system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
How to reconcile the term 'non-binary', its refusal to belong to a category and its creation of what is essentially another category?

It strikes me the term 'non-binary' is an attempt to leave behind dualistic notions about gender identity and to escape categorisation. 

I suppose I'm wondering if it's a fallacy to essentially create a category that is defined by its refusal to belong to a category in a sense?

I'm interested in reading more about this topic so any recommendations would be welcome.
gpt
The problem that you raise about the term 'non-binary' would be a real problem, if the term was instead something like 'non-categorizable.' If someone categorizes their gender as 'non-categorizable,' then maybe they have undermined themselves. But if someone categorizes their gender as 'non-binary'--meaning that it does not fit into a specific \*two-gender\* categorization schema--and if by categorizing their own gender that way they thereby implicitly endorse a \*three-gender\* categorization schema, then they have not undermined their own position in any way.

It is important not to conflate: (a) claiming that something does not fit into either of two particular categories and (b) claiming that something does not fit in any possible category. Those are relevantly different.