A reader writes: “In a comment, you wrote about gender norms: ‘I also believe that, no matter how much we relax (the binary gender system) or expand it (or even if we eliminate it), the medical need for transition will remain. People who need to transition need to transition, regardless of the gender system in place. The elimination or expansion of the binary gender system would serve to reduce or eliminate the stress and discrimination that trans people experience, but I don’t think it would eliminate the need to transition.’
“I would like to hear more about your thoughts on this and the reasons why you think so. How would trans issues look in some sort of gender-diverse/free utopia?”
The comment that the reader refers to above was my response to another comment on the post “I Don’t Regret Seeing ‘Regretters.‘” There are people who believe that, if gender norms were relaxed or eliminated, there would be no need for any trans person to correct his or her physical body. I believe that such a system might reduce some people’s need to go through a physical transition, but I don’t believe that it would eliminate such a need for all trans people.
I am, of course, looking at everything through the lens of a Western, binary gender system. That is the system into which I was socialized, and although I can acknowledge, and even favor, other systems, I will probably never be able to look at things with complete objectivity.
It’s interesting that this question comes along now, because in “Writing Your Gender,” the class I teach at Metropolitan State College of Denver, we have been discussing that very thing – if a society recognizes more than two genders, and if genders did not correspond so strictly with the physical body, would anyone be compelled to change his or her body based on gender identity?
I could reference many other cultures and I could point to examples that would either reinforce or dispute my assertion that this need would still exist for some people, but either way, I would be trying to look at the question through the eyes of a culture and a mindset that I don’t have. I would be putting my own “stuff” onto someone else’s experience.
So instead, I’m going to say that the reason I think that the need would still exist is because I think that the mind and body are not separate entities. I think that they interact and influence each other. And I think that attachment or non-attachment to one’s body or a certain body configuration – identifying or not identifying with one’s body – is hard-wired.
And I think that the reason that some people in certain cultures that recognize more than two genders or do not strongly link gender with the physical body do not undergo physical transition is not because they don’t feel the need to. It’s because such a procedure is not available to them, and if it were, they would do so. Or it’s because such a procedure is so foreign to them based on their own socialization that they can’t conceive of it or identify the need to do it.
Please note that I said “I think.” I have no scientific backing for these opinions, and if there is some one way or another, I hope readers will point us in that direction.
The flip side of the opinions that I am offering is this: if gender is not tied to the physical body (but is instead, for example, tied to a person’s livelihood or community roles), then the physical body means nothing with relationship to gender identity and there would be no compelling need to make any changes. The notion of mind/body misalignment with regard to gender would be completely foreign.
I do think that our modern definition of “trans” is a Western, binary concept. I don’t think it translates across time periods or across cultures. But if our current theories about hormones in the womb affecting the mind’s relationship with the body (whether you want to call it identity, gender identity, or something else) bear out, then this is definitely a “condition” that would cross all cultural boundaries, and I believe we have seen that it has.
How it is received and responded to in each culture would be different, as we have also seen. And the structure of the culture would certainly make a difference with regard to how people within that culture would see and feel about themselves. But I’m not certain that all mind/body incongruity would respond to cultural cues and be eliminated. It just might not be identified as a “gender thing.”
I do find this subject quite interesting, however, and would love to hear readers’ thoughts, opinions, and experiences. I’m open to being convinced that the need to transition is strictly the result of a Western, binary system – so readers, once again, you’re on.
(Ask Matt Monday returns next Monday with a discussion about the various aspects of age and transition.)
I [twenty something white trans woman] find it useful to split trans issues into two bits. Firstly there’s the social, gender bit, and then there’s the body bit.
The social, gender bit has to do with how people interact or want to interact with the world. This is the most evident bit of most coming outs.
Then there’s the body bit, which to me feels like it fits more comfortably under the general banner of body disphoria. This is when an individual (trans or cis) feels ill at ease in their own body and needs medical intervention to change it. Unfortunately this is not yet as widely recognised as traditional trans or ‘gender disphoria’ issues, and hence we probably can’t safely move under that banner yet.
Knowing the world has coercively assigned you an incorrect gender does not necessarily correspond to wanting to make any changes to your body. In our western society we have often found them co-located, or have held to that narrative as that’s what we need in order to get treatment. But it does leave out genderqueer people who feel like they need body modifications, cis people who would prefer to have a ‘trans body’, and many other variations.
If we could move to a point where the two could be recognised, separately, but both valid, with differing needs, we could hopefully move forward with a more person-centred approach.
Sorry, and the relevance to the above post: some people have body modification needs due to body dysmorphia (not dysphoria sorry) and these are likely to persist even in a gender-less society.
On the science side of it, this is also interesting: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8265592/Tracking-the-tell-tale-signs-of-pure-genius.html
And Zoe Brain follows any of the research being done that she can, and has a trove of info at: http://aebrain.blogspot.com/
This came up some time ago due to Julie Bindel’s work. Bindel proposes (to sum it up probably brutally and too simply) that in a genderless world, where gender roles, expression and all other differences between what we accept as “male” and “female” all melt away into androgyny, there would be no need for transition.
I don’t know that such a world could exist. By our very nature, we like to differentiate ourselves, celebrate some of our differences and try to rise above the crowd in order to compete for affections and distinguish ourselves as unique beings. Of course, these points don’t mean that we would have to emphasize differences between sexes, but I think the likelihood is that we would.
But assuming that our society evolved into one where genderless was the ideal, was the pinnacle of beauty or was even all that was permissible, at the very least there would still remain those transsexuals who experience distress about their genitalia.
I’ve had this discussion with a number of people, and I agree with Matt. For me, it was helpful to elaborate on the 101 explanation of sex vs gender (“What’s between your legs vs what’s between your ears”, “biology vs socialisation”, some version of that*), because it is frequently forgotten or glossed-over that brains/minds are biological and part of the body.
My gender is… masculine, ish? Nominally masculine geek? Whatever it is, I don’t identify as a man. I was really not too broken up about living my gender in a body that was perceived as female; I didn’t – and don’t – feel like that is inconsistent with my gender. But entirely independent of that, my brain tells me I am male, and I am happier having made the rest of my body match up better.
I don’t feel like my experience of my gender demands any sort of “congruence” with my body. The motivation to physically transition was informed by a different aspect of me.
*Most of these, depending on how they’re worded, can run a serious risk of erasing or invalidating non-gender conforming, non-binary and/or genderqueer transsexual people.
This position always baffles me… the idea that gender norms no longer being such a big deal would suddenly eliminate the desire for gendered body modification. Body modifications tend to become MORE common the less stigmatized they become.
It used to be in Western Culture, anyways, having a tattoo was considered extremely transgressive. It’s considered alot more “commonplace” now.. and it’s common now precisely because there are fewer social sanctions against them, leading to more people getting them, etc.
So if anything physical transitions would become more common not less so because the socially permissable combinations of gendered body parts would increase in number rather than being restricted to binary expectations of what a “man” is “supposed” to look like vs what a “woman” is “supposed” to look like.
The desire to treat one’s body as an avatar of one’s inner self is deeply ingrained. It is not merely an artifact of what a given society considers cool or uncool. Social stigma or lack thereof may influence the type and manner of self expression but it doesn’t create it.
I think if we eliminated the gender system, body modification surgeries wouldn’t be called “transitioning”. They’d be called called by their more boring medical terms, same as any other surgery. Many people already work toward their own designer genitals, currently this involves things like trimming labia or piercing various bits. The idea that one mode of alteration is more legitimate than another is arbitrary. All that should matter is that you show up and tell your surgeon what you’d like.
Many people would change their bodies for various reasons if given the option. I would love to change a few things, some of them are gendered body parts, some of them I simply don’t like. I want to get rid of my stretch marks. “Ah, that’s understandable, here try this cream.” I want to get rid of my vagina. “Quick, call a psychiatrist! This one needs evaluated!”
To be honest, I can’t afford most medical intervention anyway, so I try not to dwell on it. I envy people who get to take hormones, especially people who have a desired hormone therapy which is considered “male” or “female”. Maybe I want a balance which is considered to be neither. I don’t think the minds of the medical community can even process such a concept. But perhaps my desires would be normal in our futuristic world.
TL;DR: In a world without the sex/gender binary system, there is no “wrong”, so nobody would even care if the number of physically transitioning people decreased or increased.
Whenever I read gender theories from those who believe in the possibility of a “genderless society” it solidifies my belief that gender is largely invisible to non-trans people.
It’s like they see gender in such a narrow context they imagine it’s hardly even necessary. Whereas when you’re severely gender dysphoric gender colors just about every moment of every day. In those moments you realize that gender is everywhere. And you can’t just ignore it or conceptualize a “genderless utopia” to make it better, because it hurts.
People who postulate that the deconstruction of gender will eliminate the need for transition are another example of people who try to explain being trans in terms of things we want to do rather than who we are. We keep telling them this isn’t correct, but darned if they’ll take our word for it.
Bam, on the head! I love your argument!
Gendered body dysmorphia isn’t the only form of body dysmorphia, so it’s unlikely that the specifically body dysmorphia (as opposed to gender dysphoria) would go away in the absence of gender. Of course, other forms of body dysmorphia aren’t really given more societal approval (with the possible exception of breast augmentation and botox, though even those are part of a double-bind), so it is unclear to me that divorcing the physical changes from gender would increase societal approval for the changes. It might even decrease it and would probably prevent insurance from ever covering it. Currently there is the sense that gender-related changes allow people to conform more closely to social norms and live their identity openly, whereas in a genderless world it would be more likely to be seen as purposeless and unnecessary because it didn’t serve a social purpose. Other forms of body dysmorphia surgeries are considered cosmetic unless they can be justified on other health grounds (breast reduction for back pain, weight loss because the health profession almost always thinks skinny=healthy, etc.)
I agree that gender dysphoria and body dysmorphia of primary and secondary sexual characteristics are two different things. Notably, the most likely source of the second is the sensory-motor cortex (as described in the “genius” article above). I don’t know about anyone else, but I’d definitely take a cure for this that went the other way and reshaped my brain to conform to my body, especially if it was less invasive and less expensive than current surgeries. For example, some recent research suggest virtual reality might be an effective treatment for people who have had limbs amputated and experience similar dynamics; if I could play a video game and feel less distress, I’d absolutely take the opportunity. I don’t think people who’s primary dysphoria is with gender identification would want such a cure, and offering them the option could be considered coercive and threatening to their identity.
I hope that medical science separates the two conditions, since otherwise their treatment is likely to (continue) to over-generalize regardless of which direction they go.
@Diana_W I think there are some people for whom “gender” genuinely does not matter, and not just out of privilege. I think how “gendered” someone is can vary significantly (my hypothesis is that it is related to biological constructs that follow the typical gendered bell curves: http://www.sociology.org/wp-content/uploads/263wmfc.jpg). There are people who, in the absence of social structures, would have no gender, just like there are people who, in the absence of social structures, would have no gender-based sexual preferences.
Then there are people who, cis- or trans-, are highly gendered. For those people the experience of the first group is incomprehensible, just like at times the first group seems to ignore the existence of the second, especially if they experience gender only as an oppressive force. I believe that part of why society came to embrace gender roles whole-heartedly is because people who have gender care enormously about gender, whereas most people I’ve met who don’t just want to spend as little effort on it as possible rather than actively abhorring it.
I think online interaction have revealed this most clearly to me, especially observing straight cis women’s behavior online (because lesbian and gay culture have both long had conflicts between those with a surfeit of gender and those without, so mostly this led me to generalize the bell curve further.) There are women who go online and specifically ignore gender, who revel in the lack of gendered cues and don’t care if people assume they are men as long as they don’t have to do anything regarding gender ever again. Then there are other women who go out of their way to reaffirm their female identity constantly, who are hurt if someone assumes they are male because that person ignored and erased an important part of their identity. In general, neither of these groups of women are coming in with more privilege than the other; both have experienced times where their preferred mode is given more societal approval, so it isn’t the case that their choices are based on a lack of awareness. Rather, there are genuinely different ways of being “gendered”.
In a genderless society there would still be feminine and masculine people and still be female and male people, in all possible combinations, society simply wouldn’t care, consider those traits worthy of social celebration or censure or reflect one’s identity in how other people related to one. I usually imagine it like musical sub-cultures: gender would become like listening to metal or hip-hop or country music. For some people it’s a key part of their identity, but in general it is only important socially as a marker of cultural belonging and many people don’t listen to any music at all and they aren’t considered weird or anything.
I believe there are people for whom such a culture would be frustrating and erasing because they are highly gendered and that gender is a core part of their identity; such people want everyone around them to recognize them as a woman. I don’t believe that that makes it an invalid thought experiment or inherently advocating against trans* people’s experience, any more than our current society advocates against classical music just because few people are really into it. Simply because something isn’t a principle of social organization doesn’t mean it goes away. There are other people who would be able to relate to such a society more fully and completely than they can now where they are subject to inescapable gendering.
As long as those people without gender identity stick to trying to erase gender altogether and people with lots of gender stick to trying to relax the barriers and allow more possible expressions, activist circles will continue to work at cross-purposes.
Thanks for writing this comment, knightsofsummer. It says a lot of things that I would’ve liked to say, but more eloquently.
I’m a-gender, and for the first sixteen years of my life I sort of assumed everybody else was too. I was faking gender, so it seemed plausible that everybody else was faking it too as some sort of elaborate game of social interaction. Some of the naivete of youth has passed now, and I can see the importance that gender expression has for others in terms of their identity.
Utopia ought to be gender optional, rather than genderless. Society doesn’t require that you have a gender, but if you do that’s equally valid.
I can speak about myself. I experienced body dysphoria before I identified it as gender dysphoria. I identified it as “wanting to remain a child”. At the same time, I had only male role models in terms of looks. It was not until I linked “not wanting to be an adult woman” with “wanting to look like male heroes”, that I realized what it was.
I believe in a difference between mind and body, but also recognize there is no mind without the physical brain. I too realize I am a product of Western Culture, but my need to transition comes from an internal drive to recognize myself in the mirror. The dysphoria I felt prior to starting transition left me with the inability to look myself directly in the mirror. I am internally male and to finally see a male face in the mirror means more than any amount of money could buy. My mind and body are coming together and what I see in the mirror feels like my mind has come home.
My problem with that hyposthesis is that nobody actually tells me how such a genderless society would look like. Could someone describe it in detail?
As long as I don’t get that information, I find it hard to answer that question.
Would it mean that people had ansdrogynous bodies? Or would they have the same bodies they have today? If they had them, would they still feel attracted on the basis of body, or not, and why? If there would be attraction on the basis of body sex, this would automatically create clusters of people.
Personally, while I do believe that it’s possible to overcome patriarchy and a binary society, I don’t believe that we can get rid of sexual attraction based on body sex.
Another thought:
“People who postulate that the deconstruction of gender will eliminate the need for transition are another example of people who try to explain being trans in terms of things we want to do rather than who we are. We keep telling them this isn’t correct, but darned if they’ll take our word for it.”
I agree, because it was never about behaviour for me, but always about wanting to be with a group of male bodied people while having a male body myself, no matter what they did. I had different phases in my life. As a young kid, I would have loved to go to war with a male group. Later on, I was fine with cooking and and decorating with a male group. But the important thing is that I do it with male bodied people, people who smell like men and have male voices, not just penises. And I want to be “same” with them, not “other”. I don’t have that urge with regards to female bodied people (female smell, female voices etc) That’s what feels natural for me. I don’t know why, it’s just the way it is.
Thank you for this most interesting discussion, and please continue. I have nothing to add right now, but all this has got me thinking, and I am going to put out a post with some of those thoughts on Thursday. Thanks again for reading and for the discussion.
I agree that Gender (the system) underlies many aspects of western culture. The nature/nurture dichotomy plays its part too.
But as with most things human, I think the truth is always more complex than we can comprehend. Like the three blind men examining an elephant, we only perceive the part of Truth that lies within our own reach.
So the need to transition is an individual response to a personal conflict with some external paradigm; if the conflict is mostly driven by social/cultural norms, then changing the norms would suffice; but if the conflict is more physical (a mind-body dysphoria) then a physical alteration (now only body modification is available) must answer.
It is possible to make some generalized statements about this, but in individual cases it boils down to: the heart wants what the heart wants. Explanation should be unnecessary in a “free’ society.
I have often thought about this question, because many of my reasons for wanting to transition related to the need to fit properly in a Western, binary world. I felt like on a stranded island, I would STILL want medical transition, so I guess that’s sort of like genderless utopia.
What I’ve come to realize post-transition is that the hormonal component goes *far* beyond anything related to effects that matter for creating/fitting in a gendered, Western binary system.
I believe that the relationship between the brain and the endocrine system simply doesn’t lend itself to the kind of segregated thought about body vs. mind that something more cosmetic, such as tattoos, suggests. Hormones are the fuel that the brain and the body run on, and I can say without a doubt that “cross-hormone” therapy is analogous to putting the right kind of fuel in my car. While the science on this is in its infancy and placebos can be powerful, I do believe that there is good reason positive response to cross-hormone therapy is viewed as a confirming diagnostic for GID.
To me, the idea of existing in a “genderless utopia” requires a fundamental shift of what neuroscience currently suggests gender is. And I can’t imagine what that even looks like. On the other hand, if the question is about what happens when you breakdown gendered expression as a social construct, who knows. I can’t see if changing that basic need for the “right” bio-chemical balance, based on something inate.
Each trans person has different goals and needs. It will continue that way no matter what environment we find ourselves in. Acknowledging that we are all different is the first step to addressing us as people and not just statistics.
Personally, in a society without a “social” gender, I would still like to physically transition to just about where I am: agender. Actually, that’s pretty much what I’ve done – I’ve transitioned physically, but only just begun to think about a social transition.
I’d say that for some trans people, an absence of gender norms/expectations would greatly alleviate some of the dysphoria experienced in day to day, as they would not have to live up to expectations, or feel the jarring contradiction between their brain and what people tell them. This would be my case. However, on a more binary-oriented trans person, this might be detrimental, because they feel so strongly towards one gender that removing the social validation of it would be less than positive.
Lastly, I think physical dysphoria is mostly unrelated to social gender, in that it would persist regardless.
Of course, these are my opinions in hypotheticals. Which may be biased by my never having experienced a “genderless” world.
I’m wondering, how cispeople would feel in a gendrless world. would they still experience pms, pregnancy or horniness? how would they interpret the way they experience their bodies and hormonal status?
If we boil this concept down to the essential, this would mean that gender is solely a social fabrication, that if society was to relax its norms around it, gender identity could then cease to exist. This is the proposition around advocating for change in this psychosocial area: new norms that would be more accepting of variance would allow people to express themselves without fear of social exclusion.
This would mean that all of us who transitioned or are transitioning are doing so solely to remove ourselves from social exclusion by conforming our body with the present standard of gender binary. Thing is, nobody is doing that. All who transition do so because they want to have a healthy relationship with themselves, not society; if doctors supervise the transition of persons who do so because they want to conform to social norms, they should be removed from practice!
All this does not visit the root of the question to begin with: why do humans need to part the two (main) genders (and at the same time, the sexes) so far apart? There is an evolutionary reason to this. Some scientists do research this area, and more will come. To effectively eliminate the concept of gender from the human face, we would need to understand the fundamentals of gender. In doing so we will understand that it is not a social fabrication.
What hurts is not gender expression and the way we want to express who we are, but rather that societies/cultures impose behaviors according to sex and punish (to different degrees) the transgressors. What needs to be eliminated is not gender (as a social fabrication) but rather norms imposing gender roles to sexed bodies.
On a more personal note, if society was to become genderless, I would be very disappointed, different and expressions of gender are beautiful!
“This would mean that all of us who transitioned or are transitioning are doing so solely to remove ourselves from social exclusion by conforming our body with the present standard of gender binary. Thing is, nobody is doing that. All who transition do so because they want to have a healthy relationship with themselves, not society.”
Love this and could not have said it better.