Facebook allows nonbinary gender identities

[Luveria]

You're either a man or woman.

Third genders exist.

Or not having one at all.

If someone doesn't want to identify as any, then it's not going to get anywhere by telling them what they are, or saying they can only be a man or woman.

The belief that it's only between those two choices is especially broken upon encountering an intersex person or a transexual person who doesn't want SRS, which is how Buck Angel is.

[Grenartia]

Holy good gosh that list is redundant.

Which isn't a bad thing. If somebody doesn't understand one label for an identity, they might understand another.

That's good, although I didn't know there were 56 gender identities; I thought there were like 7, so that's cool that there are more. I have some reading to do.

See above.

If they do that they should let me be a "guy" or a "dude" and not just Male. With ladies they should be able to be "chicks" or "ladies" instead of just Female.

They can. Custom text field.

No, it looks like a custom text field, but it isn't. I tried it out. You can only use one of the 56.

1. You're either a man or woman. 2. IF you're gay and a man, you're still a man. 3. If you changed sex from woman to man, then your a man.

1. I'm neither. I'm an androgyne.

2. No shit, Sherlock.

3. Sex isn't gender. And a sex change does not a woman make. Identity does. Getting one's penis inverted into a vagina does not make one a woman. Identifying as a woman, however, makes one a woman.

[Luveria]

They can. Custom text field.

No, it looks like a custom text field, but it isn't. I tried it out. You can only use one of the 56.

That's unfortunate and means the reports in this thread about it being a custom text field weren't true.

[Neutraligon]

Third genders exist.

Or not having one at all.

If someone doesn't want to identify as any, then it's not going to get anywhere by telling them what they are, or saying they can only be a man or woman.

The belief that it's only between those two choices is especially broken upon encountering an intersex person or a transexual person who doesn't want SRS, which is how Buck Angel is.

I feel loved.

[Grenartia]

No, it looks like a custom text field, but it isn't. I tried it out. You can only use one of the 56.

That's unfortunate and means the reports in this thread about it being a custom text field weren't true.

I doubt the people who said it was meant to lie. They probably just looked at it, noticed it looked like a custom text field, and didn't test it further. I did, and I couldn't use anything other than one of the 56.

[Neutraligon]

That's unfortunate and means the reports in this thread about it being a custom text field weren't true.

I doubt the people who said it was meant to lie. They probably just looked at it, noticed it looked like a custom text field, and didn't test it further. I did, and I couldn't use anything other than one of the 56.

Maybe they can open it up. Although, they may be worried about people putting random things down like gay butterfly to troll trans* people.

[Luveria]

Or not having one at all.

If someone doesn't want to identify as any, then it's not going to get anywhere by telling them what they are, or saying they can only be a man or woman.

The belief that it's only between those two choices is especially broken upon encountering an intersex person or a transexual person who doesn't want SRS, which is how Buck Angel is.

I feel loved.

You should. Is your rejection of gender due to abolitionism?

That's unfortunate and means the reports in this thread about it being a custom text field weren't true.

I doubt the people who said it was meant to lie. They probably just looked at it, noticed it looked like a custom text field, and didn't test it further. I did, and I couldn't use anything other than one of the 56.

I'm aware none of them meant to lie. I would have assumed it's a custom text field too if it looked like one.

[Luveria]

I doubt the people who said it was meant to lie. They probably just looked at it, noticed it looked like a custom text field, and didn't test it further. I did, and I couldn't use anything other than one of the 56.

Maybe they can open it up. Although, they may be worried about people putting random things down like gay butterfly to troll trans* people.

That's not a good reason to prevent a custom name field. People can instead realize the trolls are doing it because they know they get easy tears from it.

[Neutraligon]

I feel loved.

You should. Is your rejection of gender due to abolitionism?

Nope, although I do feel we need to get rid of gender roles. I don't so much reject it as realize I never had it in the first place. I have no idea what it is to feel a woman (my sex). I would have no problem living in either a man's body or a woman's body, both would feel perfectly fine to me. I'm not bigender, nor androgynous. For me, I can't understand what having a gender would be like. I guess how some asexuals can't understand how sexuality works.

[Neutraligon]

Maybe they can open it up. Although, they may be worried about people putting random things down like gay butterfly to troll trans* people.

That's not a good reason to prevent a custom name field. People can instead realize the trolls are doing it because they know they get easy tears from it.

No it isn't, but it could be a possible explanation (although the more likely is either they didn't think about it, or were just testing opening it up. It is possible that since they set it up as a text field, they will eventually expand it to any typed in gender. By that time, people will be used to the idea of genders besides man and woman and will probably ignore that field.

[Luveria]

That's not a good reason to prevent a custom name field. People can instead realize the trolls are doing it because they know they get easy tears from it.

No it isn't, but it could be a possible explanation (although the more likely is either they didn't think about it, or were just testing opening it up. It is possible that since they set it up as a text field, they will eventually expand it to any typed in gender. By that time, people will be used to the idea of genders besides man and woman and will probably ignore that field.

I'm expecting they are cautiously testing it first. If so, that only shows Facebook doesn't care about saving people from having sad feels caused by trolls, but that they believe it would be embarrassing if the text field is rampantly being misused. A reasonable position for a corporation to take.

You should. Is your rejection of gender due to abolitionism?

Nope, although I do feel we need to get rid of gender roles. I don't so much reject it as realize I never had it in the first place. I have no idea what it is to feel a woman (my sex). I would have no problem living in either a man's body or a woman's body, both would feel perfectly fine to me. I'm not bigender, nor androgynous. For me, I can't understand what having a gender would be like. I guess how some asexuals can't understand how sexuality works.

Having a gender feels the same as not having one. I've felt no different since realizing it's nonexistent.

[Cuprum]

Cool

[Neutraligon]

No it isn't, but it could be a possible explanation (although the more likely is either they didn't think about it, or were just testing opening it up. It is possible that since they set it up as a text field, they will eventually expand it to any typed in gender. By that time, people will be used to the idea of genders besides man and woman and will probably ignore that field.

I'm expecting they are cautiously testing it first. If so, that only shows Facebook doesn't care about saving people from having sad feels caused by trolls, but that they believe it would be embarrassing if the text field is rampantly being misused. A reasonable position for a corporation to take.

Nope, although I do feel we need to get rid of gender roles. I don't so much reject it as realize I never had it in the first place. I have no idea what it is to feel a woman (my sex). I would have no problem living in either a man's body or a woman's body, both would feel perfectly fine to me. I'm not bigender, nor androgynous. For me, I can't understand what having a gender would be like. I guess how some asexuals can't understand how sexuality works.

Having a gender feels the same as not having one. I've felt no different since realizing it's nonexistent.

I agree they are being cautious, and are right to do so. Considering the comments I have been hearing, once they manage to get this to work out, they will expand it.

I wouldn't know. If gender does not exist then what I feel makes sense since I don't feel I have one. If gender does exist then I still feel like I don't have one. Either way, I am completely unaffected.

[Luveria]

I'm expecting they are cautiously testing it first. If so, that only shows Facebook doesn't care about saving people from having sad feels caused by trolls, but that they believe it would be embarrassing if the text field is rampantly being misused. A reasonable position for a corporation to take.



Having a gender feels the same as not having one. I've felt no different since realizing it's nonexistent.

I agree they are being cautious, and are right to do so. Considering the comments I have been hearing, once they manage to get this to work out, they will expand it.

I wouldn't know. If gender does not exist then what I feel makes sense since I don't feel I have one. If gender does exist then I still feel like I don't have one. Either way, I am completely unaffected.

What exists is gender pronouns, a feminine/masculine name, and a feminine/masculine appearance. Those things all exist. None of that went away when I stopped identifying as a gender, so I don't see the point to it when I'm not required to identify as a gender to have everything I prefer.

I had the belief that I had to identify as a female to have everything I wanted about it, which is simply untrue. I do not see what's being identified as. It's repeatedly taught again and again that gender is defined only by what a person identifies as. But what are they identifying as? A word? There's little to it beyond that. What people attribute to gender like the pronouns, name sets, and appearances, exist separately from it. As such, it's a superficial concept that nothing depends upon.

[Grenartia]

I agree they are being cautious, and are right to do so. Considering the comments I have been hearing, once they manage to get this to work out, they will expand it.

I wouldn't know. If gender does not exist then what I feel makes sense since I don't feel I have one. If gender does exist then I still feel like I don't have one. Either way, I am completely unaffected.

What exists is gender pronouns, a feminine/masculine name, and a feminine/masculine appearance. Those things all exist. None of that went away when I stopped identifying as a gender, so I don't see the point to it when I'm not required to identify as a gender to have everything I prefer.

I had the belief that I had to identify as a female to have everything I wanted about it, which is simply untrue. I do not see what's being identified as. It's repeatedly taught again and again that gender is defined only by what a person identifies as. But what are they identifying as? A word? There's little to it beyond that. What people attribute to gender like the pronouns, name sets, and appearances, exist separately from it. As such, it's a superficial concept that nothing depends upon.

Is gender not basically a preference for pronouns, name, and appearance?

[Libertarian California]

What exists is gender pronouns, a feminine/masculine name, and a feminine/masculine appearance. Those things all exist. None of that went away when I stopped identifying as a gender, so I don't see the point to it when I'm not required to identify as a gender to have everything I prefer.

I had the belief that I had to identify as a female to have everything I wanted about it, which is simply untrue. I do not see what's being identified as. It's repeatedly taught again and again that gender is defined only by what a person identifies as. But what are they identifying as? A word? There's little to it beyond that. What people attribute to gender like the pronouns, name sets, and appearances, exist separately from it. As such, it's a superficial concept that nothing depends upon.

Is gender not basically a preference for pronouns, name, and appearance?

If that's all gender is, then why isn't it just called "one's aesthetic preferences"?

[Luveria]

What exists is gender pronouns, a feminine/masculine name, and a feminine/masculine appearance. Those things all exist. None of that went away when I stopped identifying as a gender, so I don't see the point to it when I'm not required to identify as a gender to have everything I prefer.

I had the belief that I had to identify as a female to have everything I wanted about it, which is simply untrue. I do not see what's being identified as. It's repeatedly taught again and again that gender is defined only by what a person identifies as. But what are they identifying as? A word? There's little to it beyond that. What people attribute to gender like the pronouns, name sets, and appearances, exist separately from it. As such, it's a superficial concept that nothing depends upon.

Is gender not basically a preference for pronouns, name, and appearance?

No. I still have all those same preferences without a gender. That's my point. People are looking at it backwards when having a belief that their gender is what determines those preferences.

In actuality it's that the pronouns, name, and appearance a person prefers are assumed to be their gender. You can take away gender and all those preferences remain unchanged. Those preferences are what people have, and not a gender.

[Grenartia]

Is gender not basically a preference for pronouns, name, and appearance?

If that's all gender is, then why isn't just called "one's aesthetic preferences"?

Maybe because gender is simpler to say?

Is gender not basically a preference for pronouns, name, and appearance?

No. I still have all those same preferences without a gender. That's my point. People are looking at it backwards when having a belief that their gender is what determines those preferences.

In actuality it's that the pronouns, name, and appearance a person prefers are assumed to be their gender. You can take away gender and all those preferences remain unchanged. Those preferences are what people have, and not a gender.

What I'm asking is, what if those preferences ARE gender?

[Luveria]

No. I still have all those same preferences without a gender. That's my point. People are looking at it backwards when having a belief that their gender is what determines those preferences.

In actuality it's that the pronouns, name, and appearance a person prefers are assumed to be their gender. You can take away gender and all those preferences remain unchanged. Those preferences are what people have, and not a gender.

What I'm asking is, what if those preferences ARE gender?

That's not what gender is claimed to be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity

Gender identity is a person's private sense, and subjective experience, of their own gender. This is generally described as one's private sense of being a man or a woman, consisting primarily of the acceptance of membership into a category of people: male or female.

Preferences aren't gender. Preferences are preferences. They don't somehow make a gender when you add enough matching preferences together. Every accepted definition of gender is that it's simply a person's sense of their gender and never defined as being a collection of preferences. That would be inherently flawed too, because we can easily observe various people identifying with genders and not having preferences for what is expected of it, so no, preferences aren't gender. No credible organization says it is, and identifying as a gender doesn't require having preferences for what is expected of it. What's the point of identifying with it when every one of us when dismantled is reduced to which pronouns, name, and appearance we prefer to have, and no gender being there?

[Free Soviets]

so...i've been thinking about it and i'm not sure 'gender' is a coherent concept.

and if it is - if it makes sense to lump everybody from the most hyper-masculine aggro stereotype to blissed out hippie guys under one heading (and queer theory does exactly this with its whole cis thing) - then trans is not a gender. trans is a statement about gender-biology mismatching, but not some third thing. after all, we've already explicitly drawn a distinction between sex and gender. so being a person who doesn't fit the standard link between sex and gender simply would be the gender they are, regardless of sex.

in so far as there would be other gender options, they would have to simply be either not displaying any aspects of the other two broad categories or displaying aspects of both (at once or switching over short times, presumably). but accepting that, i'm not sure why we would still lump all 99%ish of everybody else into the same two categories in the first place - clearly they do not all share all of the traits of some gender stereotype nor exclude all the traits associated with the other.

but given that, then what the fuck is a gender? could you even coherently put people on some sort of a gender scale? does everybody get their own? what would that even mean?

and unless that sort of mess can be cleared up, why not just say fuck it and go back to directly linking gender to sex? sure, we should add a couple extra options on that (i'm thinking three: intersex, trans, and a none-of-the-above for the dedicated genderfuckers), but sex is still fairly straightforward. and the other relevant distinction - sexuality - seems downright easy.

somebody convince me that gender is a meaningful concept when made distinct.

[Condunum]

Maybe they can open it up. Although, they may be worried about people putting random things down like gay butterfly to troll trans* people.

That's not a good reason to prevent a custom name field. People can instead realize the trolls are doing it because they know they get easy tears from it.

I refuse to accept this "equality" move until I'm allowed to openly identify as potato.

[Luveria]

so...i've been thinking about it and i'm not sure 'gender' is a coherent concept.

and if it is - if it makes sense to lump everybody from the most hyper-masculine aggro stereotype to blissed out hippie guys under one heading (and queer theory does exactly this with its whole cis thing) - then trans is not a gender. trans is a statement about gender-biology mismatching, but not some third thing. after all, we've already explicitly drawn a distinction between sex and gender. so being a person who doesn't fit the standard link between sex and gender simply would be the gender they are, regardless of sex.

in so far as there would be other gender options, they would have to simply be either not displaying any aspects of the other two broad categories or displaying aspects of both (at once or switching over short times, presumably). but accepting that, i'm not sure why we would still lump all 99%ish of everybody else into the same two categories in the first place - clearly they do not all share all of the traits of some gender stereotype nor exclude all the traits associated with the other.

but given that, then what the fuck is a gender? could you even coherently put people on some sort of a gender scale? does everybody get their own? what would that even mean?

and unless that sort of mess can be cleared up, why not just say fuck it and go back to directly linking gender to sex? sure, we should add a couple extra options on that (i'm thinking three: intersex, trans, and a none-of-the-above for the dedicated genderfuckers).

sex is fairly straightforward. and the other relevant distinction - sexuality - seems downright easy.

somebody convince me that gender is a meaningful concept when made distinct.

You know that won't be possible. I've pointed out that pronouns, a name, and an appearance aren't a person's gender. Gender by itself doesn't exist other than believing it does, and it can't be viewed. Like you've mentioned, it's not possible to label people with a gender anyway since they can look female in every way but they may actually identify as something else.

It's a sham. When someone realizes their preferred pronouns, name, and appearance are only that, what is gender for? There's nothing gained by it. Nothing added by it. It's not required for anything. At this point I can't identify with a gender anymore because as far as I can see it's placing a box around my preferences yet it's not a box around it?

That's not a good reason to prevent a custom name field. People can instead realize the trolls are doing it because they know they get easy tears from it.

I refuse to accept this "equality" move until I'm allowed to openly identify as potato.

*gasp* I'm like so totally offended you're not taking gender seriously!!!!!1111!1

Yeah, for some reason I expect SJWs would believe you're trolling them by having potato in your gender field.

[Condunum]

I refuse to accept this "equality" move until I'm allowed to openly identify as potato.

*gasp* I'm like so totally offended you're not taking gender seriously!!!!!1111!1

Yeah, for some reason I expect SJWs would believe you're trolling them by having potato in your gender field.

The perfect excuse to stretch my fundie religion defending muscles.

[Liriena]

That's not a good reason to prevent a custom name field. People can instead realize the trolls are doing it because they know they get easy tears from it.

I refuse to accept this "equality" move until I'm allowed to openly identify as potato.

Love, you'll always be a potato to me, no matter what FB says.

[Kassaran]

I'll establish the Transformer movement so that transexual people have a positive word they can use for themselves.

If Optimus Prime be with us, who can be against us?

Oh you guys! XD
What have I created?