Practically speaking, what is definition of queer then?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Practically speaking, what does non-binary mean?

It’s not bisexual, right? That means liking both men and women sexually.

Non-binary relates more to the individual than their sexual preference, correct?

But what does that mean?

It’s troubling that this thread makes it sound like non-binary means a woman who prefers pants and isn’t a wallflower. If that’s the definition, then I suppose most successful women fall in that category.

Me again.

Google lists non-binary celebrities including Ruby Rose.

Maybe it’s because I’m old (pushing 50), but people I know IRL who identify as queer seemingly fit the bill. These are more butch or masculine females who are attracted to feminine females. They dress in more masculine clothing. Like Ruby Rose, they sometimes use makeup or dress provocatively.

A select few are asexual, and a couple identify that way.

Google definitions say non-binary essentially means queer or asexual.

Then why don’t they identify as butch lesbian?

Because queer was the label of choice when they came of age?

I dunno.

Older folks from the lgbt community don’t even add the Q because they find the word offensive. I can think of a nonprofit that serves gay senior citizens that only uses lgbt and refuses to use Q for that reason. But the subsequent generation that came of age in the 90s/early 00s took back the word and has a queer-positive messaging campaign. Pronouns weren’t a thing then.

I suppose this is just the evolution of labels.

I get that it’s useful to put this out there to increase representation, but I suspect it’s rather limiting for actors to adopt such labels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Practically speaking, what does non-binary mean?

It’s not bisexual, right? That means liking both men and women sexually.

Non-binary relates more to the individual than their sexual preference, correct?

But what does that mean?

It’s troubling that this thread makes it sound like non-binary means a woman who prefers pants and isn’t a wallflower. If that’s the definition, then I suppose most successful women fall in that category.

Me again.

Google lists non-binary celebrities including Ruby Rose.

Maybe it’s because I’m old (pushing 50), but people I know IRL who identify as queer seemingly fit the bill. These are more butch or masculine females who are attracted to feminine females. They dress in more masculine clothing. Like Ruby Rose, they sometimes use makeup or dress provocatively.

A select few are asexual, and a couple identify that way.

Google definitions say non-binary essentially means queer or asexual.

Then why don’t they identify as butch lesbian?

Anonymous wrote:Practically speaking, what does non-binary mean?

It’s not bisexual, right? That means liking both men and women sexually.

Non-binary relates more to the individual than their sexual preference, correct?

But what does that mean?

It’s troubling that this thread makes it sound like non-binary means a woman who prefers pants and isn’t a wallflower. If that’s the definition, then I suppose most successful women fall in that category.

Me again.

Google lists non-binary celebrities including Ruby Rose.

Maybe it’s because I’m old (pushing 50), but people I know IRL who identify as queer seemingly fit the bill. These are more butch or masculine females who are attracted to feminine females. They dress in more masculine clothing. Like Ruby Rose, they sometimes use makeup or dress provocatively.

A select few are asexual, and a couple identify that way.

Google definitions say non-binary essentially means queer or asexual.

Practically speaking, what does non-binary mean?

It’s not bisexual, right? That means liking both men and women sexually.

Non-binary relates more to the individual than their sexual preference, correct?

But what does that mean?

It’s troubling that this thread makes it sound like non-binary means a woman who prefers pants and isn’t a wallflower. If that’s the definition, then I suppose most successful women fall in that category.

The cast is way too big. Why hire more people after the departures last season? Let a smaller cast show their skills instead of overloading the cast. And diversity has never really been achieved at SNL and I don’t know why they don’t reflect more of the population in NYC since location is such a big part of the show.

Nothing against Molly here, I’m sure they’re hilarious and deserves the opportunity and I look forward to seeing what the can do.

But after a rash of female cast members departing over the last couple years, including Aidy Bryant, Kate McKinnon, Vanessa Bayer, and Melissa Villaseñor, is is disappointing to me that the new cast members are three men and non-binary person. The show’s head writers, who also host weekend update, are men. It’s produced by a man. And now the cast is composed of 11 men, 6 women, and one non-binary person. Oh, and while the men in the cast are relatively diverse (they better be, given there are twice as many of them), there are only two women of color on the show.

It’s a show about popular culture. Are there not enough women in popular culture to merit keeping them in the cast? Is the old “there are no funny women” trope still alive and kicking?

Anonymous wrote:Based on what I see in schools, I would say it is a mask for other issues.

In Molly’s case, I don’t understand what makes them non-binary. They present as a woman, have a woman’s name. Only dainty, attractive people can be considered women? Back in the day, we would have called them a tomboy. They also look like they could be a butch lesbian.

Agree. It’s like gender dysphoria is the eating disorder or cutting of the current generation. Not minimizing people who truly need to change genders to be their authentic selves, but when all you do is change your pronouns, why it is it such a big deal? Isn’t it no different than trying out a new haircut or fashion style?

Based on what I see in schools, I would say it is a mask for other issues.

In Molly’s case, I don’t understand what makes them non-binary. They present as a woman, have a woman’s name. Only dainty, attractive people can be considered women? Back in the day, we would have called them a tomboy. They also look like they could be a butch lesbian.

Many of us women who have never identified with the frilly, feminine identity of womanhood, who have never accepted subservience, and who have never bought in to the fashion demands of the patriarchy, might consider ourselves “nonbinary” if we define womanhood as pink femininity and as sexual appeal to men.

I have a larger body, I wear men’s Oxford shoes to work because I refuse to voluntarily hobble myself with most women’s stress shoes with painful heels, no support, and unrealistic shaping. I like trousers with pockets. I am far from dainty. I speak up as well as men. I don’t wear makeup or jewelry and I let my hair dry naturally. (My exbf kindly described my appearance as “confident dyke” even though I’m straight. I just don’t sign up for all the alterations I’d have to make to my
Body in order to fit into the ever-narrowing scope of what women are allowed to be.

But I am a woman. I have grown and birthed a baby. I have fed him my own milk. I am wise and nurturing and warm. But it occurs to me that I were 17 now rather than in 1988, I might say I’m non-binary, too.

Anonymous wrote:So…is she trans? Or just a woman who goes by “they”?

Not sure the media is just saying they are non-binary. They present like they were assigned female at birth. Just overweight and no make up.

Anonymous wrote:If you lost weight people would value the fact that you speak up. Being overweight is the principal problem.

I’ve lost weight before and it was even worse. People didn’t expect a pretty woman to go against the flow and question things at work.

If you lost weight people would value the fact that you speak up. Being overweight is the principal problem.

So…is she trans? Or just a woman who goes by “they”?

In the same week we have people calling Zendaya “not black” when she made history winning her Emmy, people criticizing Halle Bailey for being a black Mermaid, and now some of those same people are now celebrating Molly Kearney as the first non-binary actor in SNL.

I don’t claim to understand everyone’s identity but aim to respect everyone. However, I am noticing among celebrities (and in my classrooms) that it’s mostly people assigned female at birth that come out as non-binary. If I wasn’t told to, I would continue using she/her pronouns. Is they/them a mask for other issues? As a cis female in a male dominated profession I feel like I too could cal myself non-binary. I am also overweight and not model size and have personality traits that society doesn’t value in women such as the confidence to speak up.