Non-binary Gender in Binary Philosophies and Practices: HT only recognizes M/F?

>>>How does one tell the difference between male and female?
>>>Where would an intersex or genderqueer person fit
>>>into the binary? The Olympic Committee would love
>>>to know how to draw the line, biologically speaking,
>>>between the sexes. I don’t care much for labels
>>>and prefer just to spontaneously enjoy being myself,
>>>but there are several questions that I have that
>>>are more about application of theory in practice
>>>than establishing whether or not the HT acknowledges
>>>two-spirit people, for example. I relate deeply
>>>to the idea and connected ideas but have no idea
>>>how to do an astrology reading, as one small example,
>>>for anyone but M or F.

It makes sense for such a distinction for sporting events, to try to level the playing field for contestants. Like or not, biologically men are typically superior in that arena, and it would be unfair to women if everyone were lumped into one group. With two groups, one could allow women to participate in men’s events if that’s what they wanted by their own individual free choice . . . but without the possibility of a converse, arguments could be made of unfairness.

That said:
M/F is not a 0%/100% all-or-nothing proposition.
We all have varying degrees of maleness or femaleness within.
In fact, if someone declares themselves 100% one-or-the-other “in spirit”, I would be personally inclined to believe such a person to be lying and not honest with who-they-are (although I would probably keep such judgments to myself). I would also consider someone who said that they were 50-50 to also be a true anomaly, possibly also similarly lying out of some self-idealistic pride of having some inner need to declare themselves “unique” in this fashion. Even the true 50-50 is–in all likelihood–50.1%/49.9% in one-or-the-other direction.

Therefore, if someone felt 70% female and 30% male, then it would make sense to identify as “female” simply out of convenience.

BUT that does not mean that one needs to reject the other fraction or half. I personally fail to see how assigning a gender label to oneself limits one to be able to choose to do whatever one wants to do in life.

Perhaps that were true a hundred years ago (and longer)–when there were “assigned” gender roles–but that’s hardly true today. If a woman wants to participate in so-called masculine hobbies, she is free to do so. If a man wants to participate in so-called feminine hobbies, similarly he is free to do so.

If a woman liked the color blue, liked rugged outdoorsy things, violent sports, what-have-you, why does she need to be a man to engage in that? Similarly, if a man likes the color pink, likes knitting, playing with dolls, what-have-you, then why would he need to be a woman to engage in that?

The point is, whatever label “man” or “woman” you’ve identified with yourself, this in no way limits your ability to enjoy the aspects of the other gender aspect of you. Others may create judgments, but again–this is their issue, not yours. I don’t see the reason that outside validation by a label is terribly important.

For me, I’m biologically a man. I’ve always felt myself to be a man. I have never thought of myself as a woman, nor will I. Nonetheless, I have never felt limited into pursuing only male interests or feeling limited into only behaving as a man would. If there is something I do . . . an interest I have . . . or some personality/emotional aspect . . . that is labeled “feminine” by somebody, that is THEIR label, not mine. I don’t label what I do in that regard. That’s not to say that I haven’t had such “feminine labels” applied to me based on certain interests or emotional expressions I’ve given. However, I don’t feel the need to match their labeling criteria. I know who I am. Others don’t validate me. *I* validate me.

Maybe I’ve expounded too much, but I’ve always felt that people make much too much of a bigger deal of this gender issue than it actually is. For me, it is simple. Pick a label “male” or “female”, simply out of convenience and simplicity–preferably one that matches your biology to make routine issues like bathroom visits not a challenge. Then live your life as you wish regarding your interests and personality, without feeling limited by such labels. To me, it is no different than my name “Steven”. I use it out of convenience and for reference. I would not be harmed by a different label.

On your last note, if I were giving someone a Chinese Astrology reading, obviously their gender identification is important as the 10-year luck cycles flow in reverse for the opposite gender. So I would ask them which one they more closely identify with. If they could not answer, I would likely print out two charts: one for males with their birth data, and one for females with their birth data. Then when I read their 10-year luck cycle, I would ask them which reading felt more correct to them, and go with that one. There is no need to make things complicated. Things only get complicated when a person lives too much in their head, trapped by mental ideas.

As to your comment about “pronouns”, if one really feels the need to do a dance, the word “one” as a pronoun–while not commonly used in modern society–I feel works quite well. One, oneself, one’s, etc. Why create someone new, when we already have it?

Again, ignore anything that doesn’t resonate with you.
Ultimately my opinion is unimportant to your life personally.

Qi,
Steven

this is why “neutral” is no answer, false answer, at all..

ie generally larger (or rounder) breasts/penis = greater capacitance/voltage, but all is pendant on circuit

sorry, nature tested for maximum polarity because yin holds yang by the same laws as magnetic repulsion

>>>Reminds me of an amusing story where society is
>>>restructured so that very masculine women are
>>>paired with very masculine men–the logic being
>>>that extremely feminine women were needed to
>>>help create more pronounced masculinity in
>>>otherwise effeminate-seeming men. A very
>>>masculine woman with a very feminine man,
>>>let’s say, would just not have that rigid
>>>and evenly polarized (to the maximum degree)
>>>balance that nature is expected to adhere to

Unfortunately there are a number of “fools” that actually believe such things, even in this system. Trying to naively filter sexual attraction into some kind of faulty yin-yang theory.

I totally agree with the concept of “inner male vs. inner female” percentages for gender issues. It’s been consistent with my experience in what I see with a variety of different folks. I don’t–however–agree that this has anything to do with pairing partners or sexual orientation.

There are some straight men that are very masculine and some who are very feminine (yet still straight). There are some gay men who are very masculine-behaving–perhaps much more so than the effeminate straight men–and some who are feminine-behaving. Same things could be said for women. Sexual orientation doesn’t have anything to do with the inner mix of inner male vs. inner female. It is a completely different issue entirely.

People who try to fit sexual attraction into a polarity model are off-base in my opinion, as the previous paragraph demonstrates why it is false. Unfortunately there are a lot of people that have this misunderstanding in my experience.

Qi,
Steven

Here’s an example: “This sentence is false.”

(Echoes of) the Liar Paradox, me thinks.

It’s similar, but even more directly shows the nature of sentences that are not propositions. Saying something is a lie usually implies some kind of conditional, namely that there is an implied deception. However the word “false” gives the predicate truth value transparently.