Talk:Non-binary gender

Unary
what about those unary people who believe people can only be of one sex? 157.211.134.108 (talk) 11:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

"Enbian" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enbian&redirect=no Enbian] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. -- MikutoH talk! 00:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Criticism
Please revert section of criticism. And punish DanielRigal  for deleting scientific criticism. Firstly, it is not some "guy". Secondly, what is the argument that this is a single critical voice? Based on what Wikipedia rules did DanielRigal think up that one is not enough? Please revert and punish the vandal. Pawel.jamiolkowski (talk) 00:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC) The framing of it as a "criticism" section and overall approach promoting it above are clearly non-starters, but for future reference, the source is this academic article, readable in full, here. Generally, we have treated these sorts of articles in the humanities as WP:PRIMARY sources equivalent to single studies in science, with little or no weight on topics like this where secondary sources should exist. I haven't read it, but the source is clearly taking a queer theory perspective and probably isn't an attack on non-binary people in particular, but a questioning of our culture's way of categorizing gender overall. Of course, numerous opinions along those general lines exist. Crossroads -talk- 16:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The revert of your edit is standard at Wikipedia. First, see WP:CRIT. Second, the views of a particular person belong in an article on that person, such as at Kadji Amin. If there is no such article, and if WP:SECONDARY sources have not highlighted the views, they should be removed per WP:UNDUE. Johnuniq (talk) 00:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I read. So please explain, why some articles have Criticism section, for example Islam ? Why can Islam be criticized, but non-binary gender cannot? Hypocrisy? Pawel.jamiolkowski (talk) 12:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If you are here to criticise an article subject then you do not understand how to edit an encyclopaedia. When we cover a topic we cover all notable aspects of it, including notable criticisms of it. We cover criticism but we do not not ourselves criticise. That's WP:NPOV. There is not a topic on this earth that doesn't have at least a few haters. I'm sure that if you looked hard enough you could find a few non-notable people who hate watercress, walruses and wheelbarrows but it would not be appropriate to cover their non-notable opinions in the articles on those subjects. DanielRigal (talk) 18:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Great, now please answer why one can criticise Islam and cannot non-binarity. So far, I have not received an answer to this. Pawel.jamiolkowski (talk) 19:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * We have talked about the inclusion of a criticism section years ago. What exactly is there to criticize?CycoMa1 (talk) 18:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Here's a link to the most recent discussion of a criticism section that I can find in the archives. Funcrunch (talk) 19:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * But that discussion is out of date because it is claimed that there is no scientific literature questioning non-binary. I just provided such literature from 2022. And this is not the only criticism and more and more will appear. There's not much to it, because "non-binary" is a new creation. Pawel.jamiolkowski (talk) 20:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I want to pipe in and say that an editor with the same name as the OP added a section on rationalwiki identical to the one reverted. Ioe bidome (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Adding a criticism section to an article about non-binary gender makes about as much sense as adding a criticism section to articles like "African-American" or "man"
 * 2) The "criticism" was just the opinions of one guy.
 * 3) Islam and non-binary are not comparable. One is a gender identity while the other is a religion that has been used to justify homophobia and transphobia. Ioe bidome (talk) 13:22, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I thought you're a vandal on "RationalWiki", but now I see you're really funny. Funny guy. Pawel.jamiolkowski (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I thought you're a vandal on "RationalWiki", but now I see you're really funny. Funny guy. Pawel.jamiolkowski (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Xenogender flag?
So Xenogender redirects to Non-binary_gender. What do others think of adding Xenogender flag to Non-binary gender? EarthFurst (talk) 20:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It would need reliable secondary sources indicating that the community meaningfully uses this flag. Crossroads -talk- 22:14, 30 June 2024 (UTC)