Reality Adjustments

Quantum Gay: An Insight into the LGBTQ Gender Word Soup Physics

Sep 07, 2018

Part 1: Word Soup

If you’re like me, you have seen the LGBTQ scene exploding with new definitions of gender in the past few years: gay, lesbian, heterosexual, bisexual, polysexual, pansexual, omnisexual, skoliksexual, demisexual, grey-ace, asexual, polyamorous, intersex, MTF, FTM, agender, genderfluid, bigender, trigender, pangender, genderqueer, demigirl, demiboy, androgyne, intergender, nonbinary, questioning, homoromantic, biromantic, panromantic, and aromantic (to name a few).

Related, quantum physics in the past century has shifted from “atoms in the ether” to its own particle soup of up and down quarks, charm and strange quarks, top and bottom quarks, electrons, muons, taus, electron neutrinos, muon neutrinos, tau neutrinos, gluons, photons, Z bosons, W bosons, Higgs bosons, and the theoretical graviton.

Part 2: Graphing It

To better illustrate this, there are two graphs we’d like to call to your attention.  1) The Standard Model of particle physics and 2) the Genderbread Person.

In the standard model, you see three of the four known fundamental forces ( electromagnetic, weak, and strong ), as well as classifying all known elementary particles.  There is also the theoretical graviton, which would include the 4th force (gravitation).

And here with the Genderbread person you see how identity, expression, attraction, and sex can each combine into its own quantum person to create different words of expression.

In both graphs, we have Energy + Style = Form

Part 3: Action Reaction

Are you pleased that we can now better express gender and sexuality through terms other than the reductive gay/straight binary?

Or are you triggered by this?  Do you “hate this shit” for some reason?  Do you find it is too much or too confusing?  A symptom of a political correct liberal culture gone rampant?

Do you ask: Why can’t we just say “all matter is energy?”  Why can’t we just say “all energy is love?”  

Do you wonder: Are young children ready to make surgical decisions for their bodies?  Are young physicists ready to create weapons of plutonium fission and operate large hadron colliders?

Is it useful to talk about Z bosons choosing a skoliksexual path?  Is there value in understanding the panromantic expression of charm quarks? 

Who misses the “good ol’ days” of Isaac Newton?

Why so many gender words and subatomic particles?  There must be a simpler way.  Surely it is confusing.  Or is it?

Part 4: The Tilted Angle

No, this is not a disentanglement from, but a progressive knotting into.
Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow

Here at The Tilted Glass, we find there is no right or wrong side of the coin.  Better to study the coins.  It is more of a matter of what dimension you choose to operate in in the moment.

Sometimes we wish to fly through the world of particle physics and enjoy its theater of illusion.  And sometimes we wish distill a unified theory where all is energy and all is love.

Sometimes we wish to remain in superposition.  And sometimes we wish for the expression of superpositions.

This is the process of simultaneous multiple systems.  This is the path of operating in multiple dimensions at the same time.

Who gets uptight about it all?  And why?  What is the process of getting tripped up in 3D, 4D, 5D, string theories, M-theories, lions, tigers, and bears, o my?

What triggers you?  Does you love or hate the quantum soup?  Does you love or hate the search for a unified field theory?

Whatever your angle, we find this "quantum gay" analogy quite useful to chew on.  

The same process that physistics went through in learning the standard model, mirrors the same process gender sociologists are going through in learning a gender expressive model.

For related reading, check out our humorous article: “Down with labels! We’re just sexual beings!” says Orwellian newspeak agent.

The Tilted Glass