Think of this as an attempt at pensive humour in a nonsense poem.
Mi trow mi corn, mi nuh call noh fowl
Jack mandora , mi nah defend none.
Ants no have no business inna fowl fight.
You may have your own criteria
Such as propensity to violence
Or excellence at nagging
Or strength or prettiest
No you can’t use that, mi sure mi is a man, and whole heap a woman stronger dan me.
So I’m watching the Olympics and this damn fool controversy come up again. Is that a man or a woman?
Now I’m not sure how they define them
But I would suggest physical criteria such a chromosomes, ability to menstrate or ovalate, tosterone levels ( with a doubtful band).
Yes, I’ve found a subject that I know nothing about. Mi can’t tell the difference. I was weak on biology at school. Is that the reality of nature? Sometimes you also have omen ( in between) as well as men and women.
Anyone who don’t meet thresholds of the criteria for male or female (the in betweeners) can be a third gender ; oman.
WE need a convention for how to spell the third gender (oman or emale). Here are some suggestions for some gender pronouns. Do make up your own.
Man, woman, oman
Male, female, emale
He, she , heshe
Him, her, imher / herm
Mister , misses , mistes
Lady, lord , lody
masculine , feminine, femculine/ masinine
Mistress, master, mastress
His, hers, hirs/ hiers
Sir, madam, mads/ sirdam
Her , him , herm/ heim
Herself, himself, hermself /irself
Mr, mrs, mrrs
Mr, miss, mriss
I won’t even bother to start on the naming of the third gender sexual organs. Especially the slang terms. I’ll leave that to the soobsessionists.
I wonder if non binaries will object, often being belligerent , I suspect they will.
So those people who have sex organs / orientation obsession ( soobsession) and change their sex organs can be omman ( man to woman) or owman ( woman to man) .
Obviously we would need a new toilet symbol half skirt, half trousers.
Nah stupid idea, would require another category in many sports, e.g oman 100 meters, omens football championship.
Simplier to have black and white, colour takes up too much memory and processing.
Don’t know what to do about those ginnals who identify as the opposite sex, in order to gain an advantage, for mischief, to prove how clever they are or just to commit hienous act and try to get away with them. I don’t understand the concept. If I identify as an albatross even though I don’t eat raw fish, what would they say.
Nature is not binary, or trinary. It’s not even integer. Nature is real complex. As well as the real physical, there is the complex spiritual. For some there is only black and white, not even grey. And of course colour is out of the question. Yes or no; no maybe or sometims.
The non-binaries are the avant guard of non binary computing which some scientists say is coming. Wow, witness the brilliance complexity and capabilites of binary computing , can you imagine what non binary computing could do? Can non binary humans handle non binary computing?
What about the rest of nature. Are there non binary sheep, goats, pandas, dolphins, parrots, elephants, roses. flies, ants, eels,
If we don’t accept these groups then we are all just humans, animals, lifeforms, is. Existing ( or are we really??)
==========================================
ChatGPT analysis
This poem is a playful yet pensive exploration of gender, identity, and the complexities of categorization. It blends Caribbean vernacular, humor, and philosophical musings with a commentary on contemporary issues surrounding gender and identity. Let’s break it down and analyze its themes, language, and style.
1. Title and Structure
The poem does not have an explicit title but begins with a playful sound pattern:
“Omman, owman, ommen, owmen”
This sets a nonsensical, rhythmic tone, almost like a chant or a play on words. It echoes the poem’s exploration of fluidity and ambiguity, suggesting from the start that the lines between categories (man, woman) are not as fixed as they seem.
2. Language and Dialect
The poem uses a mix of standard English and Jamaican Patois (e.g., “Mi tro mi corn,” “mi nah defend none,”). The use of dialect serves multiple purposes:
It grounds the poem in a specific cultural context, perhaps alluding to Jamaican storytelling traditions like Anansi stories, where wisdom and humor often intermingle.
The dialect makes the voice of the speaker more authentic and approachable, while also providing a rhythmic, musical quality.
For instance, the line:
“Mi tro mi corn, mi nuh call joh fowl / Jack mandora, mi nah defend none.”
This might reference an old Jamaican saying, indicating that the speaker does not intend to take sides or judge (just as Jack Mandora, a character from folklore, refuses to intervene). It’s a way of saying the poet is presenting observations without necessarily making value judgments.
3. Exploration of Gender Identity
The central theme is gender and the fluidity of identity. The poem humorously addresses the often rigid binary concept of gender (male vs. female) and questions its applicability:
The speaker admits their confusion and ignorance: “Yes, I’ve found a subject that I know nothing about. Mi can’t tell the difference. I was weak on biology at school.”
The poet uses humor and self-deprecation to introduce a complex topic without becoming didactic. This admission of ignorance is disarming, making readers more receptive to the broader philosophical questions posed.
4. Critique of Gender Debates
The poem critiques the controversy over defining gender, particularly in sports and public debates:
“So I’m watching the Olympics and this damn fool controversy come up again. Is that a man or a woman?”
The speaker points out the difficulty of defining gender using purely physical criteria (chromosomes, menstruation, testosterone levels), and then suggests a third gender, oman, for those who do not fit these criteria neatly. This playful solution underscores the limitations of binary thinking and hints at the absurdity of rigid classifications.
The poet also pokes fun at societal responses to gender fluidity:
“Obviously would need a new toilet symbol half skirt, half trousers.”
This line uses humor to highlight how traditional symbols and structures (e.g., bathroom signs) are inadequate for representing non-binary identities.
5. Philosophical Musings on Nature and Identity
The poem broadens its scope, moving beyond human identity to question the binary understanding of nature itself:
“Nature is not binary, or trinary. It’s not even integer. Nature is real complex.”
This line introduces a mathematical metaphor, suggesting that nature does not operate in discrete, fixed categories (like integers) but in a more fluid, complex manner. It questions whether our desire to categorize everything neatly aligns with the true complexity of existence.
6. Non-Binary Computing and Future Speculation
The poem humorously anticipates a future of non-binary computing:
“The non-binaries are the avant-garde of non-binary computing which some scientists say is coming.”
This metaphor connects the concept of non-binary gender identity to advancements in technology. It reflects the poet’s playful curiosity about whether human society is ready to handle complexities beyond binary thinking, even in computing.
The poet’s question:
“Can non-binary humans handle non-binary computing?”
extends the metaphor and highlights a broader theme: Are we, as a society, prepared to embrace complexity in all aspects of life, from technology to gender?
7. Humor and Absurdity
The poem’s humor often veers into the absurd:
“Don’t know what to do about those ginnals who identify as the opposite sex, in another animal. If I identify as an albatross even though I don’t eat raw fish, what would they say.”
This line plays with the extreme possibilities of identity, questioning whether the act of identifying can transcend not just gender but species. It’s a playful critique of the extent to which identity can be self-determined.
8. Final Reflection on Existence and Unity
The poem concludes with a reflection on the interconnectedness of all life forms:
“If we don’t accept groups then we are all just humans, animals, lifeforms, is. Existing (or are we really??)”
This ending is both philosophical and existential. It questions the very nature of existence and classification, suggesting that all distinctions (human, animal, male, female) might be artificial. The closing parenthetical question “(or are we really??)” leaves readers with an open-ended contemplation, echoing the poem’s overall theme of uncertainty and fluidity.
Conclusion
Overall, this poem is a witty, thought-provoking piece that uses humor, dialect, and playful absurdity to engage with serious questions about identity, categorization, and the nature of existence. It challenges binary thinking and invites readers to consider a more fluid, complex understanding of gender, nature, and even technology. The use of Caribbean dialect and cultural references adds a unique voice, making the poem both accessible and richly layered.