be asked, others feel uncomfortable (for me, especially if those conversations turn into “are you a man or a woman? no really, which one? but, you look like an X to me …”).

As a genderqueer-identified person, I agree with you that asking everyone’s pronoun is impractical in our society. For better or worse, I don’t do it. But, I’m aware of how uncomfortable it is to ask, and hope in the future it could be more acceptable to ask, and for queer folks to ask to be referred to differently. I think part of that would be facilitated if cisgender and some binary transgender people (e.g. Julia Serano) wouldn’t be offended when asked, at least if the person asking is trying to be sensitive about the existence of genderqueers.

> don’t expect me to take you seriously if you decide that your gender is “genderfuck”

I don’t like the label either — it seems flippant for something that’s personally significant to me, but I don’t pass my judgments onto others’ choice of words. I guess I can see how “fuck”, if
interpreted as “messing with the system” than sexual or seriously destructive, can describe some experiences.

when i want to make a political statement about gender or gender roles, i discuss those topics with other people, or i make art about it. what i identify as, on the contrary, is something i have to keep to myself more often than i really want to, and one of the main reasons for that is because of disrespectful, othering, yet still prevailing attitudes such as what is portrayed by the author of this article here.

i sincerely hope she thinks twice and maybe will actually talk to the people she’s writing about before publishing anything else on identities she does not understand.

no love,
a nonbinary person

If you look back at articles written 10 years ago about bisexuals as well as attitudes about them in lesbian circles I am seeing a lot of cross over. In a non-binary way of course.

I think what is helpful is to remember that people are feeling more comfortable and confident to express their gender identities in a more fluid way and people should be given the space to do so. In the same way that fluidity with sexuality is finally starting to become more accepted in UK society.

The younger generation challenges these outdated ways of thinking and as an extended queer community we all need to give one another space to express, love and to be however we choose.

Some people change and experiment with gender as they might do with sexuality – why should this be an issue when groups of people aren’t harming anyone in the process?

I feel that gender is perceived as a ‘threat’ to some and I haven’t quite grasped that.

It turns out that Meg Barker’s article quite clearly and sensitively explains that those of us with nonbinary identities are people who don’t fit into the gender binary, a small but significant minority of trans* and/or intersex people who are unable to feel comfortable with living as either their assigned gender or the other binary alternative. The article discusses several ways that we, as a diverse group, have found language that authentically expresses our genders (or lack of gender) and pronouns that respect them. Talks about the difficulties of doing this and how gender clinics are gradually recognising the validity of our experiences and helping those of us who need it to access treatment for our gender dysphoria.

I’ve written a longer critical and personal response to Hattie’s article on Practical Androgyny here:
http://practicalandrogyny.com/2013/09/21/lesbilicous-writer-asks-how-helpful-nonbinary-gender-is/

I hope Hattie will think again about nonbinary gender, and re-read Meg Barker’s excellent DIVA article, this time without the apparent assumption that the people described experience gender in the same way that she does.

* The author of this piece genuinely believes what she wrote.
* This post is clickbait.

Trick question! Both ways involve shitting on marginalised people for no reason at all!

You start off by arguing that rigid gender rules are the problem and that no-one would need non-binary labels if there were no rules connected to the genders “male” and “female”. Except that you then go on to argue that it would be laughable and offensive for anyone to ask you for your preferred pronoun because it’s obvious from your appearance. That, there, is a rigid gender rule: if you appear a particular way, people must assume you’re female (and of course, only people who fit that rule get to automatically be treated as female). In fact, in practice it’s a whole bunch of gender rules covering facial shape and build, clothes, hairstyles, body language…

If rejecting rigid gender rules was really the solution to non-gender binary people’s problems (which it isn’t), then by your own argument you personally are part of the problem by enforcing those rules. In fact, this in itself a major issue: essentially everyone I’ve seen who’s proposed this as a solution is so deeply reliant on binary gender and all the rules and roles that go with it that they don’t even think about the fact they’re doing so.

Meh, my point stands.

Like other commenters, I’m not genderqueer because I’m trying to make some kind of anti-establishment statement about how shit binary gender essentialism is. I mean, yes, it is, but I could have done that without, as you so kindly point out, opening myself up to ridicule.

I came out as genderqueer after over two decades of agonising about my gender identity, unable to fit into any of the binary boxes available: stick with the assigned-at-birth gender identity that I’m dysphoric about? Transition to the other binary option and still feel not-right? That was it for years.

I’m painfully aware that my gender identity is an easy target. Coming out at work was awkward and has involved compromises for the sake of professional convenience.

Introducing myself to self-proclaimed queer allies who then say that “aren’t comfortable with” non-gendered pronouns? Yeah, fun.

(Hell, grammar nerd though I am, even I get tired of providing supporting evidence for the use of “they” as a singular pronoun.)

The git at the pub after an old-school punk gig who, when he twigs my original gender from my voice, starts insistently referring to me by it in the most demeaning way possible? Good times.

Feeling, and occasionally being made to feel, that I don’t belong in the wider trans* community, or deserve to have my rights campaigned for as part of that community? Hi-fucking-larious.

Feeling the need to justify my gender identity by bringing up a medical condition which gives me physical, hormonal and neurological attributes that differ to those associated with my reproductive organs? (Note: this shouldn’t matter one way or the other.) Oh, how we laughed.

So yes, I’m quite aware that people may not “take me seriously”.

And, upsetting as it is when they – and you – decide I’m not to be taken seriously, that my gender identity is some kind of attention-grabbing phase or social statement, I really couldn’t give a monkey’s whether I’m “effective” when it comes to “challenging traditional gender roles”.

I personally think that the acceptance of gender as a sliding scale (think of the kind of thing Kinsey did for sexuality) would help when it came to challenging traditional gender roles, but I’ve not the least interest in being a guinea pig for that argument. If this were a choice, I assure you that I’d really rather not have the hassle of it intruding into my already complex personal and professional life.

I identify as genderqueer because it’s the only gender identity I’ve lived with which hasn’t made me feel as though I’m tearing myself apart or denying an important aspect of myself on some deep level. It’s what fits. It’s what I am.

And quite frankly, it’s not for you to tell me I’m wrong based on your own fictitious notion of what gender-variant people’s feelings and aims must be.

I apologise if comparing sexual orientation and gender identity came off badly. What I meant was that I suspect that Hattie Jacobs would recognise that any straight woman who found it offensive to be asked whether her partner was male or female would come across as extremely anti-lesbian. I think Hattie Jacobs saying that it would be offensive if anyone asked her about her preferred gender pronouns is the same dynamic: what’s she’s basically saying is “ew, don’t confuse me with THOSE people.” I think what she’s said in that paragraph is pretty horrible and transphobic.

I hope that’s clearer – I apologise for the ambiguous first comment!

Being asked what gender your significant other is – if you are playing the gender game and using ambiguous reference terms out of respect to their wishes, being coy, what have you – that’s not a wholly rude question, but that is my personal opinion.

Further, I suggest you look to the experiences of femme lesbians who are constantly doubted and seen as “not enough” in women-only spaces as not fitting in in regards to your question of women to whom it “should be obvious” to tell their sexual orientation. Also, as a gentle reminder, gender identity does not equate sexual orientation.

(Unless you meant something else?)

I’m not trying to radically overhaul society (though that might be nice!) I’m just trying to quietly live my life in a genuine, comfortable manner with terms that I choose.

I wonder how the author would feel about a straight woman being offended by someone asking what gender her partner is, because she thinks it ought to be obvious from looking at her that she’s not a lesbian?

I don’t need you to point out that my identity as non-binary is “ripe for satire” – I know that better than you do, considering I live it every day and it’s rare that I find a place I can be comfortable and surrounded by people who understand.

The title of this piece is argumentative and is one-sided to begin with. I don’t want nor aim for my gender identity to be a political statement, as you seem to think it is. I am not giving “two fingers up to society,” merely trying to live my life. It is abundantly clear you didn’t speak with anyone who identifies as something other than the binary. Congratulations on making assumptions on an entire group of people based solely on your personal opinion.

I honestly don’t know what to say to the fact you would feel insulted of someone asking for your preferred pronouns. You assume people should be able to tell you are female solely by your dress and presumably, lack of facial hair. Asking for pronouns doesn’t exclude people, if anything, it’s a sign of respect extended by the party asking. It may feel extremely silly to you but it’s a welcome thing for lots of people – transgender folks, trans men and women (especially those who are unable to afford hormone therapy), dare I say, butch lesbians?

Gender is inherent. Gender identity is not about the box society puts you into based on your chromosomes, your dress or manner of speech. The fact that a number of people feel safe enough to truly be themselves in today’s world is a sign of safer times, not something to be mocked or questioned with humor simply because you can’t grasp the concept.

I also don’t get the impression you’ve actually *asked* many genderqueer/non-binary people whether they find it marginalising to be asked which gender pronoun they prefer, or have you just decided that they’d feel excluded if you did that? It looks like your argument is a lot like, “God, I don’t want anyone treating ME like I’m non-binary, that would be gross. So I’m not going to find out how anyone else would like to be treated, because I’ve already decided that *I* would find it gross.”

As another cis female person, I’d find it trivially easy to say, “I’m fine with ‘she’” if someone asked me what gender pronouns I preferred. But I also don’t think *my* opinion on what’s easiest and politest is as important as the opinion of someone who is trans, genderqueer and/or non-binary. Why on earth would cis people’s offended feelings be prioritised?

Also, it seems you are offended when someone questions your gender (by asking which pronouns you prefer), while simultaneously questioning the genders of thousands of people.