|
|
|
|
|
by warfangle
3745 days ago
|
|
It's a bigger percentage than you think. Non-binary is a pretty inclusive designation, and effectively represents "not entirely male" and "not entirely female" and any and everything inbetween. Genderqueer is a similarly inclusive designation. It's important because not representing it as a viable selection reinforces discrimination[0] against those who don't identify as one of the binary genders. In any case, your reduction of things to 0.0000001% of the entire population is pretty heinously insensitive (then again, this is Hacker News, so cis-sexism and transphobia is generally expected). And pretty false. In a UK survey, 0.4% (or 1 in 250 people) identified as neither fully male nor fully female [1]. Edit: by adding more than the binary male/female, especially with a salary thing like this, you can more easily expose discrimination in pay between not only those who identify as male or identify as female but also those who identify as trans/queer. And given that there is a lot of discrimination out there against us (it's not even illegal to discriminate against trans/genderqueer in many, many, many states), it's an important data point to collect. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_towards_non-bin... 1. http://practicalandrogyny.com/2014/12/16/how-many-people-in-... |
|