Respectfully disagreeing here because I understand what you're trying to say, but from my perspective this is not entirely correct. I am a trans man (female-to-male trans person) because I experience physical and emotional distress because I don't have the typical male physical characteristics such as genitalia, deep voice, body hair, flat chest, et cetera. If we had no gender roles, no social constructs of how one sex or the other should act, men could wear dresses and make-up with no social repercussions, et cetera, I would still be a trans man because of that dysphoria and would still want to transition to male to finally get my dingalingadingdong down there. Regardless of social constructs.
But maybe this is being transsexual instead of transgender as gender definitely is a social construct because of what is considered to be masculine, feminine, et cetera. I'm still scratching my head over this. I fully believe non-binary identities exist and whatever, I just don't entirely see how one would want to present as something but not transition to become that something. But maybe it's because everyone's experiences things differently. I dunno.
I'll call anyone whatever pronouns and names they ask me to use as that is their right. Not hating. Just trying to figure things out and trying to place their experiences somewhere next to mine and that often enough doesn't work. orz
As for the actual topic. I've always understood that bisexuality is attraction to two, and pansexuality to all, so including intersex people, basically interested in having sexual relations with anyone they are attracted to, regardless of what's in their pants. But again, considering the words for sexual and romantic attraction are often used interchangeably, a bisexual person could also Mayberry be attracted to for instance masculine and non-binary presenting people and no the feminine presenting people, and now my head hurts and this is confusing.
