Why androgyne and not genderqueer?

[ativan]

The terminology that is being used by those who are participating on a regular basis is different than the one used in 2006.
I'm more concerned about how this section is being used, rather than how it was used.
Although I think the history of it is important to understand how it has changed over the years.

If there is enough reason and enough people who wish it changed and it is an acceptable change, then it would just reflect how it is being used.
I've seen this come and go before, and it isn't going to change the questions that people ask, nor the answers.
It might ease some confusion as to what this section is and how it is used.
I use Non-Binary and I would have put my name to that if asked to.
It's broad enough in its definition, as it's used the most, to justify it, but it isn't necessary for the section to function.
We could break it down into sub sections if that's something that would make it easier to use, that's just fine.
But I think the topics handles that pretty well, but you just never know until you try it out.

Polls here never seem to quite get as many people responding to them as there are people.
And the people here do come and go, new people showing up all the time.
So see what happens...

@Emerald  I can understand your concern for the name of this section and therefore wanting to jump right in to participate in this topic.
The link to a thread from 2006 is interesting to see.
But it doesn't really answer the question, however it does bring to a halt the dissemination of misinformation.
I would be thrilled to see you also participating in the current discussions in this section you named.
It would be an even bigger thrill to see you participating in it and bringing everyone up to date with the correct information to their questions.
I use the word 'would' with intent. 'Will' just doesn't seem to be the right way to say that.
But if it is, then I will look forward to your dissemination of current information here,
*I edited out a couple lines I feel uncomfortable with and used in a way that isn't my intent.
*I do get pissed at times and it can come out in what I write.
* I am having some painfully stressed things going on right now and it clouded my judgement.
*I apologize for that. I'm hopeful that my situation will get better sometime soon, just have to wait and see.
Ativan

[helen2010]

Ativan/Emerald

I know it is a big ask but your continued participation and sharing of insight and experience gives much needed depth and perspective to the forum which we would/will be much the poorer without. 

But understanding that your time and travel may already be calling you onward I wish to thank you for your leadership and contribution, and wish you safe travels.

Aisla

[mandonlym]

I'll hang out for a while and see how I feel. Honestly I'm just a bit ambivalent because I've been here a few months and have never contemplated coming into this forum even though I'm non-binary, just because I have no relationship to the term androgyne... maybe that won't be true in future. I do know that the term doesn't sit comfortably with me now, especially when I know that at least a couple of people I like don't feel welcome in the community because they're non-binary but don't identify as androgyne.

[eli77]

I'll hang out for a while and see how I feel. Honestly I'm just a bit ambivalent because I've been here a few months and have never contemplated coming into this forum even though I'm non-binary, just because I have no relationship to the term androgyne... maybe that won't be true in future. I do know that the term doesn't sit comfortably with me now, especially when I know that at least a couple of people I like don't feel welcome in the community because they're non-binary but don't identify as androgyne.

You could tell them that they are definitely welcome. During the time I've been here, there have been periods where the majority of posters did not identify as androgyne. I mean take a look through the introduction posts and you can see how many different ways people identify themselves. Beyond that I don't know what to say. I can't really see how changing the name of the forum will make it seem more welcoming, but if you want to try to change it to non-binary I would vote in favour, just because it seems a little more accurate.

I still think it's important to remember this forum has 8 years of history though, and that we should respect that.

[ethereal-ineffability]

Susan previously and soundly rejected 'Non-Binary' as being far too broad a category. Something more specific may gain a favorable response.

Well that's hardly fair. What if your personal category IS "far too broad"? What if you can at points feel either a mix of masculine or feminine, or neither, or one or the other? Heck, what if someone experienced all of that within the same day (and didn't go insane from whiplash)?

I refuse to accept that non-binary has been "soundly rejected". It is a valid identity for a group of people and deserves consideration just as much as any other identifying term.

EDIT: Or would one who also experiences periods of binary identification still be considered or consider themselves non-binary? Forgive me, I am too exhausted to mull this over right now.

[Satinjoy]

Provocative.

I would suspect most non binaries are quite concerned with figuring out their identities, since it is not as easy in a polarized set.

All non binary folk have much to say and much to help regardless of the specific identities within the forest.  There are many different trees in the forest, and they need each  other.

I am late into this forum area and I would have benefited by coming into it sooner.

Partially because I thought I was not androgyne and because the term androgyne totally confuses me.  I thought I did not fit it, and did not come to play seriously until this week.  Especially with a physical mtf gender identity, not understanding there is more to this than physical identities, it goes far deeper than that.

Does androgyne exclude?  No.  A simple notation stating that all nonbinary identites are welcome to post here would resolve the issues.  Or something simialr, since the mtf's or ftms or intersex should not feel excluded, it is an open forum to explore ourselves and to help others.  This is paramount.

I need to be here.  There are too many triggers in the mtf forum and I am too fragile yet to handle them, the stakes are too high for me.

As long as we feel welcome to come in and post and let our hair down, we have succeeded.

I would have argued for non binary as the name of the forum.

However as a newcomer I have high respect for the forum and would not poke into it.

As Ativan has pointed out, gender identities evolve, especially as we peel the onion and find out who we really are after getting the gook out of the way.

We just need to make sure all of the non binaries feel safe and supported to post.

If a subset posts, then the responders will naturally be inclined to post back.  If it is not relevant to their life experience, they wont.  No big deal.

My little take on it.  Resolves nothing, but it is my hope that all that are outside the box of binary genders would feel safe and helped in this area of Susans.

[mandonlym]

As you can probably tell I tend to be a consensus-driven person so I don't like stepping on people's toes. I just hesitate whenever people say it's all semantics, etc. just because this is the same argument that, for instance drag queens use against the idea of using the term tr***y. For me androgyne has no association at all apart from it possibly sounding a bit feminine as French things tend to. But for younger trans people I've spoken to, the term reads as super old-fashioned to them. That's why I would advocate for the more "neutral" term non-binary.

And yes, of course there's a history, but you know Harvard Gay and Lesbian Caucus refused to add Transgender for years because of their claim that the name is historical; this is fresh in my mind because I still refuse to join as a result of this. We need to balance history with the present and future needs of people.

[Satinjoy]

I edited out my semantics term.  Frankly I never properly learned the definition of it anyway.  its gone.  Which may screw up Mandolym's response a little bit.   

I cant really understand the labels anyway, it all gets so confusing to me in here.

The last thing I want to do is offend anyone in here.  I need you all far too much to do that.

Thanks for letting me post in here.

[mandonlym]

Hi Satinjoy, not sure how to read this but I bear no ill-will or offense. People often read me as being argumentative when I'm just being factual. I'm just explaining my point of view for the position I personally hold.

[Satinjoy]

No sweetie I just suddenly realized I used a word I didn't understand.  lol

And I am very glad you are in here since I know you post a lot on the mtf it makes me a little more comfortable among new friends

[Emerald]

Here you go mandonlym, some pertinent information... It explains what each of us is welcome to do, and what will and what will not be tolerated. I invite you and everyone else to carefully read each and every post Susan made in the thread entitled "Androgyne".
https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,22474.0.html

[helen2010]

Here you go mandonlym, some pertinent information... It explains what each of us is welcome to do, and what will and what will not be tolerated. I invite you and everyone else to carefully read each and every post Susan made in the thread entitled "Androgyne".
https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,22474.0.html

Emerald

Very useful and illuminating re Susan's thinking and philosophy.  The taxonomy still seems to work but if therefore is a groundswell (10 or more) then it appears Susan will consider a new forum but not sure if we won't see the duplication that she wished to avoid in the first place.  Either way I am fluid and am flexible on this one

Aisla

[ethereal-ineffability]

Here you go mandonlym, some pertinent information... It explains what each of us is welcome to do, and what will and what will not be tolerated. I invite you and everyone else to carefully read each and every post Susan made in the thread entitled "Androgyne".
https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,22474.0.html

There are many things I could say about that post, but the only immediately relevant thing is that the apparently official definition for this forum IS the problem. If there were no definition and it was meant to be an all-encompassing term, then fine, whatever, everyone who doesn't like it would have to suck it up because they have no room to complain. But this leaves quite a bit of room to complain. Let's look at the accepted/official definitions once more, shall we?

Androgyne: An androgynous person
Androgynous: Being neither distinguishably masculine nor feminine, as in dress, appearance, or behavior.

So by association that means that this forum is meant for androgynous people, and in order to be androgynous you must be "neither distinguishably masculine nor feminine, as in dress, appearance, or behavior." But that doesn't leave out ANY of us who aren't binary (and don't have any other forum to go to besides the "transgender" forum which is open to literally everyone here and therefore is not a place where they could discuss issues pertaining specifically to them), right you guys?

Wrong. Bigendered individuals are clearly left out, for one. Some fluid individuals as well. In fact, this definition is so narrow that it completely leaves out anyone who does not live full-time as someone who always actively rejects binary gender traits and presents as androgynous 24/7. And while individuals in all these categories do have a lot in common for sure, they have about as much in common as they do with those who identify/present in a binary way 24/7; In other words, different issues that we should have a space to be able to talk about in specifically with other people who can relate.

Language is important. Language shapes culture, and culture shapes us throughout our whole lives. Argue "but it encompassed literally everyone else when the forum was made!!!" all you like, but once a word has been defined and said definition clearly does not apply, that excuse doesn't fly anymore. And saying that we are not "welcome" to express concern about this matter and that any and all complaints will "not be tolerated" is a little suspect of a forum which is supposed to represent a welcoming and supportive community, to say the least.

If you don't like the definitions go start your own site. There's a delete account option in your profile. Any other definitions do not apply. Any arguing about these definitions will result in that persons ability to post on this site being removed.

Such a statement, from the ADMIN no less, really makes me wonder how actually accepting this community is to begin with. If my posting abilities are removed by bringing up these very valid and legitimate concerns, then I am not really sure I will spend too much time being disappointed about it, given that I do not particularly want to be a part of a community where such a thing could even happen in the first place. Open (harmless) discussion and the ability to adapt if it is deemed necessary is how we progress as a society, and any environment which does not encourage this (or at least strongly hints of hostility) is not a healthy place to be.

[ativan]

Realize that you are being sucked into an argument by someone who wishes to twist the words around with 6+ yr old posts.
My post was correct for the simple reason that Susan has the last word, even if it is delegated to someone else.
It is still by simple logic, her choice to do so and so it is her decision that named the section from a suggestion by someone else.
Regardless, it's her forum, it's her decision by default.

An argument is the wrong way to achieve the desired results you want.
Also keep in mind that if nothing comes from it, you haven't lost a thing here.
The section will and can go on functioning as it does, it will just need those clarifications that it isn't strictly an androgyne section and is used as a more broad over all non-binary section as it has for a long time now. Which can be used to open a new discussion about terms and descriptions, once again.
If the owner of the forum, Susan wants it to stay as it is, you lose nothing.
Arguing the point or decision could cause you to lose something, possible a warning or a ban or the removal of the section altogether.

Form the group you need, pick a leader or a few of them if you need to and organize the information in a way that presents it in it's best form for it to be used in an informed way to make an informed decision. Try a poll if you think it is worth it, it just might.
There is little recourse and you still haven't lost anything.

Don't be fooled by the current discussion. It's intent is to lead to an argument of some sort.
I won't play that game, so I'm sitting this out. Maybe for an extended length of time, it feels like it might be time to do just that.
I come here to help answer questions as best I can, which I have stressed are not ever the last word.
They are simply opinions, nothing more, just as you have opinions.
This one I'm forced to sit out, by my own set of rules which I have made clear in the past.
My rules tell me it's time to make a decision as to how I will approach this forum from this point on.
Hopefully it will be a decision of little consequence, of no importance.

This is the quote I referred to before:

Gender has no meaning or value if it is counterfeit.
Counterfeit gender is just a game, a trick, an amusement,
an act, a fraud, a deception, an imitation, artificial, bogus.

Be yourself, not a gender.
Being yourself is effortless and genuine.
Being yourself is REAL, not counterfeit.
In being yourself, in behaving in a manner which is natural to you,
whatever gender you are becomes self-evident.

-Emerald

Later, hope you can work around this in a reasonable way, one that is better than this discussion has gone and is going.
Ativan

[ativan]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_towards_non-binary_gender_persons

[ativan]

Really, what is a word? Just how do you define one? By definition or by situation?
They are nothing more than words and you can make them what you want them to be, how you want them to be.

Shaley koot-tum. <3



Ativan

[ethereal-ineffability]

And I will say it again, in your terms this time: If I am banned for bringing up a valid point, I have lost nothing, because there was nothing of value (my membership in a community which bans individuals who bring up valid points) for me to lose in the first place. There is a difference between argument and debate. Argument claims that your way is the only correct way of thinking and that the other party is wrong, which is what that linked post was in a nutshell. I do not believe that she is wrong, in fact, I believe she had several valid points, but I take issue with the fact that even just permitted discussion on this matter was so openly and forcefully silenced. Although, I do admit that it is very old, and that I am not one to judge someone based on something which happened several years ago.

But I am not a leader by any stretch of the imagination, and I am too new here to have any influence. Let it be known that if someone else wishes to take on the stress of discussing these things with the powers that be, I promise to be a strong follower.

In the mean time, I am curious to see what banner the community at large thinks we should band together under. I volunteer to start that poll if no one else wants to, since I have already thrown myself under the bus.

[Ms Grace]

It's not about the point, but the way you take it up. The "detransition" sub forum, for example, was started through a request rather than demands and accusations of exclusion. Tell me what you'd like and I'll put it to the admins. Can't promise anything but it's worth a shot.

[JulieBlair]

What an interesting and well spoken thread.  As so often happens around here, you have opened up my thinking to possibilities that I have failed to consider, and will have to now explore.  What is my gender identity? Mostly but not all female.  How fluid is it?  Some.

I've identified myself as queer for a very long time.  HRT has transformed by body into something more feminine.  But I'm not really cis or trans anything.  For the last couple of years I've been on a journey with a defined beginning and middle, but without a definitive end.  Maybe there isn't one.  Maybe there doesn't need to be one.

So what the hell do I put on my new passport? 

Think I'll take a nap now,

Julie

[helen2010]

It's not about the point, but the way you take it up. The "detransition" sub forum, for example, was started through a request rather than demands and accusations of exclusion. Tell me what you'd like and I'll put it to the admins. Can't promise anything but it's worth a shot.

Ms Grace

I would like you to put the case for changing the sub forum from androgyne to non-binary to Susan.  Like the others on this thread I think that the latter term is more inclusive and has greater currency, more relevance and better reflects the folk who contribute to this sub forum and the language as it is currently used in the tg community.  I don't think that the objection previously raised (6/7 years ago), when this was first considered, necessarily holds as I think that the term non binary is now a well accepted and commonly used term to capture those for whom the androgyne sub forum was originally set up.  It is not that the androgyne sub forum is irrelevant rather that the name could now be improved and made more relevant/inclusive/ and better reflect current community usage  (imho).

I trust that this request will be viewed as constructive and positive, rather than seen as causing unnecessary contention.

Aisla