RE: Please convince me gender is binary
February 2, 2019 at 5:51 pm
(This post was last modified: February 2, 2019 at 5:58 pm by bennyboy.)
DLJ, I'd say that the symbolic representation of physical phenotypes will conflate mode with definition. We don't really say that 10 fingers is modal for our species, even though that's true. We say that since so many people have 10 fingers, it's a defining feature of the species. I certainly think that it's fair to say that ANY sexual reproductive species is divided into male and female-- whatever detours or side branches some individuals end up taking, the species certainly has some traits which are so overwhelmingly dominant that they can be considered definitional.
Now, that doesn't mean that among 7 billion people, the "other" category isn't so massive that they deserve consideration. In general, as a social species with a bent toward good, we should accommodate all differences. But to pretend that it's all just a big rainbow, and you just fit in wherever you want, is a semantic abuse of the definition of the human species on the whole. If you went out into the population and attempted to identify them by sex, you'd be accurate like 99% of the time, I reckon. And that 1% wouldn't prove you wrong-- it would prove that there are exceptions which prove the rule.
Now, that doesn't mean that among 7 billion people, the "other" category isn't so massive that they deserve consideration. In general, as a social species with a bent toward good, we should accommodate all differences. But to pretend that it's all just a big rainbow, and you just fit in wherever you want, is a semantic abuse of the definition of the human species on the whole. If you went out into the population and attempted to identify them by sex, you'd be accurate like 99% of the time, I reckon. And that 1% wouldn't prove you wrong-- it would prove that there are exceptions which prove the rule.
