Demigender

[Pat]

Because there aren't enough divisions under the Transgender umbrella...

I've just been exposed to the term "demiboy":


A demiboy, also called demiguy, is someone whose gender identity is only partly male, regardless of their assigned gender at birth.[5] They may or may not identify as another gender[6] in addition to feeling partially a boy or man. They may also define their identity as both male and genderless (agender).

"Alternatively, demiguy can be used to describe someone assigned male at birth who feels but the barest association with that identification, though not a significant enough dissociation to create real physical discomfort or dysphoria, or someone assigned female at birth who is trans masculine but not wholly binary-identified, so that they feel more strongly associated with 'male' than 'female,' socially or physically, but not strongly enough to justify an absolute self-identification as 'man'."

http://nonbinary.org/wiki/Demigender

There is, of course, a matching "demigirl" term and more encompassing "demigender." Although I think a lot of terms we use are attempts by people to describe the same identity using different words, I do like the idea that "demi" captures the identification with a gender that is not strong enough to assert being that gender. So those of us born male who have decided that we're non-binary but still have a historical/habitual connection to maleness might well be described as "demiboys." Or we might feel attachment to both genders but not strong enough to identify and either and be "demifluid."


Demifluid is a gender identity for "someone whose gender is partially fluid (genderfluid) with the other part(s) being static; an example could be: one part of their gender is 'woman' while the part that fluctuates is 'man' and 'genderqueer'."

An interesting addition to the lexicon. I have always said we spend most of our time finding out what we're NOT. So it's one more thing to try on and see if it describes us.

[Jennifer-GWN]

This whole... Finding a moniker is not unlike standing in front of a piece of abstract art. How about we leave it as abstract and stop trying to argue labels to attach... Too much time and energy spent, noses out of joint, and feelings miffed for nothing more then trying to find finite labels for an abstract spectrum. Off to the art gallery to listen to the old ladies argue about what they see...

[Teresa]

Jennie,
I'm not sure if we can handle another division, even if we accept and understand them the rest of the World won't. Trying to put our case now creates a media mix up, they get transgender and transexual mixed up. To most people we wear women's clothes for some inexplicable reason, we may like a new label but it will mean very little outside our community .

If we want better acceptance we have to keep it simple, the US has problem enough deciding who's bathroom someone in a dress can use, being called a demiboy is going to go right over their heads as most of the other labels we use do .

[Sue Too]

I'm with Jennifer------- I've said it before and I'll say it again--------Labels are a pain. All they do here is cause unnecessary conflict. Labels Be Gone!!

[Pat]

Personally I find "labels" important -- not for the outside world, but for myself. They convey other people's insights into their situation and allow me to compare mine to theirs and see if there's resonance there. If there's resonance, then they might be a model to me. If there's not, then I know they're on a different path. Like I said, I spend most of my time figuring out what I'm not -- I keep hoping it will lead me to find what I am.

The other thing about labels is my old saw that you can't have a discussion about ducks unless there's a word for ducks. It's true that ducks are things and you could use "things" in place of the word "ducks" but words that are more specific allow more effortless communication. I often see people here saying that they are OK with being male but don't believe it describes them completely/correctly. Demiboy may be the concept they're struggling with in a single, handy word.

I don't expect it to catch on, but it's interesting.

[Ineke Vashon]

Labels - schmabels. I can't keep up with endless variations :eek:. If we're not fully male, in mind at least, why not use something simple, like "half and half?" Goes well with a cup of coffee :D.

Ineke, 25% or so:daydreaming:

[Teresa]

Jenny,
I'm not against labels, we do need them to describe ourselves to others. If we have too many we may just confuse people more, blinding with science or labels doesn't make a stronger case for us.

I'm not sure if I like " Demiboy " , I would prefer to escape a male label when I dress !

[ReineD]

Biologically, we are either male, female, or intersex. There are no other biological categories.

As far as gender indentity, we are either (regardless of chromosomes and genitals) man, woman, or nonbinary. There are tons of words we can use to describe the "nonbinary" folks. Here's a list of the more popular ones:

Gender nonconforming
Mixed gender
Bigender
Agender
Dualgender
Androgynous
Gender fluid
Pangender
Demiboy
Demigirl
And here's more: http://nonbinary.org/wiki/List_of_nonbinary_identities

IMO, there's not much point debating the finer differences between all the nonbinary identifications. They will vary according to each individual's perception of what the words mean.

[flatlander_48]

Personally I find "labels" important

As do I. In part, it is the currency of communication.

If we consider Crossdressers at one end of the spectrum and M>F Transsexuals at the other, that would mean essentially 100% male identified and essentially 100% female identified, respectively. However, what that does is leave A LOT of space in the middle and room for a great deal of variance.

I've stated that for me it feels like 70%/30%, male to female. This is a very rough guess on my part and, as far as I know, there isn't a structured way of making this determination. It is purely my interpretation of how I think and act. However, surely someone who figured out their split was 50/50 or 30/70, for example, would likely have some significant differences compared to me. So, the degree of variation, the subtleties involved and what that can mean for gender identity doesn't surprise me.

Gender identity is not an exact science, at least not yet. The fact that these variances exist points to the fact that there's a lot that clinicians and scientists don't know.

DeeAnn

[Lorileah]

If we consider Crossdressers at one end of the spectrum and M>F Transsexuals at the other, that would mean essentially 100% male identified and essentially 100% female identified, respectively. However, what that does is leave A LOT of space in the middle and room for a great deal of variance.



DeeAnn
Why do there have to be "ends"? Maybe it's a circle, or ellipse or rectangle. If you have "ends" you have contention over those in the middle. And even circles suggest some sort of continuum. I think we are random dots in the universe...stars in the night sky

[Pat]

Double helix maybe?

[sometimes_miss]

I'm with Jennifer------- I've said it before and I'll say it again--------Labels are a pain. All they do here is cause unnecessary conflict. Labels Be Gone!!
Yet the search continues by folks who want a new one. Some don't like the current labels that society uses, for obvious reasons. Others might think that the old labels with the derogatory adjectives that lots of people add to them aren't nice enough to use. People know what we are. Changing the label isn't going to change what they think.

[TinaZ]

I've stated that for me it feels like 70%/30%, male to female.

DeeAnn

How are you not chewed up and spit out by some people around here by saying that? I'm constantly gobsmacked (and I've run screaming from this site) because some TS women here are absolutely married to a gender binary - which is the height of irony, really. The "I'm 100 percent woman, have always been 100 percent woman and will forever be 100 percent woman!" chant gets obnoxious and tiring, especially when the underlying message is, "And the rest of you are only boys playing with dresses."

Yeah, I'm having a ball. Why I'm practically Cinderella over here.

Just. So. Tired.

[Marcelle]

For some labels are important and I get that. Heck I would hate to go through life being referred to as the woman with a name beginning with M :). For others it is not so important as they define themselves internally and are good with that. IMHO within the transgender community people just want to find a place to belong, a plot of land to stick in a flag and say "I belong, there are others like me and I am not weird!". Nothing wrong with that. Heck when I first stumbled here I had spent 50 years identifying as male and was for the most part miserable. I then latched on to CDer because it seemed to fit but again I became miserable because dressing did not do it for me so . . . gender fluid with varying degrees of mix. Again, the whole concept of moving from one end of the gender binary (male) to the other (female) did not do it because as a male I was miserable. So now I identify as a woman and could not be happier.

My point . . . we all just want a slice of happiness and if that requires a label then get out your label maker and mark away. Nobody has the right to define who you are and rain on your parade . . . only you have that right, rain or shine. So whatever floats your boat and gets you to a happy place . . . go forth and enjoy. :)

Cheers

Marcelle

[Mollyanne]

I'm NOT going to agree or disagree with what you are trying to convey, but isn't there enough "labels" to deal with?????? Why add to the confusion?????? For whats it worth, I have been labeled a x-dresser, a transvestite, a pervert, a demented sick individual and a sexual deviant. Labels are just an excuse to put people into a "neat little box for exclusion from society". Am I a x-dresser, YES I AM, SO WHAT!!!!! My female traits are dominant over my male traits, and quiet frankly I like it that way. Leave the labels in the garbage!!!!!!

Molly

[Pat]

In general I'm in total agreement with Reine although I don't think we'll get the general public to think "non binary." If we can get them to accept that people are man, woman or transgender I personally will do a victory lap then retire to the lounge and have a beer. To the external world there's no benefit in detailing the non-binary any more than there's a point to getting them to understand that some transgender people are binary and some aren't. To me, it's a lot like Civil War Reenactors -- the one collective title tells me everything I need/care to know about them, I don't care if there are subcategories. ;)

But within our own ranks I think all of the subcategories are important and unless you know unambiguously which one you are, you should learn about them -- not so others can label you -- but so you can label yourself as a step toward understanding yourself. That and later on, when you go to the big TG conference you can walk into the bar and shout, "Hey! Where's all the demiguys at?" (Or whatever) and find like-minded people for mutual betterment.


I'm constantly gobsmacked (and I've run screaming from this site) because some TS women here are absolutely married to a gender binary

TinaZ! My favorite gender non-conforming ukulelist (and vocalist)! So cool to see you! I think one of the issues with the TG community is that we have such different types under the same umbrella and there's no way we can be understanding of each other through direct experience so any chance of empathy between types depends on intellectual understanding. We have to listen to each other and we have to believe each other. People in the gender binary can't understand what we're feeling; we can't understand what they're feeling. But you're right -- we also have to relax with each other and not take offense where none is meant.

[Tracii G]

Anytime I hear the term gender binary my ears close up and I want to scream.
If I read an article that is full of gender stats and figures I tend to think the author is just re posting something he read somewhere else and the info is probably bogus anyway.

[flatlander_48]

Why do there have to be "ends"? Maybe it's a circle, or ellipse or rectangle. If you have "ends" you have contention over those in the middle. And even circles suggest some sort of continuum. I think we are random dots in the universe...stars in the night sky

Not if there's 100%/0% and 0%/100%. Synonyms for Spectrum include Scale and Range. That 100/0 to 0/100 is the range. This ain't no Mobius Strip.


How are you not chewed up and spit out by some people around here by saying that?

Don't think that hasn't been tried.


I'm constantly gobsmacked (and I've run screaming from this site) because some TS women here are absolutely married to a gender binary - which is the height of irony, really. The "I'm 100 percent woman, have always been 100 percent woman and will forever be 100 percent woman!" chant gets obnoxious and tiring, especially when the underlying message is, "And the rest of you are only boys playing with dresses."

Two points that come into play: chromosome arrangements and that the vast majority of M>F transsexuals were raised as male.


Yeah, I'm having a ball. Why I'm practically Cinderella over here.

Just. So. Tired.

As someone once told me:

Livin' The Dream...

DeeAnn

[Kate Simmons]

I kind of prefer the term demigoddess myself. :battingeyelashes::)

[Jacqueline85]

I hate labels for one simple reason. The idea behind them is to convey in a single word a (possibly very) complicated description of that which is labelled. In principle that would be fine, but it doesn't work. Leaving aside, for the moment, the fact that there are so many variations among people who would adhere to some label. The difficulty is that those who are on the outside or, in ReineD's description either man or woman, and have little exposure to anyone who is not in one of those two categories, will never understand the full definition of all the labels. Heck, most of them can't tell the difference between a heterosexual male CD and a homosexual male, not to mention TG.

Adding more labels only adds confusion and I don't think that leads to more acceptance. Now you might say that the labels are for those of us who are already in the community and understand the labels, and that's where my earlier point comes in about the inadequacy of labels. There are so many variations amongst us CDs, and we make up a small portion of the gender spectrum. We start to need to string labels together and even then it won't be adeqquate.