so, there’s a thread on AVEN that opens like this…
A new (to me) concept was recently thrown in my path. It’s the idea that there are sex orientations as well as gender orientations; ie that sex is not strictly what you physically look like, but what you want to look like (sexual characteristics-wise).
For example, neutrois would count as a sex orientation, not a gender one; neutrois, as I understand it, is a desire to present as neutrally as possible, with the characteristics of neither binary sex. However, agender and genderless are gender orientations, because they specifically refer to the construct of gender, not physical aspects.
This made a lot of sense to me, intuitively. It allows us to think of a single person as both neutrois and agender, to follow the above examples. Or neutrois and demi-guy, or androgynous man, or female agender, or any combination.
I’m wondering how many other people have heard of or use this convention, and what you think of it?
and i replied with this:
speaking for myself only here, but…
as a neutrois person i see neutrois as my gender identity. to me it is not an orientation, nor does it have anything to do with my sex. it is a gender identity just as surely as agender is.
it is true that some neutrois people desire to become as sexless (lacking in sex characteristics) as possible, but that is not what neutrois itself is imho. as i said before, neutrois is a gender identity and seeing as how gender is not the same thing as sex, that gender identity does not dictate that person’s sex any more than an agender identity would.
as i’ve said, i speak only for myself, but personally i really wish people would understand that sex and gender are two different things and as such a neutrois person’s gender identity does not by default entail anything about their sex….to me it’s similar to how years ago many people were unable to distinguish between someone who is transgender and someone who is transsexual, assuming that someone who is transgender is by default also transsexual. that said… why out of all of the non-binary gender identities does it seem to be only the neutrois identity that is singled out like this?
so in short, i cannot understand nor agree with what you are saying at all. sorry.
and then someone else (not the OP) replied with this:
Because if you take out the surgery aspect, transgender and transsexual express exactly the same concept – identifying with the gender that is opposite your biological sex. (Or, if you use another definition of transgender, it means identifying with a gender that is not your biological sex.) The same goes for agender and neutrois. The way I see it, neutrois people would want to transition to a more neutral body appearance, whereas agender people don’t necessarily want to, although they may want to present neutrally through clothing, haircuts, etc. In short, it’s not that neutrois people are being singled out – it’s just that there is too much controversy on the terminology for it to even mean anything objective. And this comes from a person who identifies as largely neutral. Just check my Gender field.
and then i got even more annoyed and replied with this:
i think you missed my point.
transgender and transsexual are not the exact same concept minus surgery any more than agender and neutrois are.
- someone who is transgender can desire medical transition without being transsexual.
- someone who is agender can desire medical transition without being neutrois.
- someone can be transsexual without a desire for medical transition.
- someone can be neutrois without a desire for medical transition.
if everything is as binarist (ie. want to medically transition? you must be X. don’t? you must be Y.) as you and many others seem to think, why is it that only the agender and neutrois gender identities exist on this binary system?
what about genderqueer people who wish to medically transition? where is their binary equivalent?
what about genderless people who wish to medically transition? where is their binary equivalent?
what about androgyne people who wish to medically transition? where is their binary equivalent?
etc, etc, etc
if the neutrois identity isn’t being singled out, then why is it that only that ONE gender identity out of the many many that exist is being held up to the standard of “you must want X to be Y”?
i’m sorry, but i personally reject the binarist relationship that too many people feel exists (for some reason exclusively) between the agender and neutrois gender identities. nothing is ever so binary or black & white.
and again, what the hell does the person’s sex or their (lack of) desire to annul it have to do with a gender identity? i would hope that most would agree with me when i say that a transsexual’s gender identity is not invalidated nor affirmed by the state of their desire to medically transition– people can have entirely valid reasons to want to or not want to medically transition and their identity is not dependent on this– so why then is someone’s neutrois identity invalidated or affirmed by the state of their desire to medically transition?
i’m sorry if i come across rudely or angrily, but this is a topic that i find myself having to deal with more than i like. it’s nothing personal. and again, as i said, i argue only for myself and for my own identity. i do not claim to speak for all neutrois people.
and i can’t help but wonder why i seem to be the only person who sees the binarist relationship that people think exists between (and only between!) agender and neutrois identities? or is it that i’m the only one that cares?
i understand that people try to paint things as being black & white for the facilitation of their own understanding, but god that erases so many people and so many things. or maybe it’s just me who’s being erased…?