Darcy Vescio has an announcement

[Thryleon]

This has been referenced a few times on this site, but the native americans were all over this before the europeans imposed their views....
https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/t...ve-genders

sorry mate I've read this before and I reject it

This has been referenced a few times on this site, but the native americans were all over this before the europeans imposed their views....
https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/t...ve-genders

Not sure about the navajo and their belief structures but for me you can still paint all of this into traditional genders of anatomy X and Y.

Where the variance is seems to be behavioural and not gendered.

I.e. we associate femininity with females and masculinity with males as we have defined the class male and female, but both genders have the same capacity for both, and how they behave is actually irrelevant. 

The class male or female is the issue for someone to state they don't belong to one is in my opinion still bollocks because its their definition they don't belong to.  Its just anatomy.

You can't not have anatomy of one or the other.  Its a thumbing of social norms based on flawed models of social norms.

I remember once being told "She is the cat's mother".  Perhaps we knew better once upon a time but im never really going to understand this thinking regarding rejection of anatomy.  You introduce more chromosomes and im more understanding but the waters seem to have been muddied here for no real apparent reason IMHO.