Objection: the set of sets is not a set. This is a different level of binary, therefore making you simultaneously binary and non-binary depending on perspective.
If the set of sets is not a set then why did you just define it as a set? Checkmate.
I really wanted to reply “checkmate” but you already added it yourself. So instead I posted this. You’re welcome internet!
I’m conservative and this is deep.
The idea behind identifying as non-binary is just to frame your personal identity in terms that others are more familiar with.
Nonbinary people recognize that most others view sex (or more specifically gender) in binary terms and use that framework as a scaffold to help others understand.
Sure, there’s an aspect of “master’s tools cannot destroy the master’s house” but at least they’re trying to meet others halfway. Why aren’t you?
Let me express my sincerest admiration for your way with words. All I could think was, “what? no. that’s not how that works. what?”, and here you are actually explaining why it’s nonsense.
It is posted as a logic joke, not as a slam against non-binary person.
Maybe don’t use marginalised groups for that.
Its like the joke about caitlyn jenner getting in a car accident, and the punchline is : women drivers. The joke is not about trans people at all, it is about a stereo type, and that stereo type being bogus because as soon as she became a woman she lost her driving skills. You have to read between the lines with humour.
I don’t think OPs post is criticizing non binary as a sexual identity, it’s just making a linguistic / math joke about the phrasing we use to describe it.
It is posted as a logic joke, not as a slam against non-binary person.
god, this was the most intelectual comment session that i ever see, ditching reddit was the correctly decision
For REAL. I’m so used to expecting awful comments on a relatively popular meme sub but it was so tame here.
