Man, I really enjoyed this author&#x27;s viewpoint. This passage in particular voiced something I&#x27;ve been unable to express:<p>&gt; Yet consider: in order to construct this spectrum, it is necessary first firmly to establish what it means to be “man” and “woman.” Even if you are “genderqueer”—convinced that your gender identity does not conform to the social norms associated with your sex—alienation from social norms depends on the perpetuation of social norms. Thus if you are a gruff, muscular, assertive woman who has adopted the genderqueer label, girlishness must continue to be associated with garrulousness, weakness, and passivity for your identity to scan.<p>&gt; In short, the spectrum depends on stereotypes.<p>About a year ago I started to question my sense of gender, and ended up arriving at the &quot;genderqueer&quot; label. But not because it felt most right, just less wrong than the other labels. About six months later I came to a similar conclusion as the above passage: so what if I don&#x27;t do stereotypical $GENDER things, why should that prevent me from identifying as $GENDER? Doing anything else seemed like a special sort of narcissism, or a hobby -- not sure of the right words, but it seemed like a needless&#x2F;useless waste of time and energy. That, combined with realizing that I don&#x27;t want to define myself by my gender, helped me stop thinking about this for the most part and, i think not coincidentally, feel a lot happier about myself.