TL;DR - why do we need so many terms? can we all not use just a simplified pronoun system (as explained below, or if someone else comes up with something better), and can we stop adding a sexual preferences as a part of gender, as that is something too personal in my opinion?
I primarily want to understand how it relates to a person's identity.
Before starting, let me partially introduce myself. I am a male, and If I get my terms correctly, I am possibly Aero Ace. I am (possibly) coming of a privilige that my percieved gender identity is same as that of what I accept myself to be. Also, I have not read any literature or watched much content about this stuff. I am not asking anything about why would someone have a "different gender". I just want to understand how it relates to you as a being.
And before going ahead, I am not sure gender is the best word or not. If it is not, please correct me. And I am sorry in advance in case I say stupid or bizzare or straght wrong stuff. Please forgive me if possible.
Also I am quite ramble-y, so reading and understanding what I write may be hard, or non-sensical, so pardon me for that too.
My first question is, why do we have so many terms? I know the answer is somewhat obvious, that everyone has there own preferences, and it may not align with someone else, so to identify themselves, they would get a different label. (kinda like names, if everyone had same names, it would cause confusion) But I also want to ask, Is using a label not somewhat alienating?
Try to understand my perspective, I have almost never mentioned my gender to anyone. Possibly it is because my "attire" says it. Or maybe it is because I am not a very social person, or the fact that I have never had a "personal" conversation with some other person. My general conversational idea is how it goes with siblings - slightly informal, a lot of stupid slander, and jokey stuff, and the actual stuff. If someone comes to me, and mentions there gender, I kinda do not know how to process it. because as I understand, 1 part of gender ideentity is what "orientation" (sorry if it is a bad way to put it, but I want to mean how they dress, or how they want to adressed as) and another is sexual preferences. I understand that If I know there gender, I can atleast address them as they prefer (also I do not know how to do it in general. I am an old school guy, I use they/them/their for people older than me (as a form of honorification), with small children (it is somewhat amusing, and also children like it when they get respeect) and whenever I do not know what gender a person is, or how does that gender prefered to be addressed). But this gave me the thought, that why do we not use the same pronouns for everyone (for example they/them), or maybe 2 pairs, one for formal, one informal, or 1 more pair, for singular and plural. Why do pronouns have to depend on gender?
The second part is sexual prefernces. I do not know much about sex or sexual preferences. I am a young adult, and have not had to know about this for any person that I have met yet. I have never had the interest to know about this for someone, neither have I retained this information. I understand that if you are looking out for partner/s, then you would have to share this, so we would have to use some words for it. But why do we have to keep this as a part of gender. As in, why would I want to share this information with my governments (who do census), or for my visa applications. Should this not just be something personal?
I understand that one reason to have some words for it is inclusivity. If, for example, we want some group to better assimilate with society, and we want to do some "positive discrimination" (I do not know if this is appropriate wording or not, what I mean is for example, reservations, or some other kind of actions to integrate some people in society), then we would need some terms to make rules with. And that makes sense, but then again I feel that revealing your preferences is a bit too revealing. Am I overblowing this? I also understand that completely ditching the sexual part from gender might not be possible today. It would probably require a more accepting society. For example, in most places, gay marriage is still illegal. I do not know why laws have to have laws defining marriage (it may have something to do with subsidies going for marriages, or definitions of families/spouse being used by insurance companies or any other banking system, where your spouse also gets certain benefits/rights), or gay adoption is illegal, but can we not make something like - any reasonable person/s can adopt anyone (where reasonable part is just to maybe seculde criminals, or people with prior histories of child related offences, or if they are not financially stable - but all this is very separate discussion)
If a person tells me their gender, how should I react/respond to it? Is my current line of actions appropriate (just address them with their preferd pronouns, and if I do not know that, use they/them; completely ignore the sexual part of it)
Another thing that I want to ask is, why do some groups use different acronyms? I remeber hearing about this the first time, and the word used was LGBT. Then I heard LGBTQ, then LGBTQIA+, and today I heard LGBTQ2. I presume that since more people are getting aware, and they are trying to express themselves, they need some newer words, and hence the acronym would keep on evolving, if so, is it not a endless exercise? Am I being insensitive If I use one over other (for quite some time, I have been sticking with lgbtqia+, in hope that + means extensions, as in, others, so hopefully it is less excluding than others, but if that is not the case, please correct me.)
edit - moved my summary to the top as tl;dr
He seems overly dramatic about it. and some of the things are factually incorrect. for example, he says we functionally do the same things, but we do not, we essentially now run much more complex software in browsers. the best way that i can put it, is, browsers are practically virtual machines, which run softwate like word processors and meetings. I am not encouraging anything here, I myself am the kind of guy who refuses to use web applications, but I understand why people use them. in the broll, there was some example of a few tabs open, and only 2 gigs of memory usage. not sure exactly how old that clip is, but things have changed, many for better. for example, your browsers ususally limit memory usage to half of total available (be it 4 gig, or 8 gig or 16 gig (tthere are now some better/finer things related to exact limit, but lets not go there)), and if you have larger amount of ram available, your browser caches more (save future cpu/gpu cycles). Also, we now have better sandboxing and better isolation of tabs, which results in duplication of assets, but better security. you can still do some manual tweaking (i do, for example, disable js by default, or instead of per tab isolation, i have per site instace, which is less secure, but more efficient, plenty more), nobody stops you from doing that.
I do get the hatred for cloud shift. I dislike it too, and maintain offline stuff. but that has nothing to do with hardware performance decreasing. if anything, it would lead to less memory/storage required, as most of compute will be done in server. you would have lighter machines, with just display and inputs. and this was the exact model of computing 40yrs ago, servers/mainframes and weaker terminals.
if you want to complain about stuff, you can complain about excess use of js, or writing desktop stuff in js (this while is worse than using some compiled languages, it is not that bad), or about the amount of things that now want your attention. you can rant about bad tech practices, but not, about comparing a modern web + video editing, as opposed to older static sites