[Ammi]

...It was a really interesting discussion, Maru...I think the lady he interviewed confused it a bit with her ‘act of violence’ which she didn’t correct but I think she must have meant act of violation...(..see how I’m automatically assuming their genders which is what he was saying, we do obviously assume these things...)...this is something I’m quite interested in atm but actually quite conflicted, I don’t know what my stance is tbh and the discussion didn’t really help me feel any more clear......because I can understand both sides...from the perspective he was presenting..?...yeah I can see that he felt legislation to be moving toward it being unacceptable in a genuine error being made and no offence meant etc...that recognising more than two genders becomes not only confusing but also impossible unless we know how many and can clearly identify them etc...?...just basically impossible for society...I unders5and that and the difficulty..but then...isn’t that also denying a possibility of..?...society is only accepting of two because the possibility of anything else is being closed down to...?...hmmm, it also feels like it’s encouraging trans surgery more as the only option someone might have because of society then only recognising gender if that became the case...?... when surely with surgery and the potential risks even with a general anaesthetic etc...then it shouldn’t be something that became ‘forced’ to have gender recognition.....hmmm, as I say I’ve become very interested in this recently but apologies, I’m still not that knowledgeable about it and quite easily confused...I do totally see the interviewers points but I guess don’t like the thought of possibilities closed down to because two possibilities are all society has ever known....