here's an entirely pointless point:
imagine a graph, X axis is the gender with masculine and feminine as points -1 and 1, Y is how intensely you are that gender with an average at 1.
now of course the two points are placed arbitrarily, that's why it's *socially constructed*.
now add a dimension Z repeating that process for every way of expressing gender
nonbinary conventionally means it's not in some radius around (X/Y) -1;1 and 1;1, or inconsistent in Z, but really everyone is some of it.
now honestly, do that make sense to you? relatively to the equivalent typical sociology text? would you read/share more of it?
@CobaltVelvet I do like the idea of graphs and maps of stuff, but I will say that no, I did not totally grok what that meant, to be honest. The radiuses are around what?
