Is Sex Binary? Spectrum v. Gradient

In my Love is Love, or is it? blog article, I mentioned that I believed sex to be binary. Was I wrong? 

I recently skimmed several scientific blog articles and commentaries (sorry, I can't recall where) that claimed both sex (the genetics of maleness and femaleness) and gender (the range of social, emotive, and psychological traits between maleness and femaleness) were on spectrums and that this is scientifically verifiable. I actually don't disagree that gender as defined has a range, but in my article, I described it not as a spectrum, but a gradient. In a color spectrum, colors have shades and hues, but each color is an independent item having a specific wavelength apart from the other colors. In a gradient, there is black and white, with boldness or lightness ranging between them. Shade to any color functions similarly by adding black or white. My contention is that gender is not a spectrum, but a gradient or range between two binary baselines -- maleness and femaleness.

For my argument to carry weight, sex needs to be seen as binary, but from what I have read, the apparent consensus is that sex too is spectral. In one of the blogs I skimmed, the basis for this view is that there are intersexed people who live between maleness and femaleness and have some sort of admixture between male and female chromosomes or physical features/genitalia, such as hermaphrodites. Transexuality or gender dysphoria was also noted as being on the sexual spectrum. 

 

In my original blog article, I made note of the uniqueness of intersexed people, which some sources have cited as consisting of 1.7% of the population, within a broad definition. Others, through a more concise definition, state that real intersexuality accounts for only around .018% of the population and that other conditions are misapplied or lumped-in inappropriately. Either case would place the numbers in an outlier category, but is this spectral, as if there are true third, fourth, fifth, etc. sexes? Or are these also gradients of binary norms? The vast majority of intersexed people will lean toward either maleness or femaleness, despite their physical or biochemical makeups, which to me suggests gradation. 

In the end, I can agree with the same facts, but language and presentation do matter. Spectrum, in my opinion, is the wrong word for sex and gender variations. In my view, there are indeed two archetypal forms -- male and female, which has as its primary purpose reproduction. Human reproduction is naturally binary. Variation is not an independent factor like a color is, but a tweak of the binary types, for right or wrong. With intersexed folks ranging from .018% to 1.7% of  the population and 5.6% of the population occupying some variant of the LGBTQ+ initialism (the largest group being bi-sexual at 3.1%. This may lean more toward the norms on a gradient scale.), these remain a significant minority when measured to the predominant whole, being cisgendered. While wanting to be sensitive, I still don't see a spectrum. I think spectrum is really only being used to legitimize normality, where gradation probably acknowledges the ranges more appropriately and yields to one of two poles despite distinctions. 

Now, I do not say the above to marginalize or degrade anyone's feelings, traits, or humanity. That is plainly wrong. But I do feel that the structure of language matters as a vehicle to convey intention and meaning. The use of spectrum, so far as I am concerned, is political spin and a rhetorical driver. I hold to gradation as a better linguistic analogy. 

Just my 2 cents of course. Still working it all out in my head.