#binary thinking

[frameacloud]

Describing Gender Beyond the Binary, a game created by frogwatching

Content: Rated G. Friendly for all ages.

Medium: A zine. 16 pages, with covers. Layout for reading on screen.

About: A workbook for describing your gender by plotting it on a grid, where the reference points are other concepts than a male-female axis.

Vibe: Innovative, approachable, makes difficult concepts look easy.

To feature this creation by frogwatching, I include this zine in my itch.io collections on questioning, transgender, nonbinary, and xenogender. It's in my curated collections about LGBTQIA. I'm doing this series of Tumblr posts reviewing and featuring other people's creations with links to where you can see them on itch.io to celebrate and draw attention to the cool stuff that folks make.

[kimyoonmiauthor]

My dislike to hatred of the European binary doesn't extend only to gender...

So apparently another Twitter battle broke out about PoV and which of TWO were the best. And I'm like but there are more than two and the combinations have different effects and they are all awesome. And the person delivering the news agreed with me and said they were tired of it. Then another Twitter battle broke out on if audiobooks are "really" "reading" which creates another what? fucking binary. You're with them, or you're with us, and no nuance in there or other options and urrgghhhh. I hate you for doing that.

Then people do this shit to sexuality and sexual orientation and then romantic attraction and sexual attraction, and if you cross the line from the imagined binary, welp, you have to be a specific category in that. Nuance, what? What do you mean nuance?

PINK or BLUE Shit, then what is I prefer the breath of color combinations through color theory? *Confused look* What? I'm not allowed to worship color theory more?

People justify these binary choices usually with conflict theory, but when I slap down the Jewish tradition of asking exploratory questions to add nuance and examine if the question is legitimate... That's SUPER rude. Or people have told me. (Screaming in the corner). You aren't supposed to examine the question in Christianity. Look, you took from Judaism, but 100% missed this part of it. Yes, you ask questions about the question and the lines of evidence. Anyone who has been in a Jewish debate session knows this. It makes it super pedantic at times, yes. It's literally baked into a seder. But in doing this, it means you demand evidence. Exploratory questions aren't the same as the Greek rhetorical questions that Christians seem to love. But you see, this brings me to the next bit in the binary: Asking questions is evil.

Wha~ Why?

The answers come back usually this way:

It's inherently weak

It makes you weak

It makes you vulnerable to attack.

You mean it makes you appear like a white female. (Since you hate the question form).

White women tend to use according to a study on an Italian American family, higher percentage of adverbs, adjectives, superlatives and placating questions.

Waiiiiittt... Isn't that what Writing manuals tell you not to use. There you go.

It also hates on Jews and other groups that use questions in another way... but then that's nuance. And nuance in this binary system is evil.

I love nuance, though. Trained as a Jew, and also as a Korean where the rhetoric is done differently, there isn't as much binary thinking in either.

I've spoken to people who didn't take their opinions 100% from TV, and when I ask questions, I try to find points that the television hasn't spoonfed them, to find nuance.

Is the basis of the question even valid? You're not supposed to ask that. Is the basis of the question, racist, sexist, ableist, etc, and maybe you should phrase it differently? Not supposed to ask that. Can I insert nuance and variety and greys into this question? No.

And you can start to see the flaws of binary thinking. Also why I tend to dislike it.

Also, have to point out, asking a question does not make you "weak" there are a ton of types and reasons for questions. Your thou shalt nots doesn't even invite seeing the glory of the world around us and your binaries mean even larger exclusions than what culture and experience offer.

"There are only two PoVs"

First person or third person. And if you use omniscient, WTF is wrong with you? What? Because a third option isn't supposed to exist and there aren't valid reasons to want to switch in a literary sense because the next binary is Literary fiction or Genre fiction and how dare you want to mix those. (Basically from what I can find of the early genre subscribers, white straight abled men v. everyone else).

Reading Writing manuals of this type stress me out. Why do we need a binary anyway in European texts. Can't greys and all of the colors inbetween ALSO be beautiful. But always texts try to slow it down as a competition or a conflict and I would think you all would be tired of the depression and anxiety that brings.

It's whites v. Blacks. Woah, Asians and Latines exists? How dare you. We have to take this one by one even if there is clear overlap. <-clearly sarcasm. And then Indigenous people... What are you saying here? Anyone else... we should forget they exist. ==;; You can only choose one. at. a. time. (though we are oppressing you in similar ways).

So I'm saying let go of the binary in everything, not only in gender. I've met people who were never Christian and atheist all their lives who 100% still bought binary thinking, but to me, that's an invitation to poke and prod and ask the more "invasive" question about if the binary thinking is valid in the first place.

TT Some NBs have let it go in gender, but religiously follow it elsewhere. But maybe do as the Jews do and first ask if the question creating a binary is valid first? Maybe I'm asking too much of the algorithm because it's constantly confused when I try to point it towards nuance.

BTW, Nuance to the audiobook question is (Excuse my Jewishness with exploratory questions):

What disabilities does the audiobook help or hinder?

Certain forms of ADHD. Visual impairment (obviously) and certain learning disabilities as well.

But it might hinder those who are deaf, have certain types of language processing disorders, or might be fixated on their imagination over the audio.

Sometimes when I write a book, I have very specific voices attached and will leave it in the text. (SPD, has that side effect FOR ME, not everyone. I tend to be fixated more on sound, etc). So if it's incongruous to the voice in my head, or said wrong I'll sometimes be editing the audiobook.

Do certain audiobooks sound better read than others because of a strong oral tradition in the community that the author grew up in? (Kwik Kwak, BTW, is an oral form, so the stories are always designed to be read out loud. Griot, Seanchaí (Irish storytellers), etc all have an oral form to them. Some South Pacific traditions also are designed to be told out loud and once you do, it flows magically. So demanding it only be in print might miss out on them.

Do you want to get rid of audiobooks altogether and this is why you're asking this inane question?

'cause to the visually impaired community, it sounds like a threat. And why are you even asking this question. Why can't you let it effing go already?

What if you are doing both at the same time?

Some people DO read and LISTEN to the audiobook at the same time. They might have a disability that makes it so. I know some people with ADHD that do both to help them concentrate and consume it more efficiently.

Your brain just broke. Good. !@#$

You care that deeply about how people consume books and want to invalidate the way they consume media because, frankly, invalidating entire populations, traditions of people, does exactly what for you, morally? What power trip do you exactly get by declaring this question in the first place? This is what a Jew would ask you. Because is it really that much of a difference that you need to spend hours on this making other people feel bad and bringing it up over and over again without any level of the nuance it deserves to create conflict and us v. them? Does that truly create any sense of community, cooperation, or is your entire existence as you see it is to create division and conflict? (I believe even the New Testament is against that, but sure, ignore that. I actually sat and read it. lol My favorites whom I wish there were sects for are Matthew and Luke [Granted both Jewish, which I found out after the fact, so I might be Jewish biased by accident]. But apparently writers/Christians like Paul, Peter and John more?).

And thus I really dislike binaries. They tend to create more us v. them and division and less cooperation and thought about the impact one creates in the world and how to cooperate. And truly from what I've read of the Bible, Torah, and some of the Qu'ran and a lot of other religious books as well, they spend like 80% at least trying to get people to cooperate and floating theories on how to do so. So why not let go of the binary?

[chupacabraatemybrother]

I think a major bug in human interaction and misunderstanding (which leads to hostility) is due to black and white or binary thinking. I also think that this type of thinking is a very human trait that comes to us inherently, and if we're not careful enough we can find ourselves slipping into it at any time.

I was thinking about that scene in Star Wars Revenge of the Sith when Obi-Wan says to Anakin "only a Sith deals in absolutes." It's really funny because in that moment Obi-Wan is also using an absolute, thus negating his statement: Obi-Wan is definitely not a Sith.

Humans do this all the time in so many places, especially places like Tumblr in which discourse is high. People pick and choose which binaries they will reject and which ones they will embrace and enforce. On Tumblr for example, which is a primarily liberal space, we're pretty much in agreement that things such as disability, autism, gender, etc, are not black and white binaries and there is so much nuance, not even among a gradient but among a matrix.

These same people will then turn around and use other binaries such as rich versus poor, Democrat versus Republican, urban versus rural, etc. (I could write a whole post on how liberal culture both places rural living and being "one with nature" on a pedestal, while also vilifying the people that already live here and our established practices of living in nature, including [especially] hunting).

An example of this selective thinking I've witnessed is the whole discourse seen in some lgbtqa+ spaces surrounding the inclusion of Ace/aro individuals: people that don't neatly fit the binary (ex: aro but het) are considered with suspicion.

I've also heard stories of masc non-binary people not fitting in in various genderqueer spaces because they come across as too masculine to be perceived as gender non-conforming, but oddly enough I've minimally encountered the same issue when it's someone being femme.

TL:DR; everyone falls into the binary thinking trap sometimes because it is a inherently human trait. However there will always be someone who doesn't fit neatly into any of the binaries that you have assigned to the world, and people need to be prepared to face and challenge these assumptions as they become a exposed to different ways of thinking and existing in this world. There is no one right way to be a human, and people on the internet need to stop acting like there is.

[dvandom]

Humans have a natural tendency towards ontological binary thinking. Or, to be less jargony, any belief about the world is either right or wrong, there are no shades of nuance, and in any disagreement one side is right and the other side is wrong.

One of the many places this gets us into trouble is when we get defensive about our choices. Anyone who disagrees is not just wrong, they are attacking us and calling us wrong and bad just by existing.

Writ large, this gives us religious wars, homophobia, TERFs, and so forth. But there is no conflict so small or irrelevant that it can't attract this attitude. People who might think themselves enlightened enough to live and let live on the big questions may still get sucked into vicious arguments about rarepair ships.

If we could be sure that arguments about which Sonicverse character is shtupping which(1) would use up all the energy that could otherwise be turned towards larger scale discrimination, it'd be a price worth paying. But it can also be a gateway...once you've worked yourself into a lather about Those People in a fannish forum enough times, the mindset gets easier to adopt in normie matters too.

A fandom all about love and acceptance will have some of the most intense internecine warfare about ships and fanon, but this should come as no surprise given all the actual wars fought over religions that preach love and acceptance.

(1) I have done a bunch of Sonic fan art for a friend because I'm NOT in the fandom. His ships are apparently Heretical, and none of the established fan artists would draw his stuff.

Please return us to a world where Notp and squick are used for a ship you don’t like instead of just making up a load of bullshit about how immoral it is or w/e lol 

[wasmormon]

Shifting Visions of God: Unpacking Mormonism’s Developing Theology Through Joseph Smith’s First Vision Accounts

Joseph Smith’s various accounts of the First Vision provide a window into his evolving theology, particularly regarding the nature of the Godhead. The changes in each version, when looked at as a narrative through a lens to understand the thinking of church leadership at the time, show ideas developing and how these changing ideas were incorporated, retroactively, into existing narratives, and in…

[doubledamian]

After a dialogue with ChatGPT, the following essay was generated:

Human beings often rely on categorical thinking to simplify complex situations, and quinternary thinking—dividing things into five mutually exclusive parts—is one such framework. In the context of communication with a spouse, one could classify approaches into five distinct categories: never expressing feelings, always expressing feelings, expressing only positive feelings, expressing only negative feelings, or alternating between positive and negative feelings but never expressing both types simultaneously. While quinternary thinking provides greater differentiation than binary, trinary, or quaternary frameworks, it can still oversimplify the dynamic and nuanced nature of interpersonal relationships. Recognizing the limitations of rigid quinternary classifications is essential for fostering healthier and more adaptive communication patterns.

The first approach—never expressing feelings—may seem like a way to avoid conflict or maintain peace. However, consistently suppressing emotions can lead to emotional distance, resentment, and a lack of mutual understanding. Relationships thrive on openness and vulnerability, so withholding all feelings can ultimately weaken the bond between partners and hinder deeper emotional connection.

The second approach—always expressing feelings—offers full transparency, but it also has significant challenges. Constantly sharing every thought and emotion without discretion can overwhelm the other person, spark unnecessary arguments, and create an emotionally charged environment. This approach may exhaust both partners and destabilize the relationship, highlighting the need for thoughtful restraint.

The third approach—expressing only positive feelings—might foster a cheerful and harmonious atmosphere in the short term, but it risks ignoring or suppressing underlying frustrations. A relationship built solely on positive feedback can become superficial, as unresolved issues remain hidden and opportunities for growth through constructive dialogue are lost. Over time, this lack of depth can undermine the strength of the connection.

The fourth approach—expressing only negative feelings—prioritizes addressing grievances but risks creating an atmosphere dominated by criticism and tension. Without moments of shared joy or encouragement, this pattern can erode trust and emotional safety. While addressing problems is vital, the absence of positive reinforcement can make the relationship feel draining and imbalanced.

The fifth approach—alternating between expressing only positive and only negative feelings, but never both simultaneously—presents a unique dynamic. This method can lead to erratic communication patterns, as the emotional tone may shift drastically depending on the circumstances. Such an approach can confuse both partners and make it difficult to establish a stable, predictable rhythm in their interactions. This lack of consistency may hinder long-term emotional security and trust.

Ultimately, this example highlights the shortcomings of quinternary thinking in managing complex relational dynamics. While dividing communication strategies into five categories provides more nuance than simpler frameworks, it still fails to capture the fluid, context-dependent nature of healthy relationships. A truly effective approach requires flexibility, mindfulness, and a willingness to adapt based on the needs of both partners. By moving beyond rigid classifications, couples can cultivate deeper empathy, mutual respect, and a resilient emotional connection that supports long-term growth and harmony.

[artsyape]

So there is this art piece that’s at one of my library locations in my city. And look I get that I’m a lousy binary thinker but all of these are making me itchy.

Especially the reader writer opposite? If you’re a writer that isn’t reading I’m so sorry but you’re probably not a great writer. 😂

[sapphicides]

propaganda i’m not falling for:

the idea that butchfemme is heteronormative

femme4femme as the “default” for lesbian relationships

excluding transfems from lesbian spaces

the concept of a “masc shortage”

thin/white/afab soft mascs as the “default” for masc presentation

hate for stone identities

lesbophobia

transphobia

[leidensygdom]

Love nonbinary people forever, regardless of how they look, how they present, what pronouns do they look or whether they want to pursue medical transition or not. An AMAB nb person has a beard and looks like a bear? Good for them. An AFAB agender person is breasting boobily down the stairs? Good for them! A genderflux person decides to pursue medical transition and still be genderflux? Fantastic stuff imo. A nonbinary person does not want to disclose their ASAB? Also great! Again, love nonbinary people forever, unconditionally so.

[wituwicha]

O who can be both moth and flame?

Theodore Roethke, from "The Sequel", The Collected Poems of Theodore Roethke

[postersbykeith]

[frameacloud]

Third Option, by Karma Chameleon

Content: Rated G.

Medium: Physical game. One page of instructions.

Length: A few minutes.

About: "Third Option is a simple game about reaching outside the options you're given. It takes the form of a conversation (written, spoken, or otherwise), and requires no extra materials. Recommended as an icebreaker, idle distraction, or grounding exercise."

Vibe: Thoughtful, playful.

Curator's note: The game doesn't mention genders outside of the male/female binary, but personally I think it's ideal for getting that idea across, and for sharpening the skill of thinking outside of other boxes.

For this reason, I include this zine in my itch.io collections on xenogender. I'm doing this series of Tumblr posts reviewing and featuring other people's creations with links to where you can see them on itch.io to celebrate and draw attention to the cool stuff that folks make.

[centracks]

Reblog to be like Carl

Edit: I’m aware Carl doesn’t have all the flags. Carl loves all of you despite this.

[wasmormon]

Is the Book of Mormon Historical? True? Does it Matter?

The question of whether the Book of Mormon is historical—and whether it has to be historical in order to be “true”—is one that has sparked significant debate both within and outside the LDS Church. Here’s an analysis of the issue from various angles: Is the Book of Mormon Historical? The Book of Mormon presents itself as a historical account of ancient peoples who traveled from the Middle East…

[crafftypenguin]

[fagtainsparklez]

just saw a clip where f1nn5ter was saying how at this point, he can’t be cis, but at the same time, he doesn’t feel like he’s trans—he’s just neither. and someone in chat was like “you can’t be neither cis nor trans that’s not how it works” i love finn but why is his chat so fucking bad 😭 stop recreating binaries for the love of god, identity does not have to fall into these neat little boxes for you to police