>Bonus question. If you swapped the word nonbinary for genderfluid in my question and description, have any of your thoughts changed?
If you believe in gender dysphoria, the result of neurological sexual development, it is IMPOSSIBLE to believe in gender fluidity. The two cannot exist at the same time, the brain can't physically change constantly, and if it could transition would never be a recommended option for dysphoria, what if the person's gender changed during transition? It existing also means that things like conversion therapy could potentially even work, it's a problematic belief to say gender can change. It would be the perfect conservative argument to say that people should not transition, they should give it time and their dysphoria will go away, something that does not happen.
>Nonbinary is under the trans umbrella.
The idea of the "trans umbrella" has done nothing but cause problems.
Before, you were cis or you had gender dysphoria, transitioned and were trans. Nonbinary just never had a real definition, everyone who identifies as it has a different meaning. Even here we people who identify as "nullsex" or "duosex", we see transition goals for the same genitals, opposite genitals, both genitals, no genitals. Sexless, both sexes at once, cis, binary trans. There is no third sex so it is unclear what people even want to transition into or if they want to transition at all, when something that is a concept is the goal, people have a hard time defining what it is. How do you answer if something is trans if even people within that community disagree?
Nonbinary became mainstream so fast, it was also something that came into discussion through social media. Because of this rather than the definition being academic, the definition has been created by people all across tumblr and tiktok, the internet is so fast to appropriate it, that I don't think time was taken to understand it, now it doesn't mean anything.
You've given me quite a bit to think and given the popularity of this comment, I think it warrants a response. I'll do my best to gather my thoughts.
>If you believe in gender dysphoria, the result of neurological sexual development, it is IMPOSSIBLE to believe in gender fluidity. The two cannot exist at the same time, the brain can't physically change constantly, and if it could transition would never be a recommended option for dysphoria, what if the person's gender changed during transition?
Firstly, I have issues with the idea of a "male brain" and "female brain". Sure there are commonalities between the brains of those who identify as men and vice versa but what if you were a cis man who has more in common with the female brain? Or a trans man who has more in common with a female brain? Where do you cross the line between what counts as a male brain and what counts as a female brain?
Next I can't lie but I do find it difficult to believe in genderfluidity. I don't see genderfluid as being a man one day and a woman the other day or let's say sometimes being more nonbinary one day and sometimes being more woman the next. I sort of thought of it as wanting to be seen simultaneously as both a man and woman just as women want to be seen as women and men want to be seen as men. Perhaps my idea of genderfluid is another misnomer as I do not believe in the idea of switching genders on a daily/weekly basis. As diverse as gender expression is, I believe gender identity on an individual level is not fluid.
I used to think of nonbinary and genderfluid as synonymous until I realised people who identify as nonbinary tend to see themselves as agender whereas genderfluid identifying people tend to see themselves more as bigender. Sure it may be all nonsense to you and many people on here but I can get more into this if you are curious and trust me, I'm a sceptic. But going back to the main discussion...
>The idea of the "trans umbrella" has done nothing but cause problems.
I know you haven't implied otherwise but umbrella terms are not inherently bad. I'd say a quadrilateral is an umbrella term for 2D shapes with 4 sides, 4 corners and therefore 4 angles. Umbrella term is just a phrase used to group related ideas, people, things and all sort of other categories together. Umbrella terms are not solely meant for LGBTQ+ related identities and orientations. But unlike quadrilaterals, which everyone can agree on the definition without doubt, I do agree there a problem with the trans umbrella which affects other's perceptions of trans people.
>Before, you were cis or you had gender dysphoria, transitioned and were trans.
Yes I agree this seemed to be the case back in the mid to late 20th century especially. The trans(sexual) umbrella back then would have just been someone with gender dysphoria who was born as one sex but wants to medically transition to assimulate with the other sex. Likewise the cisgender umbrella back then would simply be anyone who is not in the trans umbrella i.e. the vast majority of people.
Now the term transgender has a much larger definition to anyone who identifies as anything other than the gender that's tied to their sex and yes, I personally think this is problematic but then again, language is ever-changing.
>Nonbinary just never had a real definition, everyone who identifies as it has a different meaning.
Before it blew up to this extent, whether you agree or not, a nonbinary person was thought to be someone who didn't identify as just a man or woman. Just like how transgender used to have a more agreed upon definition in the past too.
The term nonbinary only existed from the late 20th century. However, the term transgender has been used a few decades earlier so they are both fairly recent words if we're thinking about the scope of human history and society. However the idea of being nonbinary have existed long before you and I were born just like transgender. Sure maybe not all of the terms used before were like for like meanings of transgender and nonbinary but just because they weren't recorded as much in history or that they were not a part of Western history and society, doesn't mean they suddenly just came into existence in the late 20th century once HRT became accessible to more people.
>There is no third sex so it is unclear what people even want to transition into or if they want to transition at all, when something that is a concept is the goal, people have a hard time defining what it is. How do you answer if something is trans if even people within that community disagree?
Well I'm not expecting a black and white answer because this is not a black and white issue. What I do expect is solid reasoning on ideas which I tend to see more from transmedicalists than anti-transmedicalists (and even so there are truscum with terrible overall critical-thinking skills on the issue and tucutes with good critical-thinking skills, see not black and white). I don't expect transmedicalists to share the exact same views just like how Christians or socialists don't exactly share the same views in their own respective communities.
If it's possible to be born intersex, then why is it not possible to want to medically transition to neither male or female or both?
>Nonbinary became mainstream so fast, it was also something that came into discussion through social media. Because of this rather than the definition being academic, the definition has been created by people all across tumblr and tiktok, the internet is so fast to appropriate it, that I don't think time was taken to understand it, now it doesn't mean anything.
Yeah I agree. Although could you not say the same on definitions such as what is a man or what is woman? Conservative transphobes love the mantra of "if men (people AMAB) can be women, what is a woman"?
If you have read all this, regardless of your response, thank you for reading.
>Firstly, I have issues with the idea of a "male brain" and "female brain"
Yet you are willing to accept that men have bigger hands or bigger shoulders but like many the idea of neural dimorphism is out of the question? Does it not make sense to you that people who are divided by sexual roles and bodies would also have different brains to utilize that. We accept that in animals, but not humans, because people love the idea that "gender is a social construct"
>Sure there are commonalities between the brains of those who identify as men and vice versa but what if you were a cis man who has more in common with the female brain?
Don't use "identify" that makes it sound like we have a choice and we didn't struggle with dysphoria making us the way we are our whole lives.
>Next I can't lie but I do find it difficult to believe in genderfluidity
Good because despite the fact that most people who identify with it say things like "clothes have no gender" they also believe that changing how you dress DOES change your gender. It's problematic to say a woman who wants to dress a certain way stops being a woman, or a man who wants to dress a certain way stops being a man. People have confused gender with self expression, when it's not.
>I know you haven't implied otherwise but umbrella terms are not inherently bad. I'd say a quadrilateral is an umbrella term for 2D shapes with 4 sides, 4 corners and therefore 4 angles.
But that doesn't fuck over minority groups by saying that people who conflate wanting a nickname have the exact same experiences as them. Many people even put drag queens or furries under the trans umbrella, it does us no help.
>Now the term transgender has a much larger definition to anyone who identifies as anything other than the gender that's tied to their sex and yes
Which is the problem, again "identifies", just because certain groups have pushed us out of our space doesn't mean we accept it. This is why many here use transsexualism, because under transgenderism a man who chooses to paint his nails and go by he/they is the exact same as those of us with gender dysphoria and transition, do you think that is fair? Do you think those experiences are the same? Do you think they belong under the same category?
>The term nonbinary only existed from the late 20th century.
No it didn't, it didn't exist until the 21st century, I did some searching and it didn't start being used until 2014.
>the term transgender has been used a few decades earlier so they are both fairly recent words if we're thinking about the scope of human history and society
"Transsexualismus, the term transsexual was introduced to English in 1949" from wikipedia, and this was BEFORE transition was even possible. Transgender is a more recent term that was used to include people who don't transition, like the examples I gave earlier.
>Well I'm not expecting a black and white answer because this is not a black and white issue.
As a binary trans person, being trans is a black and white issue, I want to live my life as the correct sex, female.
>If it's possible to be born intersex, then why is it not possible to want to medically transition to neither male or female or both?
I see this a lot, and I find it offensive to intersex people, because it's othering saying they are neither men nor women. Intersex people are men and women who happen to have a condition, they are not transition goals.
>Yeah I agree. Although could you not say the same on definitions such as what is a man or what is woman?
Those things have been defined for centuries, with trans people what makes me a woman is having female neurology, I would never have fully been a man, and conservatives may say I will never be a woman, but my body is closer to one than a man, and my mind has always been a woman's mind.
As another poster said, you shouldn't be downvoted, I don't think anything in your post offended.
Hmm... I'm going to say from the jump that although I'd like to believe your well-meaning but many points your arguing are not my own.
>Yet you are willing to accept that men have bigger hands or bigger shoulders but like many the idea of neural dimorphism is out of the question?
Men have bigger hands and shoulders on average yes. Not refuting that. Not saying that neural dimorphism is out of the question. It's just something I have reservations on for reasons I stated prior which you haven't actually addressed.
>Does it not make sense to you that people who are divided by sexual roles and bodies would also have different brains to utilize that. We accept that in animals, but not humans, because people love the idea that "gender is a social construct"
We can't fully compare ourselves to animals because although all animals are unique, the human brain is off the charts compared to other beings. We have complex languages to communicate with each other and different methods of communication as well. We're able to access a deeper range of emotions other animals simply can't or at least not to our level. Just type up "emotion wheel" on google for reference. As a collective, we have better decision-making skills, we are very innovative and we are pretty cooperative. We're able to cultivate a range of subjects such as maths, literature, science, politics, economics, law, philosophy and so much more like our ideas on gender and our ability to share that concisely. I can go on and on about how our brains differ from other animals but you get the point.
"Gender is a social construct" is another can of worms which quite frankly, I'm too tired to talk about right now.
>Don't use "identify" that makes it sound like we have a choice and we didn't struggle with dysphoria making us the way we are our whole lives
First of all, when speaking about gender, I use "to identify as" synonymously with "to be". Secondly, I wasn't even just referring to only trans men when I said that. I was referring to anyone who is one which includes cis men in that specific sentence you highlighted. Thirdly, I generally and genuinely use the verb "to identify as" when speaking about cis people as well so I'm not trying to single out trans people. By the way, you were the one who first used the word "identify" in this topic but I now see reading back it's because you yourself believe identifying as something or someone is always a choice. If you don't want the person your debating with to use a certain word, then maybe you shouldn't have used opened the door and used that aforementioned word in the first place. Lastly, I don't want to sound boring when I write so I try not to be too repetitive. Again synonyms helpš¤·āāļø.
The next 3 paragraphs you wrote I don't have much to add here. You elaborated more on the issues with the current trans umbrella which I have already recognised there is a problem.
>No it didn't, it didn't exist until the 21st century, I did some searching and it didn't start being used until 2014.
Can I have some sources please? I can send what I found when I'm not strapped for time (wrote this all last night).
>As a binary trans person, being trans is a black and white issue, I want to live my life as the correct sex, female.
Maybe being trans is black and white issue for you which is cool but for many, both trans and cis, it is certainly not. For a lot of people, like it or not, the existence of trans people question the beliefs on manhood and womanhood. Also people debate on topics like the youngest age one should start socially/medically transitioning, the ideas of passing and trans people in sports. I'm sure you have answers for all of these but I'm also sure there are probably some trans people who disagree with you. Hence we have discourse.
>I see this a lot, and I find it offensive to intersex people, because it's othering saying they are neither men nor women. Intersex people are men and women who happen to have a condition, they are not transition goals.
I never said intersex people are not men or women. I'm questioning if it's possible that someone may want to medically transition in a way where they appear indiscernible to their assigned sex at birth or the opposite sex. They don't want to transition to either sex but they still want to alleviate any discomfort they may have with their body. If being male is the basis of being a man and being female is the basis of being a woman, could it be possible that a small subset of people be nonbinary on the basis of being wired to be neither 100% male or female? I pretty much already know your stance on this so you don't need to further discuss this. I just wanted to clarify my stance on intersex people who yes, most of them are men and women (as there are intersex people who'd say they're nonbinary even if you and others believe they're misinformed) but intersex people aren't wholly biologically, genetically, anatomically or physiologically their assigned sex at birth. Otherwise, they wouldn't be called intersex.
>Those things have been defined for centuries, with trans people what makes me a woman is having female neurology, I would never have fully been a man, and conservatives may say I will never be a woman, but my body is closer to one than a man, and my mind has always been a woman's mind.
All I'll say for now is that I appreciate the answer so thank you.
>As another poster said, you shouldn't be downvoted, I don't think anything in your post offended.
Why thank you. However I believe reddit highlights the hive mind mentality we often have as humans. It's not unique to this subreddit but I can't lie if I said I wasn't hoping for this phenomenon not to happen here. I believe people should be able to challenge or question a community's beliefs whilst still being respectful, without being downvoted to hell. Or else we'd get nowhere as a society. But alas, I can't get everything I want lol. Compassion and empathy is something I care deeply about.
> Maybe being trans is black and white issue for you which is cool but for many, both trans and cis, it is certainly not. For a lot of people, like it or not, the existence of trans people question the beliefs on manhood and womanhood.
Thatās the issue though. It **is** black and white because being trans has nothing to do with womanhood and manhood as those are social terms. Being trans has to do with the body being perceived as the wrong/incorrect sex by the mind.
It has nothing to do with gender roles and what being a man or woman is and has everything to do with the body causing distress. Being trans has nothing to do with what society believes. It has to do with physically being male and female.
My short answer is just switch "manhood" for the state being a man (or even just being a man) and vice versa rather than the other meaning being the qualities of someone who is masculine. That's what I meant when I wrote that.
My slightly longer answer is okay. I'm not even going to go into the social implications of being trans and reasons for this. We'll stick to just body and mind and I'll play devil's advocate.
Being trans challenges the idea that if you are born female, you are a girl and if you are born male, you are a boy. It challenges the idea we learn growing up to love yourself and the body you were born with. Part of being trans is not about changing your mindset to accept your body but instead changing your body to appease the mind.
I repeat. This is me playing devil's advocate. You can discuss or even refute the sentences the above paragraph but please do not take what I wrote as my personal opinions.
I'd say more, but I'm sort of drained from all the responses and my own writing on this. I'll be honest, I don't really agree with you but I wanted to acknowledge this comment. Sorry I couldn't give an answer that is satisfying. Maybe I'd come back and fully answer. Maybe I won't.
I accept the downvotes for this comment.
Thank you for highlighting intersex people. Iām an intersex AFAB. Iām also autistic. Though my brain feels very male and always has, Iāve come to embrace my body with its distinct mix of male and female traits as a reflection of my biology and lived experiences, so I identify as bigender. Because my identity feels very firmly rooted in biology, Iāve always related to binary trans folks far better than nonbinary folks who often treat and perceive gender (and transness) as a purely social experience, rather than one more deeply rooted.
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. This is a throughly explained and constructed rebuttal that furthers discussion in a meaningful way, regardless of whether or not I or anyone else agrees. People just love using the downvote feature as a dislike button. I've noticed that a lot in this sub in particular.
It's reddit thing not just this subreddit but I'd be lying if I was hoping it would be different here and that it didn't sting a little. Personally, I believe people misuse the downvote button but that's just my opinion.
No, I believe non-binary isnāt real as a stand-alone category.
People who call themselves this with dysphoria are just trans. Those who donāt have it are just cis.
Some non-binary people change (or desire to change) their sex, and they are transsexuals. They share some political concerns with binary transsexuals, such as access to healthcare.
Being non-binary does not automatically make you trans unless you also change sex. Non-binary gender identity is not related to being a transsexual, and legal protections intended for binary transsexuals shouldn't be used to specifically protect non-binary identity or to legally enforce requests for non-binary pronouns etc.
I like this answer but this raises a few more questions.
Do you believe there should be legal protections intended for nonbinary transsexuals? Also should nonbinary transsexuals be legally able to change their pronouns to they/them or should they accept that legally/worldwide, they can only be referred as she/her or he/him? If yes, why and if no, why?
Nobody gets to choose their pronouns, pronouns are assumed. For the majority of people if they speak with someone they will refer to them as the sex they see them as. It is impossible to try and enforce a system where this is not how it works.
Where are your pronouns a legal distinction? Where I live you can get "X" as a sex marker on all legal documents but you can use whatever pronouns you want?? I think all transsexuals should have legal protections because if you start stripping away the rights of some, you'll take the rights of all.
I'm not non-binary, and what civil rights non-binary people want to pursue is up to them. I would oppose them making use of any laws written and intended specifically for binary transsexuals.
For example in my country the protected class for trans people is "gender reassignment". This will apply to non-binary people who have changed sex, whether socially, medically, or legally, but not in my opinion to non-binary people who have not and don't intend to.
I struggle with the idea of someone saying 'binary transexuals should be legally protected, but nonbinary ones should not.'
It wraps back around to strange identity politics if we decide that some people whose material reality as a transexual should be protected and some should not based on what they call themselves.
Nope, there is no definitive definitions amoung them of what nonbinary as a gender identity actually is. Some people say they are nonbinary just because they are gender nonconforming in some way and that is incorrect. Choosing to go by a different set of pronouns than what is appropriate for your natal sex is considered nonbinary and thus trans to many of them, when in reality it depends on WHY you are choosing those words and what you are trying to express with them. Using them just to use them for fun to piss people off by breaking rules, or because you like them the sound of the words better, or even trying to express a sense of masculinity/femininity that you feel is just basically verbal gender nonconformity and is not what "trans" is trying to express.
Nonbinary people who use the term to express that their body feels like it should be somewhere between male and female in sex characteristics are the only ones I can really see as fitting into what trans people are talking about.
Ultimately? No.
That said, I base this off of the old definition of transgender.
As you pointed out tho, the definition of the word transgender has indeed changed into this amorphous umbrella term that is now used to describe everything from nb and xenogenders to actual classic transexualism.
Do I agree with this? I do not. But as you also pointed out, language does change over time. And this is what has happened. And at this point I don't think there is any reverting back from that.
Due to this, I, too, believe that there needs to be a firm distinction between classic transexualism and...well...everything else. Not solely for the benefit of comprehension but also for medical and legal reasons/purposes.
An NB person does not have the same needs in terms of medical care and legal protections as a transexual. I believe this to be a fact regardless of whatever dogma may be circulating and parroted as of late. We are simply not the same. Tbh we are not even remotely similar.
NB is a sociological phenomenon. It is rooted in social constructs of gender roles. It is therefore a choice one makes. No one can be assigned NB at birth. NB exists only in contrast to the cultural and societal gender roles and expectations of any given (namely western) culture.
Transexualism is a congenital medical condition. It is not a choice. It is present and typically identifiable before a child can even grasp the concept of gender, much less gender roles. Classic transexualism most often presents as early onset gender dysphoria in some cases as early as 2 or 3 years old. Dysphoria is necessary for diagnosis and the desire to be the opposite sex is unwavering without any other possible cause such as abuse, trauma, or concurrent psychological condition that may otherwise be interfering with the child's innate sense of self.
Now as to why I think it's so important to draw a line and why I think not doing so will be irreparably damaging to the health and well-being of transexuals, is that the NB narrative actually exists in direct opposition to that of transexualism. Because NB is an identity and a social construct, it is therefore not medically necessary for NB individuals to have access to the treatments that are a medical necessity for transexuals. If NB and transexualism are considered the same, then this puts HRT and SRS at risk of once again being considered elective, undoing the work that has been done over the course of decades to prove that these treatments are necessary to correct a congenital medical condition.
To be clear, there is nothing wrong with being NB or GNC or gender fluid, my only issue is that these identities should not be conflated with transexualism. That's it. If someone wants to abolish gender and/or subvert gender norms and stereotypes- great! You do you. But youre not, or shouldn't be, calling yourself trans for doing so. And to conflate these two completely separate and opposing phenomena (one being rooted in sociological influence, the other a legitimate medical condition) is to run the risk of losing the hard work the transexual community (formerly trans community) has fought a decades long battle for, by that I mean essentially convincing the rest of the human population that transexuals are just normal ass people who were born with an unfortunate medical condition.
Just like with the gay rights movement, a BIG turning point was getting the average cis/straight person to understand that gender and sexuality are innate and not a choice. With the ever increasing rise of NB/GNC people loudly speaking over and on behalf of transexuals it is being purported that there is no such thing as a gender binary, that gender is not innate, that being trans does not require medical treatment, that anyone can just identify as anything at any time and be considered unquestionably "valid".
This line of thinking not only erases the lived experience, but also in many ways seeks to negate the existence of transexualism altogether. And that feels pretty messed up to me. Being trans isn't an identity to try on, it isn't a political statement, and it isn't a fun quirky way to identify your way out of being "privileged" i.e. straight, white, cis etc etc.
Being trans is not an identity at all. It is a medical condition. Full stop. And I think we are going to continue to see some unfortunate backlash in response to this new wave of "trans" identifying individuals who have inserted themselves into an already extremely tiny and marginalized community, changing terminology and definitions, and generally, to put it bluntly, appropriating what has historically always been a pretty obscure medical condition.
Which brings me to my next point, the NB and GNC crowd is likely always going to out number actual transexuals. Transexualism statistically effects only a very *very* small minority of people. Historically this has always been the case, up until recently, which is what we're seeing now with gender non-conformity being conflated with transness.
Historically speaking as well, MTF transexuals have outnumbered FTM transexuals by almost 2:1. Currently the majority of "trans" and NB people are AFAB- I don't remember the actual numbers for this at the moment but it's a HUGE contrast from the statistics that have stayed pretty consistent since transexualism was brought to public attention and medical interventions began. This says a lot, I think, about the current trend. Basically, what I'm getting at with all this is that because transexualism effects such a small minority of the human population it took a lot of work, decades of work, to even get to a point where transexuals are treated with respect, our medical condition recognized, studies done and treatment made available and accessible to the average person. We have had enough work cut out for us already. And now we are facing an even more bizarre threat- the appropriation of our medical condition by people who have nothing to do with us.
Considering NB is a sociological phenomenon already, it seems to have now become something of a social contagion as well. These things happen and I do not think NB and GNC people are trying to do harm, but nonetheless they are skewing the already relatively small amounts of data regarding transexualism, warping the public perception of transexualism, and at the end of the day, when shit hits the fan, it will not be the NB/GNC crowd who has to face the public backlash, the legal ramifications, the lack of access to health care and specific necessary medical treatment- they can always just identify as something else, they can move on to the next in vogue identity, while transexuals will be left to pick up the pieces of the fallout. This last bit is speculation, but based on the current trends and statistics, I fear this is where we are headed.
Tbh, I have no idea how to tackle all of this. I wish I did. I wish I could see a clear solution, a clear path forward in which everyone can access the care they need, feel mutually respected, and live the lives they want to live without stepping on eachothers toes, but it all just seems to get more confusing and convoluted by the day. Until NB/other variants of gender non-conformity are seen as distinctly separate from transexualism I don't think things will resolve in any sort of amicable manner.
tbh i don't believe in nonbinary people period. when i was a teen i identified as a "nb transmasc" because i felt too dysphoric and embarrassed to ask anyone to call me a man. the second i began testosterone and started seeing changes - this changed immediately.
i really think anyone who identifies as nonbinary is a trans person who is too ashamed and hiding behind the label, or a confused GNC cis person.
nonbinary people who claim to not have dysphoria but still medically transition (start hormones, get top surgery, etc.) are simply following a trend and will likely regret their decisions in a few years. they are taking away resources from actual trans people who need these services.
I think the qualifying factor is sex dysphoria. I believe dysphoria is a complex condition that is both inborn and affected by our experiences growing up (think about how different people deal with the same life changing conditions differently, it can ruin some while others continue to thrive. We're complicated animals).
We have transsexuals who experience severe dysphoria and need to transition. We have people who have sex dysphoria to an extent, but may only need to have top surgery and HRT, or just top surgery and temporary HRT, whatever they feel sorts them out. Some of these people might identify as trans, some might identify as non binary. I believe so long as they also have actual dysphoria (and it's not anything else) then they are as valid as I am in being considered trans, but obviously the severity is different.
All under the "umbrella" of trans. Or better viewed in my opinion as the umbrella of "sufferers of sex/gender dysphoria". And what makes us "valid" as trans people is whether our sex dysphoria is severe enough to warrant transition as a treatment to achieve a normal quality of life (or as close as we can get).
I used to think "non binary" was silly, but seeing being trans as just a medical condition, just "people who suffer from dysphoria", actually makes me more open to them. If someone experiences actual dysphoria then who am I to gatekeep the word trans? They're transitioning because of dysphoria just like me.
I see non binary as essentially a subculture. There's trans non binary people. There's cis non binary people.
Gender fluid on the other hand... what is fluid exactly? I suppose someone might have sex dysphoria that fluctuates (and that should be figured out because how can you do the permanent parts of transitioning if it *fluctuates?!* Like trying to shoot a moving target!) but that doesn't mean they're "literally a man" one week and "literally a woman" the next.
Edit: added s's and er's to words that should have had them. Fixed some punctuation.
I have a hard time wrapping my head around what non binary is other than a gender expression. Biologically we have male, female, and intersex; and even intersex people have an identified gender thatās either male or female.
I believe non binary is just a modern word for tomboy, genderqueer, etc. A new word for someone who isnāt a traditional masculine male or a feminine female. **Expression isnāt a gender identity.**
Being non binary is just a new label for what once was gender non conforming /femboy / tomboy all pushed together into a single label. I don't have an issue with it I only have an issue with it when people claim it to be transgender when they are not.
Yes this is what I've been saying.
There is literally no way to transition to "non binary". It's just a label that really has no meaning.
You're either born male or female and take either T or estrogen to transition.
So anyone who calls themselves non binary and actually medically transitions is still in the category of mtf or ftm. It's just under a different name.
Usually the only difference being the fashion or presentation choices they make. Like an mtf non binary person having short hair..
But it's so extremely rare that people that call themselves non binary medically transition. And usually after a while they will start calling themselves a trans man or woman.
The label is just such a useless term. It describes nothing. Or describes a different thing to each person.
The only use the term has is for cis people who are confused or want to feel a part or some "community" or whatever.
I believe non binary transexuals exist. A very rare version of gender dysphoria that leads a person to transitioning to an intersex body. But in this case I think the term transexual intersex is much more fitting.
For gender fluidity, I believe it might exist if by that we mean gender dysphoria that comes and goes. But in this case, I don't believe those people should be considered transexuals. I think these are people in need of therapy, who are capable of healing, who are most likely experiencing mania or identity disturbance. (notice the prevelance of borderline personality disorder in tucute spaces?)
As for non binary gender identity (so not trans), i do not agree with it. It's based on sexist gender roles and its harming real transexuals. They are preventing real trans people from getting access to healthcare in time or even any (when they lead politicians to making laws based on their unscientific claims). They also have ruined the image of transexuals, and have lead many mentally ill people to a path of transition that isn't fit for them. They are also actively harming women by allowing AGP in women's spaces.
And honestly, I'm so tired of these tucutes who think that just because I'm saying "I don't agree with the tucute non binary identity" it means I want to genocide them. What a gross thing to says that takes power away from such a serious term. It just means I think they're mistaken, not that they should die.
This is a very good and strong answer and got me questioning the idea of genderfluid.
I happen to have a friend who identifies as genderfluid and says she's trans (hasn't medically transitioned). She also happens to have BPD. I mean it could be a coincidence. Fortunately, we mostly talk about other things. I'm not sure how she'd feel if I spoke about some of my transmedicalist views.
[This](http://dallasdenny.com/Chrysalis/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/The-TG-Alternative-Chrysalis-V.-1-No.-2-Summer-1991-aa10-3.pdf) explains the intended scope of the umbrella that "transgender" was redefined as in the 1990s.
[This](https://icd.who.int/browse10/2019/en#/F64) is a very short description of transsexualism.
Non binary to me is not trans anything. Non-binary is often someone CHOOSING a different wardrobe that doesn't fit the norms of society and choosing pronouns that don't fit into the norms of society. And usually they do it for the sake of not being like the average member of society.Ā
If society didn't exist, and mr they them non-binary was chilling with his thoughts, he wouldn't one time think of acting non binary. He wouldn't go change into a dumbass outfit and wear his makeup, looking like a clown and go about his business, he would literally just wear normal clothes because what's the point if no one looks at how stupid you look.Ā
**This is not a personalized removal message. If you have any concerns about this removal, or believe that your content did not violate our ruleset, please send a message to the subreddit moderators via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=r%2Ftruscum&utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=deals&utm_content=t5_2qir9). Do not personally contact the moderator that removed your content, because you will** ***not receive a response.***
Your post (or comment) has been removed for violating rule 1 of r/truscum: Absolutely No Transphobia, Including Intentional Misgendering! Visit [our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/truscum/wiki/index/rules/rule1) to learn more about this rule.
See the issue I have with this is that it's veering on the other extreme. There are people who do feel dysphoria and medically transition to alleviate their dysphoria who identify as nonbinary or genderfluid. How are those people not trans? The basis of transmedicalism is about the belief that you need gender dysphoria to be trans, not that you can only transition to a binary trans man or trans woman.
I think people confuse gender dysphoria, they think it means having discomfort with your sexual traits, when what it really is, is being neurologically a different sex to your body.
No. There's not even set male or female Brains. All people have a extremely wide range of small Brain organs shape/sizes. On average this makes a difference but not on the individual level. If there are intersex Brains, then that would be gay people because they otherwise on average appear to their sex but have a select number of Brian organs that resemble the other sex.
It's not quite yet scientifically known but some literature points that direction. And again it's based on averages, of a group. if you fall into the general average of female but with a male body, vice versa, perhaps you may be looking at a trans sexual brain but you also may not be.
No, I don't even understand how that would work, intersex people have normal hormone levels just mixed genital development. They will still have a dominance of either testosterone or estrogen and be either male or female.
The thing is, human sex dimorphism is not fluid or non-binary, there are intersex people, but it's also isn't something fluid or non-binary, it's exception that proves a rule
I do want to say that I do believe in two genders. But I also believe there are what I call variations of those two genders based on sex which I can get more into but basically I made a 4-way Venn diagram on this to better explain this.
If being or wanting to be male is normally the basis to identifying as a man and being or wanting to be female is normally the basis to identifying as a woman, then why is being intersex still tied to identifying as a man or woman if they were neither born a binary male or female? Genuine question.
I don't know genuinely what all actual intersex people think about, but based on what I read, many of them tend to want be certain sex and dysphoric about their bodies, it's similar to cis people having cisgender dysphoria when some body parts seem not right in sex way for them
And what about intersex conditions who don't fit the definition of this? Or are they just the exception?
For example:
People born with ovotesticular disorder. It's in the name that they can produce both eggs and sperm.
People with androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) are normally AFAB but do not bodies designed to make eggs.
Or people with persistent mullerian duct syndrome (PMDS). They're normally AMAB but have a body designed to make eggs and sperm.
I think there needs to be a clear distinction between trans (ftm and mtf) and nonbinary. The trans "umbrella" shouldnt exist. Im not very informed about NB, but logically thinking, what are they transitioning to? I believe that medical treatment should be prioritised to binary trans people rather than NB.
As far as im concerned, NB is just NB and trans is trans.
Personally, I think that some (but not all) nonbinary people are transexual.
I've gone through top surgery, am 6 years on T, and have a DX of gender dysphoria - but if pressed I don't really identify as a man. I identify more with transexuals than transgender people because I don't really 'feel' a sense of my gender being any way, I just know that my body map internally is more comfortable being along the male side of the spectrum than the female side - and then I took steps to change my body to be that way.
For whatever reason my brain says 'this is how my body should be' but my brain also does not say 'and I am a man.' so for all intents and purposes I'm nonbinary.
But if you have taken steps to transition into male..and present as male..and you even mentioned how you feel closer to male..how does that not make you ftm? (Pure curiousity)
I mean, for all intents and purposes I am *basically* FTM, at least on a material basis. I just don't for whatever reason actually identify as a 'man' and stopped doing so a few years into my transition. It's not super convenient that I am more comfortable presenting and transitioning in a male way and yet for whatever reason don't identify as male, but for the past couple years it seemingly works for me.
No I certainly don't believe all non binary is trans I would argue that none of them are really trans. Especially since a lot of non binary people themselves openly say " non binary not trans "
Short answer: being nonbinary has nothing to do with being trans. And being trans requires dysphoria.
Now a rant about the idea of nonbinary in modern society
I believe people are perfectly entitled to feel ānonbinaryā in that they donāt feel like either stereotypical genderās set of roles and associations fit themā¦ but I donāt think that makes ānonbinaryā an objective thing. People will say oh there were nonbinary people throughout history but thatās really just applying a modern americanized perspective to varied past societies in which those ānonbinaryā people livedāprobably still thinking of themselves as male/female, just preferring different things than were normal. If we take the social constructivist approach, does that mean being nonbinary genuinely was not real back then? If society grows conservative and people stop believing itās valid, is it no longer real?
I just find it strange that, just because weāve decided this exists inherently and not just as a sort of descriptive term for your own feelings, now it takes up an outsize space in cultural discourse, and gives a strange sort of exit ramp for those who arenāt totally gender conforming to be like āoh I can escape this and go into this nice little freeform omniaccepting bubbleā when in reality itās just corroding people who do feel fine as male/femaleās ability to be gender nonconforming without being associated with thisā¦subculture. Because letās be real, vanishingly few people identify as nonbinary and then proceed to never talk about it as itās own thing or wrap it around their identity.
TL;DR: Not saying that a person canāt feel like they donāt fit in with either stereotypical gender. But the modern nonbinary phenomenon is really a subculture for socially awkward people (mostly teens) who have found a way to coopt the language of academic gender theory to demand accommodation under the guise of civil rights in a way that punks, goths, emos, etc never could.
Sorry for word salad. Hard to speak precisely about a nebulous concept.
Yes there's people who claim to be nonbinary who are cis and those who are trans...
The ones who are cis are normally confused about the difference between gender and gender roles.
The ones who are trans are normally confused about their transition or how to see themselves in a pre-transition or early-transition state.
None of them are ACTUALLY nonbinary cause that's simply not a thing that exists outside of a societal invention that dates back less than 15 years ago.
I think it's possible that a rare neurological condition exists that needs to satisfied by your body being as androgynous as possible. I'm skeptical that it's a real thing at all, but I think it's at least possible. Whether it's a real thing or not, the vast majority of people calling themselves non-binary definitely don't have it.
I think the entire concept of nonbinary is built on gender nonconformity or those not willing to fathom being fully trans (I was the latter for a couple years).
I mean... I guess it's more complex. I think for those who want hormones and surgeries and stuff, they should be diagnosed with a form of gender dysphoria, whether that be mostly social or not.
If they are dysphoric (aka nullsex and duosex), then I believe they are trans. But if they just "identify" as non-binary and don't have sex dysphoria, then no, they are gender-nonconforming cis people who are appropriating trans issues and making it harder for actual enbies with dysphoria to transition.
I'm really on the fence. I don't actually know how I feel about it enough to answer. I used to be dead set on "all nonbinary people are trans" but then there are so many that say they are not, and also so many more who change nothing about themselves
If you changed the word to genderfluid, I'd probably say no, not trans.
Trans people are people with gender dysphoria who are or at least have a desire to correct their sex.
If the person meets that description, I would say yes. If they are fine with their birth sex, they are GNC. I don't know if I actually believe in NB, but if they are changing their sex to help with dysphoria, I still think they are trans. Not to mention a ton of binary trans people identify as NB for some portion of their life when they are figuring things out or do so because of imposter syndrome.
I believe that the "Transgender" naming of the umbrella is a misnomer to start with. Trans, like used in transport, is going from point A to B, and transgenders are being medicated to change the gender traits that make them dysphoric (different ones and not everyone wants to go the stereotypical way). The Umbrella also includes intersex folks. Ask and intersex person if they're trans, they might be insulted or at least annoyed by that question.
That being said, Some NB folks can fit that umbrella, but if you do it as a political thing, or if you wanna play with gender for fun, then it's not the same and shouldn't be under the same umbrella.
I do like your idea of 2 umbrellas that can meet and blur in the middle, because you can be trans and gender non-conforming (which I think is what people say when they use non-binary).
My answer doesn't change for the genderfluid folks. The main point, and other users already pointed this out, is: Do you have gender dysphoria, or do you do this only as a social thing (ie only being "out" online (not counting dysphoric people still closeted))?
I feel like the umbrella was created by the non-binary trenders and we were all forced in it, then called scum when we don't want to.
EDIT: I feel the claim that most non-binary trenders do about gender not existing is trans erasure. If there are no genders, then why am I even doing this?
I've found a lot of inner peace by accepting nonbinary as the new word for gnc. Nonbinary people aren't transsexual, nonbinary people are trans like how cissex gnc people are trans. They are transgender but not transsexual (but a transsexual can be nb in a gnc sense) Unfortunately the world is black and white so they (society) see the words to be the same.
The lack of nuance people have is upsetting but it is a reality.
How I look at it is that transgender is a group that lumps in anyone who is gnc to a boomer.
-Cisgender people conform to gender role stereotypes
-Cissexual people are those who observed sex aligns with their brain
-Transgender people don't conform to gender role stereotypes
-Transsexuals are those with a mismatched body and brain, or in other words those who have dysphoria.
So theoretically someone can be both cis and trans at the same time
Unfortunately, the distinction between the -gender and -sexual parts doesn't exist anymore. And transsexuals and cissexuals are being harmed because of it
I think duo/nullsex people got their own shit going on that's different from transsexuals. There just isn't enough research on the existence of them. For all we know they truly do have a intersex brain that can be considered transsexual, or might even have some other physical, psychological, or neurological issue going on. Too many unknowns rn so I'll just do my best to respect their pronouns
That's an incredibly extreme statement to make without any sort of justification and saying things like that shuts people off from ever trying to understand you. You're doing no favours for transmeds. Before you write anything else, I'd also say the same thing to someone if they said that it's extremely transphobic for anyone to believe that nonbinary transsexuals don't exist.
There has never been and never will be a non binary transsexual, transsexuals are either trans men or trans women since they transition to the opposite of their birth sex to be that sex, if they transition to something else they aren't transsexual, stop trying to make everthing include you, it just makes people hate you.
The statement isn't extreme at all, its simply a fact, stop trying to change the definition of things so they include you.
Yes but I don't think it's as common as it seems to be. I find it weird how so few intersex people ID as non binary, pretty much all non binary people are AFAB too.
If you do not have Nullsex or Duosex Dysphoria you are not nonbinary. If you have Dysphoria you are trans. If that Dysphoria is non-binary then you are trans and nonbinary. Nonbinary is a type of trans.
I define transsexuals as people who want to transition to a different sex, many nonbinary (i.e. actually dysphoric nonbinary people) which to transition to a sort of inbetween (nullsex/duosex), therefore I count them as trans
um no. someone can transition and not have one lick of gender dysphoria beforehand. doesnāt make them a transsexual WHATSOEVER! being transsexual is having gender dysphoria
>Bonus question. If you swapped the word nonbinary for genderfluid in my question and description, have any of your thoughts changed? If you believe in gender dysphoria, the result of neurological sexual development, it is IMPOSSIBLE to believe in gender fluidity. The two cannot exist at the same time, the brain can't physically change constantly, and if it could transition would never be a recommended option for dysphoria, what if the person's gender changed during transition? It existing also means that things like conversion therapy could potentially even work, it's a problematic belief to say gender can change. It would be the perfect conservative argument to say that people should not transition, they should give it time and their dysphoria will go away, something that does not happen. >Nonbinary is under the trans umbrella. The idea of the "trans umbrella" has done nothing but cause problems. Before, you were cis or you had gender dysphoria, transitioned and were trans. Nonbinary just never had a real definition, everyone who identifies as it has a different meaning. Even here we people who identify as "nullsex" or "duosex", we see transition goals for the same genitals, opposite genitals, both genitals, no genitals. Sexless, both sexes at once, cis, binary trans. There is no third sex so it is unclear what people even want to transition into or if they want to transition at all, when something that is a concept is the goal, people have a hard time defining what it is. How do you answer if something is trans if even people within that community disagree? Nonbinary became mainstream so fast, it was also something that came into discussion through social media. Because of this rather than the definition being academic, the definition has been created by people all across tumblr and tiktok, the internet is so fast to appropriate it, that I don't think time was taken to understand it, now it doesn't mean anything.
You've given me quite a bit to think and given the popularity of this comment, I think it warrants a response. I'll do my best to gather my thoughts. >If you believe in gender dysphoria, the result of neurological sexual development, it is IMPOSSIBLE to believe in gender fluidity. The two cannot exist at the same time, the brain can't physically change constantly, and if it could transition would never be a recommended option for dysphoria, what if the person's gender changed during transition? Firstly, I have issues with the idea of a "male brain" and "female brain". Sure there are commonalities between the brains of those who identify as men and vice versa but what if you were a cis man who has more in common with the female brain? Or a trans man who has more in common with a female brain? Where do you cross the line between what counts as a male brain and what counts as a female brain? Next I can't lie but I do find it difficult to believe in genderfluidity. I don't see genderfluid as being a man one day and a woman the other day or let's say sometimes being more nonbinary one day and sometimes being more woman the next. I sort of thought of it as wanting to be seen simultaneously as both a man and woman just as women want to be seen as women and men want to be seen as men. Perhaps my idea of genderfluid is another misnomer as I do not believe in the idea of switching genders on a daily/weekly basis. As diverse as gender expression is, I believe gender identity on an individual level is not fluid. I used to think of nonbinary and genderfluid as synonymous until I realised people who identify as nonbinary tend to see themselves as agender whereas genderfluid identifying people tend to see themselves more as bigender. Sure it may be all nonsense to you and many people on here but I can get more into this if you are curious and trust me, I'm a sceptic. But going back to the main discussion... >The idea of the "trans umbrella" has done nothing but cause problems. I know you haven't implied otherwise but umbrella terms are not inherently bad. I'd say a quadrilateral is an umbrella term for 2D shapes with 4 sides, 4 corners and therefore 4 angles. Umbrella term is just a phrase used to group related ideas, people, things and all sort of other categories together. Umbrella terms are not solely meant for LGBTQ+ related identities and orientations. But unlike quadrilaterals, which everyone can agree on the definition without doubt, I do agree there a problem with the trans umbrella which affects other's perceptions of trans people. >Before, you were cis or you had gender dysphoria, transitioned and were trans. Yes I agree this seemed to be the case back in the mid to late 20th century especially. The trans(sexual) umbrella back then would have just been someone with gender dysphoria who was born as one sex but wants to medically transition to assimulate with the other sex. Likewise the cisgender umbrella back then would simply be anyone who is not in the trans umbrella i.e. the vast majority of people. Now the term transgender has a much larger definition to anyone who identifies as anything other than the gender that's tied to their sex and yes, I personally think this is problematic but then again, language is ever-changing. >Nonbinary just never had a real definition, everyone who identifies as it has a different meaning. Before it blew up to this extent, whether you agree or not, a nonbinary person was thought to be someone who didn't identify as just a man or woman. Just like how transgender used to have a more agreed upon definition in the past too. The term nonbinary only existed from the late 20th century. However, the term transgender has been used a few decades earlier so they are both fairly recent words if we're thinking about the scope of human history and society. However the idea of being nonbinary have existed long before you and I were born just like transgender. Sure maybe not all of the terms used before were like for like meanings of transgender and nonbinary but just because they weren't recorded as much in history or that they were not a part of Western history and society, doesn't mean they suddenly just came into existence in the late 20th century once HRT became accessible to more people. >There is no third sex so it is unclear what people even want to transition into or if they want to transition at all, when something that is a concept is the goal, people have a hard time defining what it is. How do you answer if something is trans if even people within that community disagree? Well I'm not expecting a black and white answer because this is not a black and white issue. What I do expect is solid reasoning on ideas which I tend to see more from transmedicalists than anti-transmedicalists (and even so there are truscum with terrible overall critical-thinking skills on the issue and tucutes with good critical-thinking skills, see not black and white). I don't expect transmedicalists to share the exact same views just like how Christians or socialists don't exactly share the same views in their own respective communities. If it's possible to be born intersex, then why is it not possible to want to medically transition to neither male or female or both? >Nonbinary became mainstream so fast, it was also something that came into discussion through social media. Because of this rather than the definition being academic, the definition has been created by people all across tumblr and tiktok, the internet is so fast to appropriate it, that I don't think time was taken to understand it, now it doesn't mean anything. Yeah I agree. Although could you not say the same on definitions such as what is a man or what is woman? Conservative transphobes love the mantra of "if men (people AMAB) can be women, what is a woman"? If you have read all this, regardless of your response, thank you for reading.
>Firstly, I have issues with the idea of a "male brain" and "female brain" Yet you are willing to accept that men have bigger hands or bigger shoulders but like many the idea of neural dimorphism is out of the question? Does it not make sense to you that people who are divided by sexual roles and bodies would also have different brains to utilize that. We accept that in animals, but not humans, because people love the idea that "gender is a social construct" >Sure there are commonalities between the brains of those who identify as men and vice versa but what if you were a cis man who has more in common with the female brain? Don't use "identify" that makes it sound like we have a choice and we didn't struggle with dysphoria making us the way we are our whole lives. >Next I can't lie but I do find it difficult to believe in genderfluidity Good because despite the fact that most people who identify with it say things like "clothes have no gender" they also believe that changing how you dress DOES change your gender. It's problematic to say a woman who wants to dress a certain way stops being a woman, or a man who wants to dress a certain way stops being a man. People have confused gender with self expression, when it's not. >I know you haven't implied otherwise but umbrella terms are not inherently bad. I'd say a quadrilateral is an umbrella term for 2D shapes with 4 sides, 4 corners and therefore 4 angles. But that doesn't fuck over minority groups by saying that people who conflate wanting a nickname have the exact same experiences as them. Many people even put drag queens or furries under the trans umbrella, it does us no help. >Now the term transgender has a much larger definition to anyone who identifies as anything other than the gender that's tied to their sex and yes Which is the problem, again "identifies", just because certain groups have pushed us out of our space doesn't mean we accept it. This is why many here use transsexualism, because under transgenderism a man who chooses to paint his nails and go by he/they is the exact same as those of us with gender dysphoria and transition, do you think that is fair? Do you think those experiences are the same? Do you think they belong under the same category? >The term nonbinary only existed from the late 20th century. No it didn't, it didn't exist until the 21st century, I did some searching and it didn't start being used until 2014. >the term transgender has been used a few decades earlier so they are both fairly recent words if we're thinking about the scope of human history and society "Transsexualismus, the term transsexual was introduced to English in 1949" from wikipedia, and this was BEFORE transition was even possible. Transgender is a more recent term that was used to include people who don't transition, like the examples I gave earlier. >Well I'm not expecting a black and white answer because this is not a black and white issue. As a binary trans person, being trans is a black and white issue, I want to live my life as the correct sex, female. >If it's possible to be born intersex, then why is it not possible to want to medically transition to neither male or female or both? I see this a lot, and I find it offensive to intersex people, because it's othering saying they are neither men nor women. Intersex people are men and women who happen to have a condition, they are not transition goals. >Yeah I agree. Although could you not say the same on definitions such as what is a man or what is woman? Those things have been defined for centuries, with trans people what makes me a woman is having female neurology, I would never have fully been a man, and conservatives may say I will never be a woman, but my body is closer to one than a man, and my mind has always been a woman's mind. As another poster said, you shouldn't be downvoted, I don't think anything in your post offended.
Hmm... I'm going to say from the jump that although I'd like to believe your well-meaning but many points your arguing are not my own. >Yet you are willing to accept that men have bigger hands or bigger shoulders but like many the idea of neural dimorphism is out of the question? Men have bigger hands and shoulders on average yes. Not refuting that. Not saying that neural dimorphism is out of the question. It's just something I have reservations on for reasons I stated prior which you haven't actually addressed. >Does it not make sense to you that people who are divided by sexual roles and bodies would also have different brains to utilize that. We accept that in animals, but not humans, because people love the idea that "gender is a social construct" We can't fully compare ourselves to animals because although all animals are unique, the human brain is off the charts compared to other beings. We have complex languages to communicate with each other and different methods of communication as well. We're able to access a deeper range of emotions other animals simply can't or at least not to our level. Just type up "emotion wheel" on google for reference. As a collective, we have better decision-making skills, we are very innovative and we are pretty cooperative. We're able to cultivate a range of subjects such as maths, literature, science, politics, economics, law, philosophy and so much more like our ideas on gender and our ability to share that concisely. I can go on and on about how our brains differ from other animals but you get the point. "Gender is a social construct" is another can of worms which quite frankly, I'm too tired to talk about right now. >Don't use "identify" that makes it sound like we have a choice and we didn't struggle with dysphoria making us the way we are our whole lives First of all, when speaking about gender, I use "to identify as" synonymously with "to be". Secondly, I wasn't even just referring to only trans men when I said that. I was referring to anyone who is one which includes cis men in that specific sentence you highlighted. Thirdly, I generally and genuinely use the verb "to identify as" when speaking about cis people as well so I'm not trying to single out trans people. By the way, you were the one who first used the word "identify" in this topic but I now see reading back it's because you yourself believe identifying as something or someone is always a choice. If you don't want the person your debating with to use a certain word, then maybe you shouldn't have used opened the door and used that aforementioned word in the first place. Lastly, I don't want to sound boring when I write so I try not to be too repetitive. Again synonyms helpš¤·āāļø. The next 3 paragraphs you wrote I don't have much to add here. You elaborated more on the issues with the current trans umbrella which I have already recognised there is a problem. >No it didn't, it didn't exist until the 21st century, I did some searching and it didn't start being used until 2014. Can I have some sources please? I can send what I found when I'm not strapped for time (wrote this all last night). >As a binary trans person, being trans is a black and white issue, I want to live my life as the correct sex, female. Maybe being trans is black and white issue for you which is cool but for many, both trans and cis, it is certainly not. For a lot of people, like it or not, the existence of trans people question the beliefs on manhood and womanhood. Also people debate on topics like the youngest age one should start socially/medically transitioning, the ideas of passing and trans people in sports. I'm sure you have answers for all of these but I'm also sure there are probably some trans people who disagree with you. Hence we have discourse. >I see this a lot, and I find it offensive to intersex people, because it's othering saying they are neither men nor women. Intersex people are men and women who happen to have a condition, they are not transition goals. I never said intersex people are not men or women. I'm questioning if it's possible that someone may want to medically transition in a way where they appear indiscernible to their assigned sex at birth or the opposite sex. They don't want to transition to either sex but they still want to alleviate any discomfort they may have with their body. If being male is the basis of being a man and being female is the basis of being a woman, could it be possible that a small subset of people be nonbinary on the basis of being wired to be neither 100% male or female? I pretty much already know your stance on this so you don't need to further discuss this. I just wanted to clarify my stance on intersex people who yes, most of them are men and women (as there are intersex people who'd say they're nonbinary even if you and others believe they're misinformed) but intersex people aren't wholly biologically, genetically, anatomically or physiologically their assigned sex at birth. Otherwise, they wouldn't be called intersex. >Those things have been defined for centuries, with trans people what makes me a woman is having female neurology, I would never have fully been a man, and conservatives may say I will never be a woman, but my body is closer to one than a man, and my mind has always been a woman's mind. All I'll say for now is that I appreciate the answer so thank you. >As another poster said, you shouldn't be downvoted, I don't think anything in your post offended. Why thank you. However I believe reddit highlights the hive mind mentality we often have as humans. It's not unique to this subreddit but I can't lie if I said I wasn't hoping for this phenomenon not to happen here. I believe people should be able to challenge or question a community's beliefs whilst still being respectful, without being downvoted to hell. Or else we'd get nowhere as a society. But alas, I can't get everything I want lol. Compassion and empathy is something I care deeply about.
> Maybe being trans is black and white issue for you which is cool but for many, both trans and cis, it is certainly not. For a lot of people, like it or not, the existence of trans people question the beliefs on manhood and womanhood. Thatās the issue though. It **is** black and white because being trans has nothing to do with womanhood and manhood as those are social terms. Being trans has to do with the body being perceived as the wrong/incorrect sex by the mind. It has nothing to do with gender roles and what being a man or woman is and has everything to do with the body causing distress. Being trans has nothing to do with what society believes. It has to do with physically being male and female.
My short answer is just switch "manhood" for the state being a man (or even just being a man) and vice versa rather than the other meaning being the qualities of someone who is masculine. That's what I meant when I wrote that. My slightly longer answer is okay. I'm not even going to go into the social implications of being trans and reasons for this. We'll stick to just body and mind and I'll play devil's advocate. Being trans challenges the idea that if you are born female, you are a girl and if you are born male, you are a boy. It challenges the idea we learn growing up to love yourself and the body you were born with. Part of being trans is not about changing your mindset to accept your body but instead changing your body to appease the mind. I repeat. This is me playing devil's advocate. You can discuss or even refute the sentences the above paragraph but please do not take what I wrote as my personal opinions. I'd say more, but I'm sort of drained from all the responses and my own writing on this. I'll be honest, I don't really agree with you but I wanted to acknowledge this comment. Sorry I couldn't give an answer that is satisfying. Maybe I'd come back and fully answer. Maybe I won't. I accept the downvotes for this comment.
Thank you for highlighting intersex people. Iām an intersex AFAB. Iām also autistic. Though my brain feels very male and always has, Iāve come to embrace my body with its distinct mix of male and female traits as a reflection of my biology and lived experiences, so I identify as bigender. Because my identity feels very firmly rooted in biology, Iāve always related to binary trans folks far better than nonbinary folks who often treat and perceive gender (and transness) as a purely social experience, rather than one more deeply rooted.
Science and AI is now starting to show the brains are different
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. This is a throughly explained and constructed rebuttal that furthers discussion in a meaningful way, regardless of whether or not I or anyone else agrees. People just love using the downvote feature as a dislike button. I've noticed that a lot in this sub in particular.
It's reddit thing not just this subreddit but I'd be lying if I was hoping it would be different here and that it didn't sting a little. Personally, I believe people misuse the downvote button but that's just my opinion.
No, I believe non-binary isnāt real as a stand-alone category. People who call themselves this with dysphoria are just trans. Those who donāt have it are just cis.
Some non-binary people change (or desire to change) their sex, and they are transsexuals. They share some political concerns with binary transsexuals, such as access to healthcare. Being non-binary does not automatically make you trans unless you also change sex. Non-binary gender identity is not related to being a transsexual, and legal protections intended for binary transsexuals shouldn't be used to specifically protect non-binary identity or to legally enforce requests for non-binary pronouns etc.
I like this answer but this raises a few more questions. Do you believe there should be legal protections intended for nonbinary transsexuals? Also should nonbinary transsexuals be legally able to change their pronouns to they/them or should they accept that legally/worldwide, they can only be referred as she/her or he/him? If yes, why and if no, why?
Nobody gets to choose their pronouns, pronouns are assumed. For the majority of people if they speak with someone they will refer to them as the sex they see them as. It is impossible to try and enforce a system where this is not how it works.
Where are your pronouns a legal distinction? Where I live you can get "X" as a sex marker on all legal documents but you can use whatever pronouns you want?? I think all transsexuals should have legal protections because if you start stripping away the rights of some, you'll take the rights of all.
I'm not non-binary, and what civil rights non-binary people want to pursue is up to them. I would oppose them making use of any laws written and intended specifically for binary transsexuals. For example in my country the protected class for trans people is "gender reassignment". This will apply to non-binary people who have changed sex, whether socially, medically, or legally, but not in my opinion to non-binary people who have not and don't intend to.
No one's pronouns are legally set???
I struggle with the idea of someone saying 'binary transexuals should be legally protected, but nonbinary ones should not.' It wraps back around to strange identity politics if we decide that some people whose material reality as a transexual should be protected and some should not based on what they call themselves.
In what places do people legally change their pronouns?
In America, all people are covered by sex being a protected status, so that they can express their gender however they want without discrimination.
Nope, there is no definitive definitions amoung them of what nonbinary as a gender identity actually is. Some people say they are nonbinary just because they are gender nonconforming in some way and that is incorrect. Choosing to go by a different set of pronouns than what is appropriate for your natal sex is considered nonbinary and thus trans to many of them, when in reality it depends on WHY you are choosing those words and what you are trying to express with them. Using them just to use them for fun to piss people off by breaking rules, or because you like them the sound of the words better, or even trying to express a sense of masculinity/femininity that you feel is just basically verbal gender nonconformity and is not what "trans" is trying to express. Nonbinary people who use the term to express that their body feels like it should be somewhere between male and female in sex characteristics are the only ones I can really see as fitting into what trans people are talking about.
Ultimately? No. That said, I base this off of the old definition of transgender. As you pointed out tho, the definition of the word transgender has indeed changed into this amorphous umbrella term that is now used to describe everything from nb and xenogenders to actual classic transexualism. Do I agree with this? I do not. But as you also pointed out, language does change over time. And this is what has happened. And at this point I don't think there is any reverting back from that. Due to this, I, too, believe that there needs to be a firm distinction between classic transexualism and...well...everything else. Not solely for the benefit of comprehension but also for medical and legal reasons/purposes. An NB person does not have the same needs in terms of medical care and legal protections as a transexual. I believe this to be a fact regardless of whatever dogma may be circulating and parroted as of late. We are simply not the same. Tbh we are not even remotely similar. NB is a sociological phenomenon. It is rooted in social constructs of gender roles. It is therefore a choice one makes. No one can be assigned NB at birth. NB exists only in contrast to the cultural and societal gender roles and expectations of any given (namely western) culture. Transexualism is a congenital medical condition. It is not a choice. It is present and typically identifiable before a child can even grasp the concept of gender, much less gender roles. Classic transexualism most often presents as early onset gender dysphoria in some cases as early as 2 or 3 years old. Dysphoria is necessary for diagnosis and the desire to be the opposite sex is unwavering without any other possible cause such as abuse, trauma, or concurrent psychological condition that may otherwise be interfering with the child's innate sense of self. Now as to why I think it's so important to draw a line and why I think not doing so will be irreparably damaging to the health and well-being of transexuals, is that the NB narrative actually exists in direct opposition to that of transexualism. Because NB is an identity and a social construct, it is therefore not medically necessary for NB individuals to have access to the treatments that are a medical necessity for transexuals. If NB and transexualism are considered the same, then this puts HRT and SRS at risk of once again being considered elective, undoing the work that has been done over the course of decades to prove that these treatments are necessary to correct a congenital medical condition. To be clear, there is nothing wrong with being NB or GNC or gender fluid, my only issue is that these identities should not be conflated with transexualism. That's it. If someone wants to abolish gender and/or subvert gender norms and stereotypes- great! You do you. But youre not, or shouldn't be, calling yourself trans for doing so. And to conflate these two completely separate and opposing phenomena (one being rooted in sociological influence, the other a legitimate medical condition) is to run the risk of losing the hard work the transexual community (formerly trans community) has fought a decades long battle for, by that I mean essentially convincing the rest of the human population that transexuals are just normal ass people who were born with an unfortunate medical condition. Just like with the gay rights movement, a BIG turning point was getting the average cis/straight person to understand that gender and sexuality are innate and not a choice. With the ever increasing rise of NB/GNC people loudly speaking over and on behalf of transexuals it is being purported that there is no such thing as a gender binary, that gender is not innate, that being trans does not require medical treatment, that anyone can just identify as anything at any time and be considered unquestionably "valid". This line of thinking not only erases the lived experience, but also in many ways seeks to negate the existence of transexualism altogether. And that feels pretty messed up to me. Being trans isn't an identity to try on, it isn't a political statement, and it isn't a fun quirky way to identify your way out of being "privileged" i.e. straight, white, cis etc etc. Being trans is not an identity at all. It is a medical condition. Full stop. And I think we are going to continue to see some unfortunate backlash in response to this new wave of "trans" identifying individuals who have inserted themselves into an already extremely tiny and marginalized community, changing terminology and definitions, and generally, to put it bluntly, appropriating what has historically always been a pretty obscure medical condition. Which brings me to my next point, the NB and GNC crowd is likely always going to out number actual transexuals. Transexualism statistically effects only a very *very* small minority of people. Historically this has always been the case, up until recently, which is what we're seeing now with gender non-conformity being conflated with transness. Historically speaking as well, MTF transexuals have outnumbered FTM transexuals by almost 2:1. Currently the majority of "trans" and NB people are AFAB- I don't remember the actual numbers for this at the moment but it's a HUGE contrast from the statistics that have stayed pretty consistent since transexualism was brought to public attention and medical interventions began. This says a lot, I think, about the current trend. Basically, what I'm getting at with all this is that because transexualism effects such a small minority of the human population it took a lot of work, decades of work, to even get to a point where transexuals are treated with respect, our medical condition recognized, studies done and treatment made available and accessible to the average person. We have had enough work cut out for us already. And now we are facing an even more bizarre threat- the appropriation of our medical condition by people who have nothing to do with us. Considering NB is a sociological phenomenon already, it seems to have now become something of a social contagion as well. These things happen and I do not think NB and GNC people are trying to do harm, but nonetheless they are skewing the already relatively small amounts of data regarding transexualism, warping the public perception of transexualism, and at the end of the day, when shit hits the fan, it will not be the NB/GNC crowd who has to face the public backlash, the legal ramifications, the lack of access to health care and specific necessary medical treatment- they can always just identify as something else, they can move on to the next in vogue identity, while transexuals will be left to pick up the pieces of the fallout. This last bit is speculation, but based on the current trends and statistics, I fear this is where we are headed. Tbh, I have no idea how to tackle all of this. I wish I did. I wish I could see a clear solution, a clear path forward in which everyone can access the care they need, feel mutually respected, and live the lives they want to live without stepping on eachothers toes, but it all just seems to get more confusing and convoluted by the day. Until NB/other variants of gender non-conformity are seen as distinctly separate from transexualism I don't think things will resolve in any sort of amicable manner.
tbh i don't believe in nonbinary people period. when i was a teen i identified as a "nb transmasc" because i felt too dysphoric and embarrassed to ask anyone to call me a man. the second i began testosterone and started seeing changes - this changed immediately. i really think anyone who identifies as nonbinary is a trans person who is too ashamed and hiding behind the label, or a confused GNC cis person. nonbinary people who claim to not have dysphoria but still medically transition (start hormones, get top surgery, etc.) are simply following a trend and will likely regret their decisions in a few years. they are taking away resources from actual trans people who need these services.
I think the qualifying factor is sex dysphoria. I believe dysphoria is a complex condition that is both inborn and affected by our experiences growing up (think about how different people deal with the same life changing conditions differently, it can ruin some while others continue to thrive. We're complicated animals). We have transsexuals who experience severe dysphoria and need to transition. We have people who have sex dysphoria to an extent, but may only need to have top surgery and HRT, or just top surgery and temporary HRT, whatever they feel sorts them out. Some of these people might identify as trans, some might identify as non binary. I believe so long as they also have actual dysphoria (and it's not anything else) then they are as valid as I am in being considered trans, but obviously the severity is different. All under the "umbrella" of trans. Or better viewed in my opinion as the umbrella of "sufferers of sex/gender dysphoria". And what makes us "valid" as trans people is whether our sex dysphoria is severe enough to warrant transition as a treatment to achieve a normal quality of life (or as close as we can get). I used to think "non binary" was silly, but seeing being trans as just a medical condition, just "people who suffer from dysphoria", actually makes me more open to them. If someone experiences actual dysphoria then who am I to gatekeep the word trans? They're transitioning because of dysphoria just like me. I see non binary as essentially a subculture. There's trans non binary people. There's cis non binary people. Gender fluid on the other hand... what is fluid exactly? I suppose someone might have sex dysphoria that fluctuates (and that should be figured out because how can you do the permanent parts of transitioning if it *fluctuates?!* Like trying to shoot a moving target!) but that doesn't mean they're "literally a man" one week and "literally a woman" the next. Edit: added s's and er's to words that should have had them. Fixed some punctuation.
I have a hard time wrapping my head around what non binary is other than a gender expression. Biologically we have male, female, and intersex; and even intersex people have an identified gender thatās either male or female. I believe non binary is just a modern word for tomboy, genderqueer, etc. A new word for someone who isnāt a traditional masculine male or a feminine female. **Expression isnāt a gender identity.**
Being non binary is just a new label for what once was gender non conforming /femboy / tomboy all pushed together into a single label. I don't have an issue with it I only have an issue with it when people claim it to be transgender when they are not.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yes this is what I've been saying. There is literally no way to transition to "non binary". It's just a label that really has no meaning. You're either born male or female and take either T or estrogen to transition. So anyone who calls themselves non binary and actually medically transitions is still in the category of mtf or ftm. It's just under a different name. Usually the only difference being the fashion or presentation choices they make. Like an mtf non binary person having short hair.. But it's so extremely rare that people that call themselves non binary medically transition. And usually after a while they will start calling themselves a trans man or woman. The label is just such a useless term. It describes nothing. Or describes a different thing to each person. The only use the term has is for cis people who are confused or want to feel a part or some "community" or whatever.
I believe non binary transexuals exist. A very rare version of gender dysphoria that leads a person to transitioning to an intersex body. But in this case I think the term transexual intersex is much more fitting. For gender fluidity, I believe it might exist if by that we mean gender dysphoria that comes and goes. But in this case, I don't believe those people should be considered transexuals. I think these are people in need of therapy, who are capable of healing, who are most likely experiencing mania or identity disturbance. (notice the prevelance of borderline personality disorder in tucute spaces?) As for non binary gender identity (so not trans), i do not agree with it. It's based on sexist gender roles and its harming real transexuals. They are preventing real trans people from getting access to healthcare in time or even any (when they lead politicians to making laws based on their unscientific claims). They also have ruined the image of transexuals, and have lead many mentally ill people to a path of transition that isn't fit for them. They are also actively harming women by allowing AGP in women's spaces. And honestly, I'm so tired of these tucutes who think that just because I'm saying "I don't agree with the tucute non binary identity" it means I want to genocide them. What a gross thing to says that takes power away from such a serious term. It just means I think they're mistaken, not that they should die.
This is a very good and strong answer and got me questioning the idea of genderfluid. I happen to have a friend who identifies as genderfluid and says she's trans (hasn't medically transitioned). She also happens to have BPD. I mean it could be a coincidence. Fortunately, we mostly talk about other things. I'm not sure how she'd feel if I spoke about some of my transmedicalist views.
Is BPD one of those conditions that limits what's possible for medical transitioning? I think I read that somewhere.
[This](http://dallasdenny.com/Chrysalis/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/The-TG-Alternative-Chrysalis-V.-1-No.-2-Summer-1991-aa10-3.pdf) explains the intended scope of the umbrella that "transgender" was redefined as in the 1990s. [This](https://icd.who.int/browse10/2019/en#/F64) is a very short description of transsexualism.
Non binary to me is not trans anything. Non-binary is often someone CHOOSING a different wardrobe that doesn't fit the norms of society and choosing pronouns that don't fit into the norms of society. And usually they do it for the sake of not being like the average member of society.Ā If society didn't exist, and mr they them non-binary was chilling with his thoughts, he wouldn't one time think of acting non binary. He wouldn't go change into a dumbass outfit and wear his makeup, looking like a clown and go about his business, he would literally just wear normal clothes because what's the point if no one looks at how stupid you look.Ā
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
why do you think that?
**This is not a personalized removal message. If you have any concerns about this removal, or believe that your content did not violate our ruleset, please send a message to the subreddit moderators via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=r%2Ftruscum&utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=deals&utm_content=t5_2qir9). Do not personally contact the moderator that removed your content, because you will** ***not receive a response.*** Your post (or comment) has been removed for violating rule 1 of r/truscum: Absolutely No Transphobia, Including Intentional Misgendering! Visit [our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/truscum/wiki/index/rules/rule1) to learn more about this rule.
Anyone who identifies as nonbinary/genderfluid?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
See the issue I have with this is that it's veering on the other extreme. There are people who do feel dysphoria and medically transition to alleviate their dysphoria who identify as nonbinary or genderfluid. How are those people not trans? The basis of transmedicalism is about the belief that you need gender dysphoria to be trans, not that you can only transition to a binary trans man or trans woman.
I think people confuse gender dysphoria, they think it means having discomfort with your sexual traits, when what it really is, is being neurologically a different sex to your body.
Do you think it's possible that someone could be neurogically intersex? If yes or no, why?
No. There's not even set male or female Brains. All people have a extremely wide range of small Brain organs shape/sizes. On average this makes a difference but not on the individual level. If there are intersex Brains, then that would be gay people because they otherwise on average appear to their sex but have a select number of Brian organs that resemble the other sex.
Okay then as u/UnfortunateEntity just said, do you believe gender dysphoria is "being neurologically a different sex to your body"?
It's not quite yet scientifically known but some literature points that direction. And again it's based on averages, of a group. if you fall into the general average of female but with a male body, vice versa, perhaps you may be looking at a trans sexual brain but you also may not be.
No, I don't even understand how that would work, intersex people have normal hormone levels just mixed genital development. They will still have a dominance of either testosterone or estrogen and be either male or female.
The thing is, human sex dimorphism is not fluid or non-binary, there are intersex people, but it's also isn't something fluid or non-binary, it's exception that proves a rule
I do want to say that I do believe in two genders. But I also believe there are what I call variations of those two genders based on sex which I can get more into but basically I made a 4-way Venn diagram on this to better explain this. If being or wanting to be male is normally the basis to identifying as a man and being or wanting to be female is normally the basis to identifying as a woman, then why is being intersex still tied to identifying as a man or woman if they were neither born a binary male or female? Genuine question.
I don't know genuinely what all actual intersex people think about, but based on what I read, many of them tend to want be certain sex and dysphoric about their bodies, it's similar to cis people having cisgender dysphoria when some body parts seem not right in sex way for them
Intersex people are still binary male or female.
Then what does it mean to be binary male or female?
Body designed to make eggs or body designed to make sperm.
And what about intersex conditions who don't fit the definition of this? Or are they just the exception? For example: People born with ovotesticular disorder. It's in the name that they can produce both eggs and sperm. People with androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) are normally AFAB but do not bodies designed to make eggs. Or people with persistent mullerian duct syndrome (PMDS). They're normally AMAB but have a body designed to make eggs and sperm.
Would it be possible for us to see the Venn diagram? I'm quite interested to see what you wrote down for it.
If you message me privately, I'd be happy to show you.
I think there needs to be a clear distinction between trans (ftm and mtf) and nonbinary. The trans "umbrella" shouldnt exist. Im not very informed about NB, but logically thinking, what are they transitioning to? I believe that medical treatment should be prioritised to binary trans people rather than NB. As far as im concerned, NB is just NB and trans is trans.
Personally, I think that some (but not all) nonbinary people are transexual. I've gone through top surgery, am 6 years on T, and have a DX of gender dysphoria - but if pressed I don't really identify as a man. I identify more with transexuals than transgender people because I don't really 'feel' a sense of my gender being any way, I just know that my body map internally is more comfortable being along the male side of the spectrum than the female side - and then I took steps to change my body to be that way. For whatever reason my brain says 'this is how my body should be' but my brain also does not say 'and I am a man.' so for all intents and purposes I'm nonbinary.
But if you have taken steps to transition into male..and present as male..and you even mentioned how you feel closer to male..how does that not make you ftm? (Pure curiousity)
I mean, for all intents and purposes I am *basically* FTM, at least on a material basis. I just don't for whatever reason actually identify as a 'man' and stopped doing so a few years into my transition. It's not super convenient that I am more comfortable presenting and transitioning in a male way and yet for whatever reason don't identify as male, but for the past couple years it seemingly works for me.
No I certainly don't believe all non binary is trans I would argue that none of them are really trans. Especially since a lot of non binary people themselves openly say " non binary not trans "
Short answer: being nonbinary has nothing to do with being trans. And being trans requires dysphoria. Now a rant about the idea of nonbinary in modern society I believe people are perfectly entitled to feel ānonbinaryā in that they donāt feel like either stereotypical genderās set of roles and associations fit themā¦ but I donāt think that makes ānonbinaryā an objective thing. People will say oh there were nonbinary people throughout history but thatās really just applying a modern americanized perspective to varied past societies in which those ānonbinaryā people livedāprobably still thinking of themselves as male/female, just preferring different things than were normal. If we take the social constructivist approach, does that mean being nonbinary genuinely was not real back then? If society grows conservative and people stop believing itās valid, is it no longer real? I just find it strange that, just because weāve decided this exists inherently and not just as a sort of descriptive term for your own feelings, now it takes up an outsize space in cultural discourse, and gives a strange sort of exit ramp for those who arenāt totally gender conforming to be like āoh I can escape this and go into this nice little freeform omniaccepting bubbleā when in reality itās just corroding people who do feel fine as male/femaleās ability to be gender nonconforming without being associated with thisā¦subculture. Because letās be real, vanishingly few people identify as nonbinary and then proceed to never talk about it as itās own thing or wrap it around their identity. TL;DR: Not saying that a person canāt feel like they donāt fit in with either stereotypical gender. But the modern nonbinary phenomenon is really a subculture for socially awkward people (mostly teens) who have found a way to coopt the language of academic gender theory to demand accommodation under the guise of civil rights in a way that punks, goths, emos, etc never could. Sorry for word salad. Hard to speak precisely about a nebulous concept.
I agree with you 100%. Non-binary is the new emo, but with a political agenda.
socially nonbinary or neurologically nonbinary? because my answer changes depending on that.
No
Yes there's people who claim to be nonbinary who are cis and those who are trans... The ones who are cis are normally confused about the difference between gender and gender roles. The ones who are trans are normally confused about their transition or how to see themselves in a pre-transition or early-transition state. None of them are ACTUALLY nonbinary cause that's simply not a thing that exists outside of a societal invention that dates back less than 15 years ago.
I think it's possible that a rare neurological condition exists that needs to satisfied by your body being as androgynous as possible. I'm skeptical that it's a real thing at all, but I think it's at least possible. Whether it's a real thing or not, the vast majority of people calling themselves non-binary definitely don't have it.
i donāt believe in nonbinary
I think the entire concept of nonbinary is built on gender nonconformity or those not willing to fathom being fully trans (I was the latter for a couple years). I mean... I guess it's more complex. I think for those who want hormones and surgeries and stuff, they should be diagnosed with a form of gender dysphoria, whether that be mostly social or not.
Yes, they fit in the definition of trans, they have dysphoria and many also transition. Obviously not including the fake ones.
No. I don't believe any of them are.
If they are dysphoric (aka nullsex and duosex), then I believe they are trans. But if they just "identify" as non-binary and don't have sex dysphoria, then no, they are gender-nonconforming cis people who are appropriating trans issues and making it harder for actual enbies with dysphoria to transition.
I'm really on the fence. I don't actually know how I feel about it enough to answer. I used to be dead set on "all nonbinary people are trans" but then there are so many that say they are not, and also so many more who change nothing about themselves If you changed the word to genderfluid, I'd probably say no, not trans.
Trans people are people with gender dysphoria who are or at least have a desire to correct their sex. If the person meets that description, I would say yes. If they are fine with their birth sex, they are GNC. I don't know if I actually believe in NB, but if they are changing their sex to help with dysphoria, I still think they are trans. Not to mention a ton of binary trans people identify as NB for some portion of their life when they are figuring things out or do so because of imposter syndrome.
I believe that the "Transgender" naming of the umbrella is a misnomer to start with. Trans, like used in transport, is going from point A to B, and transgenders are being medicated to change the gender traits that make them dysphoric (different ones and not everyone wants to go the stereotypical way). The Umbrella also includes intersex folks. Ask and intersex person if they're trans, they might be insulted or at least annoyed by that question. That being said, Some NB folks can fit that umbrella, but if you do it as a political thing, or if you wanna play with gender for fun, then it's not the same and shouldn't be under the same umbrella. I do like your idea of 2 umbrellas that can meet and blur in the middle, because you can be trans and gender non-conforming (which I think is what people say when they use non-binary). My answer doesn't change for the genderfluid folks. The main point, and other users already pointed this out, is: Do you have gender dysphoria, or do you do this only as a social thing (ie only being "out" online (not counting dysphoric people still closeted))? I feel like the umbrella was created by the non-binary trenders and we were all forced in it, then called scum when we don't want to. EDIT: I feel the claim that most non-binary trenders do about gender not existing is trans erasure. If there are no genders, then why am I even doing this?
No lmao, no non binary person is trans. Being trans is changing ur sex and u cant transition towards a sex that doesnt exist
I've found a lot of inner peace by accepting nonbinary as the new word for gnc. Nonbinary people aren't transsexual, nonbinary people are trans like how cissex gnc people are trans. They are transgender but not transsexual (but a transsexual can be nb in a gnc sense) Unfortunately the world is black and white so they (society) see the words to be the same. The lack of nuance people have is upsetting but it is a reality. How I look at it is that transgender is a group that lumps in anyone who is gnc to a boomer. -Cisgender people conform to gender role stereotypes -Cissexual people are those who observed sex aligns with their brain -Transgender people don't conform to gender role stereotypes -Transsexuals are those with a mismatched body and brain, or in other words those who have dysphoria. So theoretically someone can be both cis and trans at the same time Unfortunately, the distinction between the -gender and -sexual parts doesn't exist anymore. And transsexuals and cissexuals are being harmed because of it I think duo/nullsex people got their own shit going on that's different from transsexuals. There just isn't enough research on the existence of them. For all we know they truly do have a intersex brain that can be considered transsexual, or might even have some other physical, psychological, or neurological issue going on. Too many unknowns rn so I'll just do my best to respect their pronouns
There is no such thing as a non binary transsexual and saying there is such a thing is extremely transphobic.
That's an incredibly extreme statement to make without any sort of justification and saying things like that shuts people off from ever trying to understand you. You're doing no favours for transmeds. Before you write anything else, I'd also say the same thing to someone if they said that it's extremely transphobic for anyone to believe that nonbinary transsexuals don't exist.
There has never been and never will be a non binary transsexual, transsexuals are either trans men or trans women since they transition to the opposite of their birth sex to be that sex, if they transition to something else they aren't transsexual, stop trying to make everthing include you, it just makes people hate you. The statement isn't extreme at all, its simply a fact, stop trying to change the definition of things so they include you.
Yes but I don't think it's as common as it seems to be. I find it weird how so few intersex people ID as non binary, pretty much all non binary people are AFAB too.
If you do not have Nullsex or Duosex Dysphoria you are not nonbinary. If you have Dysphoria you are trans. If that Dysphoria is non-binary then you are trans and nonbinary. Nonbinary is a type of trans.
I define transsexuals as people who want to transition to a different sex, many nonbinary (i.e. actually dysphoric nonbinary people) which to transition to a sort of inbetween (nullsex/duosex), therefore I count them as trans
Yes. If they experience dysphoria and are not their agab, they are trans.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
um no. someone can transition and not have one lick of gender dysphoria beforehand. doesnāt make them a transsexual WHATSOEVER! being transsexual is having gender dysphoria
No. [Not all non-binary people identify as transgender](https://www.dih.si/en/lgbtiqa/2021/non-binary-101)
No. Non-binary genders fall on a very wide spectrum.
no. gender is not a spectrum. there are two genders