via
https://ift.tt/2KcRhpKthe LGBT community concepts of nonbinary and, in fact, trans identity, are mostly tangential to the majority of gender systems I’ve ever read about. e.g. the six gender Jewish system is, in basic intent, various categories of intersex, and in concept hostile to most categories of trans and nonbinary people.
many gender systems seem to have, basically, AMAB men (who conform to gender roles for their category and usually don’t have sex with men), AFAB women (who conform to gender roles for their category and usually don’t have sex with women), a category for transfeminine people (AMAB women and people who are absent of or mix genders) and man-loving AMABs, and sometimes a category for transmasculine people (AFAB men and people who are absent of or mix genders) and woman-loving AFABs.
of course there are tons of societies that have had and do have systems that don’t fit this typology in big and small ways, e.g. seeing homosexuality as gender standard behavior for AMAB men and AFAB women, having weak or absent gender based roles, separating AMAB women and AFAB men from people who are absent of or mix genders.
and of course this whole typology is like, untrustworthy nonsense from the guy who doesn’t know jack shit (me), and my “studies” of this topic are heavily inflected by sources with terrible and/or colonialist gender politics (I say and/or and not just and because I don’t think white people writing about, like, Ancient Greece, are really colonialist per se, they’re just awful. like sure their gender politics are colonialism-inflected but I don’t think what they’re enacting is itself colonialism. anyway). and by my own terrible and colonialist political biases.
anyway, they are mostly pretty different from the neat (LGB)T community standard “men, women, and nonbinary are all essential and primary categories.” and super different from like, “everything on this MOGAI gender listing is a class” and also often different from like… “gay men are men” and “lesbians are women” because uhhhh what-we-would-now-call-LGBT people in the past often conceptualized themselves in terms that we would now tend to find disagreeable and unsavory, and who-we-would-be-inclined-to-call-LGBT people who formed their sex and gender politics in different cultural and ideological environments may as well and it’s all, uh, well, pretty complicated. I don’t think there’s any one way to put this puzzle together correctly.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
