Read on Twitter
A part of the difficulty surrounding nonbinary gender conversations comes from, in my opinion, the difference between two dimensional and three dimensional concepts of genders.
A two dimensional concept is a line from A (man) -> B (woman). For people who dont believe in nonbinary people, we dont exist because there is nothing other than A and B
Binary trans people more often believe we exist but often conceive us as somewhere BETWEEN A and B. still 2d.
Binary trans people more often believe we exist but often conceive us as somewhere BETWEEN A and B. still 2d.
I see nonbinary people as the factor that illuminates a three dimensional, spherical array of genders. Rather than placing us between A and B, we are the existence of the array itself, ranging from identities between A and B to identities miles away from it.
These individual nonbinary genders are sometimes linearly attached to other genders as tethers, often due to similarities in those genders and/or the language that can accurately describe their individual gender experience. This includes language describing sexuality.
Some have no tethers or wish to remain unidentified. I feel that this is in part due to the fact that language for the infinite nonbinary experiences is deeply lacking. If not its existence, then circulation.
All of this is theory and not all applies to every or even any nonbinary person.
The problems I see from a lack of language are that binary trans and cis people often bend nonbinary genders toward binary ones to classify who we are and where we do and dont belong.
The problems I see from a lack of language are that binary trans and cis people often bend nonbinary genders toward binary ones to classify who we are and where we do and dont belong.
