Why do they bother you so?

Whence your figure of 10,000? Non-binary gender: Population figures contradicts that figure.

Fallen world. Plain and simple. Let it go. So you can use the system against itself, and see how far you are allowed to go. It may not be far. Or.. it may be further than even you once thought. You'll never know, until you do.

Non-binary people aren't necessarily genderless. That's just one specific non-binary identity, "agender". Non-binary is an umbrella term encompassing all gender identities besides the two binary ones, "man" and "woman". Bigender and pangender are two other types of non-binary, for example.

Also, who is dictating what to whom? Who wants/opposes the denouncing of all gender?

I have wondered about this. The concept of removing identifiers is bizarre to me.

Consider it this way: 200 resumes.

First we remove any identified religion from them, for fear that it will bias the hiring manager.

Then we remove the age of the applicant; same reason.

Then the name; as the name could provide racial cluing, which could provide bias.

Then any racial identifiers. Again, they could bias the hiring.

Then the section on Volunteer activities. Because this section promotes those with enhanced socio-economic status as they are more able to volunteer.

Then we remove education. Again, those with a higher socio-economic status will have an economic advantage, and that is discriminatory against those less fortunate.

Next we remove work history. This section allows the discerning manager to determine the approximate age of the applicant, creating ageism bias. Also some people will have more or less work history than others, which could be seen as discriminatory; so it has to go.

Finally we remove any references. These people are most likely bias for the applicant and therefore should not be included in the hiring process.

We are left with...nothing.

What was once a stack of 200 resumes, providing a snapshot of 200 applicants we now have a stack of blank paper. How exactly is this a good thing?

Wikipedia was my reference. What figure and from where would you say is more accurate?

Wikipedia was my reference. — TiredThinker

Where?

My question is how can a person say they are neither male nor female? Surely there is a very great range of ways of being and behavior as either gender so it is as if gender itself offends some people. Putting aside that sex is defined before birth, simply eliminating the word doesn't alter ones potential in any arena.

Arn't you just treating a social distinction - male and female - as if it were physical?

social distinction - male and female — Banno

Male and female are the physical distinction, it’s man and woman that are the social abstraction therefrom.

Says...? That is my preferred usage, too, but not everyone's. The point being that there is no correct usage, just convenience.

There are hermaphrodites and such physical variations; so the physical distinction is not so solid.

And, apparently, the traits that go with 'man' and 'woman' are also malleable.

Recognising variation is just being honest. Accepting someone's preference to be called "they" is common curtesy.

Yes sex is a physical distinction. Or at least a chromosome distinction. Hermaphroditism is rare and arguably is a defect. The way a person's body unfolds isn't always predictable, but if they are XX or XY they are defined as male or female. They can be gay or opposite fem/masc than might seem appropriate for their sex or be uncomfortable with the genitals that they got, but these are all different continuums outside of sex. People are beyond 3 dimensional. No reason to try to pack everything between male and female.

Special pleading. Pretending that the distinction fits all cases by ignoring those that it does not fit, or calling them names - "a defect".

Why do they bother you so? — Banno

??

I'm nonbinary myself so I'm not arguing against calling people "they" or anything like that (though I don't care about pronouns at all, for myself). And I do recognize that sex is not a binary thing either. I'm just noting the distinction between sex and gender. There are physical sexes, in addition to social genders.

Oh, agreed - I was just pointing out that some folk differ on using that designation. Cheers.

I blame the hippies. the men started to grow their hair long and the women start wearing trousers. It's been downhill ever since. A chap doesn't know who to grope and patronise these days.

I think you're being sarcastic, but I still want to note that it's actually a recent phenomenon (post-WWII) for men in general (not in the military) to keep their hair short (it's all because of military fetishism), and a similarly recent phenomenon for women in general (not the wives of wealthy lords) to avoid wearing trousers (because most women had to work, and all work was manual labor, and skirts or dresses are impractical for manual labor).

Isn't it a little extreme to let such a small group try to dictate whether or not a person can denounce all gender? — TiredThinker

Welcome to modern times. The masses control everything now. We are no longer depend in some classic bipartisanship, this is the century where the masses which once were in the street are now in the power taking decision like “non binary” or denouncing all the gender.

Yeah - joke. But also serious in the sense of having experienced a social change that is a threat to identity. It doesn't matter that these things are mere conventions that change with society, they are experienced as immutable moral imperatives. Homophobia, transphobia, are very real to the people that suffer them, and the violence that often ensues is a defence against what is being experienced as a personal attack on Mr or Mrs Normal. If you don't know whether you are X or Y, I don't know whether to fight or fuck.

Personal anecdote: I'm walking down the road with my long hair and pushchair, and from the van coming up behind, I get the wolf-whistles and a shouted proposition. Then they overtake, and can see my bearded face. And in an instant, they have gone from macho-men to gay-boys. What a humiliation for them!

Hence the now immutable fact that girls like pink and boys like blue, and they wouldn't dare, for the most part, perform anything other. The idea that children might like green or yellow is ridiculous, apparently, and we shouldn't let that small minority dictate...

Odd thing is that in Victorian times pink was for boys and blue for girls...

I see the term non binary as a way of embracing the whole continuum concept of gender, rather than being boxed into the categories of male and female.

One idea relating to non binary is androgyny.This whole idea was explored by June Singer in her book, 'Androgyny', the archetypal combination of masculinity and femininity and she traces this idea back into ancient mythology.She defines androgyny as' the One which contains the Two; namely the male (andro-) and the female (gyne).'She sees it as a term which can be applied to the physical combination, especially hermaphroditism, but more especially about psychological androgyny. She doesn't really discuss transgender in any depth, but her book was written in the 1970s.

When I see videos of 70s music, I am struck how many of the male singers in bands, especially glam rock, look so feminine, and this applies to the new romantic bands of the 1980s, like Japan and Duran Duran. Gender ambiguity has been part of music culture for a very long while, Only yesterday, I read how Sam Smith had been excluded from this year's Brit music awards because they couldn't be fitted into the male or female categories, as they wished to identify as non binary.

Odd thing is that in Victorian times pink was for boys and blue for girls... — Banno

Why is that odd? Personal identity is a social construct. Far and few far and few are the deconstructers of personal identity. Their hens are pink and their fans are blue and their memories just like a sieve.

But we don’t care a button! we don’t care a fig!

We don't, and they do. And everyone has to know which is which.

And every one said, who saw them go,
‘O won’t they be soon upset, you know!
For the sky is dark, and the voyage is long,
And happen what may, it’s extremely wrong
to hold to one gender so fast!’

non-binary — TiredThinker

If light is a spectrum within a greater spectrum, isn't that the way to look at ourselves?

What was once a stack of 200 resumes, providing a snapshot of 200 applicants we now have a stack of blank paper. How exactly is this a good thing? — Book273

Pshaw!
HR don't concern themselves with that. Why do people fear HR? Because HR has power. So it has always been, so it will always be.

Also, who is dictating what to whom? Who wants/opposes the denouncing of all gender? — Pfhorrest

It's fashionable, and it's a way to leverage power.
A few years back, when some young-ish actress (I won't mention her name for fear of revenge) who officially goes as "non-binary" declared herself as such, you know what I felt? Fear. Consternation. Because this was yet another thing that other people can potentially use against me, in the same way that rich people can use their wealth against me, or the way spiritual people can make declarations of attainment to use them against me.

In the end, it's all about power. And in terms of power, anything goes. Beauty, wealth, education, secret club membership, spirituality -- anything with which one can gain some leverage over others. And if one doesn't have beauty or wealth or the traditional means with which to gain power, then one has to invent new means, launch new ideas that can captivate other people's mind for long enough to give one leverage over them. Such as "big and beautiful" or "non-binary".

A few years back, when some young-ish actress (I won't mention her name for fear of revenge) who officially goes as "non-binary" declared herself as such, you know what I felt? Fear. — baker

Sounds like you need some professional help then. I'm sorry for your condition.

What's a non-binary? Neither male nor female I suppose. My hunch is that there's a lot that's involved in gender determination and as we all know that translates to more ways for things to go wrong and I don't mean that in a disparaging way against any of the myriad gender identities that are around.

Duh. Read my whole post.