It has been quite a while since I wrote about gender versus writing about psychopathy.
One thing that always intrigues me about gender, and especially those who are transgender, is how deviation from the accepted gender roles and norms causes great distress in others, especially the religious. They see it as desecration of the natural order, the natural segregation and differentiation of the sexes. The religious see such desecration as an affront to God’s will and creative energies. Neither argument makes sense to me. Life is all about shades or combinations of features. Being atheist, the call to a non-present entity seems hollow. How can something so arbitrary, such as the sex one is born as, be desecrated when it has no intrinsic meaning?
Any argument made by those against such deviation from accepted gender roles and norms is usually present only to hide their own revulsion towards a non-binary. In a world of seven billion people, the focus on childbirth and reproduction seems unnecessary. Likewise, a focus on who should be the housekeeper or breadwinner also seems idiotic. It is simply another manifestation of control placed upon others by society. It is another example of “us vs. them”. Many still adhere to idiotic notions of gender and sex and they expect others to do the same. The “rules” in place, set by society and continued from the rules established by prior generations, seek to preserve a binary. There is male and female, good and evil, pious and not, and so on. Is it really that those that do not adhere to traditional gender/sex congruence or other accepted representations are an affront to the natural order, or is it that they disrupt the accepted binary that has been artificially put into place?
Maybe my lack of rigid morality makes this easier for me to see through. How can something be desecrated if it is not intrinsically “natural” or “holy”? The whole notion of desecration makes no sense to me. How can their be only two groupings if there is no fundamental requirement that two groups exist? Also, wouldn’t societal differences, leading to different gender roles and norms, mean that there cannot be a universal representation? People not only want to think of the world as “those like them” and “those opposed to them”, but they want to think of the world as being simple and explainable. Going back to the good versus evil narrative, it is much easier to accept that people are separated into two groups, those who always do “good” and those that always do “evil”, than to accept that there is a continuum. Does not the psychopath break such narratives as well? We can do both good and evil actions, without exhibiting a good or evil mindset.
Most humans are simple. They want to defer their decisions to a binary. To them, a male must always have been born a male and must dress and act the way that society expects them to. Likewise for females. People think of themselves as good because they do not routinely do evil. They do not consider that it is an either/or proposition. Instead, when binaries are proven false, those that fall in the middle of the continuum are deemed societal iconoclasts and heretics. Society does not consider that there simply was nothing to desecrate to begin with.