Updated 2018 12 15: minor edits
Part of the multi-part series: ‘Single-Gender Classes’
Index and preamble for series
Seven genders – why stop there? There were of course people, well-endowed with common sense, who argued against letting anyone get a foot into the door of the time-honoured discussion of Nature vs. Nurture and pointed out that, if
- Nature no longer matters;
- Gender is a very flexible thing, “a construct”;
- The number of sexual orientations need not be limited by choice as much as by human imagination (and no one knows where the limits of that may be);
- Gender need not to be cast in stone, and the ever-changing vagaries of human desires – if let loose – would make it very difficult to address any of the aspects of the desires of human diversity to cater to gender preferences that can change at the drop of a hat;
- Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) will demand legal recognition for even only one of those gender preferences of choice, let alone that any and all imaginable sexual orientations should require formal, legal recognition, then
- There will be a lot of confusion with respect to how people feel about themselves, how others think of them, how social conventions evolve to deal with them, and how the law will eventually come around (after it has been much rewritten) to cope with things that became legal after being illegal, permitted after being forbidden, encouraged after having been discouraged (the latter wherever economies and societies thrived), thereby
- Adding an unlimited number of gender orientations to cultural and ethical norms that permitted generally only two sexes for at least the past 10,000 years of existence of civilization will create an extent of confusion and chaos that will bring civilization to an end.
Still, seven genders will not suffice.
Gender pronouns for Lesbians
Consider that some Lesbian SJWs decided, quite some time ago, that there are some 30+ sexual orientations in just the category Female Homosexual:
- Female homosexual, and I quote:
- Old-school, or classic butch-femme— Refers historically to the well-documented Butch-Femme community that organized in the 50’s. Can also refer to modern day Butches and Femmes who appreciate an/or emulate many of the values from an era when the roles in our community were more clearly defined.
- Power Femme— Femme who revels in the power, strength, and mystique of her femininity.
- Femme top, Femme bottom, Butch top, or Butch bottom— Didja think all S/M Femmes were bottoms? A Butch bottom might express masculinity and strength through endurance, while a Femme top might express her power through femininity.
- Stud And Lady— Old school term for Butch-Femme. Usage is still prevalent in Black lesbian culture.
- High Femme— Exhibits hyper-femininity which may manifest itself outwardly in appearance, and inwardly as a a celebration of femininity.
- Packing—Butch wearing a “cock” under clothing. This could be a silicone or rubber model readily used for fucking, or a realistically flaccid prothesis which can either be purchased or home-made.
- Daddy, grrl, or daddy/grrl— Dynamic in some butch-femme relationshipswhere the Butch takes over the parental or care-taking role, either 24-7, or as occasional age play. Sexually, Daddy/Grrl can be played out in a incestous or S/M fashion where Daddy is irresponsibly “wicked”, or Daddy might be emotionally responsible for nurturing and loving the grrl. This particular dynamic can allow Femmes to freely explore being bratty, playful, independent, innocent, or submissive, etc… and perhaps in some instances, both partners can confront issues surrounding abuse.
- Mommy/Boy— Rarely discussed dynamic which exists in some Butch-Femme relationships where the Femme takes on the parental role, either 24-7, or as occasional age play. The Mommy may be loving, or in an S/M context, very demanding. This dynamic an allow the Butch to be adored or punished, be child-like, innocent, boyishly devilish, or rebellious, ect.
- Stone Femme— Can define a Femme who is sexually untouchable, a Femme who is “very” femme, a Femme top, or a Femme who is partnered with or attracted to very masculine/stone Butches. “Stone Femme” iis spelled with two words. Online usage often runs the words together because early majordomo-based mailing lists required one word titles.
- Stone Butch— Usually means a hard Butch who prefers not to be touched by a partner sexually at all, or in any way that is feminizing. Stone can also mean “very”, as in “very butch” and proud of it. “Stone Butch” is spelled with two words.
- Kiki—A somewhat outdated term for a Butch/Femme switch.
- Polyamorous— Having pre-negotiated relationships with multiple partners. The opposite of monogamy.
- FTM, F2M, or TS— Female to Male transexual. The transition usually involves taking male hormones, sometimes includes top surgery, but doesn’t always indicate bottom surgery. Many feel bottom surgery for F2Ms at this time is not a completely successful resolution. Some Butches may take testosterone and have top surgery, yet don’t consider themselves transexual, or even male-identified.
- TG—Transgendered. Many believe that Butches transgress the gender of “woman” or blur traditional gender to such a degree that they are transgendered. Others believe Butch is clearly a gender of it’s own.
- Hir, hym, s/he— Various masculine pronouns for Butches. Sometimes Butches online will also call one another “bro” or use traditional male pronouns, much in the same way that queens call one another “she”. Such bending of our limited language isn’t always politically motivated, but often the practice is simply employed as a tidy way of differentiating between the Butches and Femmes online.
- Het queer— Controversial phrase used to describe how the power dynamics and polarity of B-F sexuality are closer to heterosexuality than homosexuality.
- Fag Butch— Butch into other butches or FTMs; not usually meant as a derogatory term, although some old-school butches may express discomfort with Butch-on-Butch sexuality.
- Lipstick lesbian—Media term used to describe feminine lesbians, not normally used to indicate Femmes.
- Andro dyke— Mainstrream lesbian style that is deliberately void of either masculinity or femininity, or an androgenous combination of both gender expressions, each crossing the other out. Androgeny can find roots in politics, having originated from feminist beliefs of the 70’s.
- Inner faggot— Humorous way to explain a dandy Butch who is fastiduous about style, or a Butch who (although masculine) exhibits other traits common to gay boy, such as a love of theatre or a flair for design.
- Baby Butch or baby Femme— Newly-out Butch or Femme, not always related to age.
- Binary gender system— Concept that there are two genders: man and woman. Many believe that Butch and Femme disprove the concept of a binary gender system. Some Butches and Femmes claim rights to a third gender.
- Saturday night Butch— Expression used to describe lesbians who only “butch-out” at the bar on weekends.
- Biology vs. Destiny— Very topical issue in Butch-femme discussion groups. It’s important to distinguish between sex (male/female), gender identity(butch/femme/man/woman/queen, etc), and gender expression(masculine/feminine). Since these three things aren’t dependent and each other, the safest way to navigate is to assume nothing!
As stated there, at the source of the preceding list, “As always, our language has it’s limits…so mileage may vary!” No doubt, and clearly, seven genders are not enough! There is no doubt that the list requires considerable contemplation and much serious thought, of which it received not enough, by far.
There is no possible way to tell how much time or effort should be spent to guarantee satisfaction. It is not possible to establish any standard for determining who needs to be satisfied or when he should or will be. There is no obvious reason why female homosexuality should limit itself to far fewer of those gender preferences, merely to keep the total count for all of humanity down to seven genders.
There is also no doubt that the list sets the stage for the demand that there should be vastly more than seven genders. Good luck to anyone who wishes to design the potentially hundreds and perhaps more gender pronouns that, at first glance, spring to mind. Forget about the hope that anyone will memorize more than a small fraction of those on the list. How many of those that we are in some outre jurisdictions by penalty of the law required to use can anyone not an idiot savant assign to memory, let alone use flawlessly?
No doubt, some will notice that the items on the list of those sexual orientations do not add up to the promised 30+, true, but if that bothers you, you are not paying attention. Logic has nothing to do with this. SJWs and logic are not quite compatible, at best, but we must follow their directions. Reasonable or not, that is the choice we made. Nevertheless, consider that in the description of the last item in that list it is without a doubt specified that the list of 24 “sexual orientations” in the category Female Homosexual has a multiplier, a factor of 3, comprising sex, gender identity, and gender expression. That alone will cause rapid inflation far beyond the specified seven genders.
Therefore, the set of 24 sexual orientations can soon add up to 72. That is just to cater to what the major category Female Homosexual entails. There is of course some duplication in that list, but duplicated definitions of sexual orientations go under different names or labels, which makes it a requirement to consider each and every one of those 72 gender orientations. You see how that works, don’t you? Right! You’ve got it! It is perceptions that count! Reality no longer matters in our brave new world that relocated to Never-Never Land. That is not the end of it.
The bottomless abyss of gendered language
More and more
sexual gender orientations have received and are receiving legal (well, as of now mostly legislative) recognition. Many of the laws, rules and regulations require changing, to adapt them — dismantling and reconstructing a civilization is no easy task and should not be hurried. Still, the general principle is that anything goes, although there are a few complications to be resolved, such as how to fit in orientations that have been discussed but not yet very often or very publicly, various fetishisms, bestiality and intergenerational sex (a.k.a. pedophilia), but those are minor details, even if they require some time to be resolved and legalized. With enough determination and lobbying, we are bound to get to the end of it, wherever that may be on our trip down the slippery slope to our culture’s oblivion.
Some refuse to be confused by facts. Still, their perception of reality is even more unreal or surreal in relation to the issues involved than is the perception of someone who insists that all pretense of sexual duality is futile and undesirable, wherefore it needs to be abrogated because, he insists, the only correct interpretation of the gender issue is that there are infinitesimally fine gradations of gender fluidity. If there are to be absolute standards for the assignment or categorization of genders, how many categories should there be? Why or how can the demand for all-inclusiveness possibly stop at seven genders, when there is a so much larger number of gender orientations yet to be embraced?
What is the frame of reference? Should that be a division of our perceptions, social standards as well as moral, ethical and legal standards according to chromosomal categories? Is there a case to be made for or against social, moral, ethical and legal categorization of individuals to fit the greater aspects of society at large? Should individual rights or the greater good of society be king? Should individuals submit to the greater good or should the greater good be the accidental, collective consequence of the rights of individuals? Who should conform, the individuals or society?
Chaos is the absence of order
All of those considerations are complex and difficult enough if one considers just the chromosomal reality of nature.
Incidence Rates of Chromosome Aberrations
(Not exhaustive — addresses just the most prevalent categories)
|Down’s Syndrome||• Overall – 1:700 of live births;
• Young Mothers –
1:2,000 of live births, and
• Mothers over 40 – 1:50 of live births
|Sex Chromosome Aberrations|
(Turner’s Syndrome, Bonnevie-Ullrich Syndrome)
|1:3,000 live female births|
|The XXX Syndrome (The “Super Female”)||? rare|
|Klinefelter’s Syndrome (XXY)||1:500 to 1:1,000 live male births|
|The XYY Syndrome||? A few males were found in institutions for criminals with subnormal I.Q.|
|Intersex States (True Hermaphroditism)||? Extremely rare in humans (less then 500 reported cases in the whole world)|
|Pseudo Hermaphroditism — is not a chromosomal defect. It is due to endocrinal imbalances during gestation and is curable with varying degrees of success through treatment with hydrocortisone and other similar preparations.||Dr. Warne cites an incidence rate of 1:4,500 live births, while inter-sex advocates claim an incidence rate of 1:1,500 live births|
|Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS)||1:20,000 to 1:60,000 male and female births|
Those considerations become far more complex when perceptions, desires and preferences are being brought into play. No right, entitlement or privilege that anyone demands can be enjoyed if all of the others who are to grant it won’t do that, if they will not assume the burden of the obligation to grant it. Must or should the vast majority of humanity be forced to accommodate the wants and desires of a very small minority or even the needs of a minuscule few?
Is it morally right to force the vast majority of society to assume the responsibility of providing for the comforts and self-esteem of members of minuscule minorities? It seems not. It appears that the discussion of gender rights must come to terms with the reality that, beyond tolerance of those who are by nature different, it is simply too much of a stretch to demand that the vastly larger majority of society or humanity caters to those who make a deliberate choice to want to be different.
It is not reasonable to let a few force the vast majority of society to dance to their tune. Common sense dictates that some of the few have a right to be tolerated, but that all of the few are obligated to submit to the vast majority, to the extent that no harm is done, so as to make it possible for the vast majority to grant tolerance, the right to be different. Why ask for more?
Why ask for more? What a question! Because it is all for the asking! The 98-percent majority is silent. It is silent because it has been and is being cowed into silence. It is politically incorrect to speak up. In a free society, free speech permits anyone to speak up about such issues. Unfortunately, going by the reality of censorship, of peer pressure, destroyed careers and destroyed lives, long, drawn-out court battles that leave bad tastes in the mouths of all involved and much money in the pockets or bank accounts of the lawyers and expert witnesses who get paid, regardless of which side loses, many people can no longer afford to speak up. They are not even allowed to joke about any of it anymore. Not even gallows humour is permitted in our so-called free society that is free no longer.
Therefore we must learn what we can, to acquire language skills, the rules for which appear to have been designed by sadists.
- Gender Re-education creates Gender-Newspeak Fluency
- Unhappy feminist, regarding truth on domestic violence
- Feminism destroys many aspects of society
- Second-wave feminism causes harmful fallout
- More on feminism’s legacy: Down syndrome increase
- Gender recognition receives royal assent
- Defining the Purpose of Boys