Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

musou wrote

this is an interesting point. when i talk about gender with people, i think most i've encountered define trans as like, (gender != agab), but some define it as !!gender && (gender != agab) and i think the tension between those definitions can make talking about this stuff more difficult than it needs to be.

i am trying to think about how to put that in a way that doesn't rely on programming metaphors but i'm not sure i can

3

twovests OP wrote

wait i'm confused, what is !!gender meant to be?

but i like this, i shall identify as (gender != agab)

3

musou wrote (edited )

!! is a trick in languages where values other than false count as "falsy" in boolean operators, like in ruby if you have a value that might be nil you can explicitly convert it to false with !!. so if you are a-gender, or anti-gender, or have some other value for gender that doesn't count in some sense as the affirmative presence of a gender then !!gender makes it false. and in my experience at least, for some cases like that, individuals do self-identify as trans and in others they don't.

certainly i fit that description myself and i do self-identify as trans in contexts where it's safe to do so

4