Philosophical question. In a jurisdiction that allows for full government recognition of someone not being either male or female, and if someone was “assigned NB at birth” then remains NB into adulthood… sounds like they wouldn’t meet the technical definition of trans.
This comment isn’t about taking anything away from anyone, it’s about a tiny little thought experiment.
I believe that communal bathrooms are cheaper to build and maintain, hence we still have them, not because anyone enjoys using them.
That’s what he said:
they
internet accounts are they unless otherwise specified
i see, does make sense here
it still is good practice
especially that often “he” is used without consideration
Especially on Lemmy, where the users seem to fall into one of two stereotypes: ultra-nerdy dudes, and trans/NB people.
Hell, over at !unixsocks@lemmy.blahaj.zone, they may even fit both groups.
nonbinary people do fall under the trans umbrella
unless they are intersex in a particular way that they regard their nonbinary gender identity as matching what they were assigned
Philosophical question. In a jurisdiction that allows for full government recognition of someone not being either male or female, and if someone was “assigned NB at birth” then remains NB into adulthood… sounds like they wouldn’t meet the technical definition of trans.
This comment isn’t about taking anything away from anyone, it’s about a tiny little thought experiment.
why would government recognition affect whether theyre trans
but yes, intersex people can be cis enbies
Well, trans is being a gender other than what you were assigned as, or raised as, or whatever.
If what you were assigned/raised as is, say, agender, and you continue to be agender, does that not make you “yes NB, not technically trans”?
i suppose so
parents should do this
agender should be the default, gender should be opt in