Non-binary people don’t fit neatly into the gender binary but might still associate with a gender, agender people meanwhile have no gender. Someone can be both or either one (I’m personally both).
Gender-fluid is more like a superposition on the binary. You can collapse the wave function and take a measurement but a split-second later it could be different.
This is firmly in the realm of semantic definition that most people don’t need to know IMO, definitely not in casual conversation. Like the precise botanical definition of a nut, ‘true crabs’ vs other kinds of crabs, and other such specialised definitions in various fields of study. For everyday discussion, broad labels are fine. Non-binary, agender, gender-fluid and maybe more that I’m ignorant of can all kinda be used interchangeably in most contexts and I think there’s nothing disrespectful in that. Expecting more is expecting too much.
If talking with one’s therapist about it or in circles where this is a main topic of discussion, yeah precise terms are useful, but outside of that it’s fine to mix them up.
I just felt this needed to be said. I’m absolutely in favour of people like you chiming in with the definition though, in the right context like here.
They all mean very different things, using non binary and agender interchangeably is one thing but using non binary and genderfluid interchangeably is completely different
Maybe it’s wrong, but do you think everyone in the world should know this? Though fwiw I don’t think gender-fluid is (or should be) used as a generic term for the others, the others feel more generic. I just wouldn’t think it comes from disrespect if someone does.
While I like the joke, Wakko is actually a boy. He had a crush on Miss Bambon, so one could assume hetro. Humorously, Dot also had a crush on her. 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️
Also true. But we must consider the fact that when the show was airing, though I’m sure non-binary people certainly must have existed at the time, non-binary was not something that was part of the mainstream consciousness. So would not have been acceptable in a kids show. And though I’m not sure it would even be acceptable in today’s day and age by most mainstream standards, it’s more acceptable now than it was 30 years ago.
On top of that it’s very likely that most real people at that time who would likely identify as non-binary would not have identified themselves as such and would have chosen a he/she pronoun of some sort to identify themselves in order to conform to the social standard of that time.
Still, we should celebrate the characters who are designed to be nonbinary, to represent that community, not try to decide for that character 30 years later.
Nah. Abed in Community is the best example of how you can have great representation for a group (autistic people) even if the character wasn’t initially written with that trait in mind. He was initially just written as a character, not an autistic character. Animaniacs had plenty of gender fuckery going on that kids like me noticed in the 90s
I did notice it that too. All of them wore clothes opposite of their perceived gender at one point. But it’s a cartoon. They are genderless. And not in a nonbinary way. They are whatever the script tells them to be.
Also pronouns aren’t necessarily dependent on gender, they’re dependent on the person’s pronoun preferences. Even someone who seems like they might use a specific set of pronouns based on their gender might use a different set of pronouns, as an example I knew someone who is a demiboy and they go by any pronouns.
It should be whatever Wakko prefers. Perfectly fine for a nonbinary person to use “he”.
Edit: And also, pretty sure that’s another layer to the joke. Cause Wakko is just out there living his life while the world spins around him making definitions and boxes that have no bearing on how he lives.
That’s a completely different thing, because it’s on purpose to match the “agenda” word, while “nonbinery” on purpose or not, is what someone who doesn’t read much would write, as a non native English speaker I’m kinda pedantic about such errors
Just because you can't solve everything all on your own doesn't mean you're effectively powerless.
What does make you powerless is refusing to act because you have to be part of a crowd to help, instead of some lone avenging angel who can solve everything with a snap of their fingers.
There's also more than just presidential elections. Candidates not from the two ruling parties have a much greater chance in downticket races. You just have to give enough of a shit to pay attention.
Also the founding fathers sucked and were constantly drunk slave holders.
Hey now, let a man have his drink now and again, or we’ll put another tax on whiskey.
The best Founding Fathers were the abolitionists among them, though. Most of the slave-holders who shat up the founding are long-forgotten by popular culture, except for Jefferson and Madison.
I imagine most would be pleased. They only ever wanted the voice of wealthy men to matter in the first place, and now it’s the supreme law of the land.
I don’t think so, they were trying to get away from a government that pushed too heavily onto the people. Regardless, it was a question that can never have an answer, since we cannot ask them.
When they created the United States, their Constitution only allowed the vote to wealthy male landowners.
They’d be exceedingly pleased with the way things turned out. They never wanted common people to have any real voice beyond dying for wealthy people’s property.
You all deprive yourselves of our votes by failing to follow through on your promises, along with those of the half of this country that can’t afford to miss a desperately needed day’s pay in order to vote for someone they know is only going to ignore them once elected.
Your party is the problem. You don’t get to beat people down and then pretend you’re the aggrieved party because they didn’t stand up with blood pouring down their faces and ask for more.
Yes we all know that Biden personally drinks Palestinian blood but your leader thinks 9/11 was perpetrated by the US government among other moronic ideas.
Yes we all know that Biden personally drinks Palestinian blood
I mean, he might as well be. His response to the Israeli pogroms was to give them even more weapons. You and I get to pay for those weapons, which is more than enough for me to vote for someone else.
Your leader
I mean, on the plus side, she can form a coherent sentence, which Biden definitely struggles with.
Yeah she is really good at spouting moronic conspiracy theories but let’s make fun of the old guy with a stutter because he’s an irredeemable child murderer. Your idiotic decisions totally aren’t going to lead us to fascism, thanks.
It’s not the stutter. By now you’ve seen more than enough very public examples of his inability to think.
he’s an irredeemable child murderer
He’s at least helping a whole lot of them in Israel, with our money.
Your idiotic decisions totally aren’t going to lead us to fascism
What’s going to lead to fascism was his inaction when people’s grocery bills doubled, or when their rent increased by 80%, or doing literally nothing to try and pass a minimum wage increase.
People don’t care if the candidate of change is a fascist as long as he promises prosperity.
What’s fact is that the president is not a magical wizard, but in FACT the economy has improved under him so even if it were all up to him your argument doesn’t work
I just gave you an example of precedent and how former presidents successfully navigated similar circumstances.
You’re just content to ignore it because it’s too hard for you to face the fact that Genocide Joe just doesn’t give a damn about the poor and working class.
The actions you are taking and have announced you will continue to take, will work toward significantly increasing the misery of Palestinian people. It’s not guesswork. It’s just basic observation of past events.
So yeah, I don’t really buy that you care about them, if your reaction is a toddler tantrum that will definitely hurt them…
The concentration camp was never the normal condition for the average gentile German. Unless one were Jewish, or poor and unemployed, or of active leftist persuasion or otherwise openly anti-Nazi, Germany from 1933 until well into the war was not a nightmarish place. All the “good Germans” had to do was obey the law, pay their taxes, give their sons to the army, avoid any sign of political heterodoxy, and look the other way when unions were busted and troublesome people disappeared.
Since many “middle Americans” already obey the law, pay their taxes, give their sons to the army, are themselves distrustful of political heterodoxy, and applaud when unions are broken and troublesome people are disposed of, they probably could live without too much personal torment in a fascist state — some of them certainly seem eager to do so.
Michael Parenti. (1996). Fascism in a Pinstriped Suit
Many people have been living under fascism in the United States for decades, suffering under explicitly racist police and judiciary systems, fighting against explicitly fascist foreign policy, and trying to wake people up to the explicitly fascist rhetoric of both democrats and republicans.
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,<— you are here
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
It is 12:30 PM. I am reading this exchange with no emotion until this comment. I have been stirred to tell you this: “Fuck you, Promethiel whispered calmly”.
Preach, brother. Preach. Let the world know you’re on the right side of history. Wrap yourself in that thought at night. Like a warm blanket. But never forget to grab your weapons for the culture war. It needs life long soldiers.
Ah, c’mon man. Where is the name calling? The petty insults? Once you people devolve to that point rarely do you go back to anything else. Look at you raising the bar for alt lefts everywhere. I’m proud of you.
It’s ok to be shitty some times, but at least be a man and own it. In most civilized societies, telling someone they suck their own dick and are a super douche is generally considered to be petty and name calling.
Though I suppose if a person always assumes they’re right, they wouldn’t consider it insulting. I guess you’re a victim of your own ego, and I forgive you.
This is a strange exclusionary way of considering happiness, tbh.
Like even if I want, and maybe even would be most happy, to sit down in front of a plate of duck a l’orange for dinner doesn’t mean I can’t or won’t be perfectly happy eating a sirloin steak for dinner instead
Edit: for clarity, I am referring to your father’s view on happiness, not your response to it
That really sucks. Can practically feel the tension through your post. What a bummer… shouldn’t kill anybody to let somebody else be happy doing their own thang (and be happy not necessarily copying another person’s thang).
Less importantly:
When I think about ‘universal happiness’, I’d think it’s more about creating conditions where everyone has the opportunity to pursue their own version of happiness, rather than imposing a single idea of happiness on everyone.
Add comment