Hi Erica,

I’ll take your expression of interest in understanding as sincere- and try to help. Dana’s brief response points to the answer, which is that ‘man’ and ‘woman’ seem like clear and fixed and justified identities- but they are, as she so well said, ‘cluster categories’, meaning that many different attributes are used to evaluate membership in the category, and not all are used at any one time by each person making the evaluation.

By way of contrast, ‘male’ and ‘female’ are very simply defined, and called out in the delivery room, from single attributes qualities of anatomy. Intersex people don’t fit this neat little system, and that is an example of the natural variation that bedevils any kind of overly simple classification system.

So most children are bombarded with instructions as to how to behave and become proper ‘men’ and ‘women. Quite a bit of territoriality develops, preserving privileges and demanding the other gender fulfill assigned obligations. This is the function of identity- it entitles us with rights and creates obligations, organizes the division of labor and therefore our focus in learning life skills, simplifies society and formalizes interpersonal calculations, etc.

As these binary gender constructions are ubiquitous, many of us gradually forget our transition from whole little people into half people. We come to accept that man and woman-ness are innate divisions, but this does not stand up to scrutiny. Many people find themselves bumping up against some of the requirements for their assigned gender. Men may wish they could explore and express their feelings. Women may want to have their opinion respected. Thousand of details are involved in performing our gender roles and real humans are very diverse. People experience misfit with gender roles and assumptions all the time.

Conservative practice is to dismiss that and try to enforce gender stereotypes as if they are innate, when they aren’t.