Collective article record

One Binary Please, Supersize

Collective Archive Number CAN-0000-1329-5FBF Permanent resolver

Source Summary

(The MacDonaldization of Intersex activism) My response to the following article Why Doesn’t ISNA Want to Eradicate Gender? By Curtis E. Hinkle Imagine a world in which the main division between individuals were size. This would be the first thing noticed at birth and would have to be indicated on the birth certificate. Imagine a world in which big people dominated little people and made it very difficult for a little person to become a big person and vice versa. Imagine a world in which medium sized people could not exist legally without being designated as a big person or a little person. In this world, here are the possible solutions for granting personhood to medium-sized people: forced starvation or forced feeding so as not to have that dreaded ambiguity because we all know that everyone really is a big person or a little person. They might just be a

The Source Summary reproduces the first 150 words of the source article unless a Collective editor has explicitly locked a replacement.

Read the original article View inbound sources

Interpretive context

Why this article may matter

Community significance

“One Binary Please, Supersize” may matter to community readers because it preserves a first-person or testimonial account connected to community and organizing, while also engaging law and civil rights. Such accounts can document how an issue was understood and experienced from within the period or community being discussed.

Historical significance

As a publication record from 2006 at Transadvocate.com, “One Binary Please, Supersize” provides dated evidence of how community and organizing was being argued in relation to law and civil rights. Comparing it with earlier and later records can reveal changes in vocabulary, evidence, and emphasis.

Policy significance

The article’s strongest policy connection is administrative classification and identity documents. It links that institutional frame to community and organizing and law and civil rights, making it potentially useful for tracing how an argument moves from description or history into law, regulation, administration, or public practice.

Content analysis

Ranked themes and framings

Rank 1 is the dominant inferred theme or framing. Parent labels identify broader theme families; the relationship key beneath the diagram explains the line styles used for hierarchy, same-family relationships, overlap, and separate-but-related themes.

Themes

1
Community and organizingTheme family: Identity, culture, and community
100%
2
Law and civil rightsTheme family: Institutions, law, and public life
33%

Academic framing

1
Interpretive analysis
100%

Policy framing

1
Administrative classification and identity documents
100%

Editorial function

Source topics

Relationship key

Separate but related themes

The diagram distinguishes hierarchy, same-family relationships, overlap, and separate-but-related themes inferred within this article. It does not assert that all themes are mutually exclusive.

These classifications are inferred from article text and source metadata and remain directly editable. Relationship labels express corpus-analysis judgments, not immutable facts.

Granular comparative context

How “Community and organizing” appears across the Collective corpus

This article appeared 7 year(s) before the theme reached its highest annual presence in the registered corpus in 2013.

Relative presence by year

Peak year indexed to 100

4 2004

10 2005

10 2006

33 2007

37 2008

22 2009

9 2010

79 2011

62 2012

140 2013

80 2014

20 2015

26 2016

54 2017

29 2018

8 2019

1 2020

2 2021

1 2022

1 2025

Presence by member publication

Frequently co-occurring concepts

Academic framings in this topic

Policy framings in this topic

Values measure relative presence in the registered Collective corpus, not public search interest or public opinion.

Inbound-link and citation evidence

Documented circulation and reception

No broad reception evidence has been documented yet; this may reflect unconfigured or incomplete indexes rather than an absence of circulation. These observations describe circulation and reuse; they do not assign cultural worth or evaluate the communities, arguments, or people discussed.

0distinct source records documented

0distinct referring domains

0best available scholarly cited-by count

0books or volumes documented

0references retained by the source publication

—observed years in dated evidence

Evidence by channel

Independent counts; bars are not additive

No channel totals are available yet.

Coverage of the evidence search

Shows what has actually been checked

Publisher-held referencesChecked · August 24, 2026

Scholarly indexesChecked · August 24, 2026

Book and volume searchNotchecked

Public-web searchNotconfigured

Collective corpus linksIndexed · August 31, 2026

Review scholarly results Review book results Review public-web results

No individual references have been stored yet. This can mean that source-held pingbacks have not been imported, provider access is not configured, or available indexes do not expose this work in a machine-readable form.

Counts describe documented circulation and reception in the sources currently available to the Collective. They are not a score of quality, merit, popularity, or social value, and provider totals can overlap.

Article authors

Author profiles and related researchers

Marti Abernathey

369 publications · 249 inbound sources/citations