I was more approaching it from a programming perspective than a mathematical one - we could theoretically “label” all the gender experiences (perhaps just with the name of the individual that experiences it)
Of course this would be like labeling different variations of the sine function, and other functions, to use the analogy you made
The thing thats represented by the label may be discrete or continuous or anything
To be clear, I’m not attempting to represent gender as a continuous spectrum between Man and Woman - I’m throwing the gender binary out entirely and imagining each gender as some arbitrarily defined thing, ie for some people its a sine function (again to use your analogy) with different coefficients
If one wanted to represent the “gender space” as some 1d number line or 2d space with cartesian axes, then absolutely you’d need to fulfil the infinite and continuous criteria and I agree with you.
Though, to ramble a bit, I don’t know what you’d use to label the axis/axes because we sure as hell can’t use Man to Woman when agender folk exist, and we can’t even use Man to Woman and Agender to Allogender because some folk would fall outside of those axes still.
Valid and this is very certainly my math bias poking through. Though I think to consider the false case of a gender binary, the 1-bit value being M or F would suggest it’s describing the scope of gender expressions in memory values, and this interpretation seems to continue with the meme of it needing to be a 64-bit gender. So in correcting that falsehood, it would be a the space that have spots for all possible gender expressions.
While I agree the tautological approach of person['gender'] = "{Person's gender}" would accurately label all genders, I think the radical point to make is that the space itself is the confining factor. My point being the systems needed to properly represent a gender expression can only be approximated with finite discrete systems.
Agreed the difficulty of describing the gender space even would be near impossible! I always say the simplest way I can describe mine is:
Aeiαt|💪> + Beiβt|💅> + Ceiγt|🤖>
|💪>, |💅>, and |🤖> of course being the base vectors I find most useful as invariant under my transformation.
Though, to ramble a bit
Please, this is a very serious conversation about very serious things like an n-dimensional gender hyperspace! Please refrain from nonsensical ramblings.
I guess the real question is, what would best represent your eigenvectors?
You’re 100% right that is the most logical extension from the basis of 1 bit m-f - I completely overlooked that!
I’m glad to stumble upon someone on the internet who has the same crossover of programming, math, and gender (so unlikely! I know!) as well as silly humour in this regard :D
I was more approaching it from a programming perspective than a mathematical one - we could theoretically “label” all the gender experiences (perhaps just with the name of the individual that experiences it)
Of course this would be like labeling different variations of the sine function, and other functions, to use the analogy you made
The thing thats represented by the label may be discrete or continuous or anything
To be clear, I’m not attempting to represent gender as a continuous spectrum between Man and Woman - I’m throwing the gender binary out entirely and imagining each gender as some arbitrarily defined thing, ie for some people its a sine function (again to use your analogy) with different coefficients
If one wanted to represent the “gender space” as some 1d number line or 2d space with cartesian axes, then absolutely you’d need to fulfil the infinite and continuous criteria and I agree with you.
Though, to ramble a bit, I don’t know what you’d use to label the axis/axes because we sure as hell can’t use Man to Woman when agender folk exist, and we can’t even use Man to Woman and Agender to Allogender because some folk would fall outside of those axes still.
Valid and this is very certainly my math bias poking through. Though I think to consider the false case of a gender binary, the 1-bit value being M or F would suggest it’s describing the scope of gender expressions in memory values, and this interpretation seems to continue with the meme of it needing to be a 64-bit gender. So in correcting that falsehood, it would be a the space that have spots for all possible gender expressions.
While I agree the tautological approach of
person['gender'] = "{Person's gender}"would accurately label all genders, I think the radical point to make is that the space itself is the confining factor. My point being the systems needed to properly represent a gender expression can only be approximated with finite discrete systems.Agreed the difficulty of describing the gender space even would be near impossible! I always say the simplest way I can describe mine is: Aeiαt|💪> + Beiβt|💅> + Ceiγt|🤖>
|💪>, |💅>, and |🤖> of course being the base vectors I find most useful as invariant under my transformation.
Please, this is a very serious conversation about very serious things like an n-dimensional gender hyperspace! Please refrain from nonsensical ramblings.
I guess the real question is, what would best represent your eigenvectors?
You’re 100% right that is the most logical extension from the basis of 1 bit m-f - I completely overlooked that!
I’m glad to stumble upon someone on the internet who has the same crossover of programming, math, and gender (so unlikely! I know!) as well as silly humour in this regard :D