I wrote in a previous blog post about how "gender non-binary" is such a fuzzy, vague and meaningless term, and based on completely arbitrary and undefined concepts, that it actually doesn't mean anything. Any concrete meaning that can be attributed to it is so vague that it could just as well be applied to all people, and thus it doesn't distinguish anybody from anybody else, and thus it's not any sort of categorization, and thus it doesn't really have any significant meaning.
Recently I expressed this same opinion in a forum, and some leftist objected to that claim, ie. that it doesn't mean anything, and gave a definition: "A gender identity that's neither male nor female."
To this I responded: "Ok, so please define 'male gender identity' and a 'female gender identity'."
Instead of answering she (I'm assuming she was a she, as she sounded a lot like a she) started arguing that I asked what the definition of "gender non-binary" is, and she gave the answer. I tried to explain to her that since she defined that concept in terms of two other concepts, she has to now define those two other concepts, else this first concept is not really defined at all.
The conversation went back and forth like this for quite a while, with me trying to squeeze some definition of "male gender identity" and "female gender identity", and her dodging and refusing to answer (and with lots and lots of nitpicking, like "I said 'a gender identity that's male', not 'a male gender identity' (as if that made a huge difference).)
After a lot of back and forth that didn't go anywhere, because she just outright refused to define those two terms, she finally changed the definition: "Someone who isn't either male nor female."
I answered to this that (paraphrasing) "so now you are changing the definition, but ok, let's go with this new definition. Now you'll have to define what 'male' and 'female' mean."
The conversation stopped there. She never replied.
It's funny to realize that they think that they have everything figured out, but when you ask for specifics, when you ask them to define their own terms clearly, they just cannot do it. They just resort to circular definitions, defining concepts in terms of other concepts that they cannot define, and they just run in circles avoiding the questions.
When a person cannot function as he/she is supposed to within the framework of his her biological standarts such as not being able to use legs or arms or can't have a basic Brain function not working as it is we simply define this as a disability we don't say it is a choice and within the boundaries of science to state the facts regarding this situation. Therefore if a person can't function according to his her genetically assigned genre then it is also a kind of disability a function in the body nit working as it is supposed to according to science so it is a disability instead if shaming it must be accepted but also this must not be forced upon normal as the new normal or standart.
ReplyDeleteAnd the funny thing is that in 99.99% of cases when leftist say they are "non-binary" there's absolutely nothing wrong with them biologically or neurologically. They have simply been indoctrinated into an ideology and a cult.
Delete