I see the "non-binary" concept as the result of people holding the belief that being a woman or a man isn't about one's sex, but this supposed inner feeling of

I see the "non-binary" concept as the result of people holding the belief that being a woman or a man isn't about one's sex, but this supposed inner feeling of "gender identity" that, as discussed above, can't really be explained or understood except by reference to sex stereotypes. It's the identity of the gap left between both these exaggerations of masculinity and femininity. That's also why calling oneself "non-binary" is most prevalent amongst the youngest generation as so many of them were taught the ideology of "gender identity" as if it's fact, and internalized this. > So in that sense, it's not either: You are a woman because of biology, therefore you are (stereotypes) or the alternative you mentioned: You are (stereotypes) therefore you are a woman, but instead: I am a woman (as I define it for myself) and would like to be treated as such by the world (ie. using preferred pronouns). That makes even less sense. If, by this redefinition, being a woman or a man isn't about material biological reality (sex), or about identifying with a set of sexist stereotypes, then there's literally nothing left but an empty declaration. It renders the categories of woman and man entirely meaningless. > The point is not to sneak into women's spaces, the point is that this is how they feel about themselves. They want to be a woman in every space. This just shows even more so that "gender identity" is being used as a flimsy excuse by males demanding access to female spaces. It is apparently meaningless and undefinable, but also supposedly crucial enough to trash all safeguarding policies and principles.