When I read feminist philosophy, I encountered a suggestion to look at human sex as a spectrum, with certain characteristics generally appearing together placing you closer to one end or another. Some of them encourage each other biologically, some socially/culturally. So for instance, higher levels of estrogen might encourage bigger breasts, thus they generally cluster, also with having a uterus and less facial hair, and identifying as a woman. Having many of the male cluster characteristics would put you further to the male end of the spectrum. This stayed with me. What I found appealing about this is that it doesn't put intersex people in a third, outsider category, nor separates male and female into fundamentally different opposites, it's just a bit more of this or a bit more of that. The other thing is that it recognizes sex changes, because you can acquire many of the cluster characteristics, for instance through hrt.
I'm not sure if I'm doing it justice here, but I am curious about what other people think??
yes that is very correct (at least as far as i'm aware)! and the idea of sex as a spectrum that all of us fall somewhere on is the crux of a lot of intersex activism. it shows that we're unfairly singled out and socially marked as wrong, mutated freaks of nature. when, in reality, we're just as natural as everyone else. we just have a different configuration that causes our sex traits to display themselves differently than others, or for our bodies to function differently.
it's the same core idea as in gender as a spectrum - even two non-queer women of similar status in society will have different experiences of their gender, similarly to how their bodies wouldn't work exactly the same in regards to hormones, reproductive ability, etc.
