I was expecting there to be only 2 chopsticks on the table.

Yep, part of evaluating a work is knowing whose work it is. I’ll read a paper on, say, lung cancer by SirTobaccoLobbyist differently than one by DrCancerResearcher. If I don’t know whose work it is, it’s very hard to contextualize.

Hey, the 486 I used for typing up school papers (and playing Civilization and Master of Magic) got wicked confused. I fixed the issue by telling it not to worry, it was still 1986.

For some reason, Train to Busan is what springs to my mind.

Some people do use “it” as their pronouns. (I’ve been shopping for pronoun pins, there’s a market for “it” pronoun pins, but it isn’t one of the Big 3.)

Do you have pronouns folks should use when referring to you, or should folks just use your screen name?

Agreed. Breadsmasher was polite–they acknowledged it could be a minefield of a question, explained what their fuzzy understanding was, and asked for clarification on what they got wrong, from someone who’d already shown a willingness to discuss the topic. I didn’t take it as confrontational, rude, sea-lioning, or anything stressful.

The problem I’ve seen with being called “female” is when a speaker uses “men” for one set of people and “female” for another, in the same context. It feels gross, like they don’t see women as fully human. It feels much less bleck when a speaker uses “male” and “female”.

No worries :) It’s roughly that agender people don’t identify as either man or woman, but as neither. They might not even feel like they have “neutral” gender. It’s more “404: gender not found”, which doesn’t fit neatly into a binary gender system.

Sex and gender are different. Sex is biology, gender is cultural/social. My doctor might need to know my plumbing, hormones, and chromosomes, but my coworkers don’t. Someone’s perceived sex at birth gives them their ‘default’ gender, but they might end up not being that gender when they’re able to voice their own feelings on the subject.

(caveat: I do not speak for all agender people, non-binary gender language evolves, it can be wibbly-wobbly fuzzy at times. Also, I do see myself under the Trans umbrella because ‘the more the merrier’ and there’s no need to fragment the non-cis community. Alternative definitions of “trans” can be broader, and include “anyone who doesn’t identify with the gender assigned to them at birth”)

Edit: this instagram post sums it up nicely https://www.instagram.com/the_crafty_queer/p/CzqzG4oOf-8/?img_index=1

(Technically, there’s a secret third option: agender. Agender folks are not cis, but not necessarily trans, either. Source: am agender)