Gender is Not a Spectrum

I personally believe that Gender should neither be a spectrum nor a binary. This stance stems from the fact that gender-fluidity and non-binary gender identification has been a "trend" these days. Before I start, I'd like to point out I hold no hate to gender-ambigious people, and any non-cisgendered person deserves as much respect as a cisgendered one. Still, I believe in the wrongness of the concept, and am going to discuss it from that point of view. I'd also like to point out I am in no way transphobic, but I do discourage wreckless transitioning (more on this later).We are living in a world that's so advanced that past generations would envy us so hardly. Women are equal to men, non-heterosexuality is slowly being accepted, racism is all but gone, and technology is making literally everything easier. However, I believe we have gone a little too far with questioning gender.Let's start off by defining gender. Oxford Dictionary defines it as being "The state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones)" (1) . As pointed out, gender refers to the social differences, not the biological ones. This calls for a distinction between gender and sex. As the World Health Organization (WHO) put it, " "Sex" refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women. "Gender" refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women." (2)This is where the problem with the gender spectrum starts. As the definition above suggests, gender refers to the roles ... that a given society considers appropriate for men and women. This very concept emphasises gender roles, or the set of rules that dictate what men or women should do and feel. Gender roles, for example, tell a man it's wrong to wear makeup. They tell a woman it's wrong to play wrestling, and tell a man it's wrong to wear dresses. They tell a young girl it's wrong to play with soldiers, and a young boy it's wrong to play with Barbies. Since we're all in for gender equality, we should thrive to delete gender roles altogether.Yet, people have this idea in their heads that if someone feels comfortable wearing dresses and putting on makeup and he was born a boy, he should become a transexual woman to be accepted in society. Because, in this society, we accept sex-change more than gender freedom and removing gender norms.Removing any and all gender roles will almost delete the need for transgendering and/or identifying as non-binary, because a man will be able to do all what women can do, and vice versa. We will no longer need to change our sex/gender in order to be accepted to act a certain way. However, transitioning because someone "feels" like another gender (when actually they want an excuse to act like the opposite gender, where none is necessary) will emphasize that one should be a certain gender to act a certain way, thus emphasizing gender roles (which, in turn, emphasize sexism). This does not totally delete the need for transexuality and non-binary genders. As mentioned above, I am not against transitioning, but only when the man or woman feel wrong in their own skin. That is, when someone is uncomfortable or insecure about being identified as male or female between himself/herself and his/her friends and relatives. So, if someone feels like they're annoyed by their penis, vagina, or breasts, it's okay to transition, if the opposite sex makes you feel more comfortable. In sum, biological factors are a legit reason for transitioning, but social factors are not. Transitioning due to social factors is what I call wreckless transitioning, which I'm against. Now that we've covering transitioning, we go back to our main topic: dealing with the gender "spectrum". The reason I discussed transgenderedness is the fact that there are people who transition to in-between genders, or "something along the gender binary" as they refer to it. However, I'm here to indicate that there's no need for such a spectrum. I'll start from gender-ambiguity, or the "third gender". Those, alongside "gender-fluidity", emphasize gender roles, as stated above when I was talking about transitioning. Then comes something that catches my eyes: agenderedness. I find it logical that some people would prefer to have no sexual organs whatsoever, and thus feel more comfortable if they had no gender, biologically speaking (not socially speaking, though. Same rules apply as wreckless transitioning). The need for agenderedness deletes the need for the gender binary, and the lack of need for the rest removes the need for the gender spectrum. This gives birth to a new concept: gender ternary, where there are three genders instead of two, lead by biological factors purely.To wrap it all up, gender spectrum is as a harmful term as gender binary. It emphasizes gender roles and sexism, and hurts people as much as gender binary. Transgenderedness and transexuality are used interchangably above, and are meant to be used that way, despite the slight difference in meaning. The intended meaning is "changing one's gender". Any change of gender that's due to social norms is wrong and emphasizes gender norms as well. If it's due to psychosomatic factors then it's more than welcomed. Some people feel uncomfortable as males or females, biologically and psychologically speaking. Those people rightly identify as agendered.(1) http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...(2) http://apps.who.int...