I understand basic term "trans", as people use it, but it doesn't make sense if it's on a spectrum. A spectrum is just a scale that varies. The term "trans" implies that there are only two options, as if you can only be feminine or masculine, but not the varying degrees of. Or if used in it's varied context it can imply that you're changing something, if people are born that way... what are you changing?

Why do we assume that sex and gender normally "match?" It's impossible to tell if it's all based on the spectrum.

If you're saying that we identify "Trans" as people with the brains and physical responses opposite their sex; Is a male who has these features "transgender," if he identifies as a man?

Is it appropriate to identify a transgender person by their sex, if they identify with a gender not typically commensurate with that? IE: Does a male remain male even though he identifies as a woman?

I feel like my issue is how much emphasis we put behind language. It seems that it's the language that makes all this a big deal in the first place. Instead of just defending people who look and act different, we further try to classify them into a new term.

IE: How is it acceptable to allow and lead people to think "I was born in the wrong body?"

I'm behind the belief that sex is sex, and gender isn't even real. We should all just accept ourselves and others for who we are. Nobody should need sex changes and hormones to fit in.