There are only two genders. Change my mind.

Well fuckin of course it did, it helped promote that in some states, Black lives matter was very influential and even helped with certain scandals, recent one that comes to mind would be the Baltimore Police scandal.
Saying that a movement to promote equality has no benefits is truly ignorant and shows how sheltered you are from reality.

And in regarding to the ACTUAL topic

There are two genders, there is no middle ground. I do not believe in Non-binary or any other gender, as such I shall not use any made up genders or Pronouns, you're either a he or a she, and if you choose to live your life as another gender as you were born as, that's fine by me. Just don't shove it in my face please.

 

Well, since this has spiraled from a gender discussion to an all-out discussion on equality...I'll chime in again.

The basic problem, in my opinion, is that people don't WANT to be treated equally. People want to be given more than the next guy, girl, or <custom gender here>. Add to that idea that people, in general, are horrible to one another and are practically incapable of treating each other as equals...

There are lots of white folk who think they're better than others because their skin is light....yet there's plenty of us white people who tan (real or fake) to get dark skin.

There are lots of black folk who still think they deserve special treatment because people owned black slaves in the US prior to the Civil War.

There are lots of women who still think they deserve preferential treatment because women were told to stay in the kitchen and make babies in the mid-to-late 20th century.

There are lots of other people (LGBT, other ethnic minorities, etc) who still think they have to be in the spotlight and be recognized in order to validate their existence.

There are government mandated programs that REQUIRE most of this to continue.

Equal Opportunity Employers and Affirmative Action laws REQUIRE a business to meet a certain quota of racial and gender diversity. This leads to a couple of points...

If an employer, by choice or by chance, does not have enough minority workers, they are required, by law, to hire a minority... What this means is, if given a highly qualified white candidate and a less qualified minority candidate, they are required to hire the minority to be in compliance with the law. In reverse, if there is a highly qualified minority and a less qualified white candidate, there's nothing stopping the employer from hiring the more qualified candidate. The same goes for a male candidate vs. a female candidate.

Granted, if people were honest and unbiased, the color of a person's skin or their gender would NEVER be considered in the process. But there are still plenty of racist, sexist people out there who would still hire a less qualified candidate because they were white, which is why these laws exist.

In my opinion, anyone who has to shout at the crowd "look at me! I'm here! Notice me, Senpai!" is a weak, pathetic individual.

If you want ME to notice you, then be remarkable. Be interesting. Be amazing! Don't shout at me that you're gay or you identify as a 5th level Sentarian Mockskul Warrior. Don't lecture me on why I'm wrong because I'm a straight, white, male who believes in marriage.

If you are a good person, I don't need to know your race, gender, or sexual orientation. If you are worth knowing, it'll be because of how you treat people and how you make other people feel. It'll have absolutely nothing to do with what color your skin is, what is or isn't between your legs, what god or gods you follow, or what your eating habits are.

Be a good person. Be remarkable. Be amazing. Be kind. Be humble. Be human, because no matter how your body or brain is configured...that's what we all are!

 

Your emotional reaction tells me this means a lot to you and I'd be interested in reading more about your view on the subject. However, I fail to see how me not knowing certain things makes me ignorant towards them if I haven't even been confronted with them up until this point in the debate. Maybe, instead of offending me, your argumentation would look a lot better if you cared to link sources.

 

If you really are interested you'd take the 2 seconds it takes to google it and read it up yourself instead of wanting everything to be spoonfed to you imo

 

This thread is still alive?

Just remember a rule of thumb: You're free to be whoever you want, but not shove it down people's throats.

 

Yes, I could have done that, but I fail to see how it is problematic that I did not. I do not have an agenda that would require me to defend this movement, so how is me trying to discuss with people I know to have a different mindset than me the wrong thing to do?

 

When did I say it was a wrong thing to do? At this point I really feel like you're just sealioning tbh

 

Because you implied it to be the "right" thing to do to just look it up for myself when my point is that I would rather like to learn how people with a different mindset than me see it.

 

I have no emotional attachment in the slightest, I live in the Netherlands where it isn't a big thing, nor do I care for these kinds of movements. If you find that little offensive, and you "Care" but can't manage a quick google search then I feel like you're in this just to argue, not to convince anyone to your ideas.

 

How did I convince anyone to believe anything? I did never make the statement that there were no benefits, I asked a person with a different atitude towards the subject about their opinion. I do not have an agenda in wich I would need to defend an identity movement, so why should I do another persons research when I could just as well learn it from that person who is also more likely to already have done that exact research?

Edit: I am not saying I would not fact check by myself later on. For now, I am interested in other peoples opinions.

 

I genuinely do. It highlights positive things done by minority groups that would otherwise be swept under the rug, many times intentionally, and in the case of BLM it put a HUGE spotlight on an ongoing, deeply-rooted issue in American society that many people even today refuse to acknowledge

 

I heard from someone that speaks French that they default to she when the gender is unknown, unless they are lying.

Une personne (Elle). In French it’s in the language, feminine till gender is known, from what i’ve heard.

Ya I saw someone mention it and I was like that’s a good point I’m gunna also bring up that point. We use “it” and “they” depending on context.

 

What other choices are there? You either have a freaking vagina or a dick. Or you have a vagina and think 'Hmm, I want to be a man', or the other way around.

Wait I forgot there is Asia, there are ladyboys over there. We have more than two

 

Gender is a social construct, it will be defined a the culture allows it, a person could identify themselves as the other sex because their brain was designed as the opposite sex, the same goes for the sexual orientation, environment and genetics creates a big factor and not learning by experience. The sex is different, it doesn't need to be labeled for more than two sexes, is better explained as a genetic disorder or interaction of hormones.

 

t r a p

 

ladyboy? how different is from a femboy?

 

Ok, I get you, but still I think is counter-productive. In essence one is rebelling against gender norms to create new gender norms and construct themselves to it. The path for gender equality is to treat everyone like a proper individual person instead of creating new groups to treat accordingly.

Also I think the need of belonging to a particular group is mostly a cultural and contemporary feeling, that goes in line with the dividing tribalism and the "us VS them" mindset that eradiates from the US and been growing in fundamentalist groups in Europe. It is not healthy and accomplishes nothing to the path of inclusion.

 

I think the issue some people in this thread have is that the definition of gender was originally the same as sex until fairly recently, as far as the word goes. I don't believe in gender as a "social construct" since it's completely arbitrary and it's a label people often put on themselves. I can understand switching gender from female to male and vice versa, but I really can't fathom why anyone would see it as a nonbinary spectrum - at that point, I would register that as attention seeking since they're labelling themselves with something unusual to make them stand out more than they need to (most of the time anyway).

 

I can see this as a problem for people in Canada when there is laws against misgendering and you could be fined. Bill C-16 itself is not the problem, the problem is in Social Justice tribunal courts in Canada. Which people have already been sued a huge amounts of money even for making a small mistake and not intentionally misgendering.

There is also the case that got lots of public attention with Lindsay Shepard. Even though she was showing a gender argument from both sides and taking a neutral position, the school accused her of being Hitler and an alt right. Not even taking a neutral position is ok and debate is not allowed. Which goes against what a university stands for and destroys free speech. You have to hear both sides to reach a better conclusion.

They said that they misinterpreted C-16, but some argue that no they interpreted it correctly, exactly how it was written. And people want something similar incorporated in the US. When you have something like this then people are gunna be bothered by it. Especially when they are being forced to gender someone correctly and there is disagreement on this issue. Many people don’t like the idea of thousands of possible genders emerging since people are free to make whatever new gender term they want.

 

Fairly sure that referring to someone by name wouldn't go against that law (no matter how stupid that law is) as their name is not a pronoun.