Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Gender system
View on WikipediaThis article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
Gender systems are the social structures that establish the number of genders and their associated gender roles in every society. A gender role is "everything that a person says and does to indicate to others or to the self the degree that one is either male, female, or androgynous. This includes but is not limited to sexual and erotic arousal and response."[1]: 114 Gender identity is one's own personal experience with gender role and the persistence of one's individuality as male, female, or androgynous, especially in self-awareness and behavior. A gender binary is one example of a gender system.
Gender binary
[edit]Gender binary is the classification of sex and gender into two distinct, opposite, and disconnected forms of masculine and feminine. Gender binary is one general type of a gender system. Sometimes in this binary model, "sex", "gender" and "sexuality" are assumed by default to align.[2]
Gender systems around the world
[edit]In cultures where the gender binary is prominent and important, transgender people are a major exception to the societal norms related to gender.[3] Intersex people, those who cannot be biologically determined as either male or female, are another obvious deviation. Other cultures have their own practices independent of the Western gender binary.
Native American
[edit]When European settlers first arrived in North America, they discovered different Native American nations had different concepts of sex and gender. In the Native North American society "berdaches" were given that name to identify them as gender variants. The Europeans "attempted to explain the berdache from various functional perspectives...in terms of the contributions these sex/gender roles made to social structure or culture."[4]: 11 The term "berdache" was deemed inappropriate and insulting as time passed and awareness increased, so a new term was coined in 1990, "Two-Spirit".[4]: 13 There were many roles for male and female Two-Spirits, productive specialization, supernatural sanction and gender variation. Some widespread features of the variety of gender roles are: transvestism, cross-gender occupation, same sex (but different gender) sexuality, recruitment to different roles, special languages, ritual roles, and associations with spiritual power.[4]: 14 Cross-dressing was the most visible marker but has proven a variable and less reliable indicator of status as a Two-Spirit. However the main interest is that these people are an accepted portion of their society. In some cases they were even given special respect and various honors. The roles varied greatly between nations. For example, a male variant might have to wear male clothing during warfare, but women's clothing any other time. These gender roles were often decided at a young age. If a boy was interested in women's activities, or vice versa, a gender variant role would likely be undertaken in adulthood. "In some societies, same-sex sexual desire or practice did figure into the definition of one's gender variant role, in others, it did not."[4]: 19 In the case of the Navajo, there are four genders: man, woman, masculine female-bodied nádleeh, and feminine male-bodied nádleeh. Intercourse between two people of different genders, regardless of biological sex, was not stigmatized. In the majority of Native American societies, biological sex played no part in any gender variant role.[4]: 13
The Mohave Alyha
[edit]In Mohave society, pregnant women believed they had dreams forecasting the anatomic sex of their children. These dreams also sometimes included hints of their child's future gender variant status. A boy who "acted strangely" before he participated in the boys' puberty ceremonies in the Mohave nation would be considered for the transvestite ceremony. Expressing interest in dolls, the domestic work of women, women's gambling games, and inquiring about the female skirt were all ways a boy may be considered for the transvestite ceremony. Before the ceremony, relatives would try to dissuade him, but if the boy persists, they would assist in the preparations for the ceremony. The ceremony itself was meant to surprise the boy. It was a test of willingness. Other nearby settlements would receive word to come and watch. A circle of onlookers would sing special songs. If the boy danced like a woman, it confirmed his status as an alyha. He was then taken to a river to bathe, and was given a skirt to wear. The ceremony would permanently change his gender status within the nation. He then took up a female name. The alyha would imitate many aspects of female life, including menstruation, puberty observations, pregnancy, and birth. The alyha were considered great healers, especially in curing sexually transmitted diseases like syphilis.[4]: 21–23
Juchitán, Oaxaca, Mexico
[edit]This section relies largely or entirely on a single source. (June 2011) |
A documentary film entitled Blossoms of Fire, produced in 2000, depicts the people of Juchitán de Zaragoza, Oaxaca, Mexico. It follows the daily lives of the women as they run their businesses, wear colorfully bold traditional clothing and hold their heads firmly high as they carry the weight on top. The film clearly depicts the empowered women and the tolerance of homosexuality and transgender individuals. The community exemplifies an alternative gender system unlike the gender binary that has been established throughout the world. On many occasions this community has been criticized and labeled as a matriarchy; however, the individuals who are interviewed throughout the film tend to say otherwise. They strongly believe that their community is able to function because gender roles are not placed on individuals but rather that everyone is equal—for example there is no identifiable "bread winner". Children are taken care of by whoever can help; food is cooked by anyone who is able to and drinking beer and smoking is not only okay for the "men" of the community. Gay, lesbian, and transgender people tend to feel more accepted in this alternative gender system. Juchitán's society operates under a more egalitarian gender system in which men and women have different, but not exclusive roles, and in which these roles are not necessarily expected. Due to liberal gender performance, third genders also have more prominence in Juchitán than other parts of the world.[5]
Machi (Mapuche Shamans) of Chile
[edit]This section relies largely or entirely on a single source. (June 2011) |
The machi are the shamans of the Mapuche people of Chile, and are viewed to a large extent by both Mapuche and the Chilean state as keepers of Mapuche political, cultural, and spiritual tradition and power. In many ways the machi represent an alternative gender system in that homosexual acts are more accepted, gender switching occurs, and the practice of polygamy took place.[6]: 322–343 However, though it appears there is more gender freedom, gender switching occurs based on different shamanic practices performed, and the gender associated with the practice is either derived from physical sex based on reproduction, etc., or from the hegemonic gender system of the nation of Chile. For example, political participation has become a masculine practice, while spiritual practices are considered feminine. While one does not have to be a physical "male" or "female" necessarily to perform these practices, they must channel that gender to perform them.
The machi were inevitably influenced by the dominant Western gender system of Chile through state sponsored evangelization, (most Mapuche today are Catholic)[6]: 327–328 and by the Indigenous Law. The Indigenous Law further politicized the machi and further subjected them in national discourse to the gender norms of the Chilean state, changing the way that machi perform gender. "Machi juggle various gendered systems of knowledge and identities according to their intentions, who is present, and in what context"[6]: 334
Indian Hindu
[edit]In Hindu India, there also exists different concepts of what is socially accepted when gender is in question. When compared to the native North Americans, the gender system is essentially binary, but the ideas themselves are quite different from Western thoughts. These ideas often come from religious contexts. Some Hindu origin myths feature androgynous or hermaphroditic ancestors. Ancient poets often showed this idea by presenting images with mixed physical attributes between the two sexes. These themes still exist in the culture, and are even still institutionalized. The most prominent group are the hijras.[4]: 27, 28
Hijras
[edit]
This section relies largely or entirely on a single source. (June 2011) |
"The recognition of more than two sex/genders is recorded in India as early as the eighth century BCE".[4]: 29 In modern India, the term hijra is most commonly meant as "eunuch" or intersexed, and is a term of sexual impotence. In the culture's definition, a hijra is one born as a male, but adopts the clothing, behavior, and occupations of women. Their status in society is neither male nor female, neither man nor woman. When hijras are asked whether or not they are male or female, most often they respond with comments like "We hijras are like women",[1]: xxiii demonstrating their place in culture. Hijras walk, gesture, speak, and use facial expressions more common to women in India. They even take feminine names as part of their gender transformation. Becoming a Hijra however is not outside of Indian society. Being a hijra means making a commitment that gives social support and some economic security, as well as a cultural meaning, linking them to the larger world.[1]: 54
"A male who is not born biologically intersexed who wishes to become a hijra must transform his sex/gender through an emasculation operation".[4]: 29 This operation is a rebirth for the hijras, and contains elements of childbirth to symbolize this. The process includes castration, bloodletting, and special rituals.[4]: 33 Among the hijra society there is a hierarchy of gurus, or teachers, and chelas, or disciples.[1]: 42 In order for one to be accepted into the hijra society they must be sponsored by a guru, who in turn teaches them and helps them form a family.
As of November 11, 2013, the country of Bangladesh has decided to begin a third gender birth certificate.[7]
Sādhin
[edit]The sādhin are similar to Hijras culturally. Their development is quite different however, and their existence is much less prominent. It is a girl's choice to become a sādhin. They wear men's clothing and keep their hair short. They commonly keep their female name and are still treated as a female in society, although the status of sādhin, like hijra, transcends the gender labels of India. A sādhin candidate must be a virgin, and swear to celibacy.[4]: 40, 41
Brazil
[edit]Like in Indian culture, some subcultures in Brazil follow a gender binary that differs from the traditional Western one. Rather than men and women, certain areas of Brazil have men and not-men. Men are masculine, and anyone who displays feminine qualities falls under the category of not-man. This concept is a result of sexual penetration as the deciding factor of gender. Any one who is penetrated becomes feminine, and is not-male. Everyone else, regardless of sexual preference, remains a male in Brazilian society.
Some older authors [4]: 47 [8] describe travestis as:
- Existing outside a religious context unlike in native North America and India.
- Making an individual choice to become a travesti.
- Born as males, they go to extensive measures to try to appear female with some injecting female hormones and getting silicone implants to more closely imitate the curves of the Brazilian female body.
- Not identifying as female and not wishing to become female.
- Living in a culture that is based on this man/not-man premise and (unlike the hijras) having no desire to remove their penises despite hiding their genitalia.
- Feeling that castration would not get them any closer to becoming a woman.
- Having a view of homosexuality that follows the man/not-man binary. If a travesti has a boyfriend, that man is not considered a homosexual, because the travesti is not a man. If, at any time, the boyfriend expresses interest in the travesti penis, the travesti will immediately lose interest in him as a partner because he has also become a "not-man".
Some activist organizations of travestis disagree with such statements and describe travesti as:[9]
A person who is born in the male or female sex but who has a gender identity opposite to their biological sex, assuming gender roles different from those imposed by society. Many travestis modify their bodies through hormone therapy, silicone injections and/or plastic surgeries. However, it's important to highlight that this is not a rule for all travestis. (definition adopted by the National LGBT Conference in 2008).
Differently from transsexuals, travestis do not wish to go through with gender reassignment surgery (change of the genital organ).
When talking about travestis (those who have feminine, boobs, bodies, clothes, hair and/or shape), the feminine gender article "A" should be used. It is incorrect to use the masculine article, e.g. "O travesti Maria" because this is referring to a person of the feminine gender.
In 2020, the State of São Paulo published a booklet with the following definition:[10]: 22
Travesti: a person who is born with the male sex and has a feminine gender identity. She has no discomfort with her biological sex of birth, nor with the ambiguity in female and male body traces, assuming a gender identity different from that imposed by society.
Many travestis modify their bodies through hormone therapies, silicone injections and/or plastic surgeries, but, in general, they do not wish to undergo gender reassignment surgery (known as "sex change").
Naples and Southern Italy
[edit]Femminielli or femmenielli (singular femminiello, cf. Standard Italian femmina, "a female", -ello, masculine diminutive suffix) is a term used to refer to a population of males with markedly feminine gender expression in traditional Neapolitan culture.[11][12] It may be hard to define this term within modern Western notions of "gay men" versus "trans women" since both these categories overlap to a degree in the case of femminielli [12] It has been noted that this term is not derogatory and does not carry stigma, with femminielli instead traditionally believed to bring luck.[11][12]
It is often considered reductive to insert the Neapolitan femminiello within the macro-category of transgender usually adopted in Anglo-Saxon and North American contexts. The femminiello, instead, could be considered as a peculiar gender expression, despite a widespread sexual binarism. The cultural roots of this phenomenon confer to the femminiello a cultural and even socially legitimized status. For the historical and symbolic coordinates of Naples, the identity construct of the femminiello is not superimposable to more common European and euro-centric transgender clusters.[13]
The femminiello in Campania may enjoy a relatively privileged position thanks to their participation in some traditional events, such as Candelora al Santuario di Montevergine (Candlemas at the Sanctuary of Montevergine) in Avellino[14] or the Tammurriata, a traditional dance performed at the feast of Madonna dell'Arco in Sant'Anastasia.[15] Generally, femminielli are considered good luck. For this reason, it is popular in the neighborhoods for a femminiello to hold a newborn baby, or participate in games such as bingo.[16] Feminielli participate in games of Tombola or Tombolata dei femminielli,[17] a popular game performed every year on 2 February, as the conclusive part of the Candlemas at the Sanctuary of Montevergine. Achille della Ragione suggests that recent surveys have shown that Neapolitans have a generally negative view of what he calls "the politically correct model of homosexuality of a hypocritical do-gooder society" (implying the mainstream Western gay culture), yet he contrasts femminielli as enjoying a favorable attitude from part of Neapolitan society.[18]
Polynesia
[edit]In Polynesia there are many different terms for gender roles, for example in Tahiti the role is called māhū. In Samoa the male gender variant is called faʻafafine which means "like a woman". Tuva and Tonga have terms also. In Tonga the term is fakaleiti and in Tuva the term is pinapinnaine. All of these terms are used when a male engages in women's work, clothes, speech tones, and nonverbal gestures. However, in Polynesia when a man crosses genders and "acts like a woman" he is not viewed as becoming a woman, but is suspended between male and female, being neither at the same time, but having the elements of both.[4]: 57–70 They tend to be effeminate and interested in women's household tasks, but do not dress exclusively as women. They often seek oral sex with men, who may ridicule them in public, but seek them out for pleasure in private.[19]: 334
Thailand
[edit]
Kathoey is the term used by both males and females that allows them to be alongside the normative masculine and feminine identities. Up until the 1970s hermaphrodites and cross-dressing men and women could all come under the term kathoey, however the term has been dropped for the cross-dressing masculine females who are now referred to as tom.[4]: 73 As a result of the shifts, kathoey today is most commonly understood as a synonym for transgender woman. Kathoey is derived from the Buddhist myth that describes three original human sex/genders, male, female, and a biological hermaphrodite or kathoey.[4]: 73 Kathoey is not defined as merely being a variant between male or female but as an independently existing third sex.
Philippines
[edit]The notable gender variant role in the Philippines is the bakla. Bakla are males with a feminine spirit, or core identity, who cross-dress and are assumed to take the receiving role in sex. In the Philippines, a "real man" is simply one who is not bakla. Since there are negative connotations of local terms for gender diversity, many bakla prefer to self-identify as gay, rather than a new gender. The baklas' partners are not considered homosexual by Filipino society. Over time, baklas have tried to gain status as a third sex or gender as an attempt to normalize their nonconformity and be equal to males and females in society.[4]: 78–84
The cultural definition of homosexuality
[edit]In cultures where the difference between male and female in the gender binary is masculine and feminine, it is important to look at how same-sex sexuality changes between cultures. In some cultures, like the travesti, homosexual behavior moves one from one part of a gender binary to another.
Homosexuality, and its effects on the individual's place in society is sometimes drastically different in various other cultures. In certain Sambia people of New Guinea for example, it is believed that a boy is unable to reach puberty or maturity without first ingesting the semen, considered life-force, of an older male.[20]: 9–18 In addition, these Sambian people believe that a man is unable to replenish his semen on his own, so the ritual continues until a certain time, usually marriage, when he is told of a tree that exudes a milky semen-like sap he may ingest instead.[20]: 18
In Basotho society in contemporary Lesotho, girls and women may exchange long kisses, engage in cunnilingus, and even fall in love and form a marriage-like union. In this society however, sex requires penetration, and marriage requires a man as a husband. Therefore, in this context, there is no concept of lesbianism.[19]: 336
The Alternative Model of Gender
[edit]In "The Five Sexes: Why Male and Female Are Not Enough", Anne Fausto-Sterling explores the possibilities of the intersex and how these individuals fit into the traditional labeling of "male" and "female". Her "Alternative Model of Gender" is a proposition that allows for the inclusion of intersexual individuals into the traditional gender labeling system. Anne Fausto-Sterling proposes that a body does not necessarily have to fit into the orthodox gender binary set by a society, but rather can be categorized under the possibility of male, female, merm, ferm, and herm, which are labels given to individuals born with a variation in sex characteristics. Fausto-Sterling's "Of Gender and Genitals" discuses the fate of the individuals born with "ambiguous" genitalia and the need to surgically correct the deviations these individuals propel into a male-female society. She explores the need for allowing the body to be labeled as is, rather than configuring it into the expectations of society, as the traditional binary gender labeling calls for. The Alternative Model allows for this type of gender labeling as well as to be comprehended in terms of behavioral, biological, and mental characteristics.[21][22][23]
Gendered violence
[edit]Gendered violence is a worldwide issue that can take place in different forms with varying consequences. It can be similar to a hate crime in which physical violence is specifically targeting the victim's gender. Transgender people and women experience the most gender violence but anyone can be a victim. Women are particularly at risk of gender violence in intimate relationships involving substance abuse, psychological abuse, and sexual abuse.[24] During the COVID-19 pandemic, women were more prone to gender violence due to factors of staying quarantined.[25] Women are 10 times more likely to be a victim of intimate partner violence.[26] This act of violence occurs in the public as well as the private domain and can sometimes be overlooked. Many deaths have resulted from gendered violence, as seen in the film Two Spirits.[27] Organizations such as California Coalition Against Sexual Assault support the Latino communities in particular to end domestic violence. It is also a matter related to the dominant gender system, which often underlies the motives for gendered violence. The dominant gender system also creates structural violence.[28]: 188
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ a b c d Nanda, Serena. Neither Man nor Woman: the Hijras of India. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub., 1990. Print.
- ^ Keating, Anne. "glbtq >> literature >> Gender". www.glbtq.com. glbtq: An Encyclopedia of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Culture. Archived from the original on 3 April 2015. Retrieved 2 April 2015.
- ^ Miller, Lisa R.; Grollman, Eric Anthony (September 2015). "The Social Costs of Gender Nonconformity for Transgender Adults: Implications for Discrimination and Health". Sociological Forum. 30 (3): 809–831. doi:10.1111/socf.12193. ISSN 0884-8971. PMC 5044929. PMID 27708501.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Nanda, Serena. Gender Diversity: Crosscultural Variations. Waveland Press, 1999. Print.
- ^ Blossoms of Fire. Lydia Nibley. Say Yes Quickly Productions, Riding the Tiger Productions, and Just Media, 2010. DVD.
- ^ a b c Bacigalupo, Ana Mariella. "Mapuche Shamanic Bodies and the Chilean State: Polemic Gendered Representation and Indigenous Responses". Violence and the Body: Race, Gender, and the State. Ed. A.J. Aldama. Bloomington Indiana: Indiana University Press. 2003.
- ^ "Bangladesh's Hijras Win Official Recognition as Separate Gender". online article. Global Voices. Archived from the original on June 9, 2015. Retrieved 27 November 2013.
- ^ Kulick, Don (September 1997). "The Gender of Brazilian Transgendered Prostitutes". American Anthropologist. 99 (3): 574–585. doi:10.1525/aa.1997.99.3.574. ISSN 0002-7294.
- ^ "Manual de comunicação LGBT" [LGBT Communications Manual] (PDF). www.abglt.org.br. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 October 2016.
- ^ Secretariat of Justice and Citizenship of the Government of the State of São Paulo (2020). Diversidade Sexual e a Cidadania LGBTI+ [Sexual Diversity and the LGBTI+ Citizenship] (PDF) (in Portuguese) (4 ed.). São Paulo. ISBN 978-85-68471-05-0.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - ^ a b Fulvio, Bufi (2009). "Presa Ketty, boss "femminiello" Comandava i pusher di Gomorra". Corriere della Sera (February 13, 2009): 19. Archived from the original on September 14, 2015.
FEMMINIELLO E' UNA FIGURA OMOSESSUALE (..) È UNA PERSONA DALL' ASPETTO EFFEMINATO O SPESSO UN TRAVESTITO. E' RISPETTATO E GENERALMENTE IL FEMMINIELLO VIENE CONSIDERATO UNA PERSONA CHE PORTA FORTUNA.
- ^ a b c Jeff Matthews. "The Femminiello in Neapolitan Culture". Archived from the original on 2011-05-15.
- ^ Hochdorn, Alexander, Paolo F. Cottone and Dania Vallini (2011). Gender and discursive positioning: Doing transgender in highly normative contexts. 69th Conference of the International Council of Psychologists. 29 July - 2 August 2011, Washington DC (USA) http://www.icpweb.org Archived 2012-03-04 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Il Santuario di Montevergine e la Candelora Archived 2012-01-27 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ "Traditional Dances - The Tummurriata". liceoumberto.eu. Archived from the original on 25 March 2012. Retrieved 7 May 2018.
- ^ "I femminielli (Achille della Ragione)". www.guidecampania.com. Archived from the original on 10 May 2011. Retrieved 7 May 2018.
- ^ "Tombolata dei Femminielli: divertimento e tradizione ad Avellino". irpinianews.it. Archived from the original on 31 May 2013. Retrieved 7 May 2018.
- ^ Achille della Ragione. "I femminielli". Archived from the original on 2011-05-10.
Il napoletano, come dimostrano recenti statistiche, non vede di buon occhio l'omosessuale più o meno dichiarato, quello politically correct, che oggi, altrove, va tanto di moda ed è apparentemente accettato da una società ipocritamente buonista. Ma da noi il femminiello può vivere quasi sempre, soprattutto nei quartieri popolari, in una atmosfera accogliente, segnata dal consenso e dal buonumore.
- ^ a b Rupp, Leila J. "Toward a Global History of Same-Sex Sexuality." Journal of the History of Sexuality 10.2 (2001): pp. 287-302. Web.
- ^ a b Peoples, James G. "The Cultural Construction of Gender and Manhood." Men and Masculinity. 1st Edition ed.Cengage Learning, 2001. Print
- ^ Fausto-Sterling, Anne (March–April 1993). "The Five Sexes: Why Male and Female Are Not Enough". The Sciences: 20–24. doi:10.1002/j.2326-1951.1993.tb03081.x.
- ^ Fausto-Sterling, Anne (2000). Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. New York: Basic Books. pp. 44–77. ISBN 0-465-07714-5.
- ^ "Gender binary | Gender, Role, Facts, & Description | Britannica". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 2024-03-25.
- ^ Ostadtaghizadeh, Abbas; Zarei, Mozhdeh; Saniee, Nadia; Rasouli, Mohammad Aziz (2023-05-03). "Gender-based violence against women during the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations for future". BMC Women's Health. 23 (1): 219. doi:10.1186/s12905-023-02372-6. ISSN 1472-6874. PMC 10155645. PMID 37138321.
- ^ Ostadtaghizadeh, Abbas; Zarei, Mozhdeh; Saniee, Nadia; Rasouli, Mohammad Aziz (2023-05-03). "Gender-based violence against women during the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations for future". BMC Women's Health. 23 (1): 219. doi:10.1186/s12905-023-02372-6. ISSN 1472-6874. PMC 10155645. PMID 37138321.
- ^ Shaw, Susan M.; Lee, Janet (2015). Women's Voices Feminist Actions. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Education. ISBN 978-0-07-802700-0.
- ^ Two Spirits. Lydia Nibley. Say Yes Quickly Productions, Riding the Tiger Productions, and Just Media, 2010. DVD.
- ^ Lugones, María (Winter 2008). "Heterosexualism and the Colonial/Modern Gender System". Hypatia. 22 (1): 186–209. doi:10.1353/hyp.2006.0067 (inactive 12 July 2025).
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of July 2025 (link)
Bibliography
[edit]- Duberman, Martin. "Gender Diversity in Native North America: Notes toward a Unified Analysis". A Queer World. New York And London: New York University Press, 1997. 65. Print.
- Kulick, D. "The Gender of Brazilian Transgendered Prostitutes." American Anthropologist 99.3 (1997): 574–85.
- Nanda, Serena. Gender Diversity: Crosscultural Variations. Waveland Press, 1999. Print.
- Nanda, Serena. Neither Man nor Woman: the Hijras of India. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub., 1990. Print.
- Peoples, James G. "The Cultural Construction of Gender and Manhood." Men and Masculinity. 1st Edition ed.Cengage Learning, 2001. 9–18. Print.
- Rupp, Leila J. "Toward a Global History of Same-Sex Sexuality." Journal of the History of Sexuality 10.2 (2001): pp. 287–302. Web.
Gender system
View on GrokipediaBiological and Evolutionary Foundations
Distinction Between Sex and Gender
Sex in biological terms constitutes a binary classification in gonochoristic species like humans, where individuals are distinguished as male or female based on the production of anisogametes: small, mobile gametes (sperm) by males or large, nutrient-rich gametes (ova) by females.[10] This dimorphism arises from genetic factors, including sex chromosomes (typically XY for males, XX for females), which trigger gonadal differentiation into testes or ovaries, followed by hormonal cascades influencing anatomy and physiology.[11] Disorders of sex development (DSDs), such as congenital adrenal hyperplasia or androgen insensitivity syndrome, occur in roughly 0.02% to 1.7% of live births depending on diagnostic criteria, but these represent developmental anomalies within the binary framework rather than a spectrum or third category, as affected individuals remain oriented toward one gamete type or infertile.[12] [13] Historically, the English terms "sex" and "gender" were used interchangeably to refer to biological maleness or femaleness, with "gender" deriving from grammatical usage in languages like Latin and Old English.[14] The modern distinction emerged in 1955 when psychologist John Money, studying intersex conditions at Johns Hopkins University, proposed separating biological sex—encompassing chromosomes, gonads, hormones, and genitals—from gender role and identity, which he described as learned psychosocial behaviors and self-perception malleable in early childhood.[15] Money's framework influenced subsequent feminist scholarship, such as Simone de Beauvoir's 1949 assertion that "one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman," and gained institutional adoption in social sciences by the 1970s to highlight cultural variability in roles detached from biology.[16] Money's hypothesis faced empirical refutation through the 1965 case of David Reimer (originally Bruce), a genetically male twin whose penis was destroyed in a botched circumcision; following Money's advice, he underwent surgical feminization and female rearing, yet rejected the imposed gender identity, exhibiting male-typical behaviors and ultimately reverting to male identification before dying by suicide in 2004 at age 38.[17] This outcome, detailed in John Colapinto's 2000 book As Nature Made Him, underscored the limits of environmental determinism, as Reimer's distress aligned with his biological sex despite intensive socialization.[18] Peer-reviewed research further reveals biological substrates for sex-typical traits often conflated with gender, including genetic influences on brain dimorphism—such as larger amygdalae in males—and hormonal effects on behavior, with twin studies estimating 20-50% heritability for gender nonconformity.[3] [9] While the sex-gender binary distinction persists in guidelines from bodies like the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, which define gender as "socially constructed roles" variable by culture, critiques highlight its origins in ideologically driven separation that underplays causal links between sex and behavioral dimorphism observed cross-culturally and in nonhuman primates.[19] For instance, meta-analyses of over 100 psychological traits show consistent average sex differences (e.g., men outperforming in spatial rotation by 0.6-1.0 standard deviations), attributable to prenatal testosterone exposure rather than solely socialization.[20] Academic and media sources endorsing a fluid gender decoupled from sex often stem from fields with documented left-leaning biases, potentially prioritizing constructivist narratives over integrative evidence from endocrinology and genetics; rigorous first-principles analysis affirms sex as the causal foundation for dimorphic patterns mislabeled as purely gendered.[21][22]Empirical Evidence for Sex Binary
Biological sex in humans is defined by the production of distinct gamete types in sexually reproducing species: males produce small, motile gametes (spermatozoa), while females produce large, immobile gametes (ova).[12] This gametic dimorphism constitutes a binary classification, as no third gamete type has been observed in humans or other anisogamous species; organisms are differentiated toward one or the other reproductive role.[12] [1] Empirical verification comes from reproductive biology, where fertilization requires the fusion of one sperm and one ovum, yielding viable offspring only through this male-female pairing, with no documented cases of human self-fertilization or alternative gametic combinations producing offspring.[1] At the genetic level, sex determination in humans follows an XX/XY chromosomal system, where the presence of a Y chromosome—specifically the SRY gene on its short arm—initiates male development by directing undifferentiated gonads toward testes formation around the 6th to 7th week of gestation.[23] In the absence of a functional Y chromosome (typically XX), ovarian development occurs by default.[23] This mechanism is conserved across mammals and supported by cytogenetic studies showing that over 99.98% of humans have either 46,XX or 46,XY karyotypes, with sex chromosome aneuploidies (e.g., 47,XXY or 45,X) representing rare exceptions that still align with one sex based on gonadal tissue or gametic potential rather than creating intermediates.[1] Functional outcomes are evident in gamete production: even in cases of gonadal dysgenesis, no individual produces both sperm and ova simultaneously in quantities sufficient for reproduction.[12] Disorders of sex development (DSDs), which affect approximately 1 in 4,500 to 5,500 live births depending on diagnostic criteria, manifest as atypical genital, gonadal, or chromosomal development but do not constitute evidence against binarity.[24] Most DSDs cluster within the male or female categories—for instance, congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) in 46,XX individuals virilizes external genitalia but preserves ovarian function and female gametic production, while androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) in 46,XY individuals results in female-typical phenotypes despite testicular tissue.[25] True ovotesticular DSD, involving both ovarian and testicular tissue, occurs in fewer than 1 in 100,000 births and yields no fertile dual gamete production; affected gonads are typically non-functional for one or both types.[25] These conditions are developmental errors akin to other congenital anomalies (e.g., polydactyly does not imply a spectrum of digit numbers), with prevalence data from newborn screenings and karyotyping confirming they comprise less than 0.02% of cases where sex assignment requires clinical intervention.[1] Population-level studies, including genome-wide analyses, further demonstrate bimodal distributions in sex-linked traits such as height, muscle mass, and hormone profiles, with overlaps attributable to individual variation rather than a continuum erasing boundaries.[12] Evolutionary and comparative evidence reinforces the binary: across vertebrates, sex is anisogamously binary, with humans inheriting this from therian mammals over 160 million years ago, where Y-chromosome degeneration limits male-determining factors without evolving third options.[1] Fossil and genetic records show no transitional forms producing intermediate gametes, and human fertility data—tracking millions of births annually—exclusively validate male-female reproduction, with DSD-affected individuals rarely achieving natural fertility outside their underlying sex.[12] Claims of a "spectrum" often conflate secondary traits or self-reported gender with biological sex, but empirical measures of gametic dimorphism and gonadal histology uphold the binary as the operative framework for reproduction and medical outcomes, such as differing disease susceptibilities (e.g., higher prostate cancer risk in males, ovarian cancer in females).[1]Evolutionary Drivers of Gender Dimorphism and Roles
Human sexual dimorphism, encompassing physical differences such as greater average male body size, muscle mass, and upper-body strength, evolved primarily through sexual selection mechanisms including male-male competition and female mate choice. Fossil evidence from early hominids indicates higher levels of dimorphism, with body mass differences exceeding 50% in species like Australopithecus afarensis, suggestive of polygynous mating systems where dominant males monopolized multiple females, favoring traits that enhanced competitive success.[26] In extant humans, this has moderated to approximately 15% greater male body mass and height, reflecting a history of intense but not extreme intrasexual rivalry, alongside natural selection for cooperative behaviors in pair-bonding contexts.[26] [27] The asymmetry in reproductive investment between sexes provides a foundational driver, as articulated in Robert Trivers' 1972 parental investment theory: female gametes (ova) and gestation impose higher obligatory costs than male gametes (sperm), leading females to prioritize mate quality for offspring viability while males maximize mating opportunities through competitive displays.[28] This anisogamy—differential gamete size and investment—underpins broader dimorphism, with males evolving traits like increased testosterone-driven musculature for contest competition, supported by genomic evidence of sex-biased gene expression influencing traits such as craniofacial robusticity and canine size in ancestral lineages.[29] [30] Disruptive natural selection further amplifies divergence, as environmental pressures (e.g., foraging demands) select differently for male risk-taking and female endurance, evident in metabolic and skeletal adaptations like females' higher fat reserves for lactation.[27] These drivers extend to behavioral gender roles, where evolutionary pressures fostered sex-differentiated strategies: males oriented toward status-seeking and coalitionary aggression to secure resources and mates, while females emphasized kin-directed provisioning and social bonding to offset reproductive costs. Cross-species comparisons corroborate this, with dimorphism intensity correlating positively with mating system variance and male operational sex ratio (more males competing per female).[29] In humans, this manifests in universal patterns such as greater male variance in reproductive success and preferences for physical prowess in male mate competition, as reconstructed from ethnographic data on hunter-gatherer societies where male hunting roles aligned with strength dimorphism and risk tolerance.[31] Empirical studies link these to heritable psychological differences, including men's higher interest in systemizing tasks and women's in empathizing, traceable to ancestral divisions of labor shaped by mobility constraints during pregnancy and nursing.[31]Predominant Patterns in Human Societies
Binary Gender Systems in Historical and Traditional Contexts
In cross-cultural anthropological studies of traditional societies, binary gender systems—differentiating roles between males and females based on biological sex—predominated, reflecting adaptations to physical dimorphism and reproductive constraints. George P. Murdock's Ethnographic Atlas, compiling data from over 1,000 societies, documents a near-universal sexual division of labor: men performed heavy metalworking in 100% of sampled groups, big-game hunting in 96%, and warfare in 90%, tasks leveraging average male upper-body strength advantages of 50-60% over females; women, conversely, handled child-rearing universally and gathering or small-animal procurement in 70-80% of cases, aligning with gestation and lactation demands that limit mobility.[32][33] This pattern holds across hunter-gatherer, pastoralist, and agrarian economies, where exceptions were rare and often tied to environmental factors rather than ideological rejection of binarism.[34] Ancient civilizations reinforced binary systems through codified laws, myths, and kinship structures emphasizing male provision and protection alongside female domesticity and reproduction. In Mesopotamia circa 2000 BCE, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed distinct penalties and inheritances by sex, with men dominating public assembly and trade while women managed households and weaving, a division evident in cuneiform records of over 90% male-authored contracts.[35] Ancient Egypt, from the Old Kingdom (c. 2686-2181 BCE), similarly upheld binary roles, granting women property rights but confining elite females to temple or familial spheres, as seen in tomb art depicting men in hunting and administration, women in brewing and childcare; pharaohs like Hatshepsut assumed male regalia for legitimacy, underscoring the normative male archetype rather than fluid categories.[36] Classical Greece (c. 500-300 BCE) institutionalized this via polis structures, where Athenian males over 18 held citizenship and military duties, females were veiled and home-bound per Pericles' Funeral Oration (431 BCE), with Spartan exceptions emphasizing martial males and fertile females to sustain warrior classes.[36] Traditional kinship systems worldwide further entrenched binarism, with patrilineal descent (tracking male lines) prevalent in 65% of Murdock's societies and matrilineal (female lines) in 15%, but both presupposing two sexes for alliance and inheritance.[37] Enforcement via taboos—such as cross-dressing prohibitions in Leviticus 18:22 (c. 1400 BCE) or Confucian rites (c. 500 BCE) mandating sex-segregated rituals—maintained stability amid ecological pressures, as deviations risked lineage disruption in high-mortality contexts.[38] While fringe roles like Mesopotamian gala priests blurred lines ritually, these were marginal to the binary framework governing 99% of societal functions, per textual prevalence.[35] This historical norm underscores causal links between sex differences—e.g., testosterone-driven risk tolerance in males—and role allocation, predating modern ideologies.[39]Strict Enforcement and Variations in Kinship Structures
In patrilineal kinship systems, which predominate in approximately 44% of documented societies, gender roles are strictly enforced to safeguard male-line descent and inheritance, necessitating rigorous control over female sexuality to ensure paternity certainty.[40] Women are often positioned as reproductive conduits for husbands' lineages, with deviations such as adultery incurring severe penalties, including compensatory bridewealth fees equivalent to dozens of livestock or, in extreme cases, death.[40] Among the Nuer of South Sudan, for instance, bridewealth transactions formalize patrilineal rights over children, while initiation rites like gar reinforce male authority and exclude women from key economic roles beyond domestic tasks such as milking cattle.[40] Patrilocal residence patterns further isolate women from natal kin, amplifying enforcement through dependence on affinal males and cultural ideologies of honor, as seen in Kurdish communities where approximately 5,000 honor killings occur annually worldwide to preserve lineage purity.[40][41] Enforcement extends to symbolic and ritual domains, where gender dimorphism underpins resource allocation and social order; in Nepalese Brahman society, menstrual taboos and widow stigmatization as "randi" (promiscuous) compel female purity and subordination, with caste endogamy prohibiting exogamous unions that could dilute patrilineal assets.[40] Male kin, as lineage heads, wield authority over mate selection and property, viewing women ambivalently—as unifiers through marriage yet threats to exclusivity—prompting psychological mechanisms like shame and communal ostracism in tight-knit groups.[42] These structures prioritize male heirs, fostering son preference and polygyny in resource-scarce environments, where fraternal polyandry among groups like the Nyinba of Tibet subordinates women by designating paternity collectively among brothers, thereby restricting divorce and autonomy.[40] Variations emerge in matrilineal systems, comprising about 15% of societies, where descent traces through females, conferring greater property rights and social influence to women while preserving binary roles tied to reproduction and labor division.[40] Among the Navajo, women serve as "head women" managing livestock and land, with complementary male roles in warfare, yet enforcement persists via myths reinforcing fertility norms and male oversight of legal matters.[40] Empirical studies indicate reduced gender bias in inheritance and cooperation; for example, in a formerly matrilineal Tibetan community, pre-1985 cohorts showed female-favoring land allocation (odds ratio 0.38), shifting toward neutrality with economic transitions but retaining less disparity than patrilineal counterparts.[43] Matrilineal norms, as in the Nayar of India, allow women controlled sexuality within taravad households but subordinate them to male karanavans who hold punitive power, including expulsion for misconduct.[40] Compared to patrilineal rigidity, these systems exhibit higher female bargaining power in households, with evidence from African matrilineal groups showing elevated spousal cooperation and female network centrality, though male dominance in external affairs endures.[44][45] Cognatic or bilateral systems introduce further flexibility, diminishing strict enforcement by equally weighting maternal and paternal lines, as in Kwaio society where residence and inheritance vary without rigid gender hierarchies.[40] Across variations, kinship enforces binary dimorphism to regulate reproduction, with patrilineal structures imposing harsher controls on women to mitigate cuckoldry risks, while matrilineal ones redistribute power without abolishing sexual division of labor—outcomes shaped by ecological pressures like resource defense rather than egalitarian ideals.[44][46]Cultural Variations and Exceptions
Third Gender Roles in Non-Western Societies
In several non-Western societies, cultural categories exist for individuals—predominantly biological males—who exhibit behaviors or appearances diverging from normative male roles, often integrated into specific social or ritual functions rather than fully fluid identities. These are frequently labeled "third gender" in anthropological analyses, though they typically affirm biological sex distinctions while accommodating variance through specialized roles. Examples span South Asia, Southeast Asia, Polynesia, and parts of Africa and the Americas, with roles varying from ritual performers to caregivers, but commonly involving effeminacy, same-sex attraction, or spiritual mediation.[47][48] Hijras in India and neighboring regions represent one of the most documented cases, comprising a community estimated at around 500,000 individuals in India as of recent surveys, primarily natal males who undergo castration (nirvan) and adopt feminine attire and mannerisms. They perform blessings at births and weddings, invoking fertility and auspiciousness rooted in Hindu mythology associating them with deities like Bahuchara Mata, yet face social stigma, poverty, and exclusion from mainstream employment. Anthropological studies highlight their kinship-like structure as guru-chela (teacher-disciple) lineages, distinct from binary genders, but emphasize that hijras are not regarded as women and often engage in sex work due to limited opportunities.[49][50][48] In Thailand, kathoey—effeminate males or post-operative transgender women—are culturally recognized as a third category, visible in entertainment and daily life, with historical roots in Buddhist tolerance for gender variance. Numbering in the tens of thousands, they often pursue careers in beauty, performance, or service industries, blending male biology with female presentation without formal legal third-gender status until recent self-identification options. Unlike binary genders, kathoey roles allow social acceptance in urban settings but carry stereotypes tied to prostitution and HIV risks, as documented in ethnographic research.[51][52] Polynesian societies like Samoa feature fa'afafine, natal males raised in feminine ways who embody "the manner of a woman," serving as family nurturers, caregivers for elders, and mediators, with acceptance stemming from communal values prioritizing kinship over strict binaries. Comprising 2-3% of the male population per surveys, fa'afafine typically form relationships with heterosexual men and contribute economically through female-associated labor, though colonial influences and Christianity have occasionally challenged their visibility. Similar fa'afatama roles exist for natal females adopting masculine traits.[53][54][55] Among Indigenous North American groups, diverse terms like winkte (Lakota) or nádleehí (Navajo) describe individuals—often biological males—assuming mixed-gender roles as healers, visionaries, or warriors, revered for spiritual insights bridging male and female realms in pre-colonial contexts. The modern "Two-Spirit" umbrella, coined in 1990, encompasses these but is not historically uniform across over 150 tribes, with roles tied to visions or temperament rather than innate identity, and often involving same-sex behaviors. Post-contact suppression by European norms reduced their prominence, though revival efforts persist.[56][57][58] African examples include the chibados of 16th-century Angola, male shamans adopting female dress for spiritual mediation in the Ndongo kingdom, and mugawe priests among Kenyan Kikuyu, who wear women's clothing and perform fertility rites. These roles, documented in historical ethnographies, functioned as religious specialists rather than everyday identities, with limited continuity due to colonial disruptions enforcing binaries. In the Middle East, Omani khanith—effeminate males permitted female spaces and same-sex relations—illustrate pre-modern accommodations, though Islamic orthodoxy often marginalizes them today.[59][60] Across these societies, third-gender roles generally serve adaptive functions like ritual potency or family support, without challenging the reproductive binary underlying kinship, and persistence varies with modernization and religious conservatism.[47][61]Interpretations of Gender Nonconformity Across Regions
In South Asia, particularly India, hijras—individuals exhibiting male-bodied gender nonconformity—are traditionally interpreted as a distinct third gender category, neither fully male nor female, with ritual roles such as blessing newborns and newlyweds for fertility and prosperity.[62] This interpretation stems from ancient cultural practices, where hijras hold semi-sacred status in certain Hindu and Muslim contexts, yet they face systemic marginalization, including exclusion from mainstream employment and family structures, exacerbated by colonial-era criminalization under British laws like the 1871 Criminal Tribes Act.[63] [64] Contemporary surveys indicate hijras experience high rates of poverty and violence, with limited legal recognition despite a 2014 Supreme Court ruling affirming third-gender status, reflecting a tension between ritual tolerance and social stigma.[65] Among Native American tribes, gender nonconformity has been interpreted through the lens of "two-spirit" identities in over 150 pre-colonial societies, where individuals combining masculine and feminine traits often assumed spiritual or ceremonial roles, such as healers or mediators, viewed as embodying dual spirits granted by the creator.[58] These roles were not equated with Western homosexuality or transgenderism but integrated into tribal kinship systems, with anthropological records from tribes like the Navajo (nádleehí) and Lakota (winkte) describing them as valued for unique insights into both genders.[66] Post-colonial influences, including Christian missionary efforts from the 19th century onward, disrupted these interpretations, leading to suppression and reframing as deviance, though revival efforts persist in modern indigenous communities.[67] In Polynesian societies like Samoa, fa'afafine—male-bodied individuals adopting feminine roles—are culturally interpreted as a recognized gender variant within the fa'a Samoa (Samoan way), often praised for caregiving duties toward elders and children, blending male strength with female nurturance.[53] This acceptance is rooted in pre-colonial traditions, where fa'afafine contribute to family harmony without challenging the binary for reproductive roles, yet they encounter discrimination, including verbal abuse and barriers to romantic partnerships, particularly in rural areas.[68] A 2020 study highlights their negotiation of space amid Christian influences, balancing traditional accommodation with emerging rights advocacy.[69] Southeast Asian interpretations, as seen in Thailand's kathoey (transfeminine individuals), historically viewed them as spiritually balanced, embodying dual energies in ancient Siamese courts where they served as entertainers or advisors.[70] Modern societal views treat kathoey as a third gender, with visibility in media and tourism, but underlying stigma persists, including family rejection and employment discrimination outside sex work or performance industries.[71] Linguistic studies from 2016 show kathoey self-referencing with feminine terms to assert identity, yet Thai norms emphasize similarity between sexes, potentially facilitating tolerance compared to binary-rigid cultures.[72] [73] In pre-colonial African societies, gender nonconformity manifested variably, such as among the Langi of Uganda where effeminate males were treated as women and permitted male spouses, or in Zambian groups with ritual roles for gender-variant individuals, interpreted as energetic rather than anatomical divergences.[74] These views coexisted with patriarchal structures, but European colonization from the 19th century imposed binary norms via laws and missions, recasting nonconformity as immorality.[75] Contemporary data reveal ongoing stigma, with limited empirical documentation due to oral traditions and post-colonial biases in academia. Islamic historical texts from the Middle East classify gender nonconformists like mukhannathun (effeminate men) as a tolerated category for domestic or entertainment roles, provided they abstained from vice, as noted in hadith collections from the 7th-9th centuries CE.[76] This interpretation allowed limited social integration in Abbasid-era societies, where gender variance was acknowledged without full equivalence to binary sexes.[77] However, stricter modern interpretations in many Muslim-majority states, influenced by Wahhabism since the 18th century, frame nonconformity as haram (forbidden), leading to legal penalties and social ostracism.[78] In historical Western Europe, gender nonconformity was predominantly interpreted as moral and religious deviance, punishable under canon and secular laws from the medieval period, with records of cross-dressing prosecutions peaking in the 14th-16th centuries amid sumptuary regulations enforcing binary attire.[79] Byzantine and early medieval sources document queer lives, including gender-variant figures in monastic or court settings, but these were exceptional against a backdrop of sodomy trials enforcing dimorphic norms.[80] Enlightenment-era views from the 18th century began pathologizing nonconformity medically, shifting from sin to disorder, a framework persisting until 20th-century decriminalization efforts.[81]Linkages to Sexuality and Social Norms
Homosexuality Within Gender Frameworks
In binary gender frameworks, which emphasize dimorphic roles tied to biological sex, homosexuality presents a challenge by decoupling sexual attraction from complementary opposite-sex partnerships expected for reproduction and social stability. Cross-cultural analyses reveal that homosexuality has been observed universally, yet its acceptance inversely correlates with the rigidity of gender role enforcement; societies with strong traditional gender norms exhibit higher levels of prejudice against same-sex attraction, viewing it as a violation of masculine or feminine ideals.[82][83] For example, in ancient Greece, male same-sex relations like pederasty were institutionalized but framed within hierarchical gender-like dynamics, with the erastes (adult male) in the penetrative role and the eromenos (youth) in a passive, quasi-feminine position, preserving the binary's dominance structure.[84] Societies incorporating third or additional gender categories often integrate homosexuality by reclassifying same-sex attracted individuals into non-binary roles that align with observed behavioral nonconformity rather than challenging the primary male-female divide. Among the fa'afafine of Samoa, biological males who adopt feminine gender expressions and engage primarily in receptive same-sex roles fulfill kin-care functions, reducing direct conflict with binary reproductive norms.[53] Similarly, hijra in South Asia, historically recognized as a third gender, include many homosexual males who undergo castration and perform ritual roles, with same-sex relations tolerated within this segregated category.[85] These frameworks do not typically endorse fluid gender identities but accommodate variance through fixed, often marginalized social niches, as evidenced by ethnographic studies showing third genders' association with homosexuality without broader acceptance of egalitarian same-sex unions.[86] From an evolutionary standpoint, homosexuality persists in sexually dimorphic species like humans despite reproductive costs, potentially via mechanisms such as sexually antagonistic genes—where alleles increasing same-sex attraction in males boost fecundity in female carriers—or epigenetic influences on sexual development.[87][88] Genetic studies across cultures support a heritable component, with twin concordance rates for male homosexuality around 20-50% for dizygotic and higher for monozygotic pairs, indicating biology interacts with gender frameworks rather than being solely socially constructed.[89] In rigid binary systems, this biological variance may manifest as hidden behaviors or role adaptations, whereas flexible frameworks allow overt expression within designated outliers, highlighting how cultural gender structures shape but do not originate same-sex attraction.[90]Cultural Responses to Gender Variance
Cultural responses to gender variance, defined as behaviors or presentations incongruent with an individual's biological sex, have historically emphasized enforcement of binary norms through socialization, ridicule, ostracism, or ritual incorporation into marginalized categories. Anthropological studies document that in the majority of human societies, deviations from expected male or female roles provoke social sanctions aimed at restoring conformity, reflecting the adaptive value of dimorphic specialization for reproduction and labor division. [91] [92] Third-gender accommodations, where present, typically confine variance to low-status or specialized functions rather than granting equivalence to binary genders. In South Asian societies, Hijras—individuals often born male who adopt feminine attire and roles—have been recognized for centuries in ritual contexts such as blessing newborns or weddings, invoking auspiciousness due to their perceived liminal status. However, this tolerance is limited; Hijras face systemic stigma, family rejection, employment barriers, and association with begging or sex work, resulting in high rates of poverty and health disparities. [93] [50] Ethnographic research highlights their marginalization, with legal recognition in India since 2014 failing to alleviate entrenched social exclusion. [94] Among certain Native American tribes, Two-Spirit individuals—encompassing those exhibiting cross-gender traits—were sometimes integrated as healers, shamans, or mediators, attributed to dual spiritual insights that provided practical utility in non-reproductive roles. [58] [95] Acceptance varied widely; while revered in tribes like the Lakota or Navajo for ceremonial contributions, such roles were absent or sanctioned in others, and colonial disruptions largely eroded these traditions by the 19th century. [96] Contemporary revivals often romanticize pre-contact tolerance, overlooking intra-tribal diversity and the functionality tied to societal needs. In contrast, many Eurasian and Abrahamic-influenced cultures imposed punitive measures, including religious prohibitions against cross-dressing (e.g., Deuteronomy 22:5 in Judeo-Christian texts) and secular laws criminalizing nonconformity, as in 18th-19th century Europe where "molly houses" for effeminate men were raided and participants imprisoned or executed. [97] Confucian East Asia channeled variance into eunuch roles for imperial service, but these entailed castration and social contempt, underscoring rejection over integration. Cross-cultural analyses confirm third-gender categories in fewer than 10% of documented societies, predominantly as peripheral outlets for persistent nonconformers rather than normative alternatives. [85] [98]Modern Gender Theory and Ideology
Origins and Key Proponents of Fluid Gender Concepts
The concept of fluid gender, positing that gender identity is not rigidly binary or biologically determined but capable of variation, change, or non-conformity over time or across contexts, emerged primarily from mid-20th-century sexology and later postmodern philosophy. Psychologist John Money, working at Johns Hopkins University, introduced the terms "gender role" and "gender identity" in the 1950s to distinguish psychological and social aspects of gender from biological sex.[99] Money's theory held that gender identity forms primarily through postnatal socialization and environmental influences rather than innate biology, as evidenced by his studies on intersex individuals where he advocated assigning and rearing gender based on surgical and social interventions rather than chromosomal or anatomical sex.[18] This framework, detailed in Money's 1955 paper "Hermaphroditism, gender and precocity in hyperadrenocorticism," challenged traditional views of fixed sex-gender congruence and provided an intellectual basis for later ideas of gender malleability, though empirical validation was limited and later undermined by cases like David Reimer's failed reassignment in the 1960s.[17] Building on Money's separation of sex and gender, feminist and postmodern thinkers in the late 20th century advanced notions of gender as constructed and unstable. Simone de Beauvoir's 1949 work The Second Sex asserted that "one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman," emphasizing social construction over biological determinism, which influenced subsequent deconstructions of gender categories.[100] However, the explicit theorization of gender fluidity gained traction in queer theory during the 1980s and 1990s, drawing from Michel Foucault's analyses of power, discourse, and sexuality in works like The History of Sexuality (1976), which portrayed identities as products of historical and cultural regimes rather than natural essences.[101] This postmodern skepticism toward essentialism rejected binary oppositions, framing gender as a discursive effect amenable to subversion and multiplicity. Judith Butler emerged as a central proponent through her 1990 book Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, where she introduced the idea of gender performativity: gender exists not as an internal truth expressed through acts but as the effect of repeated, stylized performances regulated by social norms.[100] Butler argued that these performances lack a fixed origin and can be reiterated differently, enabling fluid or non-normative gender expressions that destabilize binaries, as outlined in her essay "Performative Acts and Gender Constitution" (1988).[102] This theory, influenced by postmodern philosophers like Jacques Derrida and Foucault, shifted focus from gender as a stable identity to a dynamic process, profoundly shaping academic discourse on transgenderism and non-binary identities. Other contributors, such as biologist Anne Fausto-Sterling in her 1993 essay "The Five Sexes," proposed a biological spectrum beyond strict male-female dimorphism, citing intersex variations (occurring in approximately 1.7% of births) to argue against binary exclusivity, though her claims emphasized continuum over individual fluidity.[103] These ideas proliferated in gender studies programs from the 1990s onward, with proponents like Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and Donna Haraway further emphasizing intersectional and cyborg-like deconstructions of gendered bodies.[104] Despite their influence in humanities and social sciences, empirical support remains contested, as Money's socialization primacy was refuted by Reimer's reversion to male identity despite female rearing, highlighting biological constraints on gender formation.[18] Butler's performativity, while theoretically innovative, has been critiqued for conflating description with causation, overlooking evidence from twin studies showing heritability in gender dysphoria rates (around 30-50% genetic variance).[105]Empirical Challenges and Biological Rebuttals
Biological sex in humans is binary, defined by the production of either small (sperm) or large (ova) gametes, a dimorphism rooted in chromosomal determination (XX for females, XY for males) and immutable across the lifespan.[1] This binary framework holds despite rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), which occur in approximately 1 in 4,500 to 5,500 live births and manifest as developmental errors in sexual differentiation rather than evidence of a spectrum or third category of sex.[24][1] DSDs do not produce functional intermediate gametes or reproductive capacities outside the male-female paradigm, and medical consensus classifies them as pathologies requiring case-specific intervention, not validations of non-binary sex.[1] Twin studies on gender dysphoria reveal moderate heritability, with monozygotic (identical) twins exhibiting concordance rates of 20-33% compared to 5-8% in dizygotic (fraternal) twins, indicating genetic influences but low absolute penetrance that implicates non-shared environmental factors in most cases.[106][107] These findings rebut claims of gender identity as purely fluid or socially constructed by demonstrating biological underpinnings, though the discordance even among genetically identical twins underscores that identity formation involves complex interactions beyond genetics alone. Meta-analyses of neuroimaging data confirm average sex differences in human brain structure, including larger total volumes and regional variations (e.g., greater amygdala and hypothalamic dimorphism in males after controlling for overall size), with statistically significant disparities in 67% of cerebral measures examined across studies.[108][109] However, individual brains exhibit substantial overlap between sexes, and assertions of discrete "male" or "female" brain types—or mismatched "transgender" brains aligning with identified gender—fail to replicate robustly, as plasticity from hormones and experience complicates causal inference.[108] The 2024 Cass Review, an independent assessment of UK gender identity services for youth, found the evidence base for medical interventions like puberty blockers and hormones to be weak and of low quality, with only 1 of 23 studies meeting basic methodological standards and insufficient data on long-term outcomes such as fertility impairment, cardiovascular risks, and bone density loss.[110] It recommended restricting such treatments outside research protocols, highlighting how ideological pressures may have outpaced empirical validation in clinical practice.[110] Longitudinal data post-sex reassignment surgery indicate no resolution of underlying mental health vulnerabilities, with suicide rates remaining 19.1 times higher than matched controls over 30-year follow-up in a Swedish cohort, alongside elevated risks of self-harm and PTSD in subsequent U.S. analyses.[111] Regret and detransition rates, while reported as low (0.3-3.8%) in some short-term studies, are likely underestimated due to high loss-to-follow-up (up to 30-50% in registries) and exclusion of non-responders, with treatment discontinuation observed in 10-30% of cases in broader reviews.[112][113] These outcomes challenge the causal efficacy of transition in alleviating dysphoria, pointing instead to persistent comorbidities like autism and trauma that require holistic addressing over biological reconfiguration, which remains impossible at chromosomal or gametic levels.[1]Controversies and Societal Impacts
Debates Over Gender in Policy and Law
In legal and policy frameworks, debates over gender often pit biological sex-based distinctions—rooted in immutable chromosomal and physiological differences—against claims of gender identity as a basis for rights and accommodations. Proponents of expansive gender identity policies argue for self-determination to affirm personal identity, while critics emphasize empirical risks to fairness, safety, and child welfare, citing retained male physiological advantages and insufficient long-term evidence for interventions. These tensions have led to divergent approaches across jurisdictions, with some affirming binary biological sex and others prioritizing self-identification.[114] A central controversy involves self-identification for legal gender recognition, where individuals seek to alter sex markers on documents without medical or psychological gatekeeping. Denmark's 2014 law allowing self-ID for those over 18 has been credited with minimizing trans rights polarization by streamlining processes, though it requires a six-month reflection period. In contrast, Germany's 2024 Self-Determination Act, effective from November, permits changes via simple declaration but has drawn criticism from UN experts for inadequate safeguards against exploitation by predators accessing women's facilities, potentially undermining sex-based protections. The UK's Gender Recognition Act 2004 requires medical evidence, but reform proposals for self-ID were abandoned in 2020 amid concerns over impacts on single-sex spaces; ongoing parliamentary debates, as in May 2025, highlight petitions for easier access balanced against women's safety. In the US, a January 2025 executive order established federal policy recognizing only two sexes—male and female—as biologically fixed and unchangeable, reversing prior interpretations equating gender identity with sex under civil rights law. Critics of self-ID, including legal scholars, argue it conflates subjective identity with objective sex, eroding policies like female-only prisons or shelters, where data from jurisdictions with self-ID show increased incidents of male-pattern violence.[115][116][117][114] Sports participation policies exemplify fairness debates, particularly for transgender women (biological males) in female categories. International bodies like the IOC permit competition after testosterone suppression, but systematic reviews indicate transgender women retain advantages in strength, muscle mass, and performance—up to 10-50% in key metrics like grip strength or running speed—even after years of hormone therapy, due to irreversible pubertal developments. A 2021 analysis of policies noted that while inclusion promotes mental health, it disadvantages cisgender females, with real-world cases like swimmer Lia Thomas winning NCAA titles in 2022 fueling bans in 20+ US states by 2023. Pro-inclusion studies claim insufficient evidence of universal advantage, but endocrinologists highlight fundamental disagreements: biological fairness versus equitable access, with science unable to fully mitigate male advantages post-puberty. By 2025, World Athletics and similar federations barred post-male puberty transitions from elite female events, prioritizing empirical performance data over identity claims.[118][118][119] Healthcare policies for minors underscore evidence gaps in gender-affirming interventions like puberty blockers and surgeries. By July 2025, 27 US states enacted bans or restrictions on such care for those under 18, affecting 120,400 transgender youth aged 13-17, citing weak evidence of net benefits and risks of infertility, bone density loss, and regret rates up to 30% in follow-up studies. The UK's 2024 Cass Review, informing NHS restrictions on blockers outside trials, found low-quality evidence for mental health improvements and high desistance rates (60-90% by adulthood) in gender-dysphoric youth, prioritizing caution amid rising referrals. Opponents, including advocacy groups, argue bans exacerbate suicidality, but longitudinal data from Sweden and Finland—halting routine use in 2021-2022—show no clear suicide reduction from interventions and ethical concerns over medicalizing minors without resolving comorbidities like autism or trauma. Surgeries remain rare for US minors, with under 100 annually pre-bans, per 2024 data.[120][121][122] Compelled use of preferred pronouns in workplaces and schools raises free speech issues. US federal guidelines under Title VII interpret misgendering as potential harassment, but nine states by 2023 restricted mandates conflicting with biological views, while courts like the Eleventh Circuit in 2025 ruled teacher pronoun use during duties unprotected by the First Amendment if tied to official roles. Cases such as Meriwether v. Hartop (2021) affirmed protections against compelled speech for educators refusing pronouns contradicting biological sex, balancing anti-discrimination with constitutional rights. In policy, this pits dignity claims against evidence that pronouns reflect grammatical sex, not mutable identity, with empirical risks of enforcing ideological conformity in public institutions.[123][124] Underlying these are definitional clashes: policies defining "sex" as biological (e.g., UK's April 2025 Supreme Court ruling that Equality Act terms refer to immutable biology) versus fluid gender identity. US states like those amending constitutions to specify birth sex face challenges under privacy clauses, but Trump's 2025 order mandates biological enforcement in federal law, critiqued by medical groups yet aligned with genetic immutability (XX/XY chromosomes determining 99.98% of cases). These debates reflect causal realities: policies ignoring sex differences risk unintended harms, as seen in cross-jurisdictional data on increased female safeguarding issues post-self-ID.[125][126][127]Effects on Family, Education, and Mental Health
The introduction of gender fluidity concepts into family dynamics has been associated with increased parental discord and separation risks. A study of children with gender identity disorder found that 66% had experienced separation from one or both parents, significantly higher than rates in control groups (35-48%).[128] Similarly, same-sex couples, often aligned with non-binary ideologies, exhibit higher divorce rates than opposite-sex couples, with female same-sex pairs showing elevated dissolution risks potentially linked to role ambiguity.[129] These patterns suggest that deviations from binary gender norms may exacerbate family instability, as evidenced by parental affirmation of transgender identities correlating with internal family conflict, though not directly mitigating child mental health declines.[130] In education, policies promoting gender neutrality or accommodating transgender students have disrupted traditional structures without addressing innate sex-based differences in achievement. Boys consistently underperform girls in reading and face higher early school exit rates globally, with biological maturity gaps explaining up to 10% of upper-secondary disparities.[131] [132] Transgender-inclusive policies, such as access to opposite-sex facilities, have been linked to broader student discomfort and administrative burdens, potentially diverting resources from evidence-based interventions for learning gaps rooted in sex differences, like girls' earlier neurological maturation.[133] Empirical data indicate no clear mental health benefits from such school policies, with transgender youth reporting persistent high rates of anxiety and depression regardless of affirmation levels.[134] Gender dysphoria in youth is strongly tied to elevated mental health risks, including suicidality, independent of affirming interventions. Adolescents with gender dysphoria exhibit higher rates of suicidal ideation, self-harm, and life-threatening behaviors compared to cisgender peers, often comorbid with autism, trauma, or eating disorders.[135] The 2024 Cass Review, a comprehensive UK analysis of gender services, concluded that evidence for puberty blockers and hormones in minors is weak and of low quality, recommending against routine affirmation due to uncertain long-term benefits and risks like bone density loss.[136] [110] Post-surgical outcomes show no suicide risk reduction; a 2024 analysis found individuals undergoing gender-affirming surgery had a 12.12 times higher suicide attempt rate (3.47% vs. 0.29%) than non-surgical controls.[137] Regret rates, while reported low (0.3-1% in some cohorts), are likely underestimated due to inadequate long-term follow-up and loss to tracking, with detransition trends rising amid social contagion concerns.[112] Overall, biological and psychosocial factors drive persistent mental health vulnerabilities, challenging claims of affirmation as a panacea.[138]Gendered Violence and Outcomes
Patterns of Violence Linked to Gender Dynamics
Males perpetrate the overwhelming majority of violent crimes worldwide, a pattern observed across diverse societies and linked to biological sex differences in physical strength, risk-taking, and hormonal influences. In the United States, males accounted for 80.1% of arrests for violent crimes in 2012, including 87.9% for robbery and 85.0% for aggravated assault.[139] Globally, men comprise 80-90% of homicide offenders, with data from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) showing that male victims predominate in stranger and acquaintance homicides, while female victims are disproportionately killed by intimate partners or family members.[140] This disparity persists even after controlling for reporting biases, reflecting causal factors such as higher male testosterone levels, which meta-analyses associate with modestly elevated aggression (correlation coefficients ranging from r=0.054 to r=0.08 across baseline and manipulated studies).[141][142] In intimate partner violence (IPV), patterns reveal both symmetry in minor aggression and asymmetry in severity. CDC's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) reports lifetime IPV contact for 47.3% of women and 44.2% of men, with bidirectional violence occurring in approximately 50% of cases across heterosexual samples.[143][144] However, women experience higher rates of severe physical violence (e.g., beaten, burned, or strangled), rape, and injury requiring medical attention, with 13.5% of global homicides committed by intimate partners disproportionately affecting females (six times higher than for males).[145] Male-perpetrated IPV more frequently escalates to lethality due to greater average upper-body strength (men possess 50-60% more) and aggression intensity, whereas female-perpetrated acts often involve minor physical or verbal tactics in mutual conflicts.[146]| Violence Type | Male Perpetration Share | Key Gender Dynamic Insight | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Homicide (global) | 80-90% | Intimate partner killings: 59% of female victims vs. low single digits for males | UNODC/WHO[140][146] |
| Aggravated Assault (US) | ~85% | Linked to male intrasexual competition and testosterone-driven risk | FBI/BJS[139][141] |
| IPV Injury (US) | Higher severity for males | Bidirectional initiation common, but male acts cause more harm | CDC[143] |
