Disputatio:Genus non binarium

Lemma

I think that the title and main lemma should be "Genus non binarium" as straightforward translation of a vernacular expression (And we might want to add {{convertimus}}). I don't see "nonbinarius" used as one word anywhere. The few occurrences I've found in Google Books all turned out to be scanning errors; so I think it should be "non binarius". I have found "imbinarius" (see source given in the text), but that is one source and we have to assume that it's someone who has made it up and tries to put the "memum interretiale" (as they honestly call it themself) into circulation. Nice enough for a mention, but perhaps not good enough to be the title. Sigur (disputatio) 21:38, 30 Octobris 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I think you should move to "genus non binarium" unless anyone else comments. I'm a novice in this field, but "genus neutrum" seems to cover only some of the possibilities that people intend by non-binary, so it may be better to delete "genus neutrum" as an alternative lemma. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:53, 31 Octobris 2019 (UTC)

I know at least one Latin-speaking nonbinary person, and they refer to themself as a 'homo neuter.' But that's OR I guess.Temerarius (disputatio) 18:23, 3 Novembris 2019 (UTC)

OR, yes, but you might want to ask that person for other sources; one never knows... As to "homo neuter", I suspect that that rather corresponds to neutrois. Sure some people will call themselves like that, but that doesn't mean you can simply equate it with "non-binary" which is more of an umbrella term that covers at least "neither" (for which "neuter" sounds OK) and "both" (for which it does not). Sigur (disputatio) 18:46, 3 Novembris 2019 (UTC)