neutresex:

In my personal opinion, gender neutral is still suggesting the existence of only two genders and there is somehow a very distinct in between—which is false. I hope that makes sense.

I’m with neutresex on this. I don’t solicit or really even accept the use of the term ‘gender neutral’ to describe me, and I don’t use it to describe people whose identity I’m unfamiliar with. To me, neutral has two connotations:

1. That the described trait is the median between two defining poles of character. In gendered traits, this means that you’re defining something as being evenly male-female or masculine-feminine. My interpretation is that it’s a binary term.

2. That the described trait is ‘neutered’ or sexless. It’s important to me that my queer/trans identity not be plotted in a landscape that is free of desire or attraction. ‘Gender neutral’ feels clinical and devoid of sexuality to me, and I don’t want my identity de-sexed, because I’m very much a sexual being!

There’s similar problems with other binary terms like androgynous. It’s no skin off my toes if someone wants their identity to be described with the a binary descriptor like ‘gender neutral’ but I think it’s important to realize that these terms can carry heavy, harmful connotations.

I prefer the following terms: gender-nonspecific; un-gendered; genderless; ambiguously gendered; genderless; genderfucked. Changes in diction and grammar can make a big diference too: I say “that person doesn’t seem particularly (or traditionally) gendered to me” rather than “that person’s got a gender neutral look.” This is all about not projecting identities onto people.