WIXLIB

C H A N G I N G AT T I T U D E S T O WA R D S S E X A N D G E N D E RIt was not until the 1970s that the word ‘gender’ began toenter mainstream vocabulary. It took off with the emergenceof second wave feminism and the debate it instigated aboutthe rigid and sharply distinct social roles expected of menand women. Gender became a useful way to distinguishbetween the fact of being female and the performance ofwomanhood shaped by social expectations. Neither DeBeauvoir nor the feminists of the 1970s denied the existenceof sex, nor that individuals born female became womenwhile those born male became men. Rather, feminists suchas Germaine Greer sought to challenge the assumption thatbeing female meant conforming to an invented and sociallyimposed set of (gendered) expectations.6 The creation ofgender allowed for a critique of masculine and femininestereotypes; it did not lead automatically to the conclusionthat some people were transgender.Gender as performanceThird wave feminism was shaped, in part, by critical theoryand post-structuralism – ideas that emerged from insideuniversities rather than among political campaigners. Theapplication of post-structuralist thinking to ideas about sexand gender led to the view that gendered-performance –whether a person presents and acts in a way that is perceivedas masculine or feminine – serves as a signifier of theirbiological sex. What is being signified (sex) is no more ‘true’or ‘real’ than the performance; both are socially constructed.The connection between sex and gender came to be seenas increasingly arbitrary. Judith Butler, writing in GenderTrouble (1988) argued not just that ‘gender is performative,’7but that there is no biological reality, no greater truth,underpinning the performance: ‘“being” a sex or a gender isfundamentally impossible’.85

T H E C O R R O S I V E I M PA C T O F T R A N S G E N D E R I D E O L O G YFor Butler, there is only performance and no ‘real reality’.She criticises what she sees as the false assumption that‘there is a natural or biological female who is subsequentlytransformed into a socially subordinate “woman”, withthe consequence that “sex” is to “nature” or “the raw” asgender is to culture or “the cooked.”’9 Butler argues thatthe biological female is ‘a discursive formation that acts as anaturalized foundation for the nature/culture distinction andthe strategies of domination that the distinction supports.’10For Butler, gender is simply ‘a kind of persistentimpersonation that passes as the real,’11 and in order topass as real the performance, or impersonation, needs anaudience. Gender thus becomes a ‘relational term’ forgedin the process of interaction and with no fixed referent.12In other words, ‘what we take to be an internal essence,’ isactually ‘manufactured through a sustained set of acts.’13Significantly, for Butler, unlike for Greer or De Beauvoir,not only is there no ‘essence,’ there is also no agent that isresponsible for shaping the performance: ‘Gender is alwaysa doing, though not a doing by a subject who might be saidto preexist the deed.’14 Rather than sex preceding gender,Butler argues it is our social and cultural views on genderthat construct sex: ‘Gender is not to culture as sex is to nature’she explains, ‘gender is also the discursive/cultural meansby which “sexed nature” or “a natural sex” is produced andestablished as “prediscursive,” prior to culture, a politicallyneutral surface on which culture acts.’15Today, following Butler, sex has been rejected by manyradical thinkers as an outdated concept that has no morebasis in material reality than gender. As a result, theperformance of gender floats freely from biology: both areconsidered equally arbitrary. Gender can now be conceivedas fluid and multiple. People are not assumed to be born6

C H A N G I N G AT T I T U D E S T O WA R D S S E X A N D G E N D E Rmale or female but randomly assigned membership ofa culturally prescribed sex category in an act of symbolicviolence conducted at the moment of birth. (See, forexample, Labour MP Dawn Butler’s statement that babiesare born without sex).16 Some people will be socialised intoaccepting this arbitrary category and will dutifully performthe appropriate gender. For others, the conflict will provetoo much and they will be unable to comply. These peopleare, according to the theorists, transgender or ‘gender queer’.When the relationship between sex and gender isconsidered arbitrary, ‘It is the perception that the baseproperty (or properties) is present that matters . not theactual presence of it,’17 or, in other words, it is the perceptionthat someone is male or female that determines how othersrespond to them and the gender that is then conferredupon them, rather than their actually being male or female.Primary and secondary sex characteristics are significantonly in the sense that their presence (or absence) creates aperception that others respond to.Following the logic of Butler’s theory, Asta arguesgender precedes and constructs sex: ‘the schemas of genderdetermine what bodies and body parts get sexed.’18 As aresult, gender becomes freed from biology only for anatomyto be tied to public perception: ‘To be of a certain gender, forexample, is to be taken to have bodily features presumedto be evidence of a role in biological reproduction and beplaced in a hierarchical power structure as a result.’19 Whengender is understood to be distinct from sex, and bothcategories are constructed through a socially inscribedperformance, then the responses and attitudes of othersto that performance become all important. When thereis no biology underpinning gender and there is no agentdetermining the performance then the performance itself,7

T H E C O R R O S I V E I M PA C T O F T R A N S G E N D E R I D E O L O G Yand the interaction it compels, is all. As Asta puts it, ‘If youare taken to identify with being a woman in a context, youare a woman in that context.’20 This emphasis on perceptiongoes some way towards explaining why leading figures inthe transgender movement are so concerned with compellingparticular language use and enshrining in law the rightsof transgender women to access spaces and opportunitiesreserved exclusively for females.Bringing biology back inMost recently, there has been a shift in thinking aboutgender that heralds a renewed focus on biology. This is nota return to the idea that sex is inscribed in chromosomes,hormones and genitalia but a shift towards understandinggender identity, an internal sense of being male or female,as being ‘hardwired into the brain at birth.’21 One theory isthat this process of ‘hardwiring’ occurs through prenatalexposure to abnormal levels of sex hormones or endocrineinfluences linked with the developing brain’s sensitivity toandrogen and testosterone secretions in utero. However,there is little scientific evidence to support this proposition.There are generally thought to be some differencesbetween male and female brains. Subcortically, theamygdala is larger in men and has a higher density ofandrogen than oestrogen receptors, whereas portions of thehippocampus are larger in women, with a higher densityof oestrogen than androgen receptors.22 Sex differences inbrain morphology, connectivity, and function are thoughtto underlie sex differences in behaviour, psychopathology,and cognitive performance on certain tasks. In general, menhave less trouble with visuospatial tasks, whereas womenoutperform men in verbal fluency tasks. Sex differences inbrain activation during mental rotation exercises have also8

C H A N G I N G AT T I T U D E S T O WA R D S S E X A N D G E N D E Rbeen shown: men show predominantly parietal activation,while women additionally show more interior frontalactivation.23It is worth noting that differences in the brain are, likeheight and weight, on a continuum rather than beingmarked by a clear distinction. This means that attempts todemarcate male and female brains rely upon averages andjust as some women may be taller than some men, likewisesome women may have a larger than average amygdala andsome men a larger than average hippocampus. As a result,there is little consensus about either the exact nature or thesignificance of differences between male and female brains.Scientists have failed to establish a definitive model of asexed brain. Stephanie Davies-Arai, founder of TransgenderTrend, explains that:‘Conclusions drawn from brain scans are vastly overblown.It’s not that men and women are exactly the same becausethere are average differences in some areas. But thoseaverage differences mean that, for example, it is only about60% likely that someone who is good at spatial reasoningwill be male – and of course an individual woman may scorehigher on this count than an individual man. In every aspectof life, there’s nature and nurture, boys and girls are treateddifferently even before they are born.’24The cognitive neuroscientist Cordelia Fine mounts a strongchallenge to what she labels as the ‘neurosexism’ thatportrays attributes such as intelligence, spatial awarenessand empathy as differentially hardwired into male andfemale brains.25The desire to locate a difference between male and femalebrains that compels a difference in personality and behaviourwas once driven by conservative thinkers in search of anaturalised explanation for gender differences. Today,9

T H E C O R R O S I V E I M PA C T O F T R A N S G E N D E R I D E O L O G Yconservative thinkers are joined by those who considerthemselves to be at the forefront of challenging society’sviews on gender. One reason for this is that the existence ofa sexed brain paves the way for the view that some peoplecan be born with a biological disjuncture between brain andbody making transgender a form of intersex located withinthe brain.At present, intersex is defined specifically as a conditionin which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypicsex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable aseither male or female. Far from being fairly common, astransgender activists suggest, the phenomenon of intersexoccurs in fewer than 2 out of every 10,000 births.26 Just asan intersex person is born with mixed or indeterminategenitalia, or having mixed or indeterminate chromosomesand phenotype, so it is argued a fetus may develop with amale brain and a female body or vice versa. If this happensthen, apparently, incongruence can exist between a person’sinternal sense of being male or female and their externalanatomical sex characteristics.The search for a sexed brain has morphed into the searchfor a transgender brain. Sex-typical cognitive abilitieshave been studied in people with gender incongruence todetermine whether they show performance and activationpatterns like their natal sex or gender identity. In one mentalrotation study, transgender women (assigned male at birth)differed from a control groups of males in brain activation:the control men showed greater activation in the left parietalregion, while untreated and hormone-treated transgenderwomen exhibited stronger activation in the temporaloccipital regions.27 One neuroimaging study showed that‘gray matter volumes of adolescents with gender dysphoriaare, on a whole brain level, in line with their natal sex, but10

C H A N G I N G AT T I T U D E S T O WA R D S S E X A N D G E N D E Rwhen analyses are done in regions of interest, there is someindication for sex atypical differentiation.’28 A third studysuggests genetic involvement in the development of genderincongruence, meaning that the brains of people with earlyonset gender incongruence show a gross morphologysimilar to their natal sex but white matter microstructureis demasculinized in transgender women (natal male) andmasculinized in transgender men (natal female).29The existence of a ‘transgender brain’ remains highlycontested. It is fundamentally premised upon the existenceof a sexed brain which, as we have seen, is also contested.Even if we do accept that male and female brains differ,there is no evidence of a complete sex reversal in the brainstructures of people with gender incongruence. Not onlyhave few studies been conducted but in those that have,techniques, design and samples are very diverse making itdifficult to draw firm conclusions or to replicate findings.Furthermore, the relationship between cause and effect isnot straightforward: it might be the case that people whocome to believe they are a different gender to their natal sexmay exhibit behaviours stereotypically associated with theiradopted gender which in turn shows up in neuro-imaging.To a certain extent, whatever brain scans do or do not showis of little relevance in understanding social attitudes. AsDavies-Arai makes clear: ‘We don’t define men and womenby their brains. Doing so would be essentialist and thelogical conclusion is frightening: will we introduce braintests to see who is really a boy and who is really a girl?’30The UK’s Department of Health (DoH) confirms that ‘thereis no physical test for detecting gender variance that maydevelop into adult dysphoria.’ Yet rather than concludingfrom this assertion that transgender is a social ratherthan biological condition, the Department suggests that11

T H E C O R R O S I V E I M PA C T O F T R A N S G E N D E R I D E O L O G Y‘clinicians must rely on the young person’s own account.’31Because ‘“brain sex” is not readily apparent,’ it is arguedthat ‘transgender people must be believed about who theyare.’32 This emphasis on belief suggests that transgenderpeople can detect a biologically inscribed male or femaleessence – a skill denied to the overwhelming majority of thepopulation.Whatever neuro-imaging may purport to show, a femalewho can read a map is clearly no more a man than a malewho can iron a shirt is a woman. As Davies-Arai argues,‘It’s a political idea that we have a sense of gender identitywhich exists independent of both our biological sex and ourgendered socialisation.’33 Yet transgender activists continueto promote the idea that people are born with a gender; or,in other words, that humans emerge into the world with afully formed male soul or female essence – or even a nonbinary, genderless essence – that is located within our bodiesor our brains. According to this way of thinking, genderis an innate sense we have of ourselves that is entirelyindependent of both anatomy and social expectation. AsDavies-Arai explains, ‘This idea is really contentious. Howcan we be born with a fully-formed, intact idea of our ownidentity?’34 The logical consequence of this view returns usto a pre-Wollstonecraft sense that biology is destiny: onlynow it is our gendered essence, rather than our genitalia,that determines our life course.The shift from exploring the physical attributes of maleand female brains to detecting a gendered-essence takesus from sketchy and inconsistent evidence into the terrainof pure fantasy. Gender is a socially constructed property;that is, it is dependent on human thoughts, attitudes andpractices. The idea that a socially constructed concept canbe biologically inscribed within the structure of the brain12

C H A N G I N G AT T I T U D E S T O WA R D S S E X A N D G E N D E Rand only transgender individuals themselves are able tounlock and interpret the inscriptions makes little sense. Theimpact of society and culture in shaping people’s actions iscompletely overlooked. As Alice Dreger puts it, ‘whetheryou end up living as an out gay man, a closeted gay man, ora straight transgender woman depends not only on biology,but also on cultural tolerance of various identities.’35Gender dysphoriaDespite the absence of evidence, gender theorists andtransgender activists continue to promote the view that thereare two quite distinct sets of biological sex characteristics:outer, anatomical characteristics and an inner sense of genderidentity. For some people, inner and outer sex characteristicsare aligned (these people are labelled ‘cis-gendered’ bytransgender activists keen to challenge the idea that thereis a ‘normal’ relationship between sex and gender) but fortransgender people, inner and outer sex characteristicsconflict. This conflict, present even prior to the moment ofbirth, may lead to a condition known as gender dysphoria,or ‘the ongoing distress that arises from the incongruity ofassigned sex at birth and internal experience of gender.’Gender dysphoria is listed in the Diagnostic and StatisticalManual of Mental Disorders, version 5 (DSM-5)36 althoughthis has proved controversial as activists argue that beingtransgender is not a mental disorder.It is advantageous for activists to promote the idea thatpeople are born with an internal sense of gender identity.It suggests that being transgender is not simply a choice;just as we have come to understand in relation to sexuality,transgender people are simply ‘born this way’. This assertionis used to claim that transgender people have always existedand it is only now that that there is greater awareness and13

T H E C O R R O S I V E I M PA C T O F T R A N S G E N D E R I D E O L O G Yacceptance that they can finally can be their ‘true selves’. Theclaim to have been ‘born this way’ now forms the basis for acollective identity. To be transgender is not just to make anindividual claim but to stake a claim to group membership.Biology-based groupings were once rejected by a previousgeneration of activists who sought to distance themselvesfrom what they considered to be reductionist perceptions ofwho they were and what they could become. As academicTerry Murray points out, they urged others not to define themby reference to genitalia, skin colour or group stereotypes. Incontrast, ‘today’s transgender activists demand recognition oftheir allegedly innate difference, believing that membershipin a biologically or essentially distinct group should entitlethem to civil rights and legal recognition.’37Far from being a naturally occurring phenomenon thathas existed across space and time, transgenderism – anideology that promotes the view that everyone has a t

of immutable sex. Nonetheless, the rise of transgenderism can be linked to an increase in the number of transgender individuals and, crucially, a change in the population most likely to identify as transgender. Where once counsellors were mainly approached by middle-aged men with a pers