Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  NEPAL VS. FACEBOOK

Out Nepalese Politician Quits Facebook After They Refuse To Add Third Gender Option

Nepal’s first openly gay politician, Sunil Babu Pant (right), sent a letter to Facebook last week requesting that they consider adding a third gender, labeled “other,” as an option. After Facebook responded in a statement to ZDNet.com that they had no plans to do so, Pant went and deactivated his account.

Facebook’s statement, deemed unsatisfactory to Pant: “People can already opt out of showing their sex on their profile. We’re constantly innovating on our products and features and we welcome input from everyone as we explore ways to improve the Facebook experience.”

Writes Pant in his “Goodbye Facebook” note:

“Many journalists have written to Facebook as well… reading Facebook’s irresponsible remarks saying ‘People can already opt out of showing their sex on their profile,’ shows Facebook is not respecting human diversity and still forcing third genders and gender variant people to be invisible. This is outrageous and unacceptable. And like to say to the Facebook that ‘Yes we also have a choice to opt out from the Facebook altogether.’

While I support Pant’s endeavor to make trans and intersex people visible, I do worry that, like the “single” and “married” options, the “third gender” option might get abused as a joke by teenagers who think it’s “hilarious” to be neither male nor female.”

By:           Evan Mulvihill
On:           Mar 30, 2012
Tagged: , , , , ,

  • 22 Comments
    • John
      John

      okay lets not view the world through western eyes many cultures including native American have a third gender role. More and more third gender and trans are challenging our view on what Christianity has made of human sexuality. You want to be global than start to respect the culture that isnt yours

      Mar 30, 2012 at 11:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dallas David
      Dallas David

      @John: True, true.
      Didn’t the Native American Indians consider beardaches as sort of a third gender?
      IMHO, no government should be allowed to discriminate against its own citizen based on either the gender they were born with, or the one they chose. Same principle holds true for religion or color.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 12:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikeE
      MikeE

      come on, is there really a need for a third gender?
      I think this is just plain silly.

      a man is a man. a woman is a woman. a transgendered woman is a woman, a transgendered man is a man.

      is there really a need to specify some mysterious “other”?

      this guy is the “first openly gay” politician in Nepal. is he gay? or does he feel that he is neither man nor woman?

      I don’t buy into the whole “gender studies” bullsh** about multiple genders.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 12:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JayKay
      JayKay

      Truly a terrible loss for Facebook. I’m sure his presence will be greatly missed.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 1:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Just being real
      Just being real

      I agree MikeE. There’s no need for a 3rd gender. Transwomen would be women, and Transmen would be men albeit men without dicks who everyone feels bad for.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 1:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • W.P.
      W.P.

      @MikeE:
      @Just being real:

      I have to with both of you to a point, but you are wrong.

      Truth: Trans women and women, and trans men are men (also, notice the space between the adjective of trans and the noun).

      I disagree with the notion that there is only male or female. That’s a highly westernized view on sex and gender that hurts a lot of people. Some people identify within the gender binary, but there are also others who identify as agender, bigender, gender neutral, etc. Forcing them into the binary is harmful for many reasons, specifically psychological ones.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 1:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • W.P.
      W.P.

      @W.P.:

      “I agree with you to a point, but you are wrong.” *

      Mar 30, 2012 at 1:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam_I_Am
      Sam_I_Am

      @MikeE: Where exactly does a hermaphrodite fit in? They do exist you know. Just so you know people can be born with both sex chromosomes, making them neither male or female. Educate yourself before you make stupid comments.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JayKay
      JayKay

      @W.P.:

      So then they just need to add “precious attention whoring snowflake” as a third option.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 3:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikeE
      MikeE

      @Sam_I_Am: ah, so Sunil Babu Pant is a hermaphrodite? or he he is chimaeric? yeah, didn’t think so.
      Maybe you should educate yourself before telling others they are stupid?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam_I_Am
      Sam_I_Am

      @MikeE: That response doesn’t even make sense.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Farquart
      Farquart

      Wow, he’s not bad looking man. Too bad he considers himself an “other”.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 4:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • W.P.
      W.P.

      @Sam_I_Am:
      Actually it’s called “intersex” now, with “hermaphrodite” being considered a slur.

      @JayKay:
      Would you please not be a bigot? Adding a third section of “other” or “trans*” in no way negatively affects you, so why do you have to trash the idea of it?

      Mar 30, 2012 at 5:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David
      David

      Hermaphrodite is NOT a slur. The idea that it’s somehow a slur is PC overkill and it’s just as bad as people who get highly offended at the term homosexual being used instead of gay or lesbian.

      Mar 30, 2012 at 7:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Blue Diamond Society
      Blue Diamond Society

      http://galva108.org/Tritiya_prakriti.html
      Tritiya-Prakriti: People of the Third Sex
      By Amara Das Wilhelm

      Introduction

      Let me first offer my respectful obeisances unto my beloved gurudeva, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Mindful of his desire to see all classes of human society included within the Vedic system of spiritual upliftment, I humbly attempt to write this book. It is also my desire to help steer readers away from the pitfalls of discrimination and hate based upon bodily distinctions, so often the trap of mundane religionists.

      In modern times, there has been much controversy concerning the position and rights of gay and other third-gender groups within society. Should they be feared and eliminated as a harmful, corruptive force within our midst? Should they be ignored and hidden away, being denied the basic rights and privileges that other citizens enjoy? Or should they be welcomed as simply another color within the rainbow of human variety? The answer to these questions can be found in the ancient Vedic literatures of India, which have thoroughly analyzed and recorded all aspects of human behavior and knowledge since time immemorial.

      After the Vedas were issued forth from Brahma at the beginning of creation, Manu set aside the verses concerning civic virtues and ethics, thus compiling the Dharma Shastra. Similarly, Brhaspati set aside the verses concerning politics, economy, and prosperity to compile the Artha Shastra. Nandi, the companion of Lord Siva, set aside the verses concerning sense pleasure and sexuality, thus compiling the Kama Shastra.1 The great sage, Vyasadeva, put this Kama Shastra into writing approximately five thousand years ago along with all other Vedic literatures.2 It was then subsequently divided into many parts and almost lost until recompiled by the brahmana sage, Vatsyayana, during the Gupta period or about 300 A.D.3 The result was the famed Kama Sutra or “codes of sensual pleasure.” Although commonly presented to Westerners in the format of an erotic sex manual, the actual unabridged Kama Sutra gives us a rare glimpse into the sexual understandings of ancient Vedic India……
      Read more on the link above

      Mar 31, 2012 at 10:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Farquart
      Farquart

      yawn, cut and paste, that went out more than few years ago.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 1:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KyleW
      KyleW

      Honestly, I am all for a bit of sensitivity in general, but I’m more than a little sick and tired of trying to figure out who wants to be called what, and what gender term to use for them. It feels to me like each time we take a tiny step forwards, a new sub-sub-sub category of gay or straight leaps up and wants their own defining term. There may be 100 words for snow, but even I am beyond confused now over what to call each person so they don’t take offence.

      I think that really is the operative term, “take offence”. I feel like more people are finding reasons to TAKE offence that was never given, and it’s getting ridiculous.

      At this rate, each of us will be demanding our own unique term of address specifying the size and function of our genitals and the extent to which we are gay or not.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 2:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark Moscow
      Mark Moscow

      Support Sunil Babu Pant

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark Moscow
      Mark Moscow

      the column “sex” should be removed. especially from official documents.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 3:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      Agreed Kyle W, there are 3 sexual orientations gay/lesbian, bisexual, or hetero/straight, and two genders. If you can’t relate to any of those I feel bad for you.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 6:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • W.P.
      W.P.

      @Sam:

      You do realize that it wasn’t until 1870 that the term of “homosexual” came into existence, right? Prior to that, we didn’t have a word for same-sex relations. Roughly the same argument you’re making could be made back in 1870/1871, by saying that heterosexuality is the only sexual orientation- granted the term “heterosexual” didn’t come until 1892- since there was no recognition of homosexuality as a sexual orientation prior to that.

      Plus the idea of there being only two genders is a highly western idea. There are multitudes of cultures that recognize more than two genders and more than two sexes.

      Mar 31, 2012 at 8:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark Moscow
      Mark Moscow

      @Sam: 2 genders? It’s shit!

      Apr 1, 2012 at 3:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    !-- Sailthru Horizon -->
    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.