The sex binary is not a ‘Western construct,’ gender identity is

Among the many incoherent or indefensible arguments made to support the concept of “gender identity” and associated demands for legislative and policy changes, the coopting and misrepresentation of sexual minorities and gender non-conforming people in Eastern and Southern cultures may be one of the most egregious.

Arguments in favour of gender identity ideology often include assertions that the sex binary is a “white supremacist colonialist construct” and that ancient/indigenous/colonized cultures acknowledge and recognize “transgender people.” This is generally accompanied by the claim that this proves “transgender people have existed for thousands of years,” followed by throw away citations of the Indian subcontinent’s Hijras, two-spirit people in Native American cultures, the Fa’afafine of Samoa, or the “ladyboys” of Thailand. According to trans activists, these examples demonstrate that sex is a Western/white supremacist construct, that older cultures recognized the authenticity of “transgender people” and that, therefore, categorizing people only as either male or female is wrong and should be junked (along with legal systems built on such identities).

Unfortunately (but unsurprisingly), Western progressives who make these claims do not bother with accuracy nor do they attempt to really understand the people or cultures they use to advance their arguments — these identities and cultural complexities are just convenient tools that serve their political narrative. Their attempts to dump various cultures, identities, and concepts into one postmodern umbrella and force non-Western cultures into a Western context result in cultural identities being erased and misunderstood, while simultaneously accusing others of doing just that.