There have been similar posts in the past and you all might be tired of commenting on them, but I’m really curious what it’s like for others. So here I am posting my own question thread.
Given that our core identities are defined by lots of different quirks, gender, romance, sexuality, platonic affinity being some of them. I am curious to know what aspects all of you measure yourself by and how you place yourselves within the bigger picture. Especially hoping for some wholesome takes that may help someone else feel more comfortable with themselves, should they adopt the way of thinking.
I’ll share my own take: Gender identity
- Masculine-feminine spectrum: Definitely more comfortable with feminine side.
- Fluidity: experiencing some, not sure if that is because of uncertainty or inherent.
- Intensity flux: also experiencing some, some days are just a little extra “I want to be a girl”-days.
- Overall: unsure about where that leaves me, status quo (I’m just me) is fine for now.
Attraction to others
- Sexuality: Definitely bisexual, trans-inclusive (who would have guessed).
- Romantic…ality?: Vastly different from sexuality, mostly romantically interested in women (cis or trans), i’d say biromantic with a 90% bias. Any men I’ve had romantic interest in shared some feminine traits, so ‘femromantic’? Is that a thing?
Social traits
- Platonic affinity: Find myself feeling most comfortable around women. As long as I can remember I’ve always been one of the girls and some interactions with men actually confirm that I’m absolutely nothing like the average dude.
- General sensitivity: Without a doubt HSP, even though others usually can’t tell (which gets me in trouble).
- Social tolerance: Intuitively introverted, though have become more outgoing lately, so not strictly introverted.
Obviously these are just some examples of things we can measure ourselves by, curious to see which ones you will add or remove and why. And it goes without saying: Only share what you’re comfortable sharing.
TL;DR: I’m a huge nerd and have reduced myself to an n-dimensional vector, and I’m asking you to do the same and maybe add some dimensions you know of.
Aha, I’m not crazy for framing gender as a vector space!
As a model for infinitely unique human characteristics that can be plotted along several different dimensions, the vector representation makes a lot of sense.
But as with anything that models reality, some of the nuance is lost because we can’t feasibly infinitely detail the model for it to still be a useful representation.
So no, you’re not crazy for framing gender as a vector space, you’re just a huge nerd. 😇
(Edit: Now complete the assignment! [glares at you from a distance])
Idk what defines me, society is weird (I’m autistic). But I do have some descriptive words I use to quickly inform others about myself, such as bisexual and homoromantic. I feel a little awkward talking about that kind of thing though because I feel like people put me into discrete boxes rather than plot me as an n-ball (or higher-dimensional ellipse?) of uncertainty inside this vector space.
Also, neeeeeeerd! :3
Nah, society is just a bunch of idiots smashing rocks together, and we all stare at the ones with the biggest or the shiniest rocks. That does not mean your enjoyment of playing with sticks is invalid.
And this is in no way an attempt to put people into discrete boxes. The body might fit for most, but then there’s the pesky tail that sticks out. It’s those quirks that make us unique that I’m after here, and testing the limits of your model is one way to do it.
The beauy of n-dimensional space is that you can just add dimensions if you feel like you’re being projected into lower-dimensional space and details get lost in translation.
But there’s also the thing where the act of taking a measurement affects the thing being measured, so “n-ball of uncertainty” is perfectly fine!
Feelin very projected into a subspace rn /j
Actually, projection can be useful, such as when a dimension isn’t relevant to a conversation. The bigger issue I see is people thinking in {finite, discrete set}^n rather than R^n, or not even accepting that the dimensions are independent!
Hey I wasn’t the first one in this thread to bring up kinks! So don’t blame me for that. 😁
While we’re on the subject of kinks… are we doing the “speak nerdy to me!” bit yet?
Wanna find a local maxima with me 🥺
That’s not the only gradient I’ll ascend… 🫦
Is this what you meant?
Heheh yeah that hits the spot! What about this one?
There’s this part of me that goes like
┌ ┐
│2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0│
│0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0│
│0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0│
│2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0│
└ ┘
Want to see what it does next?