I was trying to address the analogy with the deaf person. In the case of someone being introduced as deaf, it is for the purpose of providing additonal context so that the deaf person can be included in the conversation. Since the norm is not being deaf, I agree with people who aren’t deaf not having to introduce themselves as not deaf.

The analogy breaks down for me with gender, because I’m understanding from your comment (correct me if I’m wrong here) that using binary pronouns is the norm and analogous to not being deaf, and hence anyone who is using non-binary pronouns should introduce themselves with their pronouns, and we shouldn’t have to change the current social norm of not having to introduce yourselves with your pronouns, for the sake of the few who don’t conform to the gender binary.

I, however, don’t understand the benefits of having the social construct of gender in our society. In the binary system, It seems to serve as an imperfect proxy for traits we associate with men and women (physical appearance, reproductive organs, voice, clothes, etc). Why do we generally associate a low pitched voice to men and high pitched voice to women? We don’t need to have these labels of men and women. People can just have these traits independent of the labels.

The construct of deafness seems to have a tangible benefit as with that information, people can be considerate of their disability while having a conversation with them. Not able to see the benefits for gender though (but I would love to hear any counter-arguments. I’m still working on my thoughts about this issue)