#queer math

Basically my example goes, loafers don't make someone queer. Loafers and other elements all have a x=total and when you put the equation together you reach a total that equals queer.

So one of my outfits recently was

Platform doc loafers, tube socks with blue sky and clouds as animals print, lucy and yak leopard print trousers, crop top graphic tee of the Cramps, a curly mullet, a bandana, and my glasses have a similar 70s dad style to them.

Consider the base 3 expansion of the fractional part of pi, which begins 0.0102110122…

Let n be the number of times someone has referred to you using a personal pronoun throughout your life. If the (n+1)th digit of the fractional part of pi is a 0, they should refer to you using they/them pronouns. If it’s a 1, they should instead use she/her pronouns. Finally, if it’s a 2, they should use he/him pronouns.

As an example, someone who has just met me would say “this is Epsilon, they are a math PhD student. She is focused on number theory. I think their research is very interesting, and I bet he’s really good at sex. She is so funny” and so on.

Pi is conjectured to be a normal number, so we can expect the ratio of they/them, she/her, and he/him to balance out as the number of references to you goes to infinity.

I’ve tried to anticipate some questions people may have about how to use this set of pronouns:

Q: Do I really need to know the entire base 3 expansion of pi to use this system?

A: Yes.

Q: Do I really need to remember the number of times I’ve referred to someone using a personal pronoun to use this system?

A: Yes.

Q: Why use an irrational number instead of a rational number with small period base 3?

A term I recently came across in Judith Butlers "Bodies That Matter". If you want to talk queer theory, I understand why that book is nearly required reading. I don't think I really understand what that term means. I came across an MIT math paper that looks like it might lay it out well.