For Women and Non-binary Folks
and why that whole title pisses me off
If you are a newer member of this community, here is a little about me for the sake of some background. My name is Robin, as it has always been. I got lucky with a gender ambiguous name from birth. I came out as gay when I was a teen in high school, and acceptance wasn’t great. But I lived life as happily as I could as an out lesbian. I got married, my wife and I brought two awesome kids into the world. I came out again at 43 years old, this time as a transgender guy who is kind of transmasculine and kind of nonbinary, although I often feel more third gender or demigender. Maybe I’ll never figure out what my gender is, and you’ll all just have to be okay with that. Sometimes the journey is the point. It can be confusing to others that my pronouns are he/him, but my identity isn’t entirely male. But being transgender is rarely never about everyone else’s comfort.
For Women and Non-binary Folks
I’ve been struggling with this one for a while. Uber or Lyft are advertising a new service “for women and non-binary folks.” I see conferences and gatherings “for women and non-binary individuals.” Surveys conflate “women and non-binary” identities in their results. There are clothing collections entirely for “women and non-binary,” and all of this gives me ick feelings.
Because when you see announcements and language that is intentionally inclusive the first reaction is to be grateful. Be grateful anyone sees you at all. Be grateful they’re willing to share title space with your identity. Be grateful they aren’t TERFs (we hope?). Be grateful for any amount of visibility offered to your community. Be grateful a place is being made for you.
But this rumbles in my tummy. It’s upsetting in a way that’s hard to pin down. Wait, that’s a lie. I’m about to pin it down. So here’s your disclaimer up front. I’m angry, I’m tired, and I’m going to lay out my feelings right here. You should know I don’t speak on behalf of any community, nor should any one person be expected to. I am not the spokesperson for transgender people or nonbinary people or transmasculine people. I’m probably wrong. I’m probably overreacting. I’m sure I am The Asshole.
But I’m gonna be The Asshole because it’s genuine and real, and I promise I won’t be upset if you walk away. Last chance.
For Women and Non-binary Folks
I do not think you really mean non-binary folks.
There is this odd part of feminism that is constantly preoccupied with women being vulnerable, unempowered, endangered, alone. I once had a colleague stare at me in shock when I said I go running in the dark with no pepper spray. She was alarmed that I was unprotected, that I could be attacked, that I was inherently vulnerable by nature of having a uterus. Her entire framing of life was about arming herself to protect against the harms of men (I’m sure these days she and others would correct themselves and say “cismen” which is true, but also that is wrapped up in othering, exclusion, invalidation, and the promotion of toxic male culture/violence). She thought I needed that protection. I have never felt that need and could not identify with her fears. Yes, I understand the statistics and stories of rape and sexual assault. Yes, I do see how many people are vulnerable and that lack of safety is a very real thing. So when you lump nonbinary folks into a category with women, it is clear to me that you mean the ones assigned female at birth. Like me. Because we’re (apparently) harmless and *should* be the victims, too. And I think there is a serious problem with that line of thinking.
To be blunt, “women and non-binary folks” lumps ciswomen and AFAB nonbinary people (trans or otherwise) into a singular group that is essentially Women+TM.1
I do not think this is inclusive. It’s actually exclusive.
Because what you’re saying with “women and non-binary folks” is that you want to exclude cismen. And, by default, some section of the population will carry that on to excluding transwomen, transfeminine people, and transfemme nonbinary folks. “For women and non-binary folks” says you don’t want to see my beard. My mustache and flat chest might be alarming. Penises need not apply, those which were born or created, wanted or unwanted by their owners.
Even further into the exclusion, I am betting most of these advertisers, collectives, and groups are hoping to attract white, able people. There is nothing in that title that openly welcomes anyone of color or anyone who might be disabled. If a Black transfemme nonbinary person walked into that setting, I doubt they would feel welcomed. And if they know that will likely happen, will they even try? And this is how these spaces continue to feed into whiteness and ableism without being questioned or challenged.
This is systemic. This is wrong.
Not far enough, you say? I quite agree. This dialogue also involves the ridiculous concept that nonbinary folks are androgynous, that we must dress masculine of center, that our bodies must be just the right amount of thin, the right amount of white, the right amount of liberal, the right amount of educated, the right amount of non-threatening, the right amount of mentally/emotionally sound/stable/capable. A Black or Brown bearded person in a dress need not apply. Someone with he/him pronouns should know better. English not your primary or only language? Well that sign wasn’t written for you.
I see the mental picture they describe with their advertisement of services and groups – they see Tilda Swinton. And what in the hell is everyone’s obsession with Tilda Swinton as the be-all/end-all of gender ambiguity meets nobinariness meets androgyny meets palatable queer icon?!?2
I do not think you meant to make a ternary out of a binary and then smoosh it all back into a binary, but wow, you did.
And even that sounds awful coming from me, the person who thinks of himself more “third gender” than “nonbinary” when we really break down the terms. But this is still a point that nags and vexes me constantly. Somehow, by all of these little acts (nay, microaggressions? microinequities? miniotherings?), a term that literally derives its meaning by NOT being within a binary has now BECOME its own category to slot people into, which is exactly what it was designed NOT TO DO.
This belies my overall twitchiness about referring to myself as nonbinary, a title I do use and assume and speak about widely. It has always been the best word I could use to describe what I am not, but using “I am not” as a descriptive is hard. It automatically makes you drift toward a binary, and that’s self-defeating.
Early in my transition I bought a series of t-shirts. I thought they might help others get my pronouns right. I bought a couple “he/him/his” shirts and one that says “pretty boy” with sparkly stars on it (because duh, that’s exactly what I am). Another revamped the Nintendo logo from the 90s with the words, “not a girl.” And as soon as I wore it, I realized the error. Saying “not a girl” instantly makes you think about me being a girl. Dammit.3
When you force nonbinary identities into the backseat of an Uber with women, you declassify us. You erase us. You affirm for everyone watching that our identities are not real, that we are not what we say we are, that we are nothing more than a misguided group of people who are really “just women” and therefore deserve to be “protected” because we are “vulnerable.”
Stop with the heroism. If anyone actually cared about safety, we would be addressing toxic masculinity and violence, gun violence, and the murder rate of transwomen and transfeminine people of color. The trans panic defense would disappear.
And this is just me. It’s my fault that I’m struggling with this phrasing, this concept, this categorization that simply does not, and cannot, work for a person like me. I am not your target audience, and I am not a cisman, and so you’ve inadvertently created an entirely new closet to stuff me into that I must now deconstruct. And that just makes me tired all over.
At the same time I am gripped with an irrational (rational?) terror at saying any of this out loud for the risk that it might offend someone. Maybe other non-binary folks love being included in that title. Maybe they feel seen. Maybe they think I am The Asshole for getting upset about this. Maybe they’re right. That inner monologue about “I am overreacting” is alive and well, and it often shuts me up in these moments. Maybe I really am overreacting. Maybe I should just take a deep breath. Meditate. Try yoga. Stop being so loud. Stop saying what I think and feel.
Well I still think and feel like this is an advertising ploy to appease the general masses and virtue signal that companies “are listening” when in reality they are creating an entirely new problem that didn’t need to be birthed into the world right now.
For the love of all things queer and beautiful, please just stop.
Thanks for hanging in there with me. Maybe I’ll go try that yoga now.
Your (mildly irritated) trans friend,
Robin
You’re not gonna believe this, but I actually wrote that Women+TM logo and THEN went to find the Uber and Lyft articles, and holy shit, they ACTUALLY USED THAT EXACT TERMINOLOGY, and there is no amount of chemical interference to soothe me after seeing that crap.
Okay, I do love her acting, and I did love her in Orlando, and holy shit how many years ago was that anyway? But for real, she isn’t the right person to stand for a crowd that can not and should not be expected to look and speak and behave in a way that just feels safe and palatable to mainstream media, and if you argue, I will happily meet you out back in the alley for a wicked match of rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock right after lunch next Tuesday.
So it’s a painting shirt now. Worse than that, I dread wearing it around my wife and kids. I’m afraid it will confuse them, even after all this time of them getting everything right.
As another transmasc non-binary person, I 100% agree with you and have been feeling exactly the same way for quite a while now. I’ve encountered a couple examples of bathrooms or dressing rooms being altered toward “inclusivity” by slapping a GENDER NEUTRAL sign over what really says WOMEN but leaving the MEN sign exactly as it is. Like you said, first instinct is to appreciate it, but then you realize that it’s kinda bullshit. If there’s two spaces and one of them is Male then the other one is inherently female regardless of what you call it and it feels very invalidating as a non-binary person to be offered what is obviously just the thinly veiled female space. It’s a whole complicated situation, but you’re right to bring it up, so thank you.
It’s definitely not just you. When I saw the title, I was skeptical, but when I saw the subtitle, I wanted to scream yes, yes, YES!!! I can’t stand “women + non-binary”, even and especially because I am the exact kind of non-binary person they want: a white and woman-adjacent one. But I know I won’t find many other non-binary people there, and definitely not a diverse group of non-binary people, and we are SO DIVERSE, so why would I want to be part of something that excludes most of us? I think these women+ clubs should be renamed to “no penises or people who look like they could have a penis” because that’s really what they’re trying to get at. Just be honest, just come out and say it. Don’t pretend you actually want non-binary people there when you would freak out if a male-presenting AMAB enby showed up. It makes me so angry! I have ranted about this before, but I’m not sure where. Now I can point to your piece. Thank you.