Gender Conjecture

This is, of course, an unresearched lay idea. If someone can show me wrong I will merely be disappointed, not bitter. I am rather fond of David Brin's acronym - CITOKATE (Criticism Is The Only Known Antidote To Error). It should not be needed to put up such disclaimers but sadly much of humanity is very irrational about its ideas (I on the other hand am merely slightly irrational).

I have been wondering if perhaps gender identity works rather like what little I have read of sexual orientation. That is, a small number of people who are exclusively identified with the sex assigned to them at birth (analogous to the small fraction of the population that is exclusively heterosexual), a small number of people exclusively identified with the opposite sex to that assigned them at birth (those transsexuals who insist from the time they can speak that they are really a boy/girl) and the majority of the population being bigendered to some degree but usually feeling a definite pull toward one (and possibly being somewhat malleable?).

Now I ought disclaim that I do not believe this scheme to be immutable truth, though I do hold the opinion it is of vaguely similar shape. I do not hold any of the categories outlined to be rigidly set and I freely confess to oversimplifying things by, forex, writing as if there were only two, clearly differentiated sexes. Nor does this scheme leave any obvious place for people are genderless (much as the model it is based upon leaves out asexual people) and it does seem to put androgynes and bigendered and genderqueer people in roughly the same place. I don't know if that is a feature or a bug.

I could propose new terms but we already have equivalents (homogendered would be cisgendered, heterogendered for transgendered) and anyway those terms irk me for reasons I do not care to go into at this precise moment (but ask in the comments if you like, it is free to make as many as you could want and there may even be answers later). This basic idea has probably been proposed, possibly even falsified before but if it has I didn't notice. Possibly it is like those mathematical formulations which are later shown to be equivalent.

This Week in Writing

This week has been a bit of an odd week writingwise. It is the first week in which there are days I both attempted to meet my word quota and failed. Previously if I did not make my assigned word count it was because I wrote nothing that day. Well, I did not count what I wrote during my little block and posted this week so that may make up for it.

Then again, I did also pass a total of 10,000 words since I started, 4,556 of them on this Epic Fantasy story. Which is surprising because I did not even start working on it again until just a couple of days before I reposted the first part. The second part is already just about the length of the first and not nearly finished yet. Hopefully I can finish it before it needs posting so I can get a head start on part three, which is not even started yet.

For now I halted because I must first recall something very old before continuing.

This Week:

1,885 / 1,400 (134.0%)

Epic Fantasy:

14,702 / 30,000 (48.0%)

I wonder if it is quite fair to be setting such low word quotas when one character is so verbose? To be sure of meeting my target I need only give him some dialogue (not that he says any more than anyone else, he just takes far too many words to say it in). Still, to be sure of finishing the story in time I should probably be making a thousand words a day and even with Crangil's help I still have not managed it so I suppose it is not too much of a cheat. Welp, back to work.