You’ve cleanly identified the central uncertainty behind a hell of a lot of “gender binary” discourse, but you’re also brushing against a flamewar about something called “transmedicalism.”
(Thankfully, neither one needs to be answered to get to the correct public policy outcomes of “let people be people” and “don’t be a sexist fart.”)
Transmedicalism can be defined as a belief that only those who medically transition are transgender, with anything short of full HRT and surgery as merely a compromise state and anyone not transitioning full time dismissed as a cisgender person playing pretend indulging in something less than.
Needless to say, there are strong opinions on both sides. Just as there are LGB cis people who dismiss T as a class needing respect and protection, there are T people who dismiss Q+ as a class needing protection or respect.
What makes the argument especially infuriating is the dearth of good statistics on non-cisgender folk at all. Between low sample sizes, huge variance between state law and ethnic acceptance, and often-insulting definitions, precise data is harder to come by for trans sexuality than f-on-m sexual assault.
For your specifics;
Social expectations are a huge part of gender identity. If I had been born decades later I very well might have come out as non-binary in high school, or might have instead been a full-time trans girl. And if I lived in a redder state, or had a more right-wing partner, I might still identify as entirely cis.
Maybe? Like I said, it’s really hard to know.
Data point worth noting : the cis folk who are closest to me are definitely cis.
With the.huge caveat about data noted above, my understanding is that trans men and women are about even on their split between which sexes or genders they are attracted to. The most prominent single group may be MtF trans women who were in a cishet marriage before they transitioned, but my impression is that about 25% are “gay”, 25% “straight”, 25% “queer”, and 25% “confused by terms.”
Mostly closeted late-identified MtF non-binary here:
You’ve cleanly identified the central uncertainty behind a hell of a lot of “gender binary” discourse, but you’re also brushing against a flamewar about something called “transmedicalism.”
(Thankfully, neither one needs to be answered to get to the correct public policy outcomes of “let people be people” and “don’t be a sexist fart.”)
Transmedicalism can be defined as a belief that only those who medically transition are transgender, with anything short of full HRT and surgery as merely a compromise state and anyone not transitioning full time dismissed as a cisgender person
playing pretendindulging in something less than.Needless to say, there are strong opinions on both sides. Just as there are LGB cis people who dismiss T as a class needing respect and protection, there are T people who dismiss Q+ as a class needing protection or respect.
What makes the argument especially infuriating is the dearth of good statistics on non-cisgender folk at all. Between low sample sizes, huge variance between state law and ethnic acceptance, and often-insulting definitions, precise data is harder to come by for trans sexuality than f-on-m sexual assault.
For your specifics;
Social expectations are a huge part of gender identity. If I had been born decades later I very well might have come out as non-binary in high school, or might have instead been a full-time trans girl. And if I lived in a redder state, or had a more right-wing partner, I might still identify as entirely cis.
Maybe? Like I said, it’s really hard to know.
Data point worth noting : the cis folk who are closest to me are definitely cis.
With the.huge caveat about data noted above, my understanding is that trans men and women are about even on their split between which sexes or genders they are attracted to. The most prominent single group may be MtF trans women who were in a cishet marriage before they transitioned, but my impression is that about 25% are “gay”, 25% “straight”, 25% “queer”, and 25% “confused by terms.”