> In fact, trying to identify as anything more specific that "human" leads to massive over-generalization, and the emergence of division and conflict. While I

> In fact, trying to identify as anything more specific that "human" leads to massive over-generalization, and the emergence of division and conflict. While I agree, in general, with your point, I think I disagree on this point. It is entirely natural, and has been for all of human history, for people to make statements about themselves like: - I am a woman - I am a physician - I am a knitting enthusiast - I am... In those ways, people sort themselves into categories, very naturally. Among the single most significant self-identifications people separate themselves into is the thing arising from their biology to produce common traits shared by distinctions of gender. If it is natural for us to say "I am a woman" or "I am a man" why would it not also be natural to speak of people in groups as men or women? What we have people struggling with is "if I am a man, as I believe, what does it mean to be a good one?" And the specificity matters, because there are traits, again driven by biology that produce statistical clusters of people who will behave differently than someone in some other group. Therefore, attempting to erase gender, or pretend that these differences don't exist and treat everyone with a single standard, is also not helpful, and in many cases harmful.