Whereby a person identifies with a multitude
Ah yes the infinitude of genders again. You just can’t have too many genders.
Very cunning, very very cunning, but the problem remains – if we don’t know what they are how can the guidance guide us into the correct behavior and mode of address and belief?
We derived some wholesome amusement from the infinite genders doctrine way back in February 2017:
This is hilarious. It’s incoherent nonsense, but it’s also hilarious.
The modest title is:
What Does Multigender Mean? 10 Questions You May Be Afraid to Ask – Answered
Questions answered! Hooray! It’s always good to have an expert around.
There is an infinite diversity of genders in the world.
Each person has a totally unique interpretation and relationship with any gender they inhabit, and there are at least as many genders as there have been humans who have lived.
At least.
Are we sure that wasn’t satire?
I thought that I stepped on an unknown gender once, but it turned out just to be a hairball that one of the cats had horked up.
We are not amused.
I have come to the realization that I am gender transcendent. Not trans, please; that in no way describes me. I go beyond gender; no gender can contain the multitude that is me. The very concept of gender has no application to the being that is I (am me?). As such, my pronouns, which belong to me alone, they are mine and no one else can claim them, are and . To fully recognize and respect my transcendent nature, you must be sure to use the correct font and size in writing, and the correct number of beats in speaking. You do not know what those are, you say? Well, I am not your teacher; do your own research.
I guess if I ever had to deal with a “pangender” individual I could have no objection to referring to same as they/them. But if I encountered them face-to-face it would definitely be vous and not tu.
So you’re cis-transcendent.
They could at least make an attempt to define the size of the infinity… that’s apparently something that’s done since “infinity” isn’t a number for the purpose of mathematics.
This makes me wonder if there exist [<–sue me for using a subjunctive] an informal pronoun to be used when addressing a "multiple system" (can't find any definitions of "multiple system", neither in Wikipedia nor elsewhere, but it refers to someone that identifies as plural, as having multiple people inside her or his head).
https://meeresbande.tumblr.com/but-multiplicity-isnt-real
GW,
Cis-, trans-, such lowly words do not, cannot apply to the wonderfulness that is me. I contain and negate all gender; I am all and none; I am the alpha and omega. I am infinite; I am one. I am and am not.
Above all, I am me.
So what pronoun should I use when speaking about you, in order that I not get expelled from Twitter, or, better yet, Tumblr? (Note: I don’t actually have an account on either platform.)
I am here coming out as pangender.
Within my pangender identity are several sub-genders, which can change daily or even several times a day. They include:
Sautegender, Frygender, Deglazegender, Braisegender, Skilletgender, Scramblegender, Overeasy gender and many more.
Yum! I’ve been living without access to a kitchen for the past several weeks, and I’m losing my mind. :-(
What they mean by “gender” is not far from what we mean by “personality.” In which case someone who is “pan gender” would have an infinite number of moods, habits, preferences, abilities, and desires, knowable and unknowable, simultaneously, to varying degrees, and over the course of time.
This Person must be found. The search for God is near an end.
As I said above, my pronouns are and .
Alas, this platform erases me; it does not allow me to show the fullness of my pronouns. But a fair approximation (one that I will accept for now) is three spaces, and four.
So on your Tumblr, you need to write: “What a Maroon ( / )”?
Tumblr does not dictate to me. I dictate to tumblr. (Also, I don’t tumble.)
I am Legion. You must address me thusly, because I am many. No matter how many you think you see, I am orders of magnitude more. I am unending. I am infinity.
Yes, I am Legion.
I won’t [<–sue you for using a subjunctive] but I'll [<–snicker at you just a little for using a subjunctive] that archaic. It was still live in the 16th century, as in for example the Queen's question to Hamlet: "If it be, why seems it so particular with thee?" But it ain't live no more.
What’s most hilarious/maddening about this is the authority with which the self-designated experts tell us it. It’s as if they’re drawing on years of research and investigation and bringing it all to us as multiply-evidenced New True Knowledge. All in the world they’re doing is making it up but you’d never know it from the “here’s how it is” tone.
I think “It” will do for me. With a bit of a sneer. Because such a mutli-gendered, multi whatever personage cannot ultimately be human, can it?
It’s absolutely fine for you to snicker at me for my pretensious use of the subjunctive. I agree that it’s utterly pretensious and perhaps even ridiculous, but it’s fun.
I add, though, that my use here is somewhat different from the one that you cite from Hamlet; that’s in a less-vivid conditional direct statement, whereas I’m using it in an subordinate binary question. (Direct question: “Does there exists an informal pronoun for addressing multiple systems?” Answer: Yes/No. Subordinated question: “I wonder if [=whether] there exist a pronoun for addressing multiple systems.”)
Actually, sorry, I take that all back. That would have been a fine answer for the 1980s, but now that we know, based on years of research and investigation, that the Only True Way to speak English is with this construction, you must not snicker at me. It’s True Knowledge. It’s Science! Every scientist in the world agrees.
I’m sure that there is a general rule stemming from physics that says if a hypothesis requires invoking infinity to make it work, there’s something wrong with the hypothesis.
GW – It’s not especially pretentious, it’s more like eccentric, since it just really is not in use. If I were copy-editing a piece I would correct it. The fact that you feel the need to flag it up underlines that it’s eccentric.
Brian M #21 wrote
No, I think you’re confusing “Pangender” with “Pan-Gender:” having a gender that is half man, half goat.
Eccentric, fine. And I think everyone that has met me would say that I’m eccentric.
I’m reminded of the fellow who said to me once, when his eldest child was very small: “I’m going to have to be careful not to teach him very, uh, nonstandard grammatical forms (i.e. bullshit).” This is a fellow who has studied far more languages and far more linguistics than I have, and he loves to fuck around with all sorts of different forms based on different dialects of English and of other languages, and English (which he speaks to his children) isn’t his native tongue, so … yes, he has to be careful not to teach his children to speak “very, uh, nonstandard grammatical forms (i.e. bullshit)”.
I’m with Brian, I think “It” is a perfectly functional pronoun. I like to add “whatever” because I really don’t give a shit what they call themselves. So (it/whatever) for the sake of simplicity and accuracy. “A rose by any other name” also applies if we’re being Shakespearean, or in more modern terms “It is what It is.” :P
I have a radical idea! Maybe we could refer to it/them/whatever by a pronoun that reflects their actual biological sex!
I hope nobody minds terribly a slight diversion, but the definition of “outed” at the top, would appear on the face of it, to be the reverse of what I’ve always taken “outed” to mean?
“Outed: when a person’s gender identity is disclosed without their consent.”
Isn’t one’s gender identity the face they’re showing to the world? It’s their sex they’re guarding on pain of death, not their gender identity. Indeed, they’re most hoping you’ll assume their gender identity *is* their sex, and not their true sex.
Is this yet another example of trans ideology and language being said to mean the opposite of its actual meaning?
I once saw a Queer website that said that the difference between “passing” for LGB people and for T people is that if you are, say, a gay man, you struggle to pass for what you are not, namely a straight man; but if you are, say, a trans women, you struggle to pass for what you are, namely a woman.
But here, as you say, they UEssex definitions have flipped the table. I guess the idea is that there are many TiMs (or TiFs, though TRAs rarely care about them) that are trying to pass as being the same gender as their birth sex, keeping their inder gender identity secret. And I suppose there are trans-identified people that try to hide their trans gender identity from, say, their parents or their parents’ community.
I see the problem: “outed” in a sexual orientation is “outing” them from the closet. “Outed” in a gender identity sense is usually taken to mean “outing” them from so-called “stealth” (that is, living full time as their preferred sex, and apparently passing perfectly). I suppose it could also mean “outing” a closeted trans person (still living as their birth sex and actually trying NOT to look like the opposite sex).
But they don’t say, and there lies the difficulty.
I imagine all definitions are deemed social faux pas or hate crimes, while simultaneously tied to the other faux pas and hate crimes of never assuming a person’s gender, and always taking a person’s gender at face value, and never asking because it’s rude and none of your business and always asking to make them feel comfortable.
So, no problem at all.
Amazing that they’re still allowed to call it the University of Essex, and not the University of Esgender.
@33 LOL.
I guess I’m peculiar (and old-fashioned) because I don’t have a gender in English: I have a sex, which is male. In French or Spanish I have a gender, but it varies according to whether I’m une personne (una persona) or un homme (un hombre). If I have to fill in a form that asks me my gender I cross out “gender” and write “sex”.
I do the same, if it’s paper. It irritates me if it’s online and I can’t put it right.
Arcadia, I encountered that on an online form. They had a space for other. Since my choices were “identify as female” “identify as male” and “other”, I selected other and put that I am female, and that it is my sex, not my gender, and my gender is irrelevant to the issue (which was dermatology, since the doctor was a dermatologist). Gender, IMHO, is relevant in medicine only in psychiatry; for everyone else, they need to know your sex. In most other fields, both are irrelevant other than to track demographics, and if you insist on using “identify as”, the demographics will be skewed because you won’t know how transwomen might differ from “cis”-women, otherwise known as women. So you will be mixing males in with females without concern for their radically different social experiences, including, but not limited to, an enormously inflated sense of entitlement for one of the groups. I will leave you to sort out which group…
There was room to write all that? No character limit?
GW, I guess they needed the large limit to accommodate the pangender, or those with a multitude (but not an infinitude) of genders. If it was infinity, that’s all you’d need to put, but if you have 365 genders, one for every day of the year, you would need a lot of space.
Yeah, I was surprised by the amount of space, too.
Trans Lightyear: To Infinity And Beyond! (Woody? Not since the hormone therapy).
I have, on occasion, put smallish paragraphs on the nonsense that is asking for my gender and not sex on various forms; allowing “other” often allows large character limits.
I filled out a survey today. One of the questions was, roughly: What sex were you assigned at birth on your original birth certificate (AFAB/AMAB)? The next question was about how you currently identify, with several choices and “Other”; I don’t recall if it had a fill-in space. All these words to do what would otherwise be done with the one word “Sex” and two radio buttons, Male or Female.