Yes, I see what you mean. The power and the weakness of labels 😉 "THAT" thread is actually about the variety of sexes and genders, some of which are "labelled" as TV, TS, man, woman, etc. The scale is more analogue, than discrete. And, to be more precise, it's not one-dimensional. Anyway, let's keep this one separate for a while.
1D dichotomies are intended to decrease the dimensionality and simplify things. But "reducing" "the picture" by 1D (for example, by going from 3D to 2D) might create infinite amount of projections. Sex/gender/self-identification space is clearly not uni-dimensional and far from binary. Some of the intersected areas in this nD space are labeled CD, TV, etc.
So, it's not pure male vs female. Or you have to define "male" and "female" without any "grey areas" in between.
(23 Jun 2018, 01:56 )Tinker D Wrote: I Have been labeled a CD and a TS. But I'm not anyone of them.Yes, the purpose of that thread exactly 😉 I think I have to rename it somehow, to make it less meme-centered.
I have thought long and hard about this and did a lot of research. I know that there are a lot of guys and girls going through this.
(23 Jun 2018, 01:56 )Tinker D Wrote: That is male vs female. Not CD, TS, TG.However, as far as I understand, you do not describe yourself as 100% strictly male or 100% female, do you? So it's something in between? And we do not talk about strictly sexes, but more about genders, right?
1D dichotomies are intended to decrease the dimensionality and simplify things. But "reducing" "the picture" by 1D (for example, by going from 3D to 2D) might create infinite amount of projections. Sex/gender/self-identification space is clearly not uni-dimensional and far from binary. Some of the intersected areas in this nD space are labeled CD, TV, etc.
So, it's not pure male vs female. Or you have to define "male" and "female" without any "grey areas" in between.
