There are also only two different animals: elephants and non-elephants.
Are these elephants in the room right now?
As a non-elephant in the room I feel overlooked
The elephants exist in a state of being in the room and not being in the room
You gotta address the elephant in the room for it to exist
There are elephants, non-elephants, and undetermined elephants.
This comment was made by the intuitionistic and/or fuzzy logic gang.
I think you are mistaken actually the different types of animal are frogs and not frogs
Crabs and not yet crabs.
Your both wrong there are crabs and then there are crabs 🦀🦀🦀🦀
we are crab 🦀
🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀 JAGEX SERVERS ARE POWERLESS AGAINST AUTH DELAY 🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀
Crabbbbb people craaaabbb peopleeee
Crabs and will eventually evolve into crab.
There are bullfrogs and elephant bulls, so we can conclude that {🐸}∩{🐘}⊂{🐂}
I think you actually want {🐸}∪{🐘}⊂{🐂} because ∪ is union and ∩ is intersection. There are no frogs that are also elephants so the set would be empty and thus couldn’t contain any bulls. 😔
Aktshually, the empty set is a subset of any other set 🤓
But also, the fact that frogs and elephants are disjunct is conjecture at this point
Hmm perhaps some kind of sliding scale is in order
Frogness is a spectrum
That’s a very frogressive thing to say.
I am frog-fluid. Some days I am a frog and others I am not frog.
Doesn’t that happen just once, when tadpolemaxxing has been achieved ?
Anything unrelated to elephants is irrelephant.
This comment needs way more approval
You either are crabs or have crabs
Holy crab
Reminds me of the: everything is either a duck or not a duck
You’d think so, and yet…
Platypussoe ruin SO many assumptions, such as
- mammals don’t lay eggs
- mammals aren’t venomous
- mammals don’t have beaks/bills
- beavers can’t interbreed with ducks
- a deity created the world and deities don’t get drunk
Clearly all of those assumptions are wrong!
Black and white thinking got me here, sure it’ll get me out, too
That’s what I mean by ruining assumptions: proving them to be wrong lol
that platypus look, hmm
Feel like there’s a Set Theory issue with this but I barely understand what little I can remember about it.
A bit can have two states:
trueorfalse. Additionally, the bit can be disabled altogether (null).Does the gender of all non-self-containing genders contain itself? This is the fundamental question of gender theory.
No, it’s only Russell’s question.
Removed by mod
Thanks for the confession :D
I always think there is a we vs them vibe in the non-binary thing which is kind of toxic
That’s so sad to me. From my POV being non-binary isn’t aggressive. It’s just that there are more important things to worry about than gender.
I think it’s just the term. “Binary” isn’t exactly neutral as it can imply narrow minded. Also labelling non-X imply that everyone else is X which often includes too many people that are kind of in the middle / doesn’t really care.
so what would you suggest people who do not want to be referred to as man or woman call themselves?
On the gender spectrum?
I don’t know, I think this debate is silly.
It’s easy to call a discussion silly if it doesn’t affect you personally.
I just mean this whole premise. The idea that being nonbinary is its own binary. It’s a categorically different comparison. The “binaries” OP sets up are a:b versus (a+b):c, when really it should be a+b+c+d etc.
The comment you were replying to wasn’t about the image in the op though. It was a discussion about someone not liking people who do not identify as man or woman referring to themselves as non-binary.
Blenders. Gender ephemeral. Intangibles. An even cooler fourth option, probably.
There are tons of cool names you could go with when your identity lies outside of preconceived boundaries (and pretty much transcends them). But, non-binary’s pretty clinical-sounding, so I guess it’s easier to work into a professional setting or something.
Enbies? Although the base of the term does come back around to the original phrase.
grogsnarl the fifth, conqueror of silesia
Also have you ever considered the fact that maybe you (or other people) don’t really care about gender labels because you were assigned as the gender you prefer? It seems a bit silly to criticise a group who currently faces a lot of discrimination based on their gender preference. Also are you aware that your argument is often used to discredit the experiences of and as a reason to discriminate against people who identify as non-binary?
It seems a bit silly to criticise a group … based on their gender preference
Like, didn’t I just say that it’s the vibe of the word that I don’t like? Therefore either
- I am not criticizing any specific people at all because I’m just talking about how we use words; OR
- I am criticizing some people for their taste of words
and not what you say at all IMO
I’m going to use “you” a lot in this post but know I’m using the global definition, I’m not directly addressing you.
Right, but you must realize that is your perception and not reality.
If you’ll allow me to take some liberties and use you as an example :
They are asking you to change your perception of them.
You are asking them to change/disregard their reality to conform to your existing perception.One can be done, one cannot. They’ll still be what they are and now their way of defining themselves is forbidden, by who? Why? This path seems completely irrational.
And what value does your perception hold anyway? The meaning of every word, sound, and thought in your head is arbitrary, it’s all made up. So obviously language needs to be calibrated with reality from time to time.
Language has changed to such an extreme degree that you wouldn’t understand your own language 300, 1,000, 5,000 years ago. Why not be upset about that? Seems kinda silly to start a movement to rollback english to 1724, eh?
That is how I feel about those who oppose groups of people seeking to better define themselves. “I don’t feel what they describe, they’ve organized millions of people who claim to feel the same way to fuck with me, I’m mad!”
TLDR, it’s logical for language to change and people to carve out niches. Humans aren’t born male and female only, so it seems silly to puritanically declare that because of an ancient understanding of humans, we should ignore modern biology.
From a post I made earlier this month, the intersex population in the United States alone would comprise 10% of the population of Nebraska. These are people born, quite literally, between gender. Non-binary.
I’m not sure what you are trying to say
They are asking you… You are asking them…
Where did this come from? Why am I grouped into some kind of hater group suddenly?
Language has changed … silly to start a movement to rollback english to 1724
Ya and I was commenting on how I don’t like the choose of word in this specific change. Why not use better words when you start to describe something new?
In addition, many were mutilated as newborns
This sounds like a horror story. What?
deleted by creator
I always think there is a we vs them vibe in the non-binary thing which is kind of toxic
I dunno if there is much “we” inside the non-binary community. Like Non-binary is an umbrella term that encapsulates everything from a both/neither/almost but not quite binary/gender fluid betwixt multiple states/people who identify as trans non-binary, people who identify as non-trans non-binary/ cultural third genders/ political gender activists /DID people with alters that swap… There’s a lot of different concepts and sometimes contradictory needs there.
Like people tend to just group non-binary people into a third category and don’t really ask questions of individuals what their actual deal is. I blew a friend’s mind recently when he introduced his enbyfriend to me and while we were out on a walk I asked “Apart from the umbrella non-binary term how do you conceptualize yourself?” because he had never thought to ask that question of either of us.
Technically the existance of non-binaries also makes the binaries no longer binaries (due to increased optionality), so it would be fair to say everyone is non-binary
Good point!
Was looking for this comment. Thank you.
And when everyone is non-binary, no one is 😔
That’s not how that works. If there isn’t a binary (because there isn’t just 2 options) then this would be a non-binary system and so everyone would be non-binary.
deleted by creator
“Troll logic” is one of my favorite memes.
Exactly like being hit by lightning at any instant has a 50% risk because either it happens or it doesn’t.
What if you half die
If there already exists “a binary” then that says there are 2 states. “Non-binary” only means there are not-two-states. This could be unary (there is one kind of thing), trinary (there are now 3 things, the old 2 and new, secret 3rd thing), or really any n-ary set of n distinctly numbered things, so long as there aren’t only exactly 2 of them.
I’m considering identifying as unary now. God only made one gender and “male and female” are mental illnesses caused by the original sin 😔
God cloned Adam to make Eve, thus we all are the same gender. Wake up sheeple!
One world, one gender, one love 💗
“Non-binary” only means there are not-two-states.
The state of having two states and the state of not-having-two-states is itself a two-state solution.
Unfortunately, once you rule out non-binary as a third state, you collapse back into the original binary state. Thus, non-binary exists as a quantum superposition between states, as we fluctuate between whether or not being non-binary is politically correct.
But can a two-state solution really work?
Touché! Maybe we need a UN state shoved in beside the west bank to help keep an eye on things?
Yes and no.
Going to the UN to propose my Quantum Superposition Solution to Violence in the Middle East.
I don’t think anyone will agree to dropping a massive Schrodinger box over the whole region
But nobody is in the state of having two states, though. People range from being in one state to “it’s complicated”, but how would you be in exactly two states?
You wouldn’t, at least not while being observed.
So turn off the lights and anything can happen?
No, turn the light off and everything happens
I want to upvote the OP for presenting an interesting discussion but downvote them for being wrong. This presents a case for a non-binary voting option.
A singular like button would still only express one portion of my sentiment. A third option could be many things, none are sufficient: a none or 0 or neutral option is effectively not voting, a sideways arrow or maybe state, or mixed state would express indecision or indeterminism rather than mixed feelings.
Therefore, I propose that a second positive-negative axis is required. The addition of these “sideways” arrows allow expressing 2 kinds of sentiment: towards the post content, and towards the poster themselves. I will not specify whether left or right is positive nor will i clarify which axis (x or y) corresponds to which kind of sentiment. I’m sure this undefined behavior will cause no problems.
Here is your composite vote in the new system: ↖️
The choice between a traditional up-down vote and a new non-up-down vote must have been a tough one.
Removed by mod
Male, Female, and a Secret Third Thing
More like Man, Woman and 60 plus different other categories even good sports in the first two categories don’t tend to be bothered to learn about.
It’s not that it’s secret it’s that if you don’t ask for specifics we assume you don’t care, don’t know there are specifics or you really just don’t want to know.
Us Enbyfolk respecting that you probably don’t need to be burdened with actual specifics or interpreting that knowledge as being additional social pressure is us being polite.
Ah, a comment to test mods’ susceptibility
Neuchacho
We all live in a state of quantum flux.
You don’t know whether you’re male or female, unless you look into the mirror, or somebody observes you?
Edit: That checks out, actually. I forget my gender all the time that I’m not thinking about it.
It’s always hilarious and frustrating when people who don’t understand a topic try to disprove it. This is the same energy as flat earthers pointing to the horizon and going “See!?!” or anti-vaxxers pointing out people who still get sick.
Anyone who thinks this logic is compelling should actually crack a book. I’d recommend Judith butlers gender trouble, but this sort of meme is peak dunning kruger. Literally too ignorant of a topic to actually argue against it.
Sir, this is a shitpost.
I think it reads like a joke made by a nonbinary person
It’s always hilarious when people take jokes as if they’re literal
Wow you are stupid, aren’t you? It’s called a joke and not a debate.
When I see that kind of argument, I think of tri-state logic gates.
Those gates can be in 3 states High, Low, and Hi-Z.
If we look at non-binary people from that angle they must be in the Hi-Z state.
What if I’m naan binary (preferably garlic)?
when peshwari exists?
No…Keema is the right choice
I’m peshwari-curious.
