The Language We Need

Introducing the updated Genspect Glossary

Language is a hotly contested battleground on all sides of the debate about sex and gender.When trans activists aren’t inventing entirely new words (think ‘cisgender’, ‘genderqueer’ and ‘non-binary) they are trying to change the meaning of existing ones (think ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ‘sex’), often by shaming, cancelling and sometimes even suing people who disagree. On the other hand, critics of trans ideology have disputes of their own about language, including over whether the term ‘gender identity’ should be used at all.

To say that confusion arises when these divergent definitions meet in the real world would be an understatement. As a series of legal cases in the UK amply demonstrate, itis difficult to resolve disputes about issues like single sex spaces when each side has a different definition of ‘biological sex’. According to Dr Upton, the trans identified male doctor at the heart of the Peggie v NHS Fife case, sex is self-identified, and all humans are ‘biological’; therefore, he is biologically female. From the perspective of Sandie Peggie, the nurse who objected to Upton’s presence in the women’s changing room, sex is a matter of biology, and Upton remains male regardless of how he self-identifies.

As this example illustrates, grappling with contemporary debates about sex and gender requires an understanding of how terms are used in context, and how their meanings can vary according to the orientation and contingent beliefs of the speaker. The updated Genspect Glossary aims to provide this contextual understanding while clearly spelling out how Genspect uses these terms in our work. The Glossary was compiled by four people working together, and we didn’t always agree about how each term should be defined. Even so, we think this is a good working draft, and we welcome constructive feedback from Genspect’s followers.

Take, for example, the term ‘Gender’, the conflicting definitions of which have given rise to two opposing worldviews that regularly clash in the public square. Although gender is often used as a polite synonym for sex, it’s also the word used to describe sex based stereotypes associated with being either male or female. The term ‘Gender Identity’ takes things one step further by suggesting that we all have an inner sense of whether our gender is male, female, or something else, and that this innate gendered essence may be at odds with our sexed body.

Many people, not least feminists, take issue with the idea that we all have an identity related to where we fall on a spectrum of sex based stereotypes. Feminist campaigners have traditionally argued that such stereotypes are socially constructed and regressive. Still others straightforwardly reject the notion that they have a gendered inner identity that goes beyond simple recognition of their sexed body.

Belief or otherwise in the concept of gender identity intimately shapes the language choices and worldviews expressed in the wider debate about sex and gender. People who believe in gender identity are likely to accept the existence of a discrete class of ‘Transgender’ people, people who can objectively be said to have been ‘born in the wrong body’ due to having a gender identity that doesn’t match their biological sex. People who believe in gender identity are also likely to believe that it is literally possible to change sex, or that trans identified people automatically belong to the opposite sex class simply by virtue of their self-identified gender.

For people who reject the concept of gender identity, self-identified gender remains a subjective, unverifiable belief, much like a religious belief in the soul. On the other hand, for those who believe in gender identity the possibility of changing sex, or of being a female person with a male body, acquires the status of objective fact. Inevitably there are fireworks when these two worldviews collide in debates about access to single sex spaces and services.

According to Helen Pluckrose, author of Cynical Theories, we have the postmodern turn in academia to thank for much of today’s confusion over language. Pluckrose argues that activists informed by postmodern theory have come to view language as entirely socially constructed, a mechanism for upholding unequal power relations rather than a functional means of communicating shared concepts and describing reality

Ironically, one of the major consequences of this has been to distract attention from efforts to address the material causes of inequality. Convinced that controlling language is the most effective way to change society, activists informed by postmodernism often spend more time policing speech than they do trying to improve the lives of the minorities they claim to represent. Consider the energy expended over the last decade by trans activists trying to forcibly redefine the word ‘woman’, or mandate the use of preferred pronouns in workplaces and schools. Trans identified people might have been better served had that energy been directed towards expanding access to gender neutral spaces and services, working towards practical compromise rather than playing authoritarian language games.

Those of us who are critical of trans ideology must be careful not to fall into the same trap. It is tempting to believe that we can change reality simply by changing the words we use to talk about things, or by insisting that others communicate only in terms we find acceptable. Stamping out the use of the term ‘gender identity’ won’t stop distressed children who think they have one from seeking out dangerous medical interventions. Railing against the use of the word ‘transgender’ won’t magically disappear the cohort of people who believe they are the opposite sex. If only it were so easy.

Language is more than a political or ideological device that can be manipulated to limit the terms of debate. It’s a practical tool that we use to communicate about our shared world. While it might be important to clarify our terms, we should always be more interested in the ideas and experiences that someone is trying to communicate, rather than the individual words they use to make their point.

You can read the Genspect Glossary here.