[Serious] Please convince me gender is binary

[tackattack]

OK, I wasn't intentionally infusing a denial of evolution in my definition.. sigh.. let me try again

I define gender conformity as the opposite of gender nonconformity. They put on our birth records an identity based on our genitalia at birth. Our design is in our DNA (and evolved) as male or female. Gender identity uses the same words and is thus binary. Gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder (or whatever the PC term is) is cognitive dissonance with your assigned gender at birth. Is this a true statement? Elucidate me.

---

There has been a lot of discussion on it lately, and there's a lot of informed and actual people that struggle with gender. Perhaps I need an education in gender identity, But I only see gender as binary. I'm open to be convinced otherwise. Let me start with a statement, which I'm sure people will jump all over.

I define gender normalcy as that which functions according to its design. Our design is in our DNA as male or female.  Gender identity uses the same words and is thus binary. Is this a true statement? Elucidate me.

You define gender normalcy as what others call heteronormativity.  Since you do so, it's not surprising that you conclude as much, the conclusion being baked into the premise.  

Meanwhile, gender as a social construct evades binarism and any broad description of heteronormativity (since what is taken to be heteronormative in one society may not be taken to be so in another).

When you hear people discussing the notion that our gender system and preference for binarism may be unfounded, what they're suggesting is that while we do..yes, tell ourselves a story about heteronormativity and assume that this establishes our binarism, that only occludes the fact that we recognize in our lives and selves that this is an insufficient and innacurate representation of gender.  The very fact that we point out non normatives and call them "girly guys" for example..betrays any coherent description of what the heteronormativity is.  They are guys...they're very much likely to be very much like every other guy..but maybe they have long lustrous blonde hair that they tie up in a bow or satin ribbon? 

This, ofc, may actually be heteronormatively masculine in some other long hair satin bow loving culture.

What makes a person a girl, or girly?  Or a guy, or guyish?  Obviously not their genitalia, or we wouldn't even have a conceptual set for mannish women and effeminate men. If gender were determined by genitalia, than the sheer presence of penis would be proof of a persons masculinity.

OK I'm not arguing I don't have preconceptions and bias, I'm aware I do and am seeking to overcome them. You defeated any idea of non-binary when you said "girly guys" or "manish women" . 

It may be a subset, or type of guy or girl, but it's still a guy or girl. Perhaps rather than making declarations about personal pronouns and safe spaces, we could just accept that being a man is about more than just being a jerky jock and being a woman is about more than a maidservant? Wouldn't it just be a shit ton easier if we just accepted that our ideas of what a man and woman are vary based on culture and person proclivity, then what's going on out there now?