I think what really bothers me on this is the inherent internalized lack of tolerance in those who claim to be non-binary.
What I mean is
- Men and women are equal
- Heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality are accepted
- Clothing has become virtually unisex and accepted (other than dresses/skirts for men)
- Jewelery like earrings are acceptable for men
So what does "the sex you want to identify as" really mean? If you want to pretend gender isn't about genetics what difference at all does gender make unless you internally are intolerant to one of the above? You're a man who likes to have sex with other men and dress in silky shirts and wear floral perfume and dangly earrings? great, you're still a man. You're a woman who likes to wear old spice, suits and drive a Harley? Great you're still a woman.
I still personally don't understand how transsexuality (a bit different than what we're talking about here) isn't treated in the same way as other bodily dysmorphias like anorexia, bulimia and bigorexia
This is right in line with what I have noticed about a lot of the "accepting" elite who are better than anyone who might try to stick with tradition. A lot of their claims against bias are based in bias.
For instance, Roseanne calls a woman an ape and it is racist. But people on the "non-racist" side have called Trump the offspring of an orangutan and that was OK. Why? Because Trump is white. The differentiation of the two comments being right or wrong is ONLY based on the color of the subject's skin. Isn't the idea that skin color doesn't matter? If that is the standard than how is it OK to say something about a white person and not a black person? The color of your skin should be no different than the color of your hairs or eyes, and nobody ever says, "Oh you can't say that - his eyes are blue!!"
Not to turn this into a race comment - but I think you are applying similar logic that I agree with - it is ironic someone would choose to identify as something, and then expect to be treated differently, and then be upset they are being treated differently in another area.
And yes - people were born that way, or created, or whatever, but they can't accept it might be a "disease".
Biological success is the ability to produce viable off spring. Gender is obviously a huge factor in this. Any issues with this means you are non-functioning. If you have a low sperm count, lack eggs, are gay, transgender, etc. - you have functional issues. A lot of people will take offense with this, and I understand that, but it's no different than having cancer, or depression or whatever other number of diseases. You have an impaired function. And...lots of people do, not just one subgroup. Plenty of straight people have impaired biological functions and can't reproduce either. So live your life.
Who am I to judge whatever someone wants to be labeled as?
However, who are they to judge if I don't live by those same rules?
to me the biggest problem is the snowflakes want us all to accept these ideas....personally I don't care how you live or identify as but you have to play by those same rules and not care when I don't accept those ideas into my own life
This is so true. I think it gets back to personal responsibility. People want to make choices but not live with the outcomes of their decisions. I want to be "different" and I want to identify as that when it is to my psychological benefit, but I don't want anything negative to come with it. It has to be all sunshine and roses, no weeds.
And it's not just one group - it's most people nowadays. We try to use our issues as swords instead of shields.