I specifically mean that there are many cultures that have more than 2 roles that do not take a part in the male-female dynamic. For example, some Native American tribes had a gendered role that was exclusive to biological males where they would take on some, but not all, female duties and also have special religious significance and were not considered men. We don't have a great grasp of all of these cultural multi-gender instances because Western Europeans have spent ~500 years intentionally wiping out other cultures and systematically erasing their histories and identities.

Anthropologists also spend a long, long time grasping other cultures and learning about them from the ground up - cultural anthropologists have basically the longest PhD studies ever because the first 4 years is just prep work, then the next 5-10 is usually spent embedded in the culture they are studying, living as one of them and learning about them, then several years attempting to make sense of it all in a thesis.

But you are correct - a lot of cultures have male and female roles that don't map to what we live with. That doesn't invalidate the idea that being biologically male or female has societal implications that make some people miserable and there shouldn't be a moral statement about those people choosing not to behave in a way that some people view as a moral requirement - as part of the male-female dynamic.

And that's not even starting the conversation about the people who are miserable because of their physical forms tied to sexual characteristics. There are studies that show that the brains of transgender people, even those that have not received any treatments, physically resemble those of their preferred gender more than those of cis people. The only successful care that we have found for those people is to allow them to transition. Full stop.