But the more one looks at these categories the more complicated things become. In humans, there are many factors that contribute to what is perceived as biological sex: chromosomes, hormones, genitals, and more. Roughgarden shows that looking to animals in order to establish gender as a “naturally” binary system actually serves to prove that nature is not binary at all. In the “rainbow” of biological diversity, many animals have intersex bodies, and other animals’ sex organs will change later in life to adapt to new or shifting situations. As Joan Roughgarden explores in Evolution’s Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People(University of California Press, 2004), there are examples all throughout the animal kingdom wherein sexual bodies and behaviors exceed the rigid sex categorization of western science and culture. Setting aside the reality of gender not being fixed only to one’s physical body because it is a cultural performance, the idea of a “biological gender binary” is not supported by science.
The author sketched this image while reflecting on the federal policy changes regarding gender. And nothing about this restriction is “natural.” If a person’s hair is perceived as either too short or too long for a given gender category, that person-whether trans or not-can be misgendered because their hair is not performing that culture’s script in the expected way. Western culture’s quest for ever more “clear and objective” forms of categorization results in ever more restrictive definitions of bodies and peoples. We can see examples of this with something as simple as hair. What it means to be a woman in the midwestern United States (and how those meanings are reproduced) is much different than what it means to be a woman in China or even in coastal areas of the US. Performativity gets to the ways in which we all act out our gender by repeating gestures and cues from our cultural upbringings that signal to the world our gender identities. Judith Butler first wrote about the “performativity” of gender in 1990. Gender identity is established in one’s mind and community. Gender expression and gender identity are much larger, messier, and culturally specific. Genes, anatomy, and X and Y chromosomes are not clear determiners of gender identity, and a person’s sex/gender isn’t merely a description of some aspect of their biology. Attempts to erase trans existence by narrowly defining gender as “biological fact” need to be seen in this context.īiological: of or relating to biology or to life and living processes.Ī follow up piece in the New York Times expanded on another reason why using biology to understand gender is problematic: it doesn’t work. By some reports, 2018 is on track to set yet another record. In 2017, the number of trans lives lost to violence climbed to 29. The artwork pictured at the beginning of this article, Trans Effigy 2016 Seals, is a set of wax seal stamps representing the 27 trans and gender non-conforming people murdered in the US in 2016 the design for each stamp includes the individual’s name and the date and location of their death, and the handle length corresponds to the person’s age. For the past few years, reports of fatal attacks against transgender people in the United States have been on the rise. In 2015, the murders of 23 trans people were reported, making it the deadliest year on record.
“The department argued in its memo that key government agencies needed to adopt an explicit and uniform definition of gender as determined ‘on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable.’” Just days later, US officials proposed similar changes to UN Human Rights documents, replacing references to “gender-based violence” with the more narrowly defined “violence against women.” When transwomen are no longer recognized as women and violence against trans and gender non-conforming people is no longer recognized as violence, our lives feel increasingly unprotected.
On October 21, 2018, the New York Times reported on the Department of Health and Human Services’ plan to redefine gender as a biological “fact” determined at birth. So, this new development feels to me like that split second when something slips out of your hands and you aren’t sure if you are going to be able to catch it or if it’s going to hit the ground and shatter: vision tunneling and mind thinking of the worst possible outcomes.
I say “us” because I am a transwoman, and any effort to delegitimize trans identity directly affects the way I move through the world. As I’m sitting in the airport in Iceland with my wife waiting for our flight back to the US, I read about the newest iteration of the federal government’s policy on gender, part of an ongoing effort to erase transgender and gender non-conforming folks through defining us away.