I'm curious to know what anyone thinks of this. I have no religious objection to it, but annoys me greatly.

Don't get me wrong: I support gay rights, and believe the transgender community deserves the same rights as anyone else.

However, 56 gender options is ludicrous, and I can't see this as helpful to any cause other than getting attention. Thoughts?


http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/...tions.html

Meh. I've been on facebook for most of five years now and the entire time, my profile has read 'female.' I never felt the need to describe myself any other way and I still don't.

But I know some people who identify outside the gender binary and if they want something else, go with it. I think 56 gender options might be a bit much, but, hey, whatever floats your boat. I'm still gonna stick with plain ol' female since I'm past 'trans' being a significant part of my identity.

As much as I support gay marriage, and am angry that it's not in the federal domain, I can imagine that in 2075, my would-be 100th birthday, civil rights will actually become a really annoying thing. 3500 new groups will seek protection under the law. But I don't know when it should end. 56 gender options? I've never even heard of 56.

I'll worry about it when there is 56 different restrooms to choose from.

There are apparently 57 varieties of ketchup.

The thing that really surprises me is they put "Neither" as an option; not only is "neither" not applicable when there are 57 other options, but I cannot fathom the person who refuses to recognise themselves as belonging to any gender. It's one thing to think that "I have a penis, but I know I'm supposed to be a girl," and another thing to think "you know what, I'm not comfortable as either male or female, so I've just decided I'm giving up on having a gender." One of them can make sense. I really hope you can understand which one does.

(February 16, 2014 at 12:58 am)Rev. Rye Wrote: The thing that really surprises me is they put "Neither" as an option; not only is "neither" not applicable when there are 57 other options, but I cannot fathom the person who refuses to recognise themselves as belonging to any gender. It's one thing to think that "I have a penis, but I know I'm supposed to be a girl," and another thing to think "you know what, I'm not comfortable as either male or female, so I've just decided I'm giving up on having a gender." One of them can make sense. I really hope you can understand which one does.

Go look through Tumblr and you'll find plenty of people who will insist that 56 gender options on facebook aren't enough because it doesn't have an option that applies to them.

(February 16, 2014 at 12:58 am)Rev. Rye Wrote: The thing that really surprises me is they put "Neither" as an option; not only is "neither" not applicable when there are 57 other options, but I cannot fathom the person who refuses to recognise themselves as belonging to any gender. It's one thing to think that "I have a penis, but I know I'm supposed to be a girl," and another thing to think "you know what, I'm not comfortable as either male or female, so I've just decided I'm giving up on having a gender." One of them can make sense. I really hope you can understand which one does.

I get hit on through social networking sites by complete strangers. Keeping one's gender private can be a very attractive option. (And if you think the greater internet fuckwad theory doesn't have a corresponding phenomena in private communications, think again.)

(February 16, 2014 at 12:58 am)Rev. Rye Wrote: The thing that really surprises me is they put "Neither" as an option; not only is "neither" not applicable when there are 57 other options, but I cannot fathom the person who refuses to recognise themselves as belonging to any gender. It's one thing to think that "I have a penis, but I know I'm supposed to be a girl," and another thing to think "you know what, I'm not comfortable as either male or female, so I've just decided I'm giving up on having a gender." One of them can make sense. I really hope you can understand which one does.

"A former catering worker who identifies as neither female or male is suing Bon Appetit Management Co. for $518,000 claiming co-workers referred to the employee as a female though repeatedly being asked to stop.

Valeria Jones alleges in a lawsuit that co-workers repeatedly called Jones “miss,” “lady” and “little lady” despite explanations that Jones “was not a female or a male and that the term was unwelcome.” "


http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index...ues_f.html

Facebook should learn how a textbox works. Just saying.