[Serious] Please convince me gender is binary

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm pretty sure that no one expressing a non heteronormative position is talking about their genitalia.

Why not? I thought they were.  I go to a restroom. If I say to Randy, "sup dude" I assume he is male and Randy has a dick. If Randy corrects me saying "but I'm a chick", then I'm assuming she doesn't have a dick. That would make me question internally why Randy chose the men's bathroom to pee in. To which I would respond, "Whatever Randy, just wash your hands after"

You'd probably have to ask yourself why you thought that.  If it's on the basis of the use of "dude" that's dodgy...girls use that word too.  Just as guys use the word chick, and tell their buddies to stop being them, lol.  

If I tell you that my friend sam is a real dude for a girl...I'm not indicating that she has a large penis for a female, and I use binary heteronormative language by force of habit.

[Shell B]

Randy wouldn't be using the men's room as a chick. You're confusing non-binary gender characteristics with transgender. This isn't quite the same. Transgender people do identify as one or the other, typically.

[tackattack]

No. Then you can substitute dude for "man" and chick for "girl". I am identifying him as a "him" because he self- asserts "his" gender identity by walking into the men's restroom. If he's got boobs and walks into a men's room, I might look at "him" funny, but I'd assume "he"d identify "himself" as a dude. I'm not saying Randy is a sissy man, or a butch man, just that "he" identifies as some type of man to come into the men's room. He could just be a girl that really had to go pee though. My reaction to either wouldn't have changed much in either case, other than the fact I might volunteer to guard the door so the lady can squat.

Ok shell I'm confused again, but thought I had it straight.

Sex- Male female
Gender Identity- Male or Female (might develop later and be different than gonads)
Gender expression - What you present yourself as
sexual attraction - IDC
transgender people- gender identify as male or female typically?
non-binary gender characteristics- Is a new term introduced and I can only assume it's a combination of gender identity and expression?

[Shell B]

Yes, transgender people identify as male or female. They go from their gender of birth to the gender of their "choosing" (for lack of a better word). Therefore, if Randy was born a woman, but transitioned to a man or is transitioning to a man, he would use the men's room. Randy wouldn't stroll in wearing a dress.

[tackattack]

OK I think I got the transgender (which is still binary or in a flux state), what about the non-binary gender characteristics you were talking about, that confused me.

[bennyboy]

There are actual women, and there are biological males who act in ways that women generally act.  To pretend there are no norms, no general trends that are defined by physical phenotype, is to ignore the reality of the human species.

No one pretends that there are no cultural norms, no one.  The only reality of the human species being discussed by gender conformity or non conformity is the reality of gender constructs.  There is no specific, species wide reality of gender whatsoever, regardless of the fact that we do or don't have a specific set of genitalia.   

Yes, but they are more and more pretending that cultural norms aren't to some degree the ideation of species norms. "Gender constructs" aren't just made up by a toxic-masculine patriarchy out of thin air.

I'll give an example. On the whole, in a breeding couple, if one parent stays home, it will be the woman. This is, pretty obviously, because babies bond with their mothers, and because it's hard to do work with a baby hanging off of your breast. You can say that the idea of a woman staying at home, cooking and cleaning and so on, is just a made-up stereotype-- except it isn't. On average, men are bigger than women; in a high-paying office job, this matters (or should matter) not at all. But if a family is in an economic bracket where work is likely to mean topping trees or operating heavy machinery in a coal mine or something-- it's almost for sure going to be men simply because of their physical attributes. These men are very unlikely to wear dresses and high heels to maximize their appeal-- they are going to wear baggy old jeans, plaid shirts, and so on.

So no. I dispute that many of the so-called "gender constructs" are arbitrary. I embrace anyone who wants to try to redefine themselves or their lives-- nobody has to be normal, unless not being so harms others. But at the root of it all is not made-up role playing, or a "cultural norm." It's the physical reality of the human species of animal.

[tackattack]

I don’t think that the gender constructs are willie nilly, I think theyre based primarily on an individuals definition of what does it mean to be a man/woman. Some of that is genetic predisposition, some of that is based on your internal gender identity. Some might even be based on societal pressure as have pointed out. If I have the definitions right then that begs the question, how to legally and socially label someone’s gender. We already have that under the name field of your birth certificate. Randy is randy. I don’t think something as personal as self-identity needs a societal judgement or classification

[bennyboy]

I don’t think that the gender constructs are willie nilly, I think theyre based primarily on an individuals definition of what does it mean to be a man/woman. Some of that is genetic predisposition, some of that is based on your internal gender identity. Some might even be based on societal pressure as have pointed out. If I have the definitions right then that begs the question, how to legally and socially label someone’s gender. We already have that under the name field of your birth certificate. Randy is randy. I don’t think something as personal as self-identity needs a societal judgement or classification

Are we really talking about self-identity?  Or are we talking about publicly redefining sexuality in a post-reproductive evolutionary standstill?

And by the way, with regard to defining others-- I'm a nudist by philosophy (if shy in person). I'd be perfectly happy with uni-gender bathrooms. Let it all be in the open-- dicks, vaginas, stuff in the middle, body modifications-- anything. Let kids see it, I really don't care. My experience with nude beaches is that the brain goes freaking crazy-- holy shit! Naked girls everywhere omg omg omg! And then, ten minutes later, you've adjusted, and you realize-- it's just bald monkeys doing bald monkey stuff.

[The Grand Nudger]

No one pretends that there are no cultural norms, no one.  The only reality of the human species being discussed by gender conformity or non conformity is the reality of gender constructs.  There is no specific, species wide reality of gender whatsoever, regardless of the fact that we do or don't have a specific set of genitalia.   

Yes, but they are more and more pretending that cultural norms aren't to some degree the ideation of species norms.  "Gender constructs" aren't just made up by a toxic-masculine patriarchy out of thin air.

Determining that somethings a social construct does not mean that it's a product of toxic masculinity made up "out of thin air". 

That said, I don't think you have your finger on the pulse of what this thing is made up of by reference to your explicit assumption of a specific representation of binary heteronormativity.  You may view males as inauthentic caregivers and females as inauthentic workers but this much is explicitly cultural.  Not made up out of thin air...cultural.

- For Tack

Individuals don't determine gender constructs. They are supplied to us from before we can speak or remember that we couldn't speak. They form a part of who we are and what we implicitly take to be true, and because of this...we find folks like Benny asserting the things in his example..and we find gender dysphoria..and we find non normativism. They surprise us, for lack of a better word.

Now, this

I don’t think something as personal as self-identity needs a societal judgement or classification

I appreciate that you think that..but since legal protection hinges on these classifications ...and we're talking about a group that finds themselves ostracized, marginalized, disenfranchised and even brutalized by default of normative convention..until you can convince the nasty normativists to stop being assholes....yes, classifications will be required. Trans bans and bathroom laws and grab checks neatly lay out why, even if in a perfect world we shouldn't be having this convo..in this imperfect world it needs to be addressed.

[bennyboy]

Determining that somethings a social construct does not mean that it's a product of toxic masculinity made up "out of thin air". 

That said, I don't think you have your finger on the pulse of what this thing is made up of by reference to your explicit assumption of a specific representation of binary heteronormativity.  You may view males as inauthentic caregivers and females as inauthentic workers but this much is explicitly cultural.  Not made up out of thin air...cultural.

No, not at all. But to establish norms, you have to look at the numbers. There are some great dads-- I was one of them, I think, taking care of my daughter starting about 4 months, while my wife worked her teaching job. Then she'd come home, and I'd go off to my evening job and she'd take over baby duties. Tough life, tbh, but very rewarding. But that required a lot of technology-- breast pumps, good refrigeration, formula foods, and so on. Without those, baby would last about a week with mommy gone so much until it wasted away and ceased to exist.

Anyway, it's mostly a product of our efficient and rich society that we can enjoy these forays into new structures, including an exploration of new identities. "Social constructs" and BS words like "heteronormativity" will die pretty quick deaths when hard times strike.