oregon court rules that 'nonbinary' is a legal gender

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

I would probably just use the simpler broad term "other", but this works.

Yeah me too

Why

Because Transgenderism and gender dysphoria are real things, and people shouldn't be forced to choose between male and female on any govt. Document that asks for their gender.

I'm all for being inclusive, but chuck in an "Other" option, or this list is going to get mighty long.

you mean like "other than the two traditional binary options"?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Rome

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Why

Because Transgenderism and gender dysphoria are real things, and people shouldn't be forced to choose between male and female on any govt. Document that asks for their gender.

I'm all for being inclusive, but chuck in an "Other" option, or this list is going to get mighty long.

Why do we need a "list" of all the genders? Can't we just let everyone write in what they say their gender is, and leave it at that?

rather: why do we need a gender field at all?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

rather: why do we need a gender field at all?

You can't think of situations where a reasonable person would find it useful to refer to a category set descriptor that applies to like 99.5%+ of the population, and has near-perfect correlates to a range of physical features, and significant correlates to a huge range of secondary features?

Like, idk, if you're describing what someone looks like, and removed all things that are constructs, you'd be skipping a lot of helpful descriptors.  "Black guy" is a little better than "darker-complected, flat-chested human with above-average upper-body musculature."

passports have photographs in them

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

rather: why do we need a gender field at all?

You can't think of situations where a reasonable person would find it useful to refer to a category set descriptor that applies to like 99.5%+ of the population, and has near-perfect correlates to a range of physical features, and significant correlates to a huge range of secondary features?

Like, idk, if you're describing what someone looks like, and removed all things that are constructs, you'd be skipping a lot of helpful descriptors.  "Black guy" is a little better than "darker-complected, flat-chested human with above-average upper-body musculature."

passports have photographs in them

Yes, but according to the transgender lobby, we're not supposed to "assume" gender from photographs or looking at someone's physical features.

your point?