Biological Sex is Not Real
Chromosomes? Real. Men? Fake and gay
Hi all, coming at you two times in as many days because I just want to clear something up: sex is not real.
This feels important because I still see some well-meaning cis people referring to sex as though it is somehow more “real” than gender. In times like these, when Republican politicians and activists are trying to outlaw gender-affirming care for everyone, even adults, we need to be able to forcefully push back against the fallacious idea that trans people are somehow erasing or denying “the reality of biological science,” to quote notorious anti-trans writer Pamela Paul.
What do I mean when I say sex is not real? I mean that rather than referring to something concrete, definite, and immutable, sex refers to a range of correlations in the expressions of genes, neuro-biological processes, and the endocrine system. Sex is not a thing any more than “health” is a thing. It’s just a concept, and not a particularly useful one at that.
There’s just no place where you can look into your body and find your sex. Therefore "men" or “women” as such do not exist in the same way testosterone & estrogen or sperm & ova do. Beings with chromosomes and a host of other characteristics exist, and we assign meaning to perceived similarities and differences.
For most of the history of the world we haven't even known about chromosomes. We're just monkeys who are grouped (by other monkeys, mind you) roughly according to how well we conform to different typically grouped traits. This is how "man" and "woman" as concepts were derived, and as you have probably heard, these are not even the only two such concepts human beings have developed in our history.
It simply does not follow from established scientific knowledge that men or women actually exist outside of social reality, let alone exist as categories specifically in reference to chromosomes. The concepts are just shorthand vaguely referencing groupings of features related indirectly to reproduction, ones we now relate to chromosomes in totally unscientific ways. Even in medical contexts, sex is a simplified way of referring to groupings of traits, not a real thing or essence somewhere within you.
“Male” and “female” are socio-cultural constructs, not deterministic categories of being with innate or uniform biological characteristics. To suggest anything else is to willfully propagate not a scientific truth, but an ideological fiction. I have never quite understood why other trans people and our allies insist on ceding this ground, when objective truth is straightforwardly on our side.
When someone calls a cisgender woman a “biological woman,”1 this statement is not, contrary to popular belief, a statement of scientific fact. It’s a choice that person is making to associate “real” womanhood with some physical or genetic trait(s), usually chromosomes or ability to reproduce. It follows that we can simply choose to think of womanhood differently.
“Biological sex” is a barely coherent term, and unless you’re a doctor or specialist, you should probably just stop using it altogether.
Take care.
A funny consequence of all human behavior being fundamentally rooted in biological processes is that it becomes equally correct to say “trans women are biological women,” a statement which can cause a certain kind of person to lose their minds.
I think a lot of people who are “gender critical” or traditionalist in regards to trans issues could benefit from thinking a lot more creatively and with curiosity. I’m often a bit depressed by this kind of thinking from people who are often broadly open minded in other ways. At the same time, I’m not convinced by the argument that you’re making here. I’m not a biologist and have only a superficial understanding of it, but it seems to me that the idea that sex is biological but gender is socially constructed makes a lot of sense, and affords people of one sex to express any given gender identity that seems right and natural for them. Again, perhaps a deeper understanding of the science would bring me closer to your position but I’m having some difficulty understanding why broadening the definition of sex is critical to protecting trans rights? I share your concerns about closing down gender affirming clinics and I see and hear bigotry directed at trans people a lot at my job(I work in construction). I guess in some ways it just seems to me like these types of arguments won’t really help bring transphobic people any closer to opening their minds up. I’m also willing to admit that I could be wrong about this, however, and I’m open to any reading or other information you might suggest that could persuade me otherwise. Thanks as always for sharing your thoughts.
Good lord what hot garbage.