I'd also challenge the "50%" number you advance.
Canada asked the question in last year's census and it was under 1%. 50% would be enormous.
"Younger generations had larger shares of those who were transgender or non-binary. The proportions of transgender and non-binary people were three to seven times higher for Generation Z (0.79%) and millennials (0.51%) than for Generation X (0.19%), baby boomers (0.15%) and the Interwar and Greatest Generations (0.12%).
Together, over 1 in 6 non-binary people described their gender as "fluid" (7.3%), "agender" (5.1%) or "queer" (4.1%). Other responses included "gender neutral" (2.9%), "Two-Spirit" (2.2%), "neither man nor woman" (1.3%) and "gender-nonconforming" (1.1%)."
Then it is meaningless and hazardous to build an opinion upon it.
> My guess is 100% of these children are on Tiktok/Snapchat
TikTok usage is at 32.2% for children aged 10-19. Snapchat usage is at 59% for children aged 13-24. That would be unlikely. Those two platforms also share little in term of features and functionality. How are they relevant here?
I worked at Snapchat. Nearly every new feature we made was to compete with TikTok and drag eye ball time back from them into Snap. It sounds like you just googled “TikTok usage teens” and are using that to advance your (very shaky) argument about gender ideology.
I have teenage sisters and we talk frequently about how different discourse has become in their classrooms than it was 10 years ago when I was in high school. The 50% anecdote claimed doesn’t surprise me at all, after what I’ve heard.
But they are not the same, they just share some features that have been added as updates. They are used by the same demographic, which is why I provided the stats for both. I wrote them in response to the claim that 100%, not 50%, of the class uses them which is unlikely. The 50% figure refers to the claim that 50% of the class identifies as non-binary, which is even more unlikely.
Ultimately, we are debating anecdotal exaggerations. Your response to that? You add another anecdote from a third party. Again, this has little value before actual polls and censuses.
You're also confusing two parts of this conversation: one is about gender identities, the other is about app usage. The two topics were brought into the picture with bogus statistics, so I brought them both up. However, they have little to do with each other.
In other words, people who moved on from the gender assigned to them at birth.
Some non-binary people identify as transgender but not all of them do. Just like non-binary is both an umbrella term and a spicific gender identity, transgender is both an umbrella term and a specific gender identity. You'll often see the shorthand "trans*" to describe the umbrella term and the shorthand "enby" to describe the specific gender identity.
Examples of clear gender identities that are not used as umbrella terms are: trans women, trans men, genderfluid, agender, demigirl, etc.
Yes, and the Latin word trānseō (nominal form trānsitiō → English: transition) means exactly to "go on across", "go beyond". Trāns ("across, beyond") + eō, it ("I go, he/she/it goes") + tiō (→ English: "-tion"). It's a distinction without a difference.
What does it mean to "identify" with a claim about what society is like - namely that "binary" gender might be more of a spectrum, with weird liminal stages in-between? You've said that this is what "non-binary" is about. How does this even begin to square with all those other notions about gender identity being something exceedingly clearcut, that someone can base major life decisions on?