I think it's time to retire "gender is a spectrum" arguments in favor of more autonomy-focused and contextually-aware rhetoric. Hear me out.
-
-
This is the actual pattern manifest in our society. A doctor can support nonbinary pronouns, but at the end of the day they still have to mark M or F on your billing. It's unhelpful to retcon M/F to mean "towards Male, towards Female," which is what the spectrum model does.
Show this thread -
The "spectrum" model has also been corrupted by trans-exclusionists and is central to intra-trans discourse. In short, it has allowed for the codification of exclusionary principles for a very, very modest gain in understanding.
Show this thread -
A more useful model to me is to recognize gender as an individualizable model, unique to the person, and to *separately* recognize that societies construct patterns amenable to a large number of people's self-description.
Show this thread -
These patterns are changeable--and in fact corruptible--and their dynamism doesn't per se mean that everyone who self-describes suddenly has a shift in their gender.
Show this thread -
At the end of the day, gender terms and labels don't exist for me, but for other people to understand me to whatever contextual purpose it serves, for better or worse. So the spectrum model is really no more effective at that than the rigid binary model.
Show this thread -
We don't need to say "gender is a spectrum" to say "gender binaries are inadequate." Simply say gender binaries are inaccurate.
Show this thread -
Instead, we should focus on supporting autonomous gender identification, expression, presentation, support, etc. There are many axes along which one asserts their gender, some of which don't even exist in every culture.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.