Talk:Non-binary gender

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon gender.svg

This Gender related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


Archives for this talk page: , (new)

A little thought[edit]

As long as non-binary people are nice, I will be nice back. I hold no prejudice, although I am still a bit confused with the whole thing but am willing to learn. If someone can explain to me, please put it in terms where someone who never met a non-binary person can understand --Racia zombio94 (talk) 19:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Rationalzombie94 Any particular point of the article you're stuck on? --Zoe Kirk (talk) 07:28, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Criticism section[edit]

Rough storm pirate.png Ahoy, matey!
Beware, for there be a great sea of
Concern Troll Bullshit ahead!

Ehh, the whole section reads as a single editor's strawman. I know this isn't Wikipedia, and there's a lot more latitude for style, but this is such an over-the-top misrepresentation of a critical look at the topic as to strain the credibility of the entire article. Unless someone can put something a bit more reasonable in its place, it would be better off simply removed. (talk) 16:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Why I'm deleting the criticism section[edit]

  • It repeatedly claims there's no scientific evidence for non-binary genders, which is false, and does so without sources.
  • It implicitly adopts the perspective in some sections that NB people are identifying as such for attention, before half-heartedly countering it.
  • It then also implicitly adopts the perspective that NB people are doing it because it's a trend, before half-heartedly countering it.
  • It wraps up with essentially the old position of "I don't get trans people, but sure, they can dress however they want."

Please do not revert the edit. This is an out-dated and offensive section which doesn't really serve its purpose. It's been the subject of controversy, too. I just don't think this section does what the person who wrote it thinks its doing. Why should we doubt how someone personally identifies? Why should we offer skepticism one someone says something like, "I don't identify as a man or a woman"? That's not skepticism; it's cynicism. Even if it was written with good intentions, this does a terrible job of defending from criticism, all it actually does is attract it. If we want a "criticism" section (which is an interested word choice for what is bigotry), we can do a lot better. But I'm not convinced such a section is warrented. Please do not revert the edit. Monochroma (talk) 01:26, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps a section refuting common "objections" can be made. I think DuceMoosolini's edits were a good start, in that regard. Vee (talk) 01:37, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Binarism invented by colonialist invaders[edit]

I deleted the line "In a nutshell: colonialist invaders created the gender binary" because, as I explained in the summary, not all indigenous tribes have two-spirits, and even those that did often still categorized the people in question based on their assigned sex at birth. For example, in many societies, a non-binary gender role was open to AMAB people but not AFAB people. I'm pretty sure every culture ever documented has had gendered social categories of some kind. Someone reverted my edit with no summary. If this page is going to make an extraordinary claim like "no indigenous peoples anywhere ever had a gender binary before it was introduced by colonialist invaders," I think there should at least be a source.Madeleine (talk) 16:06, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

The Western version of the gender binary was introduced by invading colonizers and forced onto indigenous peoples. Carthage (talk) 18:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
(EC) I think what Carthage says is more accurate. There are many cultures globally that had more than two gender categories or allowed for individuals to change their gendered status culturally because the way they thought about gender was often more about social role than whatever sex organs you had. Yes, it still true that many cultures even some pre-colonized ones only recognized two genders. Many of these cultures that were colonized that had more than two gender categories or allowed for cross-gender identities still ended up being forced by entities like the catholic church to assign gender on the basis of sex as “God intended”. Similar things happened to cultures previously tolerant of homosexuality. It still needs to be reflected that non-binary gender systems were relatively normal, present in various cultures around Africa, India, and many parts of South East Asia prior to colonial contact. Western cultures may not have “invented” the gender-binary but they were the most widespread and ruthless enforcers of it - mostly rationalized through narratives of “Adam & Eve” and viewing “sodomy” as signifying a culture as inherently “irrational”. This is why some academics tie queerphobia to racism. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 19:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Gender roles are also influenced by culture. Among Eastern North American indigenous societies AFAB people were typically the farmers, and not AMAB people. This was actually used as a justification for colonialism, a sort of predecessor to white feminism serving as a tool for colonialist movements in the 19th and 20th centuries. The Classic Maya city state of Palenque had women as well as men honored as royal ancestors, and women served in positions of power (Lady Sak Kuk' being one example), but typically they were expected to step down as ruler/regent when the heir to the throne came of age to rule (which was 12 in ancient Mayan society) or their husbands were no longer ill or away at battle. Another example of cultural variation of gender and gender norms even within the classical gender binary is the tendency of otherwise patriarchal societies like the Jews to measure descent through the matrilineal line, as opposed to the patrilineal line of descent observed in Western cultures. Carthage (talk) 19:35, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

OK, I changed it to say that.Madeleine (talk) 19:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Rational criticism[edit]

Some vandals (Cosmikdebris and Ioe bidome) remove rational criticism of non-binary gender. Please punish these editors as they didn't give the reason for deleting my edition. Probably they don't understand what RationalWiki should be and how it calls itself (RationalWiki (RW) is a community working together to explore and provide information about a range of topics centered around science, skepticism, and critical thinking). You won't develop with such censors. Who needs this website if it's the same as Wikipedia? — Unsigned, by: Pawel.jamiolkowski / talk / contribs

"But I thought this was supposed to be RATIONALWiki!" Drink! Plutocow (talk) 18:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
  1. Adding a criticism section to an article about non-binary gender makes about as much sense as adding a criticism section to an article "African-American" or "man"
  2. The "criticism" was just the opinions of one guy.
  3. Islam and non-binary are not comparable. One is a gender identity while the other is a religion that has been used to justify homophobia and transphobia.
  4. See RW:ENCY

Ioe bidome (talk) 22:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)